04/12/98 - 1741

Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, Heir To the Esoteric Life Bhaktivinoda

(This article has been edited for VNN. Accordingly it is without footnotes and diacritic marks, and it contains as little Bengali and Sanskrit as possible. Readers interested in the unabridged edition can request a copy from Candrodaya dasa at audarya@earthlink.net.)

Gaudiya Vaisnavism in the West, both its practice and the considerable interest it has captured in academia, is indebted to Kedarnatha Datta, Thakura Bhaktivinoda. The Thakura has been dubbed the "Pioneer of Gaudiya Vaisnavism in the West." If he is so, Bhaktivinoda Thakura is more the theoretical pioneer, while those who made it their mission to realize his dream by giving it shape went much further West than he did. The father of such missions was Bhaktivinoda's son, Bimal Prasada, later known as Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura. He taught his followers to conceive of themselves as Bhaktivinoda parivara, the spiritual family of Bhaktivinoda. He further conceived of Bhaktivinoda as an eternally liberated associate of Sri Caitanya, the seventh Goswami.

That he inherited the legacy of worldwide Gaudiya propaganda from his father is not a point of contention. However, there is a question as to whether he inherited the inner wealth of Bhaktivinoda's esoteric life and the capacity to offer it to others. His own mission, Gaudiya Math, and more so its most well-known child, ISKCON, while preaching and propagating, have been separated in the minds of a number of scholars and practitioners from this important aspect of the theoretical pioneer. Those who have done so consider one of Bhaktivinoda' s younger sons, Lalita Prasada, the heir to Bhaktivinoda's inner life. Bhaktisiddhanta would be the first to disagree with this assessment.

Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura's preaching went against the current of the existing orthodoxy of Gaudiya Vaisnavism. When he began his mission under the direction of Bhaktivinoda Thakura, he was one soul standing up against what he considered to be an enormous edifice of religious misconception. His mission, as he envisioned it, involved declaring "totalitarian war against maya." In this he did not stop short of critiquing his own spiritual heritage. His critique focused primarily on its approach to the esoteric pratice of raganuga sadhana.

The following article deals with the sensitive issue of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura's critique of predominant practices in mainstream Gaudiya Vaisnavism current during his time. These are practices Bhaktivinoda Thakura appeared to have engaged in and wrote about, practices that Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura did not incorporate into his mission. I offer this article as food for thought and with openness to information that I may not be aware of that might alter its conclusions, as the history of events surrounding the Thakura's preaching and interaction with dominant members of mainstream Gaudiya Vaisnavism of the time has not been objectively documented to the satisfaction of all parties. I write in the spirit of serving my guru pranali, the lineage of spiritual preceptors that have most influenced my spiritual life, and not with a view to criticize unduly any particular individual. I write as well with a view to bring to the attention of scholars that which the followers of Bhaktisiddhanta understand to be the their connection to raganuga sadhana, and to address the present-day followers of Bhaktisiddhanta, and ISKCON in particular, in terms of what he expected of them. In doing so I focus on two aspects of the Gaudiya tradition: siddha pranali diksha and guru prampara.

In what has been called the Gaudiya Saraswat sampradaya, it appears that siddha pranali diksha is not offered. If it is, in the least it differs in form from that which was practiced during Bhaktisiddhanta's time and which continues to be the dominant practice in the tradition today. The tradition's stress on an unbroken diksha guru parampara reaching back to one of the associates of Sri Caitanya is central to its practice of siddha pranali diksha. As Bhaktisiddhanta broke from the tradition with regard to its stress on a diksha guru parampara, so similarly did he in terms of its popular notion of siddha pranali diksha.

According to Bhaktivinoda Thakura, siddha pranali diksha was brought to this world by Sri Caitanya himself. In Jaiva Dharma, Thakura Bhaktivinoda states that this esoteric system was given to Vakresvara Pandit, who in turn gave it to Gopal Guru Goswami. Gopal Guru gave it to Dhyanacandra Goswami. Both Gopal Guru Goswami and Dhyancandra have written about this type of diksha and the sadhana that accompanies it.

It appears that Bhaktivinoda Thakura received siddha pranali diksha from his diksha guru, Bipin Bihari Goswami. A diksha patra, or letter of initiation that often accompanies this initiation, is available in the historical record. However, there is no evidence that Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati received siddha pranali diksha from Bhaktivinoda, nor from his diksha guru, Gaura Kishora dasa babaji. Moreover, Bhaktisiddhanta consistently downplayed its importance.

Outside of the line of Bhaktisiddhanta, siddha pranali diksha is common, and it represents initiation into raganuga sadhana bhakti. In raganuga sadhana, practitioners cultivate a particular bhava of Krsna's eternal Vraja, externally in their practitioner identity (sadhaka deha) as well as internally in their eternal identity (siddha deha) (Brs. 1.2.295). Thus for its practice, knowledge of one's eternal identity is ultimately required.

Siddha pranali diksha involves the guru's explaining the eleven elemental constituents (ekadas bhava) of the disciple's eternal identity. It also involves discussion of the eternal identities of the gurus in the pranali (lineage) that form one's particular diksha parampara. After this initiation, the disciple is taught the practice of lila smaranam from the perspective of his own spiritual identity, a practice that when mature enables the disciple to enter the lila of Radha Krsna. The qualification for receiving this initiation is said to be the eagerness to pursue such spiritual identity in Vraja bhakti (Brs. 1.2.292).

