Nityananda, Sri Chaitanya's associate, Gaudiya Vaishnava saint

[निताइ dasa]

I really do not think that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu preached differences between avatars of Narayana. Even so, Ramanuja, Vedanta Desika, Madhvacharya, Jayatirtha, Vyasa Tirtha, Pillai Lokacharya, Azhwars etc would disagree that one form of Narayana is greater than the other.

"Krishnas tu swayam bhagavan!" just means that Krishna is verily God himself. If you go by the translations of the Advaitins, Tattva-vadins, and Vishistadvaitins, no real special status is given to Krishna over the other incarnations. He may be purna-avatar, but that doesn't mean he is the origin of Vishnu himself!

Nitai! I don't want to offend you, as you are a Vaishnav, and ultimately we worship the same Lord Hari, but I shall reply to your points as per the arguements of our Goswamis.

First of all, yes Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu did preach this constantly (that Sri Krsna is original source). In fact he had debates with Tattva-vadi philosophers as well as Sri Vaishnavs and did demonstrate how Sri Krsna is the source of Visnu Tattva. These can be found in Sri Chaitanya Charitamrta. Again there is a difference between the Krsna which is described by the other acharayas (who is only amsa) and the Swayam Bhagavan Sri Krsna who is described in Bhagavatam. Thus this is why the apparent contradict arise. We highly respect the commentaries of their acharyas, but we understand the the commentaries were not the highest truth in the matter of Vedanta. That highest truth was propagated by Sri Krsna himself when he came down as Lord Gauranga. In fact many learned scholars like the six Goswamis, Adwaita Acharya, Sarvabhauma Bhattacharya (who was formerly a great Adwaita vadi), Srinivasa Acharaya, Vrindavan Das and many others accepted Sri Gauranga Nityananda as Krsna Balarama. Either they were all mad (which I don't think is probable) or they did see divinity in Lord Chaitanya. Anyway that is what we believe.

As per the translation of the verse, Srila Jiva Goswami, in his Krsna Sandarbha has given all the various translation that people may give to this verse, yet he refutes them all by the rules of Sanskrit grammar. I would post the commentary here but it is quite long and wordy. If you want I can link it to you. Furthermore in the verses preceding the shloka, a long list of Visnu's forms is given. Then finally this verse declares "eta camsa pumsha Krsna tu Swayam bhagavan" I.e "the previous Visnu tattvas listed are only amsas of Sri Krsna who is Swayam Bhagavan"

I don't mean to offend you in anyway, so please forgive me if I have. A personal question arises however. Why does your sampradaya not accept Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as an Avatar? I mean there are many shlokas in smriti which testify to this. Srimad Bhagavatam clearly says "Krishna Varnam tvishakrsnam". I have heard ridiculous translation of thise verse actually by some who wish to demonstrate that it is not prophetic. There is no harm in accepting Lord Gauranga, only positives He and Nitai are so merciful that they do not concider any offenses and ensure swift spiritual progression. Even the deep intricacies of rasa vicara can only be found in their teachings. Again I don't mean to offend, just curious. Nitai!!

Ga

 

[Aupmanyav]

Nitai! I don't want to offend you, as you are a Vaishnav, ..

Would you offend a Shaiva, Shakta or a Smarta? That is not very Vaishnava.
Take lesson from our member here, Ratikala aka Ratiben.

 

[निताइ dasa]

Would you offend a Shaiva, Shakta or a Smarta? That is not very Vaishnava.
Take lesson from our member here, Ratikala aka Ratiben.

Haha generally I don't mean to offend anyone. But Vaishnavs especially. Vaishnav aparadha is the greatest offense. All other offenses will be forgiven by Hari Nama, except that.

"hari sthane aparadhe tare harinama, toma sthane aparadhe nahi paritrana"

Offenses against Lord Hari are delivered by chanting Hari Nama. But even Lord Hari cannot save someone from vaishnav aparadha!! As far as I'm am aware, there is only one avatar that can do that, and that is Lord Nitai

 

[Terese]

Who is this Lord Nitai?

 

[निताइ dasa]

Who is this Lord Nitai?

Dandavat Pranam Terese ji, I am so happy you asked this question. You see in Kali Yuga, Sri Balarama and Sri Krsna both descend again specifically to deliver the fallen souls and to establish the Nama Sankirtan movement. While Krsna descends as Lord Gauranga, Lord Nitai (short for Nityananda) is the avatar of Sri Balarama, who is also God. However, this incarnation of Lord Nitai is the most merciful incarnation of Godhead. Lord Nitai is described in scripture as "adosha darshi" meaning he does not see the bad qualities but only the good qualities of a soul. Nitai is ready to give everything in return for a little faith. Lord Nitai is a manifestation of Sri Krsna's Sandhini shakti as well as being the original Guru Tattva. According to Gaudiya Vaishnav Literature, it is Lord Nitai who expands as the primary kyavyuha (vasudeva, sankarshan, aniruddha, pradyumna) as well as the purusha avatars (Maha Visnu, Garbhodakshayi Visnu, and Paramatma) from whom the avatars of Visnu come.

