Srila Jiva Gosvami’s Disappearance Day

Giriraj Swami: Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Ādi-līlā, Chapter Ten describes the branches of the tree named Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.

TEXT 1

śrī-caitanya-padāmbhoja-
madhupebhyo namo namaḥ
kathañcid āśrayād yeṣāṁ
śvāpi tad-gandha-bhāg bhavet

TRANSLATION

et me repeatedly offer my respectful obeisances unto the beelike devotees who always taste the honey of the lotus feet of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. If even a doggish nondevotee somehow takes shelter of such devotees, he enjoys the aroma of the lotus flower.

PURPORT by Srila Prabhupada

The example of a dog is very significant in this connection. A dog naturally does not become a devotee at any time, but still it is sometimes found that a dog of a devotee gradually becomes a devotee also. We have actually seen that a dog has no respect even for the tulasī plant. Indeed, a dog is especially inclined to pass urine on the tulasī plant. Therefore the dog is the number one nondevotee. But Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s saṅkīrtana movement is so strong that even a doglike nondevotee can gradually become a devotee by the association of a devotee of Lord Caitanya. Śrīla Śivānanda Sena, a great householder devotee of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, attracted a dog on the street while going to Jagannātha Purī. The dog began to follow him and ultimately went to see Caitanya Mahāprabhu and was liberated. Similarly, cats and dogs in the household of Śrīvāsa Ṭhākura were also liberated. Cats and dogs and other animals are not expected to become devotees, but in the association of a pure devotee they are also delivered.

TEXTS 2–6

jaya jaya śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya-nityānanda
jayādvaitacandra jaya gaura-bhakta-vṛnda

All glories to Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu and Lord Nityānanda! All glories to Advaita Prabhu, and all glories to the devotees of Lord Caitanya, headed by Śrīvāsa!

ei mālīra — ei vṛkṣera akathya kathana
ebe śuna mukhya-śākhāra nāma-vivaraṇa

The description of Lord Caitanya as the gardener and the tree is inconceivable. Now hear with attention about the branches of this tree.

caitanya-gosāñira yata pāriṣada-caya
guru-laghu-bhāva tāṅra nā haya niścaya

The associates of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu were many, but none of them should be considered lower or higher. This cannot be ascertained.

yata yata mahānta kailā tāṅ-sabāra gaṇana
keha karibāre nāre jyeṣṭha-laghu-krama

All the great personalities in the line of Lord Caitanya enumerated these devotees, but they could not distinguish between the greater and the lesser.

ataeva tāṅ-sabāre kari’ namaskāra
nāma-mātra kari, doṣa nā labe āmāra

I offer my obeisances unto them as a token of respect. I request them not to consider my offenses.

TEXT 7

vande śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya-
premāmara-taroḥ priyān
śākhā-rūpān bhakta-gaṇān
kṛṣṇa-prema-phala-pradān

I offer my obeisances to all the dear devotees of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the eternal tree of love of Godhead. I offer my respects to all the branches of the tree, the devotees of the Lord who distribute the fruit of love of Kṛṣṇa.

PURPORT

Śrī Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī sets the example of offering obeisances to all the preacher devotees of Lord Caitanya, without distinction as to higher and lower. Unfortunately, at present there are many foolish so-called devotees of Lord Caitanya who make such distinctions. For example, the title “Prabhupāda” is offered to a spiritual master, especially to a distinguished spiritual master such as Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī Prabhupāda, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī Prabhupāda or Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Gosvāmī Prabhupāda. When our disciples similarly wanted to address their spiritual master as Prabhupāda, some foolish people became envious. Not considering the propaganda work of the Hare Kṛṣṇa movement, simply because these disciples addressed their spiritual master as Prabhupāda they became so envious that they formed a faction along with other such envious persons just to minimize the value of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. To chastise such fools, Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī very frankly says, keha karibāre nāre jyeṣṭha-laghu-krama. Anyone who is a bona fide preacher of the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu must be respectful to the real devotees of Lord Caitanya; one should not be envious, considering one preacher to be very great and another to be very lowly. This is a material distinction and has no place on the platform of spiritual activities. Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī therefore offers equal respect to all the preachers of the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who are compared to the branches of the tree. ISKCON is one of these branches, and it should therefore be respected by all sincere devotees of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

COMMENT

Even among Gaudiya Vaishnavas, we must be careful to avoid offenses. We must respect and recognize the service of all Vaishnavas. As Srila Prabhupada once said, if we do not give credit where credit is due, we will become envious. 

