1

Bipin Bihari Goswami's position

------------------------------------------------------------
> > This story appears to be allegorical. Bipin Bihari Goswami disappeared
> > in 1919, just about the same year that Saraswati Thakur was starting his
> > preaching mission from a single temple in Calcutta with a few followers.
> > From looking through the biographies we have of Saraswati Thakur it
> > doesn't appear that he went to Vrindaban in a car as an acarya before
> > 1926, the year he established his first temple in Vrindaban.
>
> This does seem to be conjecture on your part Bhakta Rupa prabhu. I
> understood that BSST began his preaching mission a couple of years before
> 1919. And don't forget that BSST was staying in Bhaktivinoda Thakur's
> house in Vrindavan way before then, so some kind of incident like this
> could have happened during the presence of Bipin Bihari.
>
> Of course, we can't really comment on the veracity of BR Sridhara's
> statements, but at least he was a direct disciple of BSST and in a better
> position to know about his relationship with Bipin Bihari Goswami than we
> are.

Dear Hari Sauri Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

Well, it could not have happened much before 1919. It might have happened in
1918 or in the first few months of 1919, but I maintain my doubts, because:

1. With only one temple in Calcutta and a few followers, having taken
sannyas just in 1918, would he really wanted to have called himself an
Acarya with a reputation to protect? It is more likely that the incident
actually happened in a later year when the Thakur was more prominent, but
instead there was a different caste goswami who made the statement, and the
name of Bipin Bihari Goswami got substituted by someone who didn't know that
Bipin Bihari had disappeared in 1919.

2. 1919 seems a bit early for riding in motorcars also, both in terms of
availability and the means to obtain one, whereas in the 30's they would
have been much more available and affordable.

3. How does Bipin Bihari Goswami appear in Radha Kund? His home was in
Baghnapara, West Bengal. Of course he could have been visiting Radha Kund,
but then there would have to be the coincidence of the two of them visiting
at the same time. The brief biography I have does not describe him as doing
any travelling or living for any length of time in any other place.

4. When Saraswati Thakur was staying in Vrindaban in his earlier years he

would not have been with Kunja Babu and would not have had any kind of a
acarya profile that he would be worried to protect.

So it just seems unlikely.

Your servant, Bhaktarupa Das

 2

(Text COM:2422542) -----------------------------------------

Text COM:2420758 (35 lines)

From: Purnacandra (das) ACBSP (London - GB)
Date: 20-Jun-99 12:34
To: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN) [15092] (received: 20-Jun-99
16:29)
To: Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP (Bhubaneswara - IN) [6685] (received:
20-Jun-99 14:52)
To: Hari Sauri (das) ACBSP [16402] (received: 20-Jun-99 18:02)
To: Janesvara (das) ACBSP (Syracuse - USA) [752] (received: 21-Jun-99
00:55)
To: ISKCON India (news & discussion) [2276]
Cc: Bhakti Vikasa Swami [15478]
Cc: Hridayananda Dasa Goswami [9381] (forwarded: 20-Jun-99 12:40)
Cc: Umapati Swami [9385] (received: 21-Jun-99 05:39)
Cc: CHAKRA WEB SITE <news@chakra.org> (sent: 20-Jun-99 12:40)
Cc: Samba (das) SDG (Mauritius) [6872] (received: 21-Jun-99 04:06)
Cc: (Krsna) Katha [2481]
Cc-For: Granddisciples (of Srila Prabhupada)
Cc-For: UK Forum
Reference: Text COM:2413002 by Atmarama (das) BVS (Skopje - MAC)
Subject: So-called Proof of Bipin Bihari Goswami's position
------------------------------------------------------------
> By the way, I heard that there is a verse saying that if one takes
> reinitiation although his guru is in good standing, he goes to hell because
> he has rejected Visnu.
>
> Somebody knows the reference?

Here are a couple more quotes:

bodhaH kaluSitas tena

daurAtmyam prakatI-kRtam
gurur yena parityaktas
tena tyaktah purA hariH

"One pollutes his own intelligence and exhibits severe weakness of character
when he rejetcs his own spiritual master. Indeed, such a person has already
rejected the Supreme Lord, Hari."
Brahma-vaivarta PurANa [reference: SB 11.3.48]

pratipadya gurum tastu

mohadvi prati padyate
sa kalpa kotim narake
pacyate purusa dhamaH

"Any person who has once accepted a bonafide spiritual master and then, due to
illusion, gives him up, that lowest person falls into hell for ten million
 3

kalpas." (one kalpa is 1000 yugas)

Hari-bhakti-vilas 4.365 (also from Brahma-vaivarta PurANa)

(If I'm not mistaken, the word pacyate means "he is cooked" --- not a very
pleasant situation to be in. Better to stick with your guru.)