The Supreme Absolute Creator, Lord Nitai personally advented in Ekachakra on the 12th of January, 1473 A.D and is concidered by us Gaudiya Vaishnav's as the most merciful, liberal, forgiving, rewarding, and blissful personality in the whole creation. In-fact it is our firm belief that no one can get Radha and Krishna without Nitai, as said by Narottama Das Thakura; "heno Nitai bina bhai, Radha Krsna paite nai". My Param Pujya Gurudeva, Nitaipresthiji, only realized the topmost and secret glories of Lord Nitai after 30+ years of bhajan and spiritual practice. It was only due to Nitai that he attained swarupa siddhi. He now lives in Radha Kund to preach the glories of Lord Nitai. Even in my own wretched life, I have experienced Nitai's miracles by hand, so the least I can do is spread his glories.

This can all be found in his site "Nitaism.com" or http://nitaism.com/2254-2/ if you would like to read more. Alternatively you can send me a message if you have any questions. Nitai!

 

[Terese]

I don't know much of Gaudiya faith, excluding Sri Krishna and Chaitanya. Are you a part of ISKCON?

 

[निताइ dasa]

I don't know much of Gaudiya faith, excluding Sri Krishna and Chaitanya. Are you a part of ISKCON?

No. Iskcon is our sibling branch. I come from Nitaai Gaudiya Math.

 

[Terese]

How did you become a Gaudiya?

 

[निताइ dasa]

How did you become a Gaudiya?

I was first introduced with Gaudiya Siddhanta in India when I first read Srlla Prabhupada's books. I however officially accepted Gaudiya theology when I met my Gurudeva three years ago and understood the glories of Nityananda Rama. Ever since I have given my life to his movement.

 

[Terese]

So how do you regard Krishna if you believe Nitai (who is Balarama) highly?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Lord Nitai is described in scripture as "adosha darshi" meaning he does not see the bad qualities but only the good qualities of a soul.

Good, I am relieved. Nitai will not see my bad qualities and only the good ones that I may have. In no case, he will punish me. He cannot go against His svabhava. Otherwise also, I am under the protection of Kaushalpati Raja (Lord Rama).

 

[निताइ dasa]

So how do you regard Krishna if you believe Nitai (who is Balarama) highly?

Sri Krsna is our ultimate goal, as he is the Swayam Bhagavan, the worshipable Lord of us gaudiyas. However the worship of Sri Krsna is not independent of the worship of His devotees and associates. in fact, if Krsna is worshipped through his devotees, then he is more pleased. That is why Lord Krsna declares in both Srimad Bhagavtam and Gita that "the worship of my devotees is greater than even my worship".That is why, in order to please Sri Krsna we take exclusive shelter of Radharani and to please Gauranga (who is Radha-Krsna) we take exclusive shelter of Nitai.

Furthermore, in order to be a suddha devotee of Sri Krsna, one needs to give up everything else and fully surrender to Him (as per 'sarva dharma paritrajya mam ekam sharanam vraja"). Even Lord Gauranga requires one to live a life of spiritual purity (I,e follow the regulative principles, chant 64 rounds etc). But Lord Nitai's Mercy is so liberal that He has no such rules. To even a Candala (dog eater) Lord Nitai gives the Holy Name.For the price of simply faith Lord Nitai gives us the highest spiritual attainment. That is why we hold Him so highly, because His mercy is so liberal. In fact, the best way to attain Sri Radha Krsna is through Nitai, especially for the sinful souls of kaliyuga. Sri Radha Krsna is wayyy to high for us and requires thousands of years of spiritual practice to attain (there was a scriptural quote about this somewhere) yet this can be given by Nitai in this lifetime. I know of certain devotees of Nitai who chant 64 rounds every day and constantly have darshan of the Pastimes and Forms of Sri Radha Krsna every day. It is only due to Nitai that it is possible.

 

[निताइ dasa]

Good, I am relieved. Nitai will not see my bad qualities and only the good ones that I may have. In no case, he will punish me. He cannot go against His svabhava. Otherwise also, I am in protection of Lord Rama.

Nitai!! Yes, chant Nitai and be happy! We believe that even hearing the name "Nityananda" once means that you will certainly get God, what to speak of chanting His name. Nitai is non-other than Laxshmana, who is very dear to Sri Rama

 

[Aupmanyav]

I have already got them all on my side. Lord Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, Shiva, Ganesha, Kartikeya, Brahma, Hanuman, Mothers Durga, Lakshmi, Parvati, Saraswati.
Each and every one of them.

 

[Chakra]

Nitai! I don't want to offend you, as you are a Vaishnav, and ultimately we worship the same Lord Hari, but I shall reply to your points as per the arguements of our Goswamis.