With regard to eligibility for such initiation there is not a consensus among various groups of Gaudiya Vaisnavas. Although all agree that lobha, spiritual greed to pursue Vraja bhakti, is required, just what constitutes lobha is at the heart of the lack of consensus. While some interpret greed generously, others do so conservatively. Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati was conservative in this regard, as was Jiva Goswami, the foremost philosopher of the tradition. "First maranam (ego death) then smaranam" might characterize Bhaktisiddhanta's understanding. In this, Saraswati Thakura is hardly alone. Many outside of his lineage agree heartily with this understanding. Indeed Sadhana-dipika cites renunciation of household life as a prerequisite for entering the mysteries of manjari bhava. Those who take the term cheaply, however, fit into a generic group that the Thakura termed sahajiyas, as sahaja can be translated "cheaply." Such persons are not, however, sahajiyas in the strict sense of the term. Prakrita sahajiyas differ considerably in siddhanta and practice from the orthodoxy of Gaudiya Vaisnavism.

While Saraswati Thakura might have referred to babajis at Radha Kunda and other similar sects, or his younger brother Lalita Prasada as sahajiyas and "my sahajiya bhai," respectively, he did so for different reasons. In the case of Radha Kunda babajis of the time, he detected immoral practices such as those practiced among the prakrita sahajiyas. In the case of his brother, he appears to have disagreed with him over an approach to missionary activities and Lalita Prasada's regard for Bhaktivinoda Thakura's diksha guru, Bipin Bihari Goswami. It is well known that Saraswati Thakura did not have high regard for Bipin Bihari Goswami, and there is considerable evidence to support his contention that Jagannatha dasa Babaji was the guru (siksha guru) from whom Bhaktivinoda Thakura imbibed the greatest spiritual benefit. There is also reason to trust Bhaktisiddhanta's perception of immorality in the group of babajis at Radha Kunda. Stressing the liberal statements of Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura intended to glorify the efficacy of bhakti over that of jnana marg, still today many babajis from Radha Kunda and other areas of Vraja maintain that the only sin a Vaishanava can commit is to offend a Vaisnava (Vaisnanva aparadha), thus lending to a liberal attitude with regard to immoral conduct.

Bhaktisiddhanta also appears to have considered much of the so-called raganuga sadhana of his time to be imitation of actual raganuga bhakti. Lila smaranam and lila kirtana, which are central to raganuga sadhana, were considered inappropriate by the Thakura for practitioners who had not reached the stage of being fixed (nistha) in their bhajana life. In this assessment, Bhaktisiddhanta was not alone, yet he was by far the most outspoken. As there is apparent scriptural evidence to the contrary, and as this was not the popular consensus, his policy met with considerable disapproval.

Babajis of Radha Kunda as well as followers of Lalita Prasada have criticized Bhaktisiddhanta and his followers for similar reasons of their own. When Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati rejected Bhaktivinoda's diksha guru, he also rejected the tradition's stress on the diksha guru parampara. Indeed, he did not teach his followers to worship the diksha guru of Gaura Kishora dasa Babaji, who from a diksha perspective was Bhaktisiddhanta's param guru. Babajis of Radha Kunda thus fault him for Vaisnava aparadha, as did Lalita Prasada for this and his rejection of Bippin Bihari Goswami, which at times did not appear to sit well with Bhaktivinoda. All opposition to Bhaktisiddhanta also includes the fact that he did not receive siddha pranali from Bhaktivinoda or Gaura Kishora. Some critics go so far as to question whether he was initiated at all. Furthermore, such criticism was given considerable credibility when two of the Thakura's foremost learned disciples, Ananta Vasudeva and Sundarananda Vidyavinoda, defected from his lineage and wrote books criticizing a number of his policies several years after he left the world. In doing so, however, they never mentioned the name of Bhaktisiddhanta, considering perhaps that his experiment, although of noble intent, was inherently flawed.

What then is the guru parampara of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, and what possibility is there for those in his lineage to attain Vraja bhakti, or indeed even engage in raganuga sadhana without siddha pranali diksha? While he may have criticized others justly, did he throw the baby out with the bath water? These are the kinds of questions that have caused some of his followers over the years to reject his lineage. Most of them have been learned devotees with knowledge of Bengali and Sanskrit and an apparent interest if not eagerness to attain Vraja bhakti, treading the path of raganuga sadhana. Such devotees have rejected their diksha from the line of Saraswati Thakura and have received siddha pranali diksha from other lineages. They consider themselves to be practicing ajata rati raganuga sadhana, a term first appearing Caitanya Caritamrita (C.c Mad 24.288).

Ajata rati refers to those who have not yet attained bhava (rati) bhakti. In the dominant practice of siddha pranali diksha today, ajata rati raganuga sadhakas are those who have not realized their siddha deha, but they have been told about it and are expected to engaged in the practice of lila smaranam in conjunction with chanting the Hare Krsna maha mantra in japa sixty-four rounds daily. Such devotees are also expected to follow the majority of Rupa Goswami's sixty-four limbs of regulative devotion (vaidhi bhakti) in order to give support to their practice. It is common place for these devotees to be given siddha pranali diksha before passing the stage of inner cleansing from material desire (anartha nivritti).

Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura was not an ajata rati sadhaka. He is accepted as a siddha mahatma by even the followers of Caran dasa babaji and others, whose practices were questioned by the Thakura. Bhaktivinoda Thakura entrusted his preaching mission to him, turning the charge of the Sri Caitanya's janmasthan over to Bhaktisiddhanta. From being a lone soul standing up to critique his own tradition, he amassed a sizable following in India, where he established sixty-four Maths, and his disciples brought Gaudiya Vaisnavism to every town and village the world over. It is hard to imagine that such a person was at the same time an offender to saintly persons (Vaisnava aparadhi), not properly initiated, or in any way lacking in terms of providing a venue for his followers to attain Vraja bhakti. He himself conceived of his own spiritual identity as a maidservant of Radha (Nayanamani manjari), a realization that appears to have been awakened through divine grace and spiritual practice.

It may be worth pointing out that many followers of Sri Caitanya left the so- called orthodoxy of Gaudiya Vaisnavism to join Bhaktisiddhanta, while only a handful have left his fold. Amongst those who have, fewer still have continued the practices of raganuga sadhana, and the majority of them have given up any kind of sadhana. I know of none amongst them who have attained bhava bhakti, much less Vraja prema. On the other hand, there are a number of success stories amongst the followers of Bhaktisiddhanta, my diksha and siksha gurus being prominent examples. Even if we regard my analysis as a subjective one with regard to my gurus' realization, their example of devotion and sustained interest in Vraja bhakti is itself a rare attainment.

Let us discuss what those who have left Bhaktisiddhanta may not have considered. What was his criticism of siddha pranali diksha? Why did he not institute it in his mission? How will his followers attain Vraja bhakti without this, and what is his parampara?

Bhaktisiddhanta did not emphasize ajata rati raganuga sadhana. Indeed, he seems to have downplayed it altogether, or at least any attempts to practice it in conjunction with discussion of one's spiritual identity before passing the stage of anartha nivritti. There is reason to believe that he imbibed this sene from Bhaktivinoda. Cautions regarding premature discussion of one's spiritual identity have also been voiced by Bhaktivinoda Thakura. In his Bhajana-rahasya, Bhaktivinoda advises that acquaintance with one's siddha deha is appropriate at the stage of positive attachment to the object of devotion (asakti). He draws this understanding from Sri Caitanya's eight-verse Siksastakam, which he sees as corresponding to the eightfold evolution of devotion from initial faith (sraddha) to love of Krsna (prema) delineated in Rupa Goswami's Bhaktirasasmrita sindhuh (Brs.1.4.15-16). Bhaktivinoda identifies the fifth verse of Siksastakam with the stage of asakti, drawing attention to the words ayi nanda tanuja kinkaram. Asakti occurs after nistha and ruci. It is the final stage of sadhana bhakti before one enters bhava bhakti. Bhaktivinoda taught, "If one thinks of their siddha-deha without first achieving elegibility, their intelligence gets bewildered."

If there is any license for engaging in raganuga sadhana before passing anartha nivritti, it comes from Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura. In his Raga vartma candrika, Visvanatha says that raganuga bhakti can be taken up by those who have not yet reached the stage of nistha. He says, "In the following section it will be shown how a raganuga bhakta goes through the stages of anartha-nivrtti, etc., after which he arrives at the stage of prema, whereupon he achieves direct attainment of his desired object." However, in Bhakti-sara-pradarsini (1.2.291-2) Visvanatha tell us that in order to practice raganuga bhakti one must have attained the stage of nistha. To resolve this apparent contradiction we must place Visvanatha's statements in relation to Jiva Goswami's description of ajata rati raganuga sadhana (Jiva uses the term ajata ruci). Doing so, we arrive at something that resembles the understanding of Bhaktisiddhanta.

Jiva Goswami has explained that ajata rati raganuga bhakti can be performed in conjunction with vaidhi bhakti by adding the practices of raganuga sadhana to one's practice that one is capable of engaging in (Bhakti sandarbha 311, p.165 of Chinmayi Chatterjee's 1980 edition). Capability here refers to one's ability to long eagerly to follow in the footsteps of Krsna's eternal associates in Vraja. As such longing increases through association with advanced devotees and reading descriptions of the loving relationships between Krsna and his gopa/gopis in eternal Vraja, revelation gives rise to nistha and then taste (ruci) for a particular bhava, which forms the basis of one's spiritual identity.

Although one may take up raganuga sadhana before passing anartha nivritti, it is only one's capability to practice such in the form of one's measure of eagerness that qualifies the sadhaka for acquaintance with his or her siddha deha. It should be understood that genuine eagerness for such will in most cases be considerably lacking in those who have not passed beyond anartha nivritti, and thus Bhaktisiddhanta's dismissal of siddha pranali diksha for those who have not yet passed this stage. Because the nectar of siddha pranali diksha was being given out like water, Bhaktisiddhanta reacting to this excess, practically dismissed it altogether. As Buddha appears to have rejected the Veda, while in fact he rejected its inappropriate application, Bhaktisiddhanta appears to have rejected siddha pranali diksha, while in reality he rejected its misappropriation.

Bhaktisiddhanta accordingly was particularly critical of the practice of giving so- called siddha pranali diksha, wherein both the guru and disciple were ajata rati bhaktas. One aware of a the details of a particular pranali can give a spiritual identity to another that technically conforms with the parameters of rasa tattva. However, in the estimation of Bhaktisiddhanta, such practice does not constitute actual siddha pranali diksha. This practice was and still is common-place in many branches of the Gaudiya sampradaya, whereas actual iddha pranali diksha is the prerogative of those who have attained maturity in their bhajan (apana-dasa). These are highly evolved devotees, rasikas, and bhava bhaktas.

