I was reading The Meaning of the Sannyasa Ashram by Bhakti Gaurava Narasingha Maharaja and would like to share this chapter with you.
Self Made Sannyasi
From the time of the Six Goswamis until now the sannyasa mantra given to the tridandi sannyasis has been different than the mantra received by Mahaprabhu. The mantra given at present was first given be Sanatana Goswami. However, until the time Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura the tridandi sannyasa of the Gaudiya Vaishnava line was not visible. In 1918 Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura took sannyasa from a photo of Srila Gour Kishore Das Babaji Maharaja. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is known as a self-made sannyasi, a self-manifest sannyasi.
It was Srila Bhaktisiddhanta who organized the present standard of the Gaudiya Vaishnava sannyasi, The dress, the danda, etc. Everything was done by him. The mantra which he gave was the same as the one given by the Babaji class such as Gour Kishore Das Babaji Maharaja and Jaganatha Das Babaji Maharaja. This same mantra is presently being given to all the sannyasis in the Gaudiya Vaishnava line.
I never heard of such thing as taking initiation from a photo. Is there any precedents? Does anybody have any details or information on this?
Welcome to the Gaudiya Saraswata Sampradaya. Interesting topic and important. It could have been posted under Vaisnava Controversies. I will let others comment first.
As I recall from one of his biographies (Ray of Visnu perhaps), BSST read that Ramanuja took sannyasa from a picture, which provided him with a precedent for doing so himself.
Interestingly, there was a prediction made by Gaurakisora dasa Babaji Maharaja with regard to the sannyasa being (re)instituted in Gaudiya Sampradaya.
Bhakti Pradipa Tirtha Maharaja (the elder brother of Ananta Vasudeva), under the guidance of GKDB took initiation from Bhaktivinoda Thakura at Svananda-Sukhada-kunja in Godruma. At that time (the future) Tirtha Maharaja was blessed by GKDB that he would later take sannyasa from a sat-guru and would preach the name of Mahaprabhu widely. This turned out to be true; Tirtha Maharaja was the first sannyasa disciple of BSST and he was the first to go to the West (England) to preach.
Clearly from this story GKDB and Bhaktivinoda Thakura approved of the idea of sannyasa for Gaudiyas, and Babaji Maharaja's prediction gives validation (albeit before the event) to the sannyasa of BSST.
Ekalavya was a youth who approached Dronacarya while he was training the Kurus. As the story goes, Drona refused to train this young man as he was of a lower caste, so he goes to the forest, builds an idol of Drona, and in front of it he practices incessantly, until he becomes superhumanly skillful with bow and arrows.
One day Drona and Arjuna were hunting and saw a dog whose mouth had been sewn shut with arrows, so they tracked the trail of the dog back to Ekalavya's hut, where he was practicing.
Drona approached him and asked him who he was; Ekalavya touched his feet and told him who he was and showed him the idol.
Drona and Arjuna realized that as long as Ekalavya was around, Drona couldn't have held his promise of making Arjuna the best archer ever, so Drona said: "If you are my disciple, where is my Gurudaksina?" Ekalavya offered to give anything he would ask, so Drona asked for Ekalavya's right thumb, which is essential for an archer (although I imagined shooting without the thumb and don't see any problem), at which Ekalavya just up and chopped it off.
So here is your precedent. At the same time, I really don't know what to think of this lila. The difference between Ekalavya and Srila Sarasvati Thakura is that the former had been rejected by his guru, so, as much as he became perfect in his practice, that was kind of like leaching off the sakti, which is exactly the condition we are all in within the material world, whereas SST had always been dear to Gaurakisora dasa babaji.
What both Sarasvati Thakura and Ekalavya have in common though is that purity is the force, which is true for everybody.
SST was a nasthiki brahmacari and an irreprehensible sannyasi; like Mahaprabhu, he took sannyasa for the sake of preaching effectively, which Gaurakisora would have approved of if alive. He didn't give himself sannyasa motivated by a desire for puja, labha and pratistha, and history speaks for itself. Similarly, Ekalavya was sincerely committed in the relationship with his guru, so he didn't protest when asked for his thumb, which would have made his practice vain.
As far as living guru and picture, the first thought that comes to mind is that as krsna says: "Acaryam mam vijaniyat", eventually the guru is Krsna, who comes to us in one form or another. Which form is really relative. That is Sri Guru. He stands there on the shoreline, between the beach of relativeness and the ocean of the Absolute, and he says: "Here, I'll teach you how to scuba dive."
So, we'd better focus on the absolute aspect of Sri Guru, and always be careful not to relativize, dismiss, or abuse him, otherwise we'll end like Ekalavya, who at most realized that applying oneself with devotion bares its fruit, but eventually Drona stole that fruit from him, just like Ekalavya had stolen from his Guru.
As to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, well, we are the fruit.
Ekalavya was sincerely committed in the relationship with his guru, so he didn't protest when asked for his thumb, which would have made his practice vain.