First of all, yes Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu did preach this constantly (that Sri Krsna is original source). In fact he had debates with Tattva-vadi philosophers as well as Sri Vaishnavs and did demonstrate how Sri Krsna is the source of Visnu Tattva. These can be found in Sri Chaitanya Charitamrta. Again there is a difference between the Krsna which is described by the other acharayas (who is only amsa) and the Swayam Bhagavan Sri Krsna who is described in Bhagavatam. Thus this is why the apparent contradict arise. We highly respect the commentaries of their acharyas, but we understand the the commentaries were not the highest truth in the matter of Vedanta. That highest truth was propagated by Sri Krsna himself when he came down as Lord Gauranga. In fact many learned scholars like the six Goswamis, Adwaita Acharya, Sarvabhauma Bhattacharya (who was formerly a great Adwaita vadi), Srinivasa Acharaya, Vrindavan Das and many others accepted Sri Gauranga Nityananda as Krsna Balarama. Either they were all mad (which I don't think is probable) or they did see divinity in Lord Chaitanya. Anyway that is what we believe.

First of all, welcome to the forum! It is nice to see another Vaishnava, and I apologize if you thought my tone was harsh or confrontational; that was not my intention.

Why do you think that the Krishna of the translations of Sridhara Swami, Viraraghavacharya, and others was different from the Krishna of Chaitanya? AFAIK, Chaitanya used Sridhara Swami's translation of the BP, and Sridhara Swami did not say that Krishna was greater than Vishnu (well, I haven't seen any quote so I assumed that this is the correct conclusion).

I applaud you for your belief that your sampradaya contains the highest truth. Truly shows your devotion to your Acharyas.

Here is a question: Why didn't Chaitanya encourage the Rama-bhaktas, Vishnu-bhaktas, and Narasimha-bhaktas to worship mainly Krishna and abandon their god? If Krishna is greater than all the incarnations, then that must mean that the abode of Krishna is more prestigious than the abode of other Avatars, and since Chaitanya always had the welfare of others in mind, he should have told the other bhaktas to worship Krishna to attain this great abode. However, he didn't. He actually wrote "rama-dasa" on the forehead of one of his devotees who worshiped Rama. Wasn't there also a story where one devotee of Chaitanya was crying that he had to give up Lord Rama for Lord Krishna, but Chaitanya reassured him that there would be no reason to abandon one form of god. Perhaps he believed that all Vaishnavas attained the same destination, and if worshiping any avatar of Narayana lead you to the same destination, then that must mean that all the avatars of Narayana are equal.


Even then, just because one is divine doesn't mean they are correct. Even Bhagavan says things that are not the truth. Take Buddha for example. Although he was empowered by Bhagavan himself (in Shri Vaishnava theology), he still preached a doctrine that was contradictory to the message of the Vedas. Therefore, one must check to see if a person's teachings is in accordance with Vedas. Even Bhagavad Gita cannot be taken as pramana unless it is verified that its philosophy meshes with the Upanishads'. Thankfully, the many Vedantin teachers over the years have shown just that.

I am not saying this to cause any offense, just saying that one must not rely on blind faith. That is why the Goswamis and Baladeva and all the great GV teachers that came after Chaitanya made an effort to prove that Chaitanya's philosophy was enshrined in Shruti, even if they thought that Chaitanya's divinity was enough evidence. Ramanuja himself said that one must not have blind faith in his works; one must discover the truth by his/her own merit and study.

As per the translation of the verse, Srila Jiva Goswami, in his Krsna Sandarbha has given all the various translation that people may give to this verse, yet he refutes them all by the rules of Sanskrit grammar. I would post the commentary here but it is quite long and wordy. If you want I can link it to you. Furthermore in the verses preceding the shloka, a long list of Visnu's forms is given. Then finally this verse declares "eta camsa pumsha Krsna tu Swayam bhagavan" I.e "the previous Visnu tattvas listed are only amsas of Sri Krsna who is Swayam Bhagavan"

I am not too familiar with Sanskrit, so I will have to do more research on this topic. But thank you for bringing this to my attention.

I don't mean to offend you in anyway, so please forgive me if I have. A personal question arises however. Why does your sampradaya not accept Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as an Avatar? I mean there are many shlokas in smriti which testify to this. Srimad Bhagavatam clearly says "Krishna Varnam tvishakrsnam". I have heard ridiculous translation of thise verse actually by some who wish to demonstrate that it is not prophetic. There is no harm in accepting Lord Gauranga, only positives He and Nitai are so merciful that they do not concider any offenses and ensure swift spiritual progression. Even the deep intricacies of rasa vicara can only be found in their teachings. Again I don't mean to offend, just curious. Nitai!!

Well, Shri Vaishnavas translate those verses differently. I'm not sure what their translations are though, but I'm pretty sure Tattva-vadis have similar translations. Tattva-ji could probably shed some light.

There is no doubt that by following Chaitanya and Nityananda one can attain Moksha. However, accepting him as the Supreme Lord is another matter. The only way, afaik, that Vishistadvaitins, Advaitins, and Tattva-vadins will accept Chaitanya as Supreme is if Gaudiya Vaishnavas defeated the former in debate. Once Achintya-Bheda-Abheda is shown to be the philosophy of the Vedas, they will automatically accept Gaudiya Vaishnavism. If a Shri Vaishnava were to accept Chaitanya as Bhagavan himself, the Shri Vaishnava would have to choose between Ramanuja and Chaitanya, and since Chaitanya is God, he would have to become a Gaudiya Vaishnava. I hope you can see why the other Vaishnavas have trouble accepting Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as God without compromising their own traditions.