At the same time that Bhaktisiddhanta criticized what he might call mere imitation of siddha pranali diksha, he did recognize highly advanced devotees outside of his particular missionary activities. Great souls such as Vamsi dasa babaji were pointed out by the Thakura to his disciples, and on occasion some of his disciples had the opportunity to observe or serve them. These souls may well have given this type of diksha on occasion to qualified persons. It appears that there were other evolved souls at the time who, although perhaps qualified themselves, gave siddha pranali diksha to unqualified persons. Although this could be construed as an act of mercy, and we are not to judge the decisions of great souls, Bhaktisiddhanta, commissioned by Bhaktivinoda Thakura to propagate Sri Caitanya's religion of love all over the world, was theoretically in a position to do so. Bhaktisiddhanta, in consideration of the importance of missionary activities, did not approve of such practice. When unqualified persons demonstrate their lack of such in the name of raganuga bhakti, the public opinion of Sri Caitanya's gift is diminished. The condition of the Gaudiya sampradaya during the time of Bhaktivinoda Thakura's preaching is evidence of the downside of both of the practices surrounding siddha pranali diksha that Bhaktisiddhanta sought to address by his reforms. The public opinion of Gaudiya Vaisnavism was at a low ebb, so much so that pious people considered it nothing more than a so-called religion designed to license immorality.

As mentioned earlier, Bhaktisiddhanta never received siddha pranali diksha from his diksha guru, Gaura Kishora dasa babaji. Some of his followers say that he was told by Gaura Kishora that he would realize his svarupa in the syllables of the Hare Krsna maha mantra. Regardless of what he may have been told at that time, there was a witness to the initiation, and the Thakura did receive the blessings of both Gaura Kishora and Bhaktivinoda before beginning his preaching campaign.

Bhaktisiddhanta fashioned his own approach to realizing one's spiritual identity and engaging in raganuga sadhana, one that appears to have been based on that which predated the practice of siddha pranali diksha, further edited by the Thakura in light of his missionary activities. His approach has its foundation in the sastra and spiritual common sense that pierce the veil of the literal word addressing its intent. In this approach he laid more stress on kirtana than he did on smaranam. Kirtana can be practiced by all, whereas smaranam requires a degree of purity for its practice to be effective. Smaranam in turn enables one to derive more benefit from kirtana. While smaranam requires purity of heart, kirtana does not. Kirtana cleanses the heart and qualifies one for smaranam. Attempts at smaranam for beginners are questionable. Smaranam is not a mental practice, but rather the result of subjugating the mind, and kirtana is most effective in bringing about this subjugation. Thus, although raganuga bhakti involves smaranam, kirtana is its primary limb (Bhakti-sandarbha. 273). Addressing imitative smaranam, Saraswati Thakura wrote in his famous song Vaisnava ke? kirtana prabhave smarana haibe se kale bhajana nirjana sambhava, "Smaranam can occur by the power of kirtana, and only then is solitary service possible."

By "imitative smaranam" Bhaktisiddhnata referred to neophytes attempting lila smaranam, and thus imitating advanced souls. He considered such practices no more than mental exercises. As sraddha, the birth of bhakti, cannot be produced in our mental factory, similarly, and even more so, Krsna lila, the culmination of a life of devotion, is not the result of a mental exercise. It awakens in the purified heart as a result of nama kirtana, at which time it can be meditated upon successfully. After all, the lila of Krsna is considered by all to be fully present in his divine name. Following the lead of Jiva Goswami, Bhaktisiddhanta advocated nama smaranam for beginners, which leads successively to rupa smaranam, guna smaranam, and untimately lila smaranam (Bhakti-sandarbha 275-279).

In Bhakti Sandarbha, Jiva Goswami emphasizes krirtana over smaranam thus: "These words of Sri Visnu Purana show that the glorification of the Lord (kirtana) is much more important than meditation, which leads in stages to samadhi. This is also confirmed by the following words of Srimad-Bhagavatam: 'O King, constant chanting of the holy name of the Lord after the ways of the great authorities is the doubtless and fearless way of success for all. . . .' In every yuga, kirtana is equally powerful. However, by the mercy of the Lord, it is especially to be performed in Kali-yuga. In Kali-yuga, it is praised as being most important. In Kali-yuga, the other activities of devotional service should be performed in connection with kirtana (Bhakti-sandarbha 273)."

In his Sri Caitanya-siksamrtam, Bhaktivinoda Thakura speaks of two types of devotees in the stage just prior to becoming a paramahamsa. He calls them gosthyanandi and bhajananandi. While the latter engages in solitary bhajana and gives stress to smaranam, the former goes on with kirtana and also attains the highest stage without having to resort to exclusive smaranam. Bhaktisiddhanta advocated the life of a gosthyanandi. He taught that attempts at smaranam in the lower stages of devotion were potentially injurious. Kirtana, on the other hand, is effective in the beginning of one's devotional life as well as in the end.