BTW, would someone please send me the text that I wrote about the guru taking
the karma of his disciple? I seem to have lost it.

ys pcd
(Text COM:2420758) -----------------------------------------

Text COM:2418650 (20 lines)

From: Hari Sauri (das) ACBSP
Date: 19-Jun-99 11:56
To: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN) [15071] (received: 20-Jun-99
03:09)
To: Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP (Bhubaneswara - IN) [6669] (received:
19-Jun-99 16:43)
To: Janesvara (das) ACBSP (Syracuse - USA) [750] (received: 20-Jun-99
01:58)
To: ISKCON India (news & discussion) [2267]
Cc: Bhakti Vikasa Swami [15461]
Cc: Hridayananda Dasa Goswami [9363] (forwarded: 19-Jun-99 12:00)
Cc: Umapati Swami [9384] (received: 21-Jun-99 05:39)
Cc: CHAKRA WEB SITE <news@chakra.org> (sent: 19-Jun-99 12:02)
Cc: Samba (das) SDG (Mauritius) [6868] (received: 20-Jun-99 03:42)
Cc: (Krsna) Katha [2475]
Cc-For: Granddisciples (of Srila Prabhupada)
Cc-For: UK Forum
Reference: Text COM:2413266 by Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP (Bhubaneswara - IN)
Comment: Text COM:2422542 by Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP (Bhubaneswara - IN)
Subject: So-called Proof of Bipin Bihari Goswami's position
------------------------------------------------------------
> This story appears to be allegorical. Bipin Bihari Goswami disappeared in
> 1919, just about the same year that Saraswati Thakur was starting his
> preaching mission from a single temple in Calcutta with a few followers.
> From looking through the biographies we have of Saraswati Thakur it
> doesn't appear that he went to Vrindaban in a car as an acarya before
> 1926, the year he established his first temple in Vrindaban.

This does seem to be conjecture on your part Bhakta Rupa prabhu. I

understood that BSST began his preaching mission a couple of years before
1919. And don't forget that BSST was staying in Bhaktivinoda Thakur's house
in Vrindavan way before then, so some kind of incident like this could have
happened during the presence of Bipin Bihari.

Of course, we can't really comment on the veracity of BR Sridhara's

statements, but at least he was a direct disciple of BSST and in a better
 4

position to know about his relationship with Bipin Bihari Goswami than we
are.

Your humble servant,

Hari-sauri dasa
(Text COM:2418650) -----------------------------------------

Text COM:2417581 (131 lines)

From: Madana-mohana (das) MG (IC - R)
Date: 19-Jun-99 02:12
To: ISKCON India (news & discussion) [2263]
To: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN) [15047] (received: 19-Jun-99
04:04)
Cc: CHAKRA WEB SITE <news@chakra.org> (sent: 19-Jun-99 02:17)
Cc: Samba (das) SDG (Mauritius) [6866] (received: 19-Jun-99 03:41)
Cc: (Krsna) Katha [2467]
Cc-For: Granddisciples (of Srila Prabhupada)
Cc-For: UK Forum
Reference: Text COM:2415217 by Madana-mohana (das) MG (IC - R)
Subject: So-called Proof of Bipin Bihari Goswami's position
------------------------------------------------------------
> By the way, I heard that there is a verse saying that if one takes
> reinitiation although his guru is in good standing, he goes to hell
> because he has rejected Visnu.

In this regard there is another very instructive story which was narrated by
HH Jayapataka Maharaja and sent to me by HG Vidvan Gauranga prabhu. I am
reproducing it beneath. Once it already made its way to the Katha
conference, but I hope repeating it again won't be redundant or irrelevant.

Your servant,
Madana-mohana das

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Text COM:834008 (114 lines)

From: Vidvan Gauranga JPS
Date: 06-Oct-97 23:37
To: Vijnana (das) DDG (New Vrindavan - USA) [1732] (received:
06-Oct-97
23:52)
To: (JPS Sisya Samuha) JSSS [565]
Cc: (Krsna) Katha [470]
Cc: Jahnu (das) HKS (NE-BBT Danish) [3711] (received: 26-Oct-97
12:08)
(sender: (Bhakta) Jan Mares (NE-BBT Czech))
Cc: jahnu@wineasy.se (sent: 08-Oct-97 06:39) (sender: (Bhakta) Jan
Mares (NE-BBT Czech))
Cc: Gopavrndapal (das) BCS (Abhay Charan project) [29]
 5

Reference: Text COM:832166 by Vijnana (das) DDG (New Vrindavan - USA)

Subject: Ostracization of Jayagopala dasa
------------------------------------------------------------

PAMHO. AGTSP. AGTSGG. About two years back Srila Jayapataka Swami
Maharaja had asked me to send the following text to a few GBC members
who had wanted it.

It is about Jayagopala dasa who appears to have been present during

the time of Srila Srinivasacarya. He was was ostracized by Srila
Nityananda Prabhu's son, Srila Virabhadra Gosvami Prabhu, an
incarnation of Sri Ksirodakasayi Visnu Himself.

Srila Jayapataka Swami Maharaja had shown me the text from a famous
Bengali Vaisnava encyclopedia Gaudiya Vaisnava Abhidhana (by a Gaudiya
Vaisnava named Haridasa dasa).

I think this document may be of interest to many other devotees too.