Narrottama Das Thakur said that if one believes that Chaitanya is 1) A great reformer 2) a great devotee 3) Krishna himself, that is okay. Non-Gaudiya Vaishnavas believe in 1 and 2 and nothing more. I used to be a Gaudiya-Sri Vaishnava, a mix of both, before I made my own conclusions after looking at all the evidence.

Looking forward to more fruitful discussions like this, and pardon me if I offended you with my inquisitiveness.

 

[kalyan]

First of all, welcome to the forum! It is nice to see another Vaishnava, and I apologize if you thought my tone was harsh or confrontational; that was not my intention.

Why do you think that the Krishna of the translations of Sridhara Swami, Viraraghavacharya, and others was different from the Krishna of Chaitanya? AFAIK, Chaitanya used Sridhara Swami's translation of the BP, and Sridhara Swami did not say that Krishna was greater than Vishnu (well, I haven't seen any quote so I assumed that this is the correct conclusion).

I applaud you for your belief that your sampradaya contains the highest truth. Truly shows your devotion to your Acharyas.

Here is a question: Why didn't Chaitanya encourage the Rama-bhaktas, Vishnu-bhaktas, and Narasimha-bhaktas to worship mainly Krishna and abandon their god? If Krishna is greater than all the incarnations, then that must mean that the abode of Krishna is more prestigious than the abode of other Avatars, and since Chaitanya always had the welfare of others in mind, he should have told the other bhaktas to worship Krishna to attain this great abode. However, he didn't. He actually wrote "rama-dasa" on the forehead of one of his devotees who worshiped Rama. Wasn't there also a story where one devotee of Chaitanya was crying that he had to give up Lord Rama for Lord Krishna, but Chaitanya reassured him that there would be no reason to abandon one form of god. Perhaps he believed that all Vaishnavas attained the same destination, and if worshiping any avatar of Narayana lead you to the same destination, then that must mean that all the avatars of Narayana are equal.


Even then, just because one is divine doesn't mean they are correct. Even Bhagavan says things that are not the truth. Take Buddha for example. Although he was empowered by Bhagavan himself (in Shri Vaishnava theology), he still preached a doctrine that was contradictory to the message of the Vedas. Therefore, one must check to see if a person's teachings is in accordance with Vedas. Even Bhagavad Gita cannot be taken as pramana unless it is verified that its philosophy meshes with the Upanishads'. Thankfully, the many Vedantin teachers over the years have shown just that.

I am not saying this to cause any offense, just saying that one must not rely on blind faith. That is why the Goswamis and Baladeva and all the great GV teachers that came after Chaitanya made an effort to prove that Chaitanya's philosophy was enshrined in Shruti, even if they thought that Chaitanya's divinity was enough evidence. Ramanuja himself said that one must not have blind faith in his works; one must discover the truth by his/her own merit and study.


I am not too familiar with Sanskrit, so I will have to do more research on this topic. But thank you for bringing this to my attention.


Well, Shri Vaishnavas translate those verses differently. I'm not sure what their translations are though, but I'm pretty sure Tattva-vadis have similar translations. Tattva-ji could probably shed some light.

There is no doubt that by following Chaitanya and Nityananda one can attain Moksha. However, accepting him as the Supreme Lord is another matter. The only way, afaik, that Vishistadvaitins, Advaitins, and Tattva-vadins will accept Chaitanya as Supreme is if Gaudiya Vaishnavas defeated the former in debate. Once Achintya-Bheda-Abheda is shown to be the philosophy of the Vedas, they will automatically accept Gaudiya Vaishnavism. If a Shri Vaishnava were to accept Chaitanya as Bhagavan himself, the Shri Vaishnava would have to choose between Ramanuja and Chaitanya, and since Chaitanya is God, he would have to become a Gaudiya Vaishnava. I hope you can see why the other Vaishnavas have trouble accepting Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as God without compromising their own traditions.

Narrottama Das Thakur said that if one believes that Chaitanya is 1) A great reformer 2) a great devotee 3) Krishna himself, that is okay. Non-Gaudiya Vaishnavas believe in 1 and 2 and nothing more. I used to be a Gaudiya-Sri Vaishnava, a mix of both, before I made my own conclusions after looking at all the evidence.

Looking forward to more fruitful discussions like this, and pardon me if I offended you with my inquisitiveness.

@Chakra @निताइ dasa
Am sorry but I am listening Chaitanya name only recently and who has the authority to claim he is avatar of god...Don't mistake me as I respect all branches of Vaishnavism Are there any events describing the same? I respect the Nitai postings and his belief and would like to expand on this......what was his contribution of Vaishnavism?