In his emphasis on kirtana, Bhaktisiddhanta followed the lead of Sri Caitanya himself, who singled out kirtana as the best form of worship, sarva srestha nama-sankirtana (C.c Antya 4.71). Sri Caitnaya tells Sarvabhauma Bhatacarya in Caitanya Caritamrita, "Simply by chanting the holy name of Kåñëa, one is relieved from all the reactions of a sinful life. One can complete the nine processes of devotional service simply by chanting the holy name (C.c Madhya 15.107)." One of these nine processes in smaranam. The Bhagavata characterizes Sri Caitanya's method of worship as yajnaih sankirtana-prayair. Yajnaih means sacrifice and kirtana prayair means predominated by kirtana.

Bhaktisiddhanta's idea of kirtana was dynamic, extending to include the modern world of technology in its reach. He included writing in his understanding of kirtana, wherein considerable mental concentration is required. To preach and propagate in such kirtana was, in his estimation, the most powerful means for subjugating the mind, giving rise to internal meditation upon the actual lila. In contrast, to sit in the jungle and practice lila smaranam is no easy task. Without a pure heart, one's mind is likely to prevail rather than the lila. Comparatively, how mentally consuming is the task of propagating the esoteric theology of Gaudiya Vaishnavism in modern language to a world under the influence of an entirely different metanarrative?

Bhaktisiddhanta dubbed the printing press "brihat mrdunga" great drum, reasoning that chanting the Holy Name could be heard for a few blocks, whereas the printed kirtana could be heard around the world. He considered the printing press to belong to raga marg of raganuga sadhana. He stressed this all-consuming notion of kirtana to his disciples and supplemented it with esoteric diksha mantras.

The initiations that Bhaktisiddhanta gave to his disciples included the standard diksha mantras of the Gaudiya sampradaya, gopal mantra and its corresponding gayatri commonly known as kama gayatri, gaura mantra and gaura gayatri, guru mantra and guru gayatri. He also gave brahma gayatri to his disciples. Other than this, he gave sannyasa diksha, which involves a siddha mantra relating to Vraja bhakti. This is the same siddha mantra that those who accept the life of a babaji receive. All of these mantras are extremely esoteric in their import, and their efficacy is liberation from samsara and a conceptual orientation (sambandha) to Vraja bhakti. The Holy Name of Krsna, which is to be chanted by all practitioners, is fully competent to grant entrance into Vraja lila, especially when chanted by a liberated soul who has awakened to his or her spiritual identity by perfecting the diksha mantra.

It is said that the muni cari gopis who are sadhana siddha gopis attained svarupa siddhi by perfecting the chanting of these diksha mantras (gopal mantra). According to Padma Purana, Gayatri herself desired gopi bhava and thus incarnated as Gopal tapani Upanisad, in which the kama bija and gopal mantra are revealed.

Jiva Goswami explains in his commentary on Gopal tapani Upanisad that the Sruti brings up questions posed by various risis to Brahma so that the mystery of the eighteen-syllable gopal mantra might be revealed. They ask plainly and confidently, without hesitation about confidential matters, thus indicating their adhikari for raganuga sadhana. Brahma is driven by the inquiries of the sages to contemplate, "How can a special taste in devotional practice be attained?" Thus he begins to explain the import of the gopal mantra.

The same gopal mantra in conjunction with nama sankirtana gave Gopa Kumara of Sanatana Prabhu's Brihat Bhagavatamrita Vraja bhakti. Sanatana Goswami explains that Gopa Kumara was instructed in Dvaraka by Narada and Uddhava to return to earthly Vrindavana and perform nama sankirtana, by which he could easily attain his final destination (Vraja bhakti). Remembering Narada's instructions, Gopa Kumara says, "Following Narada's instructions, I chanted sweetly in sankirtana the dear names of Krsna, and I sang and meditated upon His pastimes here ((Brihat-bhagavatamrta.2.6.1)."

The chanting of a siddha mantra is central to any siddha practice, and it appears from the example above that the gopal mantra especially in conjunction with Nama sankirtana is a powerful spiritual practice. Indeed, this is precisely what is recommended in Caitanya Caritamrita: "The efficacy of krsna mantra is that it affords one deliverance from samsara, while krsna nama delivers one to the feet of Krsna (C.c Adi 7.73)." Here "krsna mantra" refers to the eighteen syllable mantra also known as gopal mantra and its corresponding gayatri, kama gayatri. Deliverance from samsara in the context of Gaudiya Vaisnavism refers to svarupa siddhi, realization of one's svarupa. Upon attaining this realization, krsna mantra retires while krsna nama chanted in such a liberated condition delivers one to the lotus feet of Krsna. This appears to be the system recommended by Bhaktisiddhanta, one that predates the introduction of siddha pranali diksha. In this regard, it is worth noting that the term siddha pranali does not appear anywhere in the writings of the Six Goswamis.

Jiva Goswami also mentions the eighteen-syllable gopal mantra in relation to raganuga sadhana in terms of its relevance for advanced sadhakas and neophytes. In his Bhakti-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami instructs that this mantra is chanted by advanced devotees, who when doing so envision the lila of Krsna, as well as by neophytes, who chant with a view to attain such perfection (Bs 311).

The notion that revelation of one's siddha deha can arise naturally in the course of spiritual practice without the necessity of siddha pranali diksha makes spiritual common sense. That such is possible is mentioned in Krsnadasa Kaviraja Goswami's commentary on Krsnakarnamrita. Commenting on the first verse of Bilvamangala Thakura, Kaviraja Goswami speaks of two methods of approach to raganuga practice: one in which the spiritual identity is assigned and another in which it is awakened (sphurti) through spiritual practice at the stage of bhava, without the need of any forced meditation.