So I am sending a cc to Krsna Katha conference too.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of Jayagopala from Gaudiya Vaisnava Abhidhana (Khanda 3):
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jayagopala was a kayastha from the village Kandra in Bengal. Having
transgressed the mercy of his spiritual master, he was ostracized by
Sri Virabhadra Gosvami from the Vaisnava society.

In Radhadesa, there is a village named Kandra. Sri Mangala and Jnana

dasa lived there. Jayagopala was born in a family of Kayasthas in
that village. Out of false ego due to having obtained a high
education, he became proud and evil-minded. His spiritual master was
a pure devotee of the Lord but because he was illiterate, Jaya
Gopala was ashamed of him. If someone inquired as to who his guru
was, Jaya Gopala would say that his grand-spiritual master
parama-guru) was his guru. Srila Virabhadra Prabhu brought this up
and ostracized him for having transgressed the mercy given to him.
(Bhakti Ratnakara 14.180-183) [1]

The letter sent by the son of Lord Nityananda to Srila Srinivasa

Acarya requesting him to reject Jaya Gopala is appended below:

All glories to Sri Gaura and Sri Nityananda!

Sri Virabhadradeva, who is certainly to be remembered by Your Grace,

submits herewith the following with a loving embrace:

Srila Srinivasacarya! You are Sri Sri Mahaprabhu's potency.

Whereas through one energy of the Lord, transcendental literatures
were published by Srila Rupa Gosvami and others who were the
personified energies of the Lord, through His other energy, the
 6

mahajanas, the Lord is distributing the books in Bengal. Thus I am

submitting news to Your Grace.

Jaya Gopala dasa has transgressed My mercy. This has also become
known to the world. Therefore, in this matter, I have forbidden
all of My men to talk with him and so on. Similarly, Your Grace
may also not talk with him and so on. [2]

In the Bhakti Ratnakara (14.190-191), it is written:

Who does not cry on seeing the qualities of Sri Virabhadra Prabhu?
He ostracized the sinful Jaya Gopala. Everyone came to know about
this and no one would ever speak to him and so on. [3]

There is also a description of Jaya Gopala in the 19th Vilasa of Prema

Vilasa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:

[1] (Bhakti Ratnakara 14.180-183)

raadhadese kaandra naamete graama haya/
tathaa srii-mangala jnaana-daasera aalaya//
tathaai kaayastha jayagopaalera sthiti/
vidyaa-ahankaare taara janmila durmati//
guru vidyaa-hiina - ithe heya atisaya/
jijnaasile parama-guruke guru kaya//
prabhu viirabhadra prakaarete vyakta kaila/
langhila prasaada tenhi - taare tyaaga dila

[2] Directly from manuscript? [Patrika 5]

sri-sri-gaura-nityaanandau jayatah. taavadiiyaavasya-smaraniiya-
sri-virabhadradevah premaalingana-puurvakam nivedayati.

sriila-sriinivaasaacaarya tvam srii-srii-mahaaprabhoh saktih. Ata eva

ekayaa saktyaa prabhu-sakti-ruupaadi-sriimad-ruupa-gosvaami-dvaara
grantha-prakaasitah. Aparayaa saktya gauda-mandale mahaajana-samsadi
grantha-vistaaram karoti iti bhavato 'ntike madiiya-vaartam
presayaami.

jaya-gopala-daasena mat-prasaadollanghanam krtam tac ca jagati viditam

itiiha tena saardham madiiya-janena kenaapy aalaapaadikam na kriyate
mayaapi nisiddham bhavataapi tathaalaapaadikam na kartavyam iti.

[3] Bhakti Ratnakara (14.190-191)

prabhu viirabhadra gune kebaa naahi jhure/
karilena tyaaga paapii jayagopaalere//
esakala kathaa haila sarvatra vidita/
aalaapaadi keho naa karaye kadaacit//
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 7

Yours in the service of SP (through my spiritual master),

Vidvan Gauranga dasa
(Text COM:834008) ------------------------------------------
(Text COM:2417581) -----------------------------------------

Text COM:2389528 (387 lines) [W1]

From: Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP (Bhubaneswara - IN)
Date: 10-Jun-99 15:27
To: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN) [14802] (received: 11-Jun-99
03:14)
To: Janesvara (das) ACBSP (Syracuse - USA) [727] (received: 12-Jun-99
02:57)
To: Nayana-ranjana (das) (BBT Bombay - IN) [3057] (received: 11-Jun-99
07:04)
Cc: Bhakti Vikasa Swami [15020] (received: 12-Jun-99 05:35)
Cc: Hridayananda Dasa Goswami [9190] (forwarded: 10-Jun-99 15:30)
Cc: Umapati Swami [9335]
Cc: Hari Sauri (das) ACBSP [16025] (received: 10-Jun-99 23:44)
Cc: CHAKRA WEB SITE <news@chakra.org> (sent: 10-Jun-99 15:33)
Cc: (Bhakta) Didzis Melbiksis (Latvian BBT) [326] (received: 12-Jun-99
15:59) (sender: (Bhakta) Renar Terehovich (NE-BBT))
Cc: Madhusudani Radha (dd) JPS (Mill Valley - USA) [24598] (forwarded:
10-Jun-99 15:30)
Cc: Mathura Kishora (das) JPS (NE-BBT Estonian) [1667] (received:
12-Jun-99 09:47) (sender: (Bhakta) Renar Terehovich (NE-BBT))
Cc: Samba (das) SDG (Mauritius) [6812] (received: 10-Jun-99 16:20)
Cc: (Krsna) Katha [2423]
For: ISKCON India (news & discussion)
Cc-For: Granddisciples (of Srila Prabhupada)
Cc-For: UK Forum
Reference: Text COM:2377641 by Nayana-ranjana (das) (BBT Bombay - IN)
Comment: Text COM:2405197 by Ajamila (das) ACBSP (Goloka Books - GB)
Comment: Text COM:2407649 by Hari Sauri (das) ACBSP
Subject: So-called Proof of Bipin Bihari Goswami's position
------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Nayana Ranjan Prabhu,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