Ekalavya’s endeavor to learn the Dhanur Veda and his desire to become great were not accepted by his guru. Bhima would not accept him as a student out of consideration for the others. Plus he made this vow to Arjuna: “I shall now teach you in such a way that no bowman in the world will be your equal. I declare this to you in truth!” Ekalavya became better archer then Arjuna, so master’s word had to be kept and his prestige as a guru sustained. Thus the thumb request. If Ekalavya was sincere, he would have listened to his guru instructions and not pursue study of Dhanur Veda. I'm sorry but I fail to see how those two stories are related.
If I get a mantra from the book, sit near picture of Gour Kishore Das Babaji Maharaja and perform some ritual does it make me a sannyasi? I think not. So in case of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura the situation was different. And I would like to know how and why. How can divya-jnana be transfered without personal contact?
So in case of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura the situation was different. And I would like to know how and why. How can divya-jnana be transfered without personal contact?
Syamasundara has addressed this in his post, but I'll elaborate here for clarity.
What is divya-jnana? Is it conscious or not? Of course it is, being the Lord's svarupa-sakti, which can do anything and go wherever she likes with no restriction. The same with the guru-- is he limited to only coming before the disciple in person while present in his or her sadhaka deha? No. The guru is Krsna coming in a localized form. If one is sincere and pure then will not Krsna respond to that sincerity? I think he will.
But clearly this does not happen to just anyone; it depends on one's level of realization.There is a universe of difference between Saraswati Thakura and an ordinary sadhaka and that difference is realization. For a great soul like Saraswati Thakura it is no problem to see his guru everywhere and access his guru internally. A a beginner cannot do this and should thus not try to imitate the actions of great souls, just like we should not try to drink poison like Siva did.
It all comes down to realization, qualification. Saraswati Thakura sat in nama-bhajna for about nine years and fulfilled his vow to chant a billion (!) names. I would call that serious spiritual power and a feat requiring very deep realization. Again, not for the ordinary sadhaka to take up.
This also makes me think of Guru Maharaj quoting Bhaktivinoda Thakur in Sri Guru-Parampara: " Devotees of the Supreme Lord are not controlled by the scriptures since their activities are congenial to divine wisdom. Therefore, when the self-realized devotees ordain any new arrangement, this should be followed as a religious code, even if such new arrangements are not found in the scriptural dictums of the previous sages."
Especially the last line speaks very much about what we are discussing here.
What is divya-jnana? Is it conscious or not? Of course it is, being the Lord's svarupa-sakti, which can do anything and go wherever she likes with no restriction...It all comes down to realization, qualification.
Very nice answer Citta Hari, thank you very much.
If anyone has a copy of Ray of Visnu, perhaps they could cite it here with regard to the details of BSST's sannyasa. As Citta Hari mentioned, I belive he cited Ramanujacarya as a precedent for Vaisnava sannyasa as well as for taking sannyasa from a picture. However, I also seem to recall that he received the mantra and order to take sannyasa in a dream/vision. In this case the ceremony before the picture merely announced waht had taken place unseen.
His sannyasa was also in consideration of daiva varnasrama, in this case a semblence of varnasrama for Vaisnavas who have yet to attain perfection. As we have learned on the varnasrama thread, this daiva varnasrama idea originted in Bhaktivinoda, who instructed BSST to institute it. By adopting sannyasa BSST steped down, not up, to set an example of how to serve the paramahamsa Vaisnavas through preaching/kirtana as a parivrajakacarya (itnerent preacher). More could be said on this.
Otherwise, it is important to note that other Guadiya lineages objected more to the enitre idea of sannyas in the Guadiya sampradaya than they did to BSST's method of accepting it. Now we should discuss this.
What is this sannyasa for Gaudiyas when Rupa and Sanantana wore white and mandated this standard for renunciates. Moreover it is part of varnasrama dharma, not Bhagavata dharma. Furthermore according to the puranans, sannyas is prohibited in kali-yuga. These types of objections must be discussed.
With this spectacular vision in mind as his impetus and at the urging of his disciples, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura thought the time had come for widespread preaching. Up until 1918 Siddhanta Saraswati was mainly immersed in chanting and publishing books. In Vrajapattana, Mayapur, on the full moon day of Phalguna, the 29th of March, 1918, Siddhanta Saraswati took sannyasa and took the name Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Maharaja at the age of 44, according to the Vedic rites which he had gathered from the Ramanujas in his travels. He took initiation from a picture of Srila Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja. Taking sannyasa from a picture was certainly not a standard practice of the Ramanujas. The situation, however, was unique. Srila Saraswati Thakura had no spiritual master who was physically present, and he had no God-brothers, being the only disciple of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji. He was furthermore a selfrealized soul, and there is no doubt that he took sannyasa to fulfill the innermost desires of his spiritual masters, who had both ordered him to preach. This practice was never meant to be imitated by others in much less unique and less qualified positions. He wanted to establish a mission that would take the teachings of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu all over the world.
exerpt taken from A Ray of Vishnu.
What is this sannyasa for Gaudiyas when Rupa and Sanantana wore white and mandated this standard for renunciates. Moreover it is part of varnasrama dharma, not Bhagavata dharma. Furthermore according to the puranans, sannyas is prohibited in kali-yuga. These types of objections must be discussed.