On the other hand Ramanujacharya was accepted by Maha Vishnu in the form of Venkateswara as his Guru and that is why Ramanujaacharya who glorified Visista-advaita and Vaishnavism in infinite ways is considered greatest acharya who could take us to Krushna/Vishnu to grant Moksha, and Sri Krushna would not reject as he accepted Ramanuja as his acharya..This is recorded in Venkatachala mahatmyam. So if Ramanuja says so, moksham will be GRANTED by Vaasudeva alone. Only he can grant moksham finally, no one has the right to perform this task.

I respect the opinions and am just curious about the first part and would like Nitai dasa to expand on it more as in any events describing about the greatness of Nitai swamy

Adiyen Ramanuja daasa

 

[निताइ dasa]

First of all, welcome to the forum! It is nice to see another Vaishnava, and I apologize if you thought my tone was harsh or confrontational; that was not my intention.

.

Nitai! Thank you for your questions prabhuji. My heart becomes very happy when we can discuss Lord Hari and matters pertaining to Him. . I will try and give an answer to your questions as per what our previous acharyas have taught. Please understand that in no way am I trying to demean your Siddhanta and Sampradaya. Actually all the four vaishnav sampradayas are ground in scripture, it is up to us to choose which appeals to us the most.

As per your first question about the translation of the Bhagavatam. Yes, Lord Chaitanya accepted the commentary of Sridhara as authoritative, as his commentary is one of the oldest on the Bhagavatam . We understand however that the highest truth can only be established by Sri Krsna Himself, and He did so as Lord Gauranga. There is an interesting pastime in this regard actually (found in Chaitanya Charitamrta Antya Chapter 7, the biography of the Lord). Lord Chaitanya used to be close friends with Sri Vallabhacacharya. One day however, Sri Vallabha went to Lord Chaitanya to establish His own commentary of the Bhagavatam over Sridhara Swami's. On seeing this however, Lord Chaitanya simply laughed and said jokingly "Whoever does not accept svami (Sridhara) I consider a prostitute". In this way Sri Vallabha's pride was broken and He accepted Lord Chaitanya as Narayan Himself. All our previous acharayas in their following commentaries of Bhagavatam have always followed under the commentary of Sridhara. Yet they have expanded the explanations of Sridhara Swami to establish the superiority of Lord Krsna over Narayan. This can be seen in Jiva Goswami's Krsna Sandharbha.

As per your second question about the Rama and Visnu bhaktas, the answer is due to the natural inclination for the soul to serve a particular diety. You see, according to us, every soul serves Lord Hari in a particular form and mood. The Siddha Deha (the eternal form and relationship of the soul with God) is a fundamental part of each soul, and therefore cannot be changed. Some souls serve Ramachandra exclusively, and therefore are attracted to a Sampradaya that worships Him. Some souls may similarly have a Siddha Deha in only Sri Krsna's Lila and therefore are attracted to our Sampradaya. Again the swarupa of the soul is fundemental and cannot be changed. Therefore for each soul, their form of God is the highest. Even so, when we look objectivity (according to the Goswamis), Sri Krsna is the source of Visnu tattva. This is because of our understanding of Bhagavatam (the verse I quoted above) as well in terms of rasa vichara. Sri Krsna has 64 super-excellent qualities while Lord Narayan has 60. Furthermore, Sri Krsna is situated in madhurya rasa, which is categorically higher than the aiswariya rasa that Lord Visnu in situated in. This is because even Lakshmi desires to dance with Krsna in the rasa (according to Bhagavatam) yet Radharani is never attracted to Lord Visnu, only Sri Krsna. Anyway this Rasa Vicara is very high topic, so I don't know much. Our basis however is the verse I showed from Bhagavatam for this claim.

The story you quote is a very beautiful pastime and shows how the fundamental swarupa of the souls can never be altered, not even by God himself! It is actually a conversation between Lord Chaitanya and Murari Gupta. According to us Gaudiyas, Sri Murari Gupta is an incarnation of Hanuman himself, therefore He eternally serves the Lord in His form as Sri Ramachandra. Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu Himself tried to convince Murari to worship Sri Krsna, as Sri Krsna was an abode of sweetness and wonderful qualities. Murari however that night began to cry as he could not think of any Lord other then Ram. The next day he fell at Lord Gauranga's feet and said:

"Murāri Gupta said, "I have sold my head to the lotus feet of Raghunātha. I cannot withdraw my head, for that would give me too much pain.It is not possible for me to give up the service of Raghunātha's lotus feet. At the same time, if I do not do so I shall break your order. What can I do?"

Hearing this, I (Lord Chaitanya) became very happy. I then raised Murāri Gupta and embraced him."I said to him, "All glories to you, Murāri Gupta! Your method of worship is very firmly fixed-so much so that even upon My request your mind did not turn. 'The servitor must have love and affection for the lotus feet of the Lord exactly like this. Even if the Lord wants separation, a devotee cannot abandon the shelter of His lotus feet.Just to test your firm faith in your Lord, I requested you again and again to change your worship from Lord Rāmacandra to Kṛṣṇa".In this way, I congratulated Murāri Gupta, saying, "Indeed, you are the incarnation o fHanumān. Consequently you are the eternal servant of Lord Rāmacandra. Why should you give up the worship of Lord Rāmacandra and His lotus feet?" Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu continued, "I accept this Murāri Gupta as My life and soul. When I hear of his humility, it perturbs My very life."