You have attempted to supply for the benefit of the learned members of these
conferences some supposed "historical evidences" which you claim "prove the
actual position of Bipin Bihari Goswami". Ajamila Prabhu has commented on
your text by stating that the information you have supplied was
"well-researched" and "very useful". I respectfully submit that your
information is not at all well-researched, and is not only of questionable
usefulness but also misleading and possibly dangerous. Devotees should be
very careful in discussing historical matters concerning departed vaisnavas
in writing and in public forums, as there is always the possibility that if
the information is not presented properly or accurately it will result in
 8

vaisnava aparadha and ruin one's own or one's readers' spiritual life!

But to give you the benefit of the doubt, you have made what is a common
mistake -- you have believed something because it was in writing in a fancy
hardbound book with nice graphics and it was grouped together with some
quite authentic, accurate, and useful statements. Especially in this day and
age we should be cautious about repeating anything without making sure our
sources are accurate.

The first point to note about your "historical evidence" is that it consists
99% of verbatim quotes from the book "The Authorized Sri Caitanya Saraswata
Parampara" by HH BG Narasingha Maharaja, formerly with ISKCON but now having
his own preaching institution. (Or it may be quotes from the advance
publication Narasingha Maharaja distributed earlier on the internet.) Not
only have you quoted from a questionable source, but you have failed to
inform your readers where you have taken the information from and have
attempted to pass it off as the results of your own learned research. You
haven't even cared to paraphrase what is written in that book, but have
directly and extensively used Narasingha Maharaja's words without quoting
him. This is very poor practice if you actually intend to benefit those who
will read your writing.

But in any case, you have chosen this book as your source. I have studied
that book carefully and there are several points to be mentioned. Although I
appreciate Maharaja's noble intentions in writing the book, he could have
served his stated purpose quite well without even mentioning any of the
controversies surrounding Bipin Bihari Goswami. For the benefit of the
readers I will offer some brief explanation of this crucial point:

There are members of other Gaudiya Vaisnava camps who sometimes attempt to
lure inexperienced devotees away from ISKCON and the various Gaudiya Maths
with "evidence" of how Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur is not
actually coming in a bonafide line of disciplic succession. I will not go
into the details of their contrived arguments here, but they often include
with their evidence, stories about the relationship between Saraswati Thakur
and Bipin Bihari Goswami. Based upon these stories they somehow conclude
that therefore Bhaktivinode Thakur rejected Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati
Thakur, thus breaking the disciplic succession and leaving ISKCON without a
connection to Sri Krishna.

Now, the purpose of Narasingha Maharaja's book is to refute all of the

arguments of these other camps, and he does a reasonably good job of
presenting the correct arguments. But unfortunately he offers some
additional arguments about Bipin Bihari Goswami, even though it does nothing
to help establish his case that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Thakur is bonafide.
The detractors trace their line in another way to Bhaktivinode Thakur, and
then to Bipin Bihari Goswami, his diksa guru. Narasingha Maharaja attempts
to prove that Bhaktivinode Thakur's relationship with Bipin Bihari Goswami
was broken, thus the detractors' spiritual ancestry cannot be traced. It is
in this context that he makes so many points about Bipin Bihari Goswami.
 9

But the learned readers should note that logically if one wants to prove
that one's own line is bonafide there is no profit in establishing that
another person's line is unbonafide. In this way we should carefully note
that to defeat the arguments of these detractors we gain nothing by
criticizing Bipin Bihari Goswami. Rather, any mud we try to splash on him
will also serve to muddy us up a bit as well, as, after all, he is the diksa
guru of Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur.

Thus, we should not feel shy to examine more closely the relationship
between Bipin Bihari Goswami and Bhaktivinode Thakur. Sometimes we think
that we have to criticize Bipin Bihari Goswami in order to prove ourselves
as loyal followers of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur. There is no
substantial basis for this.

The next point about the above-mentioned book is that one will note that
there is practically no mention by Narasingha Maharaja as to what are the
sources of his information. I contacted Maharaja and asked him for his
sources. He told me that all of his conclusions were collected by hearing
them from HH Sridhara Maharaja and others in the various Gaudiya Math
institutions. I replied to him suggesting that it would be good if he could
present maybe even one piece of written evidence to substantiate his claims.
He replied that since he heard it from Sridhara Maharaja that was good
enough for him.