Two other Vaisnava sampradayas that involve Vraja bhakti are worth noting. The Nimbarka and Vallabha lineages are both raga marg sampradayas. Neither of them has any initiation ritual analogous to siddha pranali diksha. Rather devotees of these lineages are expected to attain the raga marg through the perfection of their diksha mantra. Of these two paths, Rupa Goswami has mentioned Vallabha's pusti marg after his description of raganuga sadhana, equating it with the raganuga of the Gaudiya Sampradaya (Brs. 1.2.309).

In recent years, two devotees who left the lineage of Bhaktisiddhanta and took siddha pranali diksha have also confirmed in their writings that raganuga sadhana and realization of one's svarupa is possible without siddha pranali diksha. Gadadhara prana dasa, a disciple of Lalita Prasada, says in Why Did Caitanya Mahaprabhu Come, and What Did He Come to Give (Part One): "If a person desiring to perform raganuga sadhana has previously received initiation from a sampradaya in which the system of siddha pranali is not available, and if he is reluctant to perform the diksa-samskara, another alternative may feasibly be adopted. Such persons may meditate on their nitya-svarupa according to the atma-dhyan in sastra. Placing faith on the acintya-sakti of hari-nama, asta kalin manasi seva maybe performed with the following atma-dhyan:"(Sanat Kumara samhita cited). Nitai dasa (Neal Delmonico), who accepted siddha pranali from Kisorikisoranada Babaji of Radha Kunda and later became a university scholar, writes in Sacred Gifts of Wonder, "It (siddha deha) is produced either in the course of practice or given by the guru in a special initiation (siddha pranali)."

In the approach to raganuga bhakti of Bhaktisiddhanta, esoteric practices of raganuga sadhana are not dismissed, nor are they imitated. As ruci and asakti stages are reached, these internal practices are incorporated into the sadhaka's practice. Before reaching these stages, sadhakas may also consider themselves raganuga practitioners proportionate to their eagerness for attaining Vraja bhakti. They are not, however, to entertain artificial internal practices, projecting their material conceptions into transcendence. Their interest in a particular spiritual identity must come through a purified heart in nama bhajana, and not from force of their imagination. Although internal practices in the stage of ruci are natural rather than forced, further siksha in this stage is in the least helpful. When the practitioner moves from ajata rati to jata rati raganuga sadhana, his practice has flowered, waiting only to bear the fruit of prema.

In contrast to the practices that Bhaktisiddhanta criticized, his methodology has been characterized by the phrase, "Don't try to see God, but act such that God will want to see you." By encouraging his disciples to serve in his dynamic conception of kirtana, he promised them that Krsna would not ignore them. Indeed, they would become qualified to tread the path of raganuga bhakti and do so successfully while bringing dignity to the doctrine of Sri Caitanya the world over, a world that at that time equated Godliness with morality. Thus his stress on a moral foundation to spiritual practice was no doubt influenced by his perception of the religious climate of the world at that time. It was undoubtedly influenced by Sri Caitanya' s own example in this regard as well.

If it is possible to attain Vraja bhakti in the parampara of Bhaktisiddhanta without the necessity of siddha pranali diksha, one question still remains: What is the guru parampara of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura? The Thakura has revealed this in his song Sri Guru Parampara, and in so doing introduced the concept of a siksha or bhagavata guru parampara.

At a glance, the idea of a siksha guru parampara appears to be a concoction with no basis in the scripture and no historical record in the tradition. The parampara is a succession from guru to disciple, who in turn becomes guru, thus passing on the lineage to his disciple through the ritual of initiation. Although instructions (siksha) are important, without initiation one is not a card-carrying member of any sampradaya. The parampara is the lineage into which one is initiated. What then is a siksha parampara, in which devotees are said to be linked by something (siksha) other than initiation, and in which such connection crosses over different lines of succession and even in some cases ignores initiating gurus in the process?

To better understand the siksha guru parampara of Bhaktisiddhanta and its validity, we must first consider the state of the Gaudiya sampradaya during his time. As mentioned earlier, the Gaudiya sampradaya was not highly esteemed at the turn of the 20th century. Bhaktivinoda Thakura himself admitted his own bias toward the Bhagavata, one imbibed from the pious Hindu circles in which he circulated. He considered the Bhagavata to be a justification or immoral life in the name of religion. He thus shocked the pious of his time when after due consideration he announced his faith in Sri Caitanya, rejecting the movements of the prominent Hindu reformers.

After joining the sampradaya, he preached vigorously about its actual doctrine and practice, and in so doing he exposed much of the distortion of the Sri Caitanya's teaching that had come to dominate the religious landscape in his name. He passed the torch of his campaign of reform to his son and devout follower, Bimal Prasada, the renowned Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura. His choice to be succeeded in this effort by Bimal Prasada no doubt took into consideration the boy's extraordinary good moral character, his erudition, and ultimately his devotion. After giving him initiation into chanting the Holy Name of Krsna, Bhaktivinoda Thakura sent him to Gaura Kishora dasa babaji for mantra diksha. Thus he readied him for the service he had in mind: restoring Gaudiya Vaisnavism to its rightful place at the peak of the great mountain of religious thought in the eyes of the modern world.