TEXT 85

tāṅra madhye rūpa-sanātana — baḍa śākhā
anupama, jīva, rājendrādi upaśākhā

TRANSLATION

Among these branches, Rūpa and Sanātana were principal. Anupama, Jīva Gosvāmī and others, headed by Rājendra, were their subbranches.

PURPORT

In the Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā (195) it is said that Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī was formerly Vilāsa-mañjarī gopī. From his very childhood Jīva Gosvāmī was greatly fond of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. He later came to Navadvīpa to study Sanskrit, and, following in the footsteps of Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu, he circumambulated the entire Navadvīpa-dhāma.

COMMENT

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has described Jiva Gosvami’s Navadvipa parikramā, and this parikramā of Nityananda Prabhu and Jiva Gosvami forms the basis of the Navadvipa parikramā we perform now, under the guidance of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura. 

PURPORT (continued)

After visiting Navadvīpa-dhāma he went to Benares to study Sanskrit under Madhusūdana Vācaspati, and after finishing his studies in Benares he went to Vṛndāvana and took shelter of his uncles, Śrī Rūpa and Sanātana. This is described in the Bhakti-ratnākara. As far as our information goes, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī composed and edited at least twenty-five books. They are all very much celebrated, and they are listed as follows: (1) Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa, (2) Sūtra-mālikā, (3) Dhātu-saṅgraha, (4) Kṛṣṇārcā-dīpikā, (5) Gopāla-virudāvalī, (6) Rasāmṛta-śeṣa, (7) Śrī Mādhava-mahotsava, (8) Śrī Saṅkalpa-kalpavṛkṣa, (9) Bhāvārtha-sūcaka-campū, (10) Gopāla-tāpanī-ṭīkā, (11) a commentary on the Brahma-saṁhitā, (12) a commentary on the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, (13) a commentary on the Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi, (14) a commentary on the Yogasāra-stava, (15) a commentary on the Gāyatrī-mantra, as described in the Agni Purāṇa, (16) a description of the Lord’s lotus feet derived from the Padma Purāṇa, (17) a description of the lotus feet of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī, (18) Gopāla-campū (in two parts) and (19–25) seven sandarbhas: the Krama-, Tattva-, Bhagavat-, Paramātma-, Kṛṣṇa-, Bhakti- and Prīti-sandarbha. After the disappearance of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Sanātana Gosvāmī in Vṛndāvana, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī became the ācārya of all the Vaiṣṇavas in Bengal, Orissa and the rest of the world, and it is he who used to guide them in their devotional service. In Vṛndāvana he established the Rādhā-Dāmodara temple, where, after retirement, we had the opportunity to live from 1962 until 1965, when we decided to come to the United States of America. When Jīva Gosvāmī was still present, Śrīla Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī compiled his famous Caitanya-caritāmṛta. Later, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī inspired Śrīnivāsa Ācārya, Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura and Duḥkhī Kṛṣṇadāsa to preach Kṛṣṇa consciousness in Bengal. Jīva Gosvāmī was informed that all the manuscripts that had been collected from Vṛndāvana and sent to Bengal for preaching purposes were plundered near Viṣṇupura, in Bengal, but later he received the information that the books had been recovered. Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī awarded the designation Kavirāja to Rāmacandra Sena, a disciple of Śrīnivāsa Ācārya’s, and to Rāmacandra’s younger brother Govinda. While Jīva Gosvāmī was alive, Śrīmatī Jāhnavā-devī, the pleasure potency of Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu, went to Vṛndāvana with a few devotees. Jīva Gosvāmī was very kind to the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas, the Vaiṣṇavas from Bengal. Whoever went to Vṛndāvana he provided with a residence and prasādam. His disciple Kṛṣṇadāsa Adhikārī listed all the books of the Gosvāmīs in his diary.

The sahajiyās level three accusations against Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī. This is certainly not congenial for the execution of devotional service. The first accusation concerns a materialist who was very proud of his reputation as a great Sanskrit scholar and approached Śrī Rūpa and Sanātana to argue with them about the revealed scriptures. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Sanātana Gosvāmī, not wanting to waste their time, gave him a written statement that he had defeated them in a debate on the revealed scriptures. Taking this paper, the scholar approached Jīva Gosvāmī for a similar certificate of defeat, but Jīva Gosvāmī did not agree to give him one. On the contrary, he argued with him regarding the scriptures and defeated him. Certainly it was right for Jīva Gosvāmī to stop such a dishonest scholar from advertising that he had defeated Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Sanātana Gosvāmī, but due to their illiteracy the sahajiyā class refer to this incident to accuse Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī of deviating from the principle of humility. They do not know, however, that humility and meekness are appropriate when one’s own honor is insulted but not when Lord Viṣṇu or the ācāryas are blasphemed. In such cases one should not be humble and meek but must act. One should follow the example given by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Lord Caitanya says in His Śikṣāṣṭaka (3):