I respectfully submit that it may be good enough for the personal

realizations of Narasingha Maharaja, but it should not be good enough for us
to accept the book as the gospel truth. It is greatly significant to note
here that:

* In spite of all the things that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur is

reported to have said about Bipin Bihari Goswami, it should be marked that
not a single piece of written information is available. And there are
volumes and volumes of written information from Saraswati Thakur. Sometimes
teams of stenographers were engaged to carefully preserve every word he
spoke. Still, there is no criticism of Bipin Bihari Goswami anywhere there.

* Not only that, but there is not, to our knowledge, a single piece of
written information from any DISCIPLE of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati
Thakur reporting that he criticized Bipin Bihari Goswami, or even themselves
criticizing Bipin Bihari Goswami.

So, even if there was something to be critical of, still the last two (or
more) generations of vaisnavas have scrupulously avoided putting anything in
writing on this subject. It makes one wonder why Narasingha Maharaja has
seen fit to "improve" on the etiquette shown by his elders.

It also makes one wonder whether Narasingha Maharaja's recollections of his

discussions with Sridhara Maharaja haven't suffered over the years, what to
speak of whether he actually heard every detail from that source or whether
 10

he just heard one or two things which were amplified by additional

discussions he had with other Gaudiya Math members.

Which brings me to another point. In ISKCON we are well trained up to avoid

leaving ISKCON to associate intimately with other Gaudiya Math sadhus or to
join other Gaudiya institutions. But in spite of this we immediately, quite
diligently, and very happily imbibe the conceptions/misconceptions commonly
found there, as if they must be automatically correct. I'll admit that all
of the points made by Narasingha Maharaja are common knowledge in Gaudiya
Math circles, but that doesn't make them true. The Bhagavatam strongly
advises us to be inquisitive and not to be blind followers. We may come
across something they say, and we may want to try to understand their
points, but we should always seek confirmation from guru, sastra, and the
previous acaryas. Blindly repeating whatever ANYONE says as truth is very
risky business.

Our learned readers may also be interested to hear some other statements
that Narasingha Maharaja makes in this very same book. After pointing out
what he considers to be some faults in ISKCON, including ongoing vaisnava
aparadha, he goes on to say, "This we feel is largely due as a result of the
ISKCON leaders having completely cut themselves off from the senior members
of the Gaudiya Math who are themselves living/realized representatives of
Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur
Prabhupada." Thus it seems he considers himself qualified to judge who is
realized and who is not realized, and he has found all the realized to be in
his camp and only the non-realized in ISKCON. By making such a statement is
he really exemplifying proper vaisnava behavior? Has he learned this
mentality from his gurujanas? I think not.

Now for the substance of your text. Please note that below I do not attempt
to prove that your statements are wrong. They may be right or they may be
wrong. The real point is that whatever you have written is simply the
repetition of hearsay. I am not making any claims about Bipin Bihari
Goswami. I am simply advising caution before one concludes that he should be
criticized. If someone wants to criticize him that is his business, but
others should know that the statements are not substantiated. If any of
these statements can be substantiated then I would very much like to see
that evidence, which even Narasingha Maharaja is not aware of. Without such
evidence we should follow the example of our gurujanas and remain silent on
the issue.

So although I am making no claims here which have to be proved, I will

suggest wherever possible, without proof, other interpretations than what is
presented by Narasingha Maharaja, for consideration by the readers:

You have written:

> I just want to put my two pennies in this discussion about Bipin Bihari
> Goswami. There are many historical evidences of a major strain in the
> relationship between Bhaktivinode Thakura & Bipin Bihari Goswami which can
 11

> be considered as conclusive evidence of the Bipin Bihari Goswami's

> position. I will give a few:

You have not stated what is his position, you have only presented what you
call "conclusive evidence", but then you have left the conclusions to the
reader. Generally you should state your conclusions, although in this case
it is probably just as well that you haven't.

> (1) With the help of Jagannatha dasa Babaji, Bhaktivinode Thakura was able
> to discover the place of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's appearance.
> Simultaneously it was declared that the so-called Yogapitha at Navadvipa
> on the other side of the Ganges was false. Many caste goswamis objected to
> the site at Sri Mayapur being the original site. Bipin Bihari Goswami at
> that time rejected Bhaktivinoda's preaching in a small newspaper of his
> own called Gauranga-sevaka Patrika in 1919. One could say at this
> point-that at the very least they did not see eye to eye or that their
> feelings for placing distance in their relationship was mutual-indeed a
> difficult relationship to maintain between "guru and disciple." (The
> Gaurangasevaka Patrika and article available at Caitanya Research
> Institute, Calcutta)

After seeing this reference in Narasingha Maharaja's book I went to the

Caitanya Research Institute in Calcutta. They don't keep copies of any
issues of the Gaurangasevaka Patrika. When I confronted Narasingha Maharaja
with this point he referred me to a book recently published by a Bengali
scholar, Kananbihari Goswami, entitled "Baghnapara Sampradaya O Vaisnava
Sahitya" (The Caste Goswamis of Baghnapara and Vaisnava Literature) I bought
the book, and it does contain many points of interest. It also contradicts
many of Narasingha Maharaja's points [see below]. Dr. Goswami is related to
the family of caste goswamis who supervise the worship of Caitanya
Mahaprabhu at Pracina Mayapur, across the river from Mayapur. He appears to
be a firm believer that Pracina Mayapur is the actual birthsite of Sri
Caitanya Mahaprabhu, so how much we can accept his authority is
questionable. He does state that Bhaktivinode Thakur was rejected by his
guru, Bipin Bihari Goswami, for giving false information about the
birthsite, and he states as his proof the article published by Bipin Bihari
Goswami in 1919. He unfortunately does not give the text of this article.

