|
 Conversations
on Madhavendra Puri
Question: Are you sure about
the article, The Pontifical Position of Sri Madhavendra Puri. It was my understanding that Srimad Ananda Tirtha did in fact write
his Bhagavad-Gita commentary *before*
having darshan of Sri Vedavyasa. He then submitted
this for the latter's approval. As I understand it, Srila Vyasa only had
one comment about the text - something regarding the way Madhva began
his commentary or ended it as my poor memory seems to recall. But the
point here is that it indicates that Madhva began writing his Tattvavada
commentaries *before* meeting with his claimed siksha guru. This calls into question then his exact relationship with Sri Vyasa.
(H. Krishna Susarla)
Narasingha Maharaja: Yes,
I am sure of the matter but in my case the "sure" is a "heart
thing" in that it relies more on the dictation of my sraddha than on my ability to reconstruct the chronology. However, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta
Saraswati Thakur, our param-guru was the editor of The Harmonist when the
article by Srila Sridhardeva Goswami was published. I think that I am
safe to assume that the article met with his approval, otherwise it would
not have been published. If there had been a mistake then we would have
seen a retraction in the next issue. (I have the originals of the Harmonist
from 1925 thru 1936, of course a few are missing.)
That it is sraddha that guides
me in this regard must of course take me to a substantial plane also.
Sraddha after all is a spiritual substance not an abstract conception.
Srila Saraswati Thakur had come to this world with a message.
In the opinion of his disciples and followers he was a nitya-siddha, a liberated soul (Nayana-mani Manjari). An essential message in the
preaching mission of Saraswati Thakur was that until one accepts the asraya-tattva, the shelter of the Supreme Lords
agent, his advancement in Krishna consciousness does not begin.
The first principle of the 64 angas of sadhana-bhakti
given in Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu by Sri Rupa is guru-pada-asraya, i.e., acceptance
of the shelter of the lotus feet of sad-gurudeva. Prior to Madhva's meeting and thus accepting the shelter and siksha of Vyasadeva the Gaudiya section is not prepared to concede that Madhva
had a positive contribution to make. Therefore, it has been said that
his preaching was in the line of destruction of the Mayavada theory. After
his connection with Vysas his constructive preaching of establishing his
cult of devotion began.
The asraya-tattva is a thing
of spiritual substance not a mere formality or etiquette. One has to purchase
it with saranagati, surrender. tad
viddhi pranpatena pariprasnena sevaya. Pariprasnena - surrender. (Gita 4.34)
Study, learning, discourse on philosophy so many things
are possible prior to initiation/diksha, but unless
one gets this ashraya one does not
gain admission to the descending flow of bhakti-rasa. (Harinama initiation is not considered
diksha in the Gaudiya school. In
Gaudiya diksha means mantra-diksha,
klim kamadevaya....) To remain in that flow there are requirements
also, not that just because I have taken shelter by initiation that I
am always connected. This principle is so essential that even nitya-siddhas
and the Supreme Lord Himself demonstrate its necessity by accepting guru-pada-asraya.
In almost every instance
it is shown that the missionary work of the nitya-siddha section begins after taking diksha. (Madhvacharya
in this case as we are discussing.) Even Saraswati Thakura was himself
no exception to this rule.
Question: Isn't it odd that
Sri Chaitanya would take sannyasa initiation
from a mayavadi (Keshava Bharati)?.
Narasingha Maharaja: Before
accepting sannyasa-mantra, tat tvam asi (I am that),
from Keshava Bharati Caitanya Mahaprabhu Himself first initiated Keshava
Bharati with the same mantra, tat tvam asi, that he later received from him but with full-fledged Vaishnava conception
(I am servant of him).
Mahaprabhu's acceptance of sannyasa is significant to the Gaudiyas in that it is the parallel lila where Krishna leaves Vrindavana which marks the beginning of the gopis feelings of separation, vipralambha-bhava. The Gaudiyas accept that Keshava Bharati was the self same Akura, the
Uncle of Krishna, who took Krishna and Balarama to Mathura on the chariot.
So, where is the question that Bharati was a Mayavadin and thus that Mahaprabhu
took sannyasa from the Mayavadi section?
Question: Because Sri Madhavendra
Puri's faith and love for Sri Krsna and his service was far too sublime
and soaring he could not be considered a Mayavadin.
Narasingha Maharaja: For me
this is a most central and attractive point in our discussion; at least
central in that it leads to the core of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's heart.
His (Puri's) faith, love and service have been represented in the verse
uttered by him before leaving his body. The verse is taken to have been
spoken directly by Srimati Radharani and it is the actual foundation on
which Mahaprabhu's sampradaya has been based,
vipralambha-bhava. Thus needless
to say this verse is classified in the prayojana-tattva of Gaudiyas
ayi dina-dayardra-natha he, mathuranatha kadavalokyase
hrdayam tvadaloka-kataram, dayita bhramyati kim karomy aham
"O my Lord! O most merciful Master of Mathura! When
shall I see You again? Because of my not seeing You, my agitated heart
has become unsteady. O most beloved one, what shall I do now? (Padyavali,
Madhavendra Puri)
Sri Madhavendra Puri is the crest jewel among the Gaudiya
Vaishnavas. What more can we say than this.
return
|