This pastime is showing very beautifully how by nature each soul is attracted to a specific deity of the Lord. However accepting Lord Gauranga, we believe, is able to speed the process of bhakti immensely and one will get Bhakti to his/her particular deity even faster. That is the function of the Chaitanya Avatar, He and Lord Nityananda give mercy to everyone indiscriminately.


(the remainder of my answer I will put in another post, as this post is becoming quite long).

 

[निताइ dasa]

First of all, welcome to the forum! It is nice to see another Vaishnava, and I apologize if you thought my tone was harsh or confrontational; that was not my intention.

Why do you think that the Krishna of the translations of Sridhara Swami, Viraraghavacharya, and others was different from the Krishna of Chaitanya? AFAIK, Chaitanya used Sridhara Swami's translation of the BP, and Sridhara Swami did not say that Krishna was greater than Vishnu (well, I haven't seen any quote so I assumed that this is the correct conclusion).

I applaud you for your belief that your sampradaya contains the highest truth. Truly shows your devotion to your Acharyas.

Here is a question: Why didn't Chaitanya encourage the Rama-bhaktas, Vishnu-bhaktas, and Narasimha-bhaktas to worship mainly Krishna and abandon their god? If Krishna is greater than all the incarnations, then that must mean that the abode of Krishna is more prestigious than the abode of other Avatars, and since Chaitanya always had the welfare of others in mind, he should have told the other bhaktas to worship Krishna to attain this great abode. However, he didn't. He actually wrote "rama-dasa" on the forehead of one of his devotees who worshiped Rama. Wasn't there also a story where one devotee of Chaitanya was crying that he had to give up Lord Rama for Lord Krishna, but Chaitanya reassured him that there would be no reason to abandon one form of god. Perhaps he believed that all Vaishnavas attained the same destination, and if worshiping any avatar of Narayana lead you to the same destination, then that must mean that all the avatars of Narayana are equal.


Even then, just because one is divine doesn't mean they are correct. Even Bhagavan says things that are not the truth. Take Buddha for example. Although he was empowered by Bhagavan himself (in Shri Vaishnava theology), he still preached a doctrine that was contradictory to the message of the Vedas. Therefore, one must check to see if a person's teachings is in accordance with Vedas. Even Bhagavad Gita cannot be taken as pramana unless it is verified that its philosophy meshes with the Upanishads'. Thankfully, the many Vedantin teachers over the years have shown just that.

I am not saying this to cause any offense, just saying that one must not rely on blind faith. That is why the Goswamis and Baladeva and all the great GV teachers that came after Chaitanya made an effort to prove that Chaitanya's philosophy was enshrined in Shruti, even if they thought that Chaitanya's divinity was enough evidence. Ramanuja himself said that one must not have blind faith in his works; one must discover the truth by his/her own merit and study.


I am not too familiar with Sanskrit, so I will have to do more research on this topic. But thank you for bringing this to my attention.


Well, Shri Vaishnavas translate those verses differently. I'm not sure what their translations are though, but I'm pretty sure Tattva-vadis have similar translations. Tattva-ji could probably shed some light.

There is no doubt that by following Chaitanya and Nityananda one can attain Moksha. However, accepting him as the Supreme Lord is another matter. The only way, afaik, that Vishistadvaitins, Advaitins, and Tattva-vadins will accept Chaitanya as Supreme is if Gaudiya Vaishnavas defeated the former in debate. Once Achintya-Bheda-Abheda is shown to be the philosophy of the Vedas, they will automatically accept Gaudiya Vaishnavism. If a Shri Vaishnava were to accept Chaitanya as Bhagavan himself, the Shri Vaishnava would have to choose between Ramanuja and Chaitanya, and since Chaitanya is God, he would have to become a Gaudiya Vaishnava. I hope you can see why the other Vaishnavas have trouble accepting Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as God without compromising their own traditions.

Narrottama Das Thakur said that if one believes that Chaitanya is 1) A great reformer 2) a great devotee 3) Krishna himself, that is okay. Non-Gaudiya Vaishnavas believe in 1 and 2 and nothing more. I used to be a Gaudiya-Sri Vaishnava, a mix of both, before I made my own conclusions after looking at all the evidence.

Looking forward to more fruitful discussions like this, and pardon me if I offended you with my inquisitiveness.

Response Part 2

As per your third statement (about pramana), yes I totally agree. Everything an Avatar teaches must also be in accordance with the scriptures. However, we Gaudiyas accept Bhagavatam as the topmost pramana, and read even the Vedanta in accordance with Bhagavatam. The reason for this, as put by Jiva Goswami in his Tattva Sandarbha, is that a great majority of Sruti has been lost to us in the past (calculations show that we have only access to about 7% of the original sruti that Srila Veda Vyasa ji scribed). Furthermore in order to study Sruti, one must also study the necessary Vedangas and Upa-Vedas as well as pass the upanayanam sanskara. In light of all this, Srila Jiva Goswami therefore suggests the study of the Smrti, and proves that Sruti and Smrti mirror the same truth, and are considered as authoritative as each other as they both originate from the mouth of Lord Visnu in the beginning of creation. The conception that Sruti is greater than Smrti was first established by Sripad Sanakaracharya as the Prasthana Trayi concept. We however reject this concept, as it cannot be found in Shastra, and accept Srimad Bhagavatam as topmost proof. We do this for many reasons, some of which I will briefly mention below:

1) It is the natural commentary on Vedanta and Gayatri (artho 'yam brahma-sutranam bharatartha-vinirnayah gayatri bhasya-rupo 'sau vedartha-paribrmhitah).