Curiously, in his book, Dr. Goswami also describes Bhaktivinode Thakur as

the "dear disciple" of Bipin Bihari Goswami, and he also praises the
writings of Bhaktivinode Thakur, describing them as being part of the
literature of the Baghnapara Vaisnavas (Bipin Bihari Goswami's extended
family). If the Thakur was rejected, then how is his literature related?

One thing that is well known is that there was a lot of politics between
different groups of Gaudiya Vaishnavas over the location of the actual
birthsite of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, even before the Gaudiya Math was started.
After the disappearance of Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur in 1914 these political
controversies became quite shrill, and there were nasty exchanges going on.
So five years after the disappearance of Bhaktivinode Thakur, Bipin Bihari
 12

Goswami did perhaps criticize those who were supporting the Mayapur site,
but without seeing the original article it is difficult to say. Right now we
only have Dr. Goswami's word to go on. We are trying to track down the
article.

And the fact remains that Bipin Bihari Goswami was appointed as one of the
directors of the committee to oversee the worship of Sriman Mahaprabhu,
newly established at the yogapitha in Mayapur by Bhaktivinode Thakur. So
perhaps Bipin Bihari Goswami had a change of mind somewhere along the way,
which he certainly had a right to do.

> (2) We do not find any association of Bhaktivinode Thakura with Bipin
> Bihari Goswami except for short time in Narail, East Bengal and this does
> not include any reference to the latter instructing Bhaktivinode in the
> matter of pure devotional service.

What about the meeting in Krishnanagar to organize the yogapitha worship?

What about the fact that Bhaktivinode Thakur appointed Bipin Bihari Goswami
to be in charge of his printing press?

And even if this statement were true it actually proves nothing.

Bhaktivinode Thakur was an important government official who was posted at
many distant places, and then later he was doing so many preaching works in
other distant places.

And as far as his instructions, doesn't giving vaisnava diksa fall in the
category of pure devotional service?

> (3) In 1911 there was an famous assembly of scholars held in Medinpur
> (Bengal) wherein the topic of debate was to be "Brahmana and Vaisnavas."
> Bipin Bihari Goswami was present at that assembly and, as already known,
> he would side with the brahmana community in the platform that brahmana
> Vaisnavas were automatically superior to non-brahmnana Vaisnavas, due to a
> brahmana being born in a higher caste. Bhaktivinode Thakura was also
> invited to attend that assembly. The conflict between he and Bipin Bihari
> was destined. Bhaktivinoda Thakura - not wanting to take a position of
> confronting & attempting to defeat his "diksha guru" in a public forum
> declined to attend the meeting on the pleaa of bad health. In his place he
> sent Sarasvati Thakura (age 37) to represent the Gaudiya Vaisnava
> Siddhanta in the line of Sri Rupa & Raghunatha dasa Goswami, as per the
> teachings of Mahaprabhu. We all know what happened in the meeting.

This appears to be a total fabrication. Of course the meeting was held and
it was a great victory for Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur. To date the
only written information we have which states that Bipin Bihari Goswami was
present at this assembly is this same "Baghnapara Sampradaya" book referred
to above. Assuming that Narasingha Maharaja considers this book to be
authentic, Dr. Goswami makes the following interesting statement:

tini smaarta panditder saastra-vicaare haariye gaudiya vaishnava-dharmera

 13

shresthatva pratipaadana koren

"He [Bipin Bihari Goswami] defeated the scriptural considerations of the

smarta pandits and demonstrated the superiority of Gaudiya Vaishnava
dharma."

I don't know how this statement escaped the attention of Narasingha

Maharaja, as it was the sentence just preceding the description of Bipin
Bihari Goswami's relationship with Bhaktivinode Thakur, referred to above,
and it states exactly the opposite from what the Maharaja claims here.

It is amazing how rumors just get out of hand! They eventually end up
stating just the opposite of the actual facts, and then they get put in
writing, which makes them conclusive truth!

> (4) It is clear also in studying the life of Bhaktivinoda that he did not
> imbibe any of the conceptions of Bipin Bihari Goswami. BVT stressed on the
> chanting on the Holy Names in contrary to the stress on siddha-pranali
> given by BBG.

This is a totally ridiculous statement. Does Narasingha Maharaja know what

is the philosophy of Bipin Bihari Goswami? Do you? I certainly don't, as he
only wrote one book, in Bengali, which has not been translated. In what
context was he "stressing" siddha pranali? Have you read the writings of
Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur? Does the Thakur ever mention siddha pranali?