Based on what Vrindavan Prabhu posted, it sounds as if sannyasa is basically for preaching purposes.
Perhaps without practicing Bhagavata dharma, real sannyasa is not possible in kali-yuga. If harinama is the only means for deliverance then what is the meaning of sannyasa without having made spiritual progress through harinama?
The spirit of your answer, Fred, is in the right direction. The famous sriptural statement prohibiting sannyasa in kali yuga speaks of karma sannyasa, which we agree is prohibited. Mahaprabhu himself cited this verse in his conversation with Chand Kazi. Then he himself took sannyasa for preaching. In his midst there were also a good number of sannyasis, Prabhodananda, Paramananda, Madhavendra, his guru Isvara Puri, etc. Srimad Bhagavatam also speaks of sannyasa. We call this Vaisnava sannyasa, or tridandi sannyasa, of which Sri Ramanuja is a good example. So the objection to the sannyasa of BSST on the basis of its being prohibited in this age are not substancial.
Still, some argue that since the forming of the Gaudiya sampradaya on the part of the Six Goswamis there should be no sannyasa in the sampradaya. They offer various arguments. For example, Santana Goswami told Jagadananda that Vaisnavas should not wear red cloth. I think I addressed this to some extent in one sanga. Look for an answer in the archives. I will try to cite other arguments later today.
Still, some argue that since the forming of the Gaudiya sampradaya on the part of the Six Goswamis there should be no sannyasa in the sampradaya. They offer various arguments. For example, Santana Goswami told Jagadananda that Vaisnavas should not wear red cloth. I think I addressed this to some extent in one sanga. Look for an answer in the archives. I will try to cite other arguments later today.
According to your Sanga, Santana Goswami told Jagadananda that Vaisnavas should not wear red cloth because the red cloth that Sanatana was wearing happened to be from a mayavadi sannyas. He was condeming the wearing of a mayavadi sannyas cloth, not the wearing of saffron. This all appears from Cc Antya 13.49 - 13.61.
In the purport of Cc Antya 13.61 where Sanatana Goswami states "rakta-vastra ‘vaisnavera' parite na yuyaya," Srila Prabhupada mentions that one reason devotees wear saffron is to avoid wearing the cloth of paramahamsas. Is the cloth of paramahamsas' white?
I would like to give a quote from The Golden Staircase by Srila Bhakti Raksaka Sridhara Deva Goswami Maharaja about tridandi-sannyasa.
And there are also different stages of sannyasa mentioned in the sastra: kuticaka, bahudaka, hamsa and paramahamsa progressively. But tridandi-sannyasa is when the sannyasi engages himself in the service of Godhead by spreading His message and doing some good to the public, and that characteristic is different. It is categorically different. The tridandi-sannyasi is not adopting an attitude or tactic of leaving all the engagements of this world as a result of becoming disgusted with its many temptations. Rather, he is engaging himself in the higher duty of the upper world through an agent, so his body has got utility. Remaining here, maintaining connection here, he is drawing some higher thing from above and distributing that in the environment. That is another conception of sannyasa, and it has positive value.
This is a similar engagement to that performed by the Lord’s closest associates. When an incarnation of God comes down, His favorite parsadas, His friends and servitors, are also sent by Him to come down to do some service to help Him. There are also sub-agents who have received some engagement from the higher agent, and by moving within this world in that capacity, they can earn more spiritual wealth than those who are very eager to disconnect completely from this material plane. They want to try to utilize their connection with this mundane plane to earn some substantial wealth of the upper house. So like the Lord’s parsadas, the tridandi-sannyasis want to work as God’s agents.
Also, I would like to mention that besides preaching, another point of reinstituting sannyasa by Saraswati Thakura was to start anew because babaji-vesa had become identified with the lowest men in society due to deterioration of Gaudiya Vaishnavism at that time.
I feel like someone learning a new language.
What does paramahamsa mean? And where is the best place for me to look up the meaning of sanskrit terms?
Thank you.
Literally it means supreme swan. The vedas say that a swan has the ability to filter milk from a mixture of milk and water.
So someone who has attained the paramahamsa stage is able to see the soul in everything, or Krsna behind every aspect of the material energy.
Paramahamsa refers to someone who, due to his high level of consciousness, is beyond the behavioral constraints of the varnas and ashramas (social class and marital state) or any regulatory dictate of the scripture, so he wears no distinctive marks or clothes proper to a religion or another.
This also makes me think of Guru Maharaj quoting Bhaktivinoda Thakur in Sri Guru-Parampara: " Devotees of the Supreme Lord are not controlled by the scriptures since their activities are congenial to divine wisdom. Therefore, when the self-realized devotees ordain any new arrangement, this should be followed as a religious code, even if such new arrangements are not found in the scriptural dictums of the previous sages."Especially the last line speaks very much about what we are discussing here.
Could someone please explain how this concept fits with the concept that one can tell an authorized person by the way that their words and actions are supported by the revealed scriptures?
Thank you.