The degradation that the tradition suffered from at the time included various diksha lineages that, although stemming originally form one of the eternally liberated associates of Sri Caitanya, had become little more than a means of material livelihood for their so called gurus. Claims of monopoly on the religious heritage of Sri Caitanya were common. Places of spiritual significance were held hostage by these unscrupulous people, who in the name of restoring them and offering blessings bilked pilgrims while keeping the holy sites in perpetual disrepair. A number of the once spiritual lineages had become lines of seminal succession, passed on from husband to wife and father to son, with little consideration of actual spiritual standing. It is this type of initiating lineage that Bhaktisiddhanta rejected.

The extent of the distortion may have justified the magnitude of his response. Although others at that time may have sympathized with him, he alone was prepared to speak out. In doing so, he may have even criticized those following properly at the time for their reluctance to join with him in his efforts. They too were implicated in his estimation. Was such a campaign justifiable? Anyone who today has been touched by Gaudiya Vaisnavism as a result of this campaign must bow their head and at the mere mention of his name, and the number of such persons is at this point uncountable, extending to all nations of the world.

Bhaktisiddhanta's siksha guru parampara involved weaving his spiritual lineage out of the fabric of substance rather than form. Considering the condition of the prominent diksha paramparas, he placed in his line all of the universally acknowledged maha bhagavatas appearing at one time or another in the various lineages. Thus his line crossed all of the lineages of the time and united them while dismissing them as well. He made a line (pranali) of siddhas and claimed that connection with all of them was the right of all sincere followers of Sri Caitanya. Their teaching (siksha) and adherence to it was the binding force to the sampradaya.

In all of his criticism of the lineages of the time, his clear intent was that of unification on spiritual terms. He wanted to separate followers of form from those of substance, and he expected those of substance to speak up for the dignity of Sri Caitanya's precepts. He in no way dispensed with the institution of diksha. Indeed, he initiated thousands of disciples himself.

One of his prominent disciples, Bhakti Raksaka Sridharadeva Goswami, has spoken about his Gurudeva's spiritual conception of parampara thus: "In Brihad-bhagavatamrita the story is told of how Gopa Kumara, by chanting his gopal mantra, gradually leaves one stage and progresses to the next. There the gradation of devotion is traced . . .

In this zig zag way he is passing. . . He is going from this side to that side, and going up. There is Prahlada's guru parampara, Hanuman's guru parampara, the Pandava's guru parampara, Mahadeva's guru parampara. . . but Gopa Kumara passes them also. . . So, Brihad-bhagavatamrita has shown us the line of our guru parampara, or the real line of our quest, of our search. . . . The very gist of the guru-parampara, the disciplic succession, is siksa, the spiritual teaching, and wherever it is to be traced, there is guru. One who has the transcendental eye, the divine eye, will recognize the guru wherever he appears. One who possesses knowledge of absolute divine love in purity he is guru. Otherwise the guru parampara is only a body parampara: a succession of bodies. Then the caste brahmanas, the caste goswamis, will continue with their trade, because body after body, they are getting the mantra. But their mantra is dead. We are after a living mantra, and wherever we can trace the living tendency for a higher type of devotional service, we shall find that there is our guru. One who has that sort of vision awakened will be able to recognize the guru wherever he may appear."

Scriptural evidence for a Bhagavata and siksha guru parampara can be drawn from the Srimad Bhagavatam in terms of its own descent. Srimad Bhagavatam is the most important scripture for the Gaudiya Vaisnavas. How has it come to them-what is its parampara? Krsna spoke its essence to Brahma. Brahma spoke it to Narada, and Narada in turn taught Vyasa its tenets. Sukadeva, who was known to have undergone no diksha samskar, learned its essence from Vyasa. Sukadeva spoke it to the emperor Pariksit. At that time Suta heard it as well, and he in turn spoke it to Saunaka. This is the Bhagavata guru parampara, a siksha parampara.

Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, speaking out against the conception of a formal diksha guru parampara taking precedence over a substantial spiritual guru parampara of great realized preceptors, thus fashioned his Bhagavata (or siksha) Guru Parampara. His is not a formal line of physical bodies, but a line, a pranali, that is full of siddhas. One might ask, "What is the meaning of a siddha pranali (line of siddhas) if it is not full of siddhas?" Thus Saraswati Thakura's criticism of siddha pranali included his rejection of a once bona fide system of guru parampara that for the most part had deteriorated into a seminal line of family gurus claiming a monopoly on spiritual life.

Saraswati Thakura considered that the wealth he found in Bhaktivinoda Thakura came not from Bipin Bihari Goswami, but from Bhaktivinoda's connection with Jagannatha dasa Babaji. Indeed, when Bhaktivinoda Thakura's diksha guru dismissed him for preaching that the true birth site of Sri Caitanya was in Mayapur and not Navadwipa, it was Jagannatha dasa babaji who confirmed the Thakura's insight with delight. Thus Bhaktivinoda's own statements in Kalyana-kalpataru: "The initiating spiritual master (diksa-guru) shows his causeless mercy by giving his disciples instructions in chanting the mantra. By so doing, he points the disciples in the direction of the truths pertaining to the Supreme Lord, Sri Krsna. But I consider the numerous instructing spiritual masters (siksa-gurus) to be more important, for they show more mercy by training the sadhakas in all the essential aspects of sadhana-bhakti."

Bhaktivinoda was the siksha guru of Bhaktisiddhanta. There is good reason to believe that Bhaktisiddhanta inherited the inner wealth of Bhaktivinoda, as evidenced in his ability to distinguish its substance from the form in which it came to Bhaktivinoda, to repackage that essence and market it worldwide as Bhaktivinoda so desired.