And in any case, so many acaryas stress different things from their gurus.
Bhaktivinode Thakur was a pioneer of a great preaching movement. Naturally
there may be some shift in emphasis. A difference in emphasis does not at
all imply a difference of opinion. This again, even if it is true, proves
nothing.

> (5)In later years Sarasvati Thakura reinitiated (hari-nama, mantra-diksha

> & sannyasa) a prominent disciple of Bipin Bihari Goswami, who became known
> as Bhaktivivek Bharati Maharaja.

Please note that the subject matter of this discussion is the relationship
between Bipin Bihari Goswami and Bhaktivinode Thakur, and this information
may distract us from the main point, on which it has no direct bearing.

But it is also a very interesting topic to understand all the wonderful and
unprecedented things Srila Saraswati Thakur did to start his preaching
movement. But we should be careful to draw too many conclusions from his
reinitiation pastimes. He also reinitiated a disciple of Sri
Visvambharananda Dev Goswami, the mahanta of Gopivallabhpur who had been the
convenor of the Brahmana vs. Vaishnava debate at Midnapur referred to above.
Even after doing this, the learned mahanta remained a staunch supporter of
Saraswati Thakur and his preaching mission. Thus there are many factors here
which need to be considered.
 14

> (6) There are some points which may not be proved directly like for
> instance it is known that Bipin Bihari mixed very freely with the degraded
> sections of Bengal society and associated with anti-Vedic philosophers
> like the Brahma Samaja. Even after his return to Vaisnavism he continued
> bad habits like smoking etc. - thus Sarasvati Thakura, who was himself
> very strict in this principles, saw this as a sign of lower Vaisnava
> adhikari (kanishtha adhikari), although Bhaktivinoda Thakura remained
> unspoken on the issue.

Where has Srila Saraswati Thakur proclaimed that Bipin Bihari Goswami was a
kanistha adhikari? What will you conclude upon hearing that Srila Vamsidas
Babaji smoked marijuana? Srila Saraswati Thakur said that he was a
maha-bhagavat.

But even Narasingha Maharaja here admits that Bhaktivinode Thakur did not
find any fault with his diksa guru over these issues. In general, though, we
would like to see any evidence anyone has to support any of the claims made
here.

> (7) Bhaktivinoda Thakura did for sometime show formal respect to Bipin
> Bihari Goswami. But when the Goswami disrespected Srila Raghunatha dasa
> Goswami by thinking that he can give blessings to Raghunatha dasa, the
> prayojana-acarya, because Raghunatha dasa was from a "lower caste", the
> Thakura distanced himself more from Bipin Bihari Goswami.

The evidence for this supposed statement by Bipin Bihari Goswami about
Raghunath Das Goswami is also missing. There is evidence, however, for a
statement of this type being made by one disciple of Bipin Bihari Goswami, a
young zamindar by the name of Choudhary Jadabendranandan. Perhaps this got
twisted into a rumor, which has now become a "fact" due to being put in
writing. Since Bipin Bihari Goswami spoke strongly at the Midnapur debate
that vaisnavas were superior than brahmanas, this supposed statement becomes
even more doubtful.

So now you may judge for your self. My humble suggestion is that you follow
our previous acaryas and not actively criticize Bipin Bihari Goswami.

One final point I would like to make here. There is a subtle implication in
this relegation of Bipin Bihari Goswami to some sort of lower status or even
outright rejection. That is, someone may conclude that since Srila
Bhaktivinode Thakur rejected or distanced himself from his diksa guru, it is
therefore proven that a vaishnava may reject or distance himself from his
diksa guru who is found to be of a "lesser standard". It was just such an
implication drawn by an innocent reader of Narasingha Maharaja's book and
posted on a public COM conference that began this whole discussion. But this
conclusion is nowhere supported by guru, sadhu or sastra. Rather, sastra
never sanctions distancing oneself from or rejecting a diksa guru unless the
guru is seriously fallen or has become a non-vaisnava. The GBC reinitiation
papers clearly state this.
 15

In conclusion, I will repeat here the most conclusive evidence about the
relationship in question, which is the only evidence we have in writing,
from the Thakur himself. He offers heartfelt prayers to Bipin Bihari Goswami
in some of his publications and also prays in Kalyana Kalpataru (3.10) for
the association of Srimati Ananga Manjari in the spiritual world. Ananga
Manjari appeared as Jahnava Mata, the original preceptor of the diksa
parampara of which Bipin Bihari Goswami was a member.

This is his specific prayer in his Amrta Pravaha Bhasya:

bipina-bih€r… hari t€'ra akti avat€ri

bipina bih€r… prabhu-bara
r… guru gosv€m… r™pe dekhi more bhavak™pe
uddharila €pana ki‰kara

"The eminent Bipin Bihari Prabhu, who is the manifestation of the

transcendental energy of Lord Hari, Who sports in the forests of Vraja, has
descended in the form of the spiritual preceptor. Seeing me in the dark well
of worldly existence, he has delivered this humble servant of his."