2) It the best of the Puranas (srimad bhagavatam puranam amalam yad vaishnavanam priyam) and (SB 12.13.16)

3) It is the fully blossomed fruit of the Vedic Desire tree (Nigama Kalpataror galitam phalam)

4) It is the essence of all Vedic literature, as it is the answer given by Suta-deva to the request by the sages who ask him to give the essence of all the Vedabta (arva-vedanta-saram hi sri-bhagavatam isyate -SB 12.13.15).

5) When Srila Vyasa Deva wrote all the other Puranas, Mahabharata as well as separation of the Vedas, still in His heart he was quite dissatisfied as he felt he had not made the absolute truth fully clear. Thus on the instructions of His Guru, Sri Narada, he entered into Samadhi and after seeing the Absolute Truth wrote Srimad Bhagavatam. The story is in quite detail in the 1st Canto I think.

That is why originally, the Gaudiya's did not write any Bhasya on the Vedanta Sutra, as we accepted Srimad Bhagavatam as its natural Bhasya. Only when our Sampradaya was challenged in Jaipur by some Ramanandis, did Sripad Baladeva Vidyabhushana scribe the Govinda Bhasya.

Again in no way am I trying to criticize and challenge your siddhanta and the conclusion of your Achayaras. I just want to bring and understanding of what we Gaudiyas beleive, and how we are also ground in scripture too (far too many times do I hear people criticizing our line and calling it un-shastric, which really hurts my heart ). Forgive me if I seem too direct.

As per your second last paragraph, yes I agree. I mean, I have thought about this alot, I can't expect any other Sampradaya to give in to us as that would in-fact undermine the primary teachings of their own Sampradaya. In no way do I want to do this, as this only lessens the spiritual faith in Sri Hari. Actually the reason I accepted Gaudiya Siddhanta was because of Lord Gauranga and Nityananda, not because of its philosophy actually. I mean ideally I would love if everyone could worship Lord Gaur Nitai Hahah, but I can see why it may become a problem.

Anyway, the Lord in the heart as the Paramatma will guide us. At least let us take joy in the fact that we accept Lord Visnu as Supreme Lord Himself and we can worship Him through Nama-Sankirtan. Ultimately, these differences are only minor, and that should not stop the Vaishnav Sampradayas from coming together to glorify the Lord in Nama Sankirtan. Nitai Gaur Haribol!

 

[Aupmanyav]

Quoting Shruti is always problematic.

 

[निताइ dasa]

@Chakra @निताइ dasa
Am sorry but I am listening Chaitanya name only recently and who has the authority to claim he is avatar of god...Don't mistake me as I respect all branches of Vaishnavism Are there any events describing the same? I respect the Nitai postings and his belief and would like to expand on this......what was his contribution of Vaishnavism?

On the other hand Ramanujacharya was accepted by Maha Vishnu in the form of Venkateswara as his Guru and that is why Ramanujaacharya who glorified Visista-advaita and Vaishnavism in infinite ways is considered greatest acharya who could take us to Krushna/Vishnu to grant Moksha, and Sri Krushna would not reject as he accepted Ramanuja as his acharya..This is recorded in Venkatachala mahatmyam. So if Ramanuja says so, moksham will be GRANTED by Vaasudeva alone. Only he can grant moksham finally, no one has the right to perform this task.

I respect the opinions and am just curious about the first part and would like Nitai dasa to expand on it more as in any events describing about the greatness of Nitai swamy

Adiyen Ramanuja daasa

Dandavat Pranam. Thankyou for gracing us with Your presence. I will response to your queries as per what I have been taught by my Gurudev. Again please forgive me for any offenses I may commit, it is not my intent.

There are many many proofs from Scripture (Smrti and Sruti which is accepted by all Sampradayas) which substantiate the claim that Lord Chaitanya is Sri Visnu himself. I will post some scripure quotes here (there are quite alot so I will post the important ones):

krsna varnam tvisa krsnam
sangopangastra parsadam
yajnaih sankirtanam-prayair
yajanti hi sumedhasah

"In the age of Kali, Krsna appears in a golden form (tviakrsnam), chanting the two syllables krs-na (Krsnavarnam). He descends along with His weapons, saktis, limbs, and eternal confidential associates(sangopangastra parsadam). Those with intelligence worship Him with the sankirtana yajna. (Srimad Bhagavatam 11.5.32)

"channah kalau yad abhavas tri-yugo ’tha sa tvam"