tṛṇād api su-nīcena taror iva sahiṣṇunā
amāninā māna-dena kīrtanīyaḥ sadā hariḥ

“One can chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind, thinking himself lower than the straw in the street. One should be more tolerant than a tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige, and should be ready to offer all respect to others. In such a state of mind one can chant the holy name of the Lord constantly.” Nevertheless, when the Lord was informed that Nityānanda Prabhu was injured by Jagāi and Mādhāi, He immediately went to the spot, angry like fire, wanting to kill them. Thus Lord Caitanya has explained His verse by the example of His own behavior. One should tolerate insults against oneself, but when there is blasphemy committed against superiors such as other Vaiṣṇavas, one should be neither humble nor meek: one must take proper steps to counteract such blasphemy. This is the duty of a servant of a guru and Vaiṣṇavas. Anyone who understands the principle of eternal servitude to the guru and Vaiṣṇavas will appreciate the action of Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī in connection with the so-called scholar’s victory over his gurus, Śrīla Rūpa and Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī.

COMMENT

In the olden days in India, Sanskrit scholars used to try to show their proficiency by traveling and challenging other scholars and learned persons to debate, and if one was successful, he would be the champion. And if the person could actually go throughout India and defeat all of the other scholars, he was digvijaya, the greatest champion in Sanskrit knowledge or in scriptural arguments. Just like today there is competition among the cricket teams: they go all over the world and face rival cricket teams, and there is fierce competition to win the match. So, in the olden days, there used to be competition to win debates about Sanskrit and shastra. 

But Rupa Gosvami and Sanatana Gosvami were pure devotees of the Lord. They had no desire to waste time arguing and debating, to gain name and fame. So when the scholar came to debate, Rupa and Sanatana said, “You want to claim that you have defeated us? All right, you can tell people.” And they each gave him a certificate: “You have defeated me.” But when the same scholar came to Jiva Gosvami, Jiva Gosvami did not like the fact that the scholar was falsely advertising that he had defeated Rupa and Sanatana. Therefore, to uphold their honor, Jiva Gosvami engaged in debate with the scholar and defeated him. 

Sahajiyās disrespect genuine acharyas. Generally, sahajiyās lack knowledge of scriptures. They think that study of scripture and discussion of siddhānta are for lower-class Vaishnavas. They want to hear kṛṣṇa-līlā, talks of the pastimes of Radha and Krishna in Vrindavan, not philosophy. Once, when Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura visited Radha-kunda, the bābājīs became excited because they thought that, as an acharya, he would speak about kṛṣṇa-līlā. But to curb the sahajiyās’ pride, he spoke on the Īśopaniṣad—not even the Bhagavad-gītā—to establish the fact that the sahajiyās should first learn the basic knowledge of the revealed scriptures.

Some sahajiyās think that initiating disciples is another form of materialism. And they blaspheme genuine acharyas for having many disciples. They cannot understand that the discussion of shastra and the training of disciples are transcendental, and so they blaspheme bona fide spiritual masters like Srila Jiva Gosvami. When Jiva Gosvami defeated the scholar, the sahajiyās thought that he was being proud and wanted to show that he knew more than others. They could not understand his real motives—to defend the names of Srila Rupa Gosvami and Srila Sanatana Gosvami and to curb the false prestige and false propaganda of the scholar. One of the basic principles of devotional service is that one should not tolerate blasphemy of the Lord or a devotee. Sahajiyās think that being humble means to tolerate all sorts of insults. And personally we should tolerate insult. But when there is insult to the spiritual master or the Vaishnavas or Krishna, we should not tolerate. If we are able, we should defeat the opposing party. The sahajiyās like the verse tṛṇād api su-nīcena taror iva sahiṣṇunā amāninā māna-dena kīrtanīyaḥ sadā hariḥ. But Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, the author of the verse, Himself showed the example that although for one’s own sake one can be meek and humble and tolerate all sorts of insults, in relation to the spiritual master and the devotees one should not tolerate. Therefore, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu came to the place where Jagai and Madhai had insulted Nityananda Prabhu ready to kill Jagai and Madhai. And thus He showed the real meaning of tṛṇād api su-nīcena.

PURPORT (continued)

Another story fabricated to defame Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī states that when Śrīla Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī showed him the newly-completed manuscript of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Jīva Gosvāmī thought it would hamper his reputation as a big scholar and therefore threw it into a well. Śrīla Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī was greatly shocked, according to this story, and he died immediately. Fortunately a copy of the manuscript of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta had been kept by a person named Mukunda, and therefore later it was possible to publish the book. This story is another ignominious example of blasphemy against a guru and Vaiṣṇava. Such a story should never be accepted as authoritative. 