Hoping you are well.

Your servant, Bhaktarupa Das

(Text COM:2389528) -----------------------------------------

Text COM:2377641 (66 lines)

From: Nayana-ranjana (das) HKS (BBT Bombay - IN)
Date: 06-Jun-99 15:48
To: Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP (Bhubaneswara - IN) [6443] (received:
07-Jun-99 15:22)
To: Janesvara (das) ACBSP (Syracuse - USA) [721] (received: 07-Jun-99
02:07)
To: ISKCON India (news & discussion) [2201]
Cc: Umapati Swami [9323]
Cc: Hari Sauri (das) ACBSP [15782] (received: 07-Jun-99 04:55)
Cc: CHAKRA WEB SITE <news@chakra.org> (sent: 06-Jun-99 15:54)
Cc: (Krsna) Katha [2398]
Cc-For: Granddisciples (of Srila Prabhupada)
Cc-For: UK Forum
Reference: Text COM:2364500 by Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP (Bhubaneswara - IN)
Comment: Text COM:2378406 by Ajamila (das) ACBSP (Goloka Books - GB)
Comment: Text COM:2386180 by Hari Sauri (das) ACBSP
Comment: Text COM:2389528 by Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP (Bhubaneswara - IN)
Subject: Proof of Bipin Bihari Goswami's position
------------------------------------------------------------
> If there was any other evidence of a strain in the relationship, then this
> could be taken as further evidence, but by itself it really tells us
> nothing conclusively.
 16

I just want to put my two pennies in this discussion about Bipin Bihari
Goswami. There are many historical evidences of a major strain in the
relationship between Bhaktivinode Thakura & Bipin Bihari Goswami which can
be considered as conclusive evidence of the Bipin Bihari Goswami's position.
I will give a few:

(1) With the help of Jagannatha dasa Babaji, Bhaktivinode Thakura was able
to discover the place of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's appearance.
Simultaneously it was declared that the so-called Yogapitha at Navadvipa on
the other side of the Ganges was false. Many caste goswamis objected to the
site at Sri Mayapur being the original site. Bipin Bihari Goswami at that
time rejected Bhaktivinoda's preaching in a small newspaper of his own
called Gauranga-sevaka Patrika in 1919. One could say at this point-that at
the very least they did not see eye to eye or that their feelings for
placing distance in their relationship was mutual-indeed a difficult
relationship to maintain between "guru and disciple." (The Gaurangasevaka
Patrika and article available at Caitanya Research Institute, Calcutta)

(2) We do not find any association of Bhaktivinode Thakura with Bipin Bihari
Goswami except for short time in Narail, East Bengal and this does not
include any reference to the latter instructing Bhaktivinode in the matter
of pure devotional service.

(3) In 1911 there was an famous assembly of scholars held in Medinpur

(Bengal) wherein the topic of debate was to be "Brahmana and Vaisnavas."
Bipin Bihari Goswami was present at that assembly and, as already known, he
would side with the brahmana community in the platform that brahmana
Vaisnavas were automatically superior to non-brahmnana Vaisnavas, due to a
brahmana being born in a higher caste. Bhaktivinode Thakura was also invited
to attend that assembly. The conflict between he and Bipin Bihari was
destined. Bhaktivinoda Thakura - not wanting to take a position of
confronting & attempting to defeat his "diksha guru" in a public forum
declined to attend the meeting on the pleaa of bad health. In his place he
sent Sarasvati Thakura (age 37) to represent the Gaudiya Vaisnava Siddhanta
in the line of Sri Rupa & Raghunatha dasa Goswami, as per the teachings of
Mahaprabhu. We all know what happened in the meeting.

(4) It is clear also in studying the life of Bhaktivinoda that he did not
imbibe any of the conceptions of Bipin Bihari Goswami. BVT stressed on the
chanting on the Holy Names in contrary to the stress on siddha-pranali given
by BBG.

(5)In later years Sarasvati Thakura reinitiated (hari-nama, mantra-diksha &

sannyasa) a prominent disciple of Bipin Bihari Goswami, who became known as
Bhaktivivek Bharati Maharaja.

(6) There are some points which may not be proved directly like for instance
it is known that Bipin Bihari mixed very freely with the degraded sections
of Bengal society and associated with anti-Vedic philosophers like the
Brahma Samaja. Even after his return to Vaisnavism he continued bad habits
 17

like smoking etc. - thus Sarasvati Thakura, who was himself very strict in
this principles, saw this as a sign of lower Vaisnava adhikari (kanishtha
adhikari), although Bhaktivinoda Thakura remained unspoken on the issue.

(7) Bhaktivinoda Thakura did for sometime show formal respect to Bipin
Bihari Goswami. But when the Goswami disrespected Srila Raghunatha dasa
Goswami by thinking that he can give blessings to Raghunatha dasa, the
prayojana-acarya, because Raghunatha dasa was from a "lower caste", the
Thakura distanced himself more from Bipin Bihari Goswami.

Your servant,
Nayana-ranjana dasa
(Text COM:2377641) -----------------------------------------