Bhagavat das Speaks for BV Narayana Maharaja
BY: ROCANA DASA, SUN EDITOR
Aug 25, USA (SUN) This Counterpoint is written in response to two recent postings from my Godbrother, Bhagavat das, including today's article comprised of "My Response to Rocana das", and a Sun Blog commentary posted on August 23rd.
In these writings, Bhagavat das has revealed that he is, in fact, a spokesman for the BV Narayana Maharaja camp. His writing/preaching style, verbiage, and preaching mood is classic Gaudiya Matha. This mood is not reminiscent of the Bhagavat das I knew and identified with when we were both active members of ISKCON. He has obviously become convinced that he has made much spiritual advancement on account of taking shelter/siksa from what he asserts is “advanced association”.
Rather than launching into a direct rebuttal of Bhagavat das's re-cycled challenges to my Sampradaya Acarya thesis, I will simply refer the reader to the following:
My original Sampradaya Acarya paper
The original Gaudiya Matha article that spawned this discussion
My Counterpoint reply to the Gaudiya Matha article
Bhagavat das's reply to my Counterpoint
I have written many other articles in response to other BV Narayana Maharaja apologists, and these can be found in the Vada section of HareKrsna.com.
Bhagavat das really hasn't offered up anything new, but is simply repackaging the same well-worn rhetoric. Having already made my previous arguments in defense, I'll now take a fresh angle of approach in an attempt to delineate the profound differences between BV Narayana Maharaja and AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada.
Please be aware that beneath all Bhagavat das's scholarly language, sastric quotations, and cooperative jargon lies his ultimate objective -- convincing the reader that our Srila Prabhupada and his siksa guru's guru, BV Srila Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Maharaja, are on an equal spiritual platform. If we carefully study Bhagavat das's statements as other Sun contributors have done, namely Shiva dasa, it is easy to detect that Bhagavat das feels that his guru is, in fact, even more spiritually advanced than Srila Prabhupada.
BV Narayana Maharaja is more traditionally sophisticated in his manner of approach, but basically he is doing the same thing Bhagavat das accuses me of doing, namely being “guru-centric”. I have been informed by Bhagavat das that Srila Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Maharaja has written extensively on the very subject I am addressing, the list of 32 great Acaryas who compose our real Sampradaya lineage. So far, my request for a copy of these writings of Srila Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Maharaja has gone unanswered.
Bhagavat das's smokescreen diatribe surrounding my use of the name "Sampradaya Acarya" in this particular context is very typical. I have answered this challenge repeatedly, but he continues to press forward without addressing my replies. His approach is quite “Gaudiya Matha like”, meaning they get hung-up on so-called Vaisnava terminology and therefore can't see the forest for the trees. I am admittedly taking some literary license in my coining or utilization of the term "Sampradaya Acarya". In fact, I'm referring to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati's "list of 32 maha-Acaryas who play a prominent role in our parampara”. The question under discussion, in my mind, is which personalities in our modern age should qualify to be added to that list? Bhagavat das asserts that I'm changing siddhanta, causing all sorts of offenses, disobeying Srila Prabhupada, and so on just because I describe Srila Prabhupada as a Sampradaya Acarya. This sort of minutia mentality is reminiscent of the Gaudiya Matha, but not of our Srila Prabhupada. It is similar to the previous Gaudiya Matha Swami who was making an issue of the supposed improper use of the English word "initiate" (which Srila Prabhupada frequently used) instead of using "diksa".
The reader should also be aware that Srila Prabhupada's Gaudiya Matha Godbrothers, as well as certain of the senior disciples now controlling ISKCON as selectively approved diksa gurus, now simply insert their own names at the bottom of this list of 32 exalted Vaisnava giants. They put equally sized pictures of themselves on the altar right beside the descended nitya-siddhas. These pretentious acts naturally send the intended message to their disciples and supporters, which is that they are equal to those on the list of 32, dare I say, Sampradaya Acaryas.
Are these gurus foolishly thinking that they are following some traditional Vaisnava path? Are they truly entitled to consider themselves on the same level of the Sampradaya as those on “the list”?
One message this sends to me is that they have erroneously extrapolated that Srila Bhaktisiddanta Sarasvati has re-introduced yet another diksa lineage, despite undisputable historical facts surrounding his vigorous and long battle throughout his lila wherein he eventually defeated the bogus diksa lineages that existed in and around Gaudiya at that time. In his writings, this great nitya-siddha clearly designated our Sampradaya as being a siksa lineage. I have presented all these truths before many times, and far more elaborately.
Bhagavat das, as a deputed spokesman for the BV Narayana Swami camp, either hasn't read any of my previous public presentations directed towards other members of his group, or he has become so mesmerized by his siksa guru that he is only capable of repackaging the standard party rhetoric. Despite all this scholarly content, in the final analysis Bhagavat das expects that the reader will simply accept BV Narayana Maharaja as an equal to the true Sampradaya Acaryas, as he obviously has. If you are not convinced or not willing to accept this premise, however, then none of Bhagavat's points make any sense.