COMMENT

Mundane people are so envious that they do not hesitate to criticize such a great personality as Srila Jiva Gosvami. They even manufacture stories. Here the story is that Jiva Gosvami was afraid that Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta would diminish his reputation as a devotee and scholar and therefore out of envy he threw the manuscript in a well so that the book would be lost. Indirectly, they charge that Jiva Gosvami was responsible for the death of Krishnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami. Such a claim is absurd—and offensive.

PURPORT (continued)

According to another accusation, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī did not approve of the principles of the parakīya-rasa of Vraja-dhāma and therefore supported svakīya-rasa, showing that Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa are eternally married.

COMMENT

Svakīya-rasa means relationship with one’s own wife. And parakīyā-rasa means relationship with someone who is not one’s wife, who is either not married at all and thus is under the protection of her parents, or who is married to someone else and thus is under the protection of her husband.

PURPORT (continued)

Actually, when Jīva Gosvāmī was alive, some of his followers disliked the parakīya-rasa of the gopīs. Therefore Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī, for their spiritual benefit, supported svakīya-rasa, for he could understand that sahajiyās would otherwise exploit the parakīya-rasa, as they are actually doing at the present time. Unfortunately, in Vṛndāvana and Navadvīpa it has become fashionable among sahajiyās, in their debauchery, to find an unmarried sexual partner to live with to execute so-called devotional service in parakīya-rasa. Foreseeing this, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī supported svakīya-rasa, and later all the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas also approved of it.

COMMENT

Once, a man asked Srila Prabhupada, “Krishna enjoyed with the wives of others, so did He not commit adultery?” Srila Prabhupada replied, “Everyone and everything is the property of Krishna. Your wife is also Krishna’s property. So who is committing adultery?” Because all souls belong to Krishna, Krishna’s relationship with them is sākhya.

PURPORT (concluded)

Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī was never opposed to the transcendental parakīya-rasa, nor has any other Vaiṣṇava disapproved of it. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī strictly followed his predecessor gurus and Vaiṣṇavas, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Sanātana Gosvāmī, and Śrīla Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī accepted him as one of his instructor gurus.

COMMENT

If Jiva Gosvami had actually deviated from the line of Rupa and Sanatana, how could Krishnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami, who elaborately described rādhā-kṛṣṇa-līlā in parakīyā-rasa, especially in Śrī Govinda-līlāmṛta, have accepted him as śikṣā-guru? All the acharyas in the line following Rupa Gosvami accept the transcendental parakīyā-rasa, and they also accept Srila Jiva Gosvami as śikṣā-guru. When they accept Srila Jiva Gosvami as śikṣā-guru, there cannot be any fault or deviation in him. He argued in favor of svakīya-rasa simply to pacify some ignorant disciples who could not appreciate the transcendental parakīyā-rasa, and to curb the sahajiyās, who would falsely try to imitate parakīyā-rasa and thus go to hell. Jiva Gosvami is faultless, and bona fide followers of Sri Jiva, or of any acharya, will defend the acharya from false accusations. Jiva Gosvami did it for his gurus, Srila Rupa and Sanatana Gosvamis, and here Srila Prabhupada is doing it for Srila Jiva Gosvami. 

We too should follow this principle. We should not tolerate blasphemy of the acharyas and pure Vaishnavas; we should defend them to the best of our ability. And if we are not able to defeat the criticism, then at least we should not hear it. We should leave the place.

Hare Krishna.

Are there any questions or comments?

Devotee: [inaudible] 

Giriraj Swami: The spiritual master may not protest, because he is following the principle of humility, but the disciples can. When Sisupala blasphemed Krishna, none of the Pandavas could tolerate the insults, and they were ready to kill him. But Krishna said, “No!” He tolerated. Then finally He Himself killed Sisupala and delivered him. But the Pandavas were bound to become upset, and they were bound to take action.

Devotee: [inaudible]

Giriraj Swami: The associates of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu are in the highest grade. Among devotees in the highest grade we shouldn’t distinguish between big and small in a material way, just as we shouldn’t distinguish between the leaves of the tulasi tree—“That one is big, so it is better” or “This one is small, so it is lesser.” All are the same because they are parts of the tulasi plant. We may distinguish between a tulasi leaf and another type of leaf, which is not sacred like tulasi, but among the tulasi leaves we should not distinguish.

Srila Prabhupada ki jaya! 
Gaura premānande Hari Haribol!