The siksha of Bhaktisiddhanta that gave rise to his undertaking of a spiritual mission must be embraced for its underlying spiritual principle. The form it took is of less consequence, and unless his own followers understand this, they may unwittingly become party to that which he stood against. There is nothing from the sampradaya that he rejected, rather the abuse or misunderstanding of its tenets.

As Bhaktisiddhanta was in some instances misunderstood during his time by those he opposed, so today in some instances he is misunderstood by those who claim to be his followers. The dominant institution that his mission gave birth to is the formal mission of A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, ISKCON. Bhaktivedanta Swami considered himself a strict follower of Bhaktisiddhanta. Accordingly, he boldly preached in the Western world with tremendous success. Today, twenty-one years after his departure from the world, his mission boasts thousands of followers, and it shows no signs of splitting into numerous factions such that the original corporate institution is itself obscured, as happened with the formal mission of Bhaktisiddhanta. ISKCON has more facility and does more to propagate the precepts of Gaudiya Vaisnavism than any other institution, and perhaps more so than all of other similar missions combined. Yet it suffers from a weakness. It is largely uninformed with regard to its raganuga heritage. In this I do not fault its founder, but his followers, who were often more concerned with distributing his books than they were with reading them and tracing out their connection with the greater body of Gaudiya literature.

The valid stress of Bhaktisiddhanta on the need for qualification to tread the path of raganuga sadhana was echoed and even magnified appropriately by his disciple Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada to his fledgling Western following. So too did Bhaktivedanta Swami stress kirtana, employing the world of modern technology in its outreach, thus paving the road for his disciples' natural progress.

Unfortunately, there are dangers even on the royal roads, and so with the dynamic kirtana of Bhaktisiddhanta. In spite of its enormous potential to subjugate the mind, distraction is possible-and in no small measure. When we employ modern technology such as computers in kirtana, there is potential to be employed by that technology in the name of employing it in divine service. Without sufficient stress on the inner life of bhajana, one's kirtana can become no more than music, preaching ego effacement no more than self-promotion, employing modern technology no more than fascination with megabytes rather than their maker. In preaching against the idea of an inherited monopoly on spiritual life, one can fall prey to thinking that oneself its sole proprietor, even while still an ajata rati sadhaka.

ISKCON, a late-blooming adolescent of thirty-three years, has suffered from these problems, the solution to which lies only in reassessment of the ideal of its father, grandfather, and great grandfather, its theoretical pioneer. The life of Vraja bhakti is the spiritual heritage of ISKCON. Today, members who express too much interest in this heritage are sometimes considered suspect. Elder members of ISKCON's parent mission, for the sins of not cooperating with one another and lack missionary zeal, have been at times labeled sahajiyas, even while these elders, remaining disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta, have on occasion sincerely sought to help their spiritual nephews with enriched understanding of their inheritance. As ISKCON continues its worldwide preaching campaign, it needs to pause and ask itself what the goal of such preaching is. Its members need greater theoretical acquaintance with their heritage and its esoteric practices, so they don't mistake them to be the property of those whom Bhaktisiddhanta opposed, rather than their own. They need to unite with the rest of the family of Bhaktisiddhanta, which would also help them to unite with one another. The members of ISKCON need to remember that other than their Founder Acarya's stress on preaching, Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's criterion for ISKCON's success stated in his more pensive moments, "I will consider my mission successful, if one of my disciples becomes a pure devotee."

ISKCON is not alone in falling short of the ideal of Bhaktisiddhanta. Today, his followers, now in various institutions, are faced with a spiritual crisis. They themselves are not unified, what to speak of unifying all Gaudiya Vaisnavas. In some instances, they have become overly critical of other Vaisnavas even within their own ranks, what to speak of those who do not come in their diksha parampara, regardless of their spiritual qualities. The dynamic missionary zeal of Bhaktisiddhanta that involved understanding the modern world and updating the tradition to present its precepts with a voice of relevance is lacking in many of the institutions founded in his name. Western visitors to any number of "Guadiya Math" institutions are often entertained with tales of preaching conquests dating back to British India by devotees resting on past laurels of their predecessors. Those from India recently entering the international arena focus their preaching on devotees, the remnants of Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's campaign. While this certainly has value when it helps such devotees better understand their heritage, it is not the cutting-edge, dynamic preaching envisioned by Bhaktisiddhanta. Moreover, in several instances, it has given rise to further divison and sectarianism with claims of exclusivity. Such a spiritual crisis must be met with introspection and reflection on the substance of the Thakura's spiritual thrust and its scope.

The followers of Bhaktisiddhanta must take care to guard against institutionalized conceptions of spiritual succession obscuring the spiritual decent. As he was prepared to critique his own tradition, so they in his spirit should be prepared to offer constructive criticism to not only those who continue to inappropriately offer siddha pranali diksha, but when appropriate, to their own lineage as well. If the followers of Bhaktisiddhanta can find true spiritual guidance outside of his formal lineage, they should respect it, as he himself in theory and practice demonstrated. In such instances, his followers should in turn use their gathered inspiration in the mission of Bhaktisiddhanta, the spiritual mission of Gaudiya Vaisnavsim, to promote worldwide the spiritual precepts of Sri Caitanya and realize the esoteric ultimate reality of Vraja bhakti, thus fulfilling the dream of Kedarnatha Bhaktivinoda, as Bhaktivinoda parivara.