All of Bhagavat das's encouragements towards jagat cooperation are couched in scholarly rhetoric, which may sound appealing to the naïve. Let's keep in mind, however, that the main ingredient in any and all cooperative spiritual scenarios is that all participants involved focus on and accept a personality as being absolutely perfect. In our case, I say this personality is Srila Prabhupada and the Sampradaya Acaryas he represents. I'm saying that Srila Prabhupada and the list of 32 Sampradaya Acaryas should be put in that focal position, while Bhagavat das is stating that BV Narayana Maharaja, the living Acarya, deserves to be recognized as the next, present Jagat Guru. This is essentially where the difference lies.
I'm all for cooperation and enjoying the wonderful results it can and will bring, but first we have to all agree upon which personalities are our natural, absolute, undisputable, spiritual “heroes”. I speak for many or most of those within the entire Brahma Gaudiya Vaisnava community when I say that BV Narayana Maharaja simply doesn't qualify. I know Bhagavat das will be disappointed to hear this statement
Whether or not Lord Caitanya benedicts us fallen souls with yet another nitya-siddha is another matter for consideration. I pray that He does. All of us conditioned souls would be eternally benefited. I pray that I'm spiritually qualified to be able to recognize such an individual, because that ability is difficult to develop. Witness the fact that all of Srila Prabhupada's Godbrothers couldn't or wouldn't accept the obvious reality that AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada was, in fact, the next Sampradaya Acarya.
At the opening of his article, Bhagavat das himself laid out the facts supporting my premise. Srila Prabhupada should be appreciated as a Sampradaya Acarya. Unfortunately, he was speaking to an assembly of BV Narayana Maharaja supporters who see Narayana Maharaja as the next Sampradaya Acarya. Bhagavat then went on to basically contradict his own flowery words about Srila Prabhupada by promoting BV Narayana Maharaja as being Srila Prabhupada's successor.
His reasoning was supported by a supposedly sastric notion that there is an absolute requirement that all Srila Prabhupada's disciples and followers accept a siksa guru (who is none other than BV Narayana Maharaja) in order to fully comprehend Srila Prabhupada's purports and instructions. This notion is asiddhantic, offensive nonsense.
I would like point out that all of us have, by Srila Prabhupada's mercy, an eternal relationship with Caitya Guru (Supersoul, Paramatma) residing within our hearts. Srila Prabhupada and the other Sampradaya Acaryas are external manifestations of Caitya Guru and speak to us on His behalf. This truth we can be absolutely assured of. On the other hand, BV Narayana Maharaja and all the other sadhana bhakti diksa gurus present on the landscape should be examined in order to determine their true level of purity and infallibility. No doubt, many advanced devotees can and will voluntarily assist us to navigate through the dangerous waters of this material existence. First, however, we must be prepared by being well-versed in our pure Sampradaya's absolute siddhanta, and by having established our personal relationship with the unquestionable Sampradaya Acaryas who will contribute to our establishing a relationship with Caitya Guru. If we do this, then we will be successful in due course.
How many heartbreaking examples of sincere but uneducated disciples of the fallen diksa gurus will Caitya Guru have to parade before us before we wake-up to the truth concerning whom and what is truly absolutely pure? Despite the fact that some of BV Narayana Maharaja's most senior disciples have recently left him, and many of his contemporaries in the Gaudiya Matha have publicly proclaimed that he is preaching asiddhantic, poisonous, sahijya nonsense, his blind followers continue to remain loyal. Of course, this behavior is not new or exclusively confined to the BV Narayana group. ISKCON's own history with the Zonal Acarya phenomenon stands as another unfortunate example.
Bhagavat das seems to be ignoring all of the telltale warning signs, as we witness by his rebuttal article. He is boldly venturing forth to lure even more moths into the BV Narayana fire. No doubt, he and his fellow recruiters will seduce many gullible lost souls who are deceiving themselves into thinking they are looking for spirituality. Alas, their material desires lead them not to the absolute path open to them, but yet again to another fallible soul in the guise of a Sampradaya Acarya. Our loving potency has to be reposed in pure souls, Lord Sri Krsna's unalloyed servants, and not be again diverted.
Over the last thirty years, I have associated on many occasions with the author, Bhagavat das, back when he was serving and preaching exclusively for and in Srila Prabhupada's interest and mood. By reading this article, I can say categorically that I am not hearing the same Godbrother that I once admired. His mood, voice, and manner is not Srila Prabhupada-like, but is instead very like BV Narayana's.
Sorry to say, Bhagavat das is the tip of the iceberg. Many of my past Godbrothers and sisters have been lead astray by this pied-piper. They have inexplicably deviated from the safe, auspicious path mapped out by the Sampradaya Acaryas. Due to my not having any inclination to venture down this path, I can only speculate as to what they find more attractive than our Srila Prabhupada. I can only judge by the negative results when I compare them to the enthusiastic associates I once knew and loved during Srila Prabhupada's lila years. In many cases, I don't see any improvement in their character, nor dedication to pushing forward Lord Caitanya's Sankirtan Movement. Quite the contrary.