In the Age of Kali, You sometimes appear in a covered incarnation. Therefore You are known as Tri-yuga" (Srimad Bhagavatam. 7.9.38)

kalina dakyamananam
paritranaya tanu-bhrtam
janma prathama sandhyayam
karisyami dvijatisu

aham purno bhavisyami
yuga-sandhyau visesatah
mayapure navadvipe
bhavisyami saci sutah

kaleh prathama sandhyayam
lakshmi- kanto bhavisyati
daru-brahma-samipa-sthah
sannyasi gaura-vigrahah

In the first part of the age of Kali, I will come among the brahmanas to save the fallen souls, who are being burned by the troubles of the age of Kali.
I will take birth as the son of Saci, in Navadvipa-Mayapura.. I will come in my complete spiritual form in the first part of Kali-Yuga.
In the first part of Kali-Yuga, the Supreme Personality of Godhead will come in a gold-like form. First He will become the husband of Laksmi (Srimati Laksmi Devi, Lord Caitanya's first wife). Then He will become a sannyasi, near Lord Jagannatha who will appear in a divine wooden form. (Garuda-Purana)


satye daitya-kuladhi-nasa-samaye
simhordhva-martyakrtis
tretayam dasa-kandharam
paribhavan rameti namakrtih
gopalan paripalayan vraja-pure
bharam haran dvapare
gaurangah priya-kirtanah
kali-yuge caitanya-nama prabhuh

"The Supreme Personality of Godhead who in the Satya-yuga appeared as a half-man, half-lion to cure a terrible disease that had ravaged the daityas, and who in the Treta-yuga appeared as a person named Rama (Lord Ramacandra), a person who defeated the ten- headed Demon Ravana, and who in the Dvapara-yuga removed the earth's burden, and protected the Gopa (cowherd men) people of Vraja-pura, will appear again in the Kali-yuga. His form will be golden, He will delight in chanting the Lord's holy names, and His name will be Caitanya." (Nrsimha Purana)

golokam ca parityajya
lokanam trana-karanat
kalau gauranga-rupena
lila-lavanya-vigrahah

In the Kali-Yuga, I will leave Goloka and, to save the people of the world, I will become the handsome and playful Lord Gauranga. (Markandeya-Purana)

kali-ghora-tamas-channat
sarvan acara varjitan
sacigarbhe ca sambhuya
tarayisyami narada

O Narada Muni, I will take birth in the womb of Saci. I shall save the people, who will give up all proper good conduct, from the terrible darkness of the age of Kali-Yuga. (Vamana-Purana)

Again is only a portion of the shastric quotes which is given by our Acharayas regarding Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. I don't want to copy and paste spam, but I have but the important ones for your pleasure to read. The rest can be found at:
http://gosai.com/writings/the-divinity-of-sri-caitanya-mahaprabhu-0

Another way we accept the authenticity of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, is because many learned scholars also thought so. This includes Vasudeva Sarvabhauma, Kesava Bhatta, Prakasananda Sarasvati, Prabodhananda Sarasvati, Advaita Acarya, Srivasa Pandita, Six Goswamis, Raya Ramananda, Nilambara Cakravarti, and Gopinatha Acarya who claimed that Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was Sri Krsna Himself. It was also the opinion of Rajarsi Prataparudra of Kalinga and his guru Kasi Misra. Either these persons were mad or they did see something. Even Meera Bai in some her bhajans descibed that Lord Krsna has come again as Chaitanya Mahaprabhu

As for Sri Ramanuja, we hold him very highly in our samparadaya as an acaraya who established Vaishnavism very strongly, and it was only due to Him that Sankara's Adwaita-vada was unable to touch South India for a long time. Sri Ramanuja saw no caste or gender distinction for Vaishnavas and up held the tradition that anyone can act as guru who is realised. We consider him to be an Avatar of Lakshmana, or Shesh Naga. I would however disagree with your statement that only Ramanuja's siddhanta can take us to Krishna. Yes you may consider the greatest acharya, as you are in his Sampradaya. However, according to Padma Purana (I can provide verse if you want), in Kali Yuga, there are only 4 sampradayas that are considered authentic, and they are Sri, Brahma, Rudra and Kumara Sampradaya.

Gaudiya Vaisnavism has very uniquely contributed to Vaishnavism as a whole in my opinion. It is only due to Lord Chaitanyas advent that the subtle intricacies of rasa tattva was revealed. The name of Radharani was unheard of in Vaishnav Sangas, and it was only due to Rupa Goswami that Her glory was revealed. In fact our Goswamis wrote hundreds of books which explicitly describe devotional service to the Lord, the process of Bhakti as well the highest goal of Prema. I mean if you read even one of those books, you can't find such depth anywhere else Of course I am biased towards it, so I invite you to read it for yourself and see. It was only due to the Goswamis that Sri Vrindavan Dhama and its many temples and tirtha sthanas were again discovered. It was only due to the Mercy of Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada that the ganga of Hari Bhakti and the sublime teachings of Vaishnavism was able to be distributed to the mleccha countries who were hopeless lost in materialism.