Viśuddha Sāmpradāyikatāī Ārya Dharmera Gaurava
(Unbroken Disciple Succession is the pride of Aryan Spirituality)
The Importance of Sampradāyas:
Bābu Śarat-Candra Datta Mahāśaya has written an article criticising sampradāyas (religious schools) and asked us to feature it in Sajjana Toṣaṇī. Earlier, this piece was published in a newspaper called Dainik, where it was attributed to the editor. It is unknown whether Śarat Bābu is the editor of the Dainika or if he simply copied the content from the previously published article. In any case, the editor of the Dainika should know about that. We are unable to publish such articles in Sajjana Toṣaṇī. The article makes me believe in two main things. The esteemed author disagrees with the ārya-śāstra. He was educated to criticise sectarian beliefs by British monotheists. The second thing is that he has a grudge against Vaiṣṇava dharma, especially towards the Viśva-Vaiṣṇava Sabhā. It appears that he is so overwhelmed by anger that he did not hesitate to offend Vaiṣṇavas and Vaiṣṇava dharma.
By rejecting the sampradāyas, we also dismiss the ārya-śāstra. The ārya–śāstra is intended for the well-being of all living beings. The sages who composed these sacred texts were far more open-minded than those associated with certain incomplete religions. Both science and history do not subscribe to the idea that all beings share the same tendencies. In reality, each jīva is endowed with unique inclinations. Among jīvas, some are naturally inclined towards certain fundamental matters. That is one specific sampradāya. However, the teachings prescribed for them by the śāstra may not be acceptable to those with different inclinations. These various tendencies are categorised by different sampradāyas as karmīs, jñānīs, and bhaktas. Even among the bhaktas, there are diverse inclinations within their respective sampradāyas. The provision of sampradāyas is one of the greatest glories of the ārya-śāstra and the ārya-ācāryas. Just as a school has multiple levels or grades, the ārya tradition of spirituality accepts different sampradāyas. However, the presence of many sampradāyas does not threaten the unity of the ārya tradition.
The term “sectarian” in English carries a different connotation. One sectarian religion typically views other religions as irreligious or misguided. Anyone who misrepresents the term “sampradāyika” and undermines the value of the sampradāya system, is ignorant of the śāstra. If someone from one sampradāya feels drawn to another, they are free to adopt it. By embracing the teachings of that sampradāya, they become satisfied.
aneka janma-saṁsiddhas tato yāti parāṁ gatim
(‘The Supreme is attained after many lifetimes.” – Bhagavad-gītā 6.45)
Criticising Sampradāyas
Bhagavān’s statement is quite clear: One has the right to choose a particular sampradāya according to one’s tendency. However, if one adopts a sampradāya without fully understanding or considering his natural inclination, it can lead to negative consequences. Each sampradāya provides specific teachings. If one tries to mix one propensity to the philosophies of different sampradāyas, the teachings will not remain pure anymore. The ṛṣis have clearly stated that a sampradāyika philosophy imparts teachings based on an individual’s natural inclination. It passes down through the guru-paramparā. Any philosophy that is asampradāyika (does not originate from a sampradāya), is considered anārya, or uncivilised.
sampradāya vihīnā ye mantrās te niṣphala matāḥ
(“Any mantra which is not received through a sampradaya does not produce any fruit” – Padma Purāṇa)
According to the ṛṣis, it is clear that those who criticise sampradāyas are entirely anārya (antagonistic). The source of the upāsya-vastu (object of worship) is one. Any difference perceived in the upāsya-vastu arises based on the inclination of the upāsaka i.e. the worshipper. Over time, this object of worship bestows greater qualifications upon the worshipper and gradually appears in the form of the Deity. Therefore, the ṛṣis always praise all the philosophies recognizing them as supreme to strengthen one’s devotion. When someone becomes a pure Śakta, they no longer enjoy the remnants of Vāmacāra (unorthodox worship of the Goddess. At that stage he worships Śyāmā (Kālī) through japa-yajñā (chanting the mantras) etc. Similarly, those who have attained the position of a Vaiṣṇava are not permitted to accept any remnants other than those offered to Bhagavān.
In this magazine, Śrīyukta Kālīpada Bābu wrote an article titled ‘Kutarka’. In that article he claimed that Vaiṣṇavas can accept the remnants of other Devas if they are worshipped in a sāttvika manner. This statement is not entirely accurate. Vaiṣṇava worship is nirguṇa (beyond the modes of nature). They are not permitted to accept the remnants of the mere sāttvika-pūjā. In Puruṣottama-kṣetra, Śrī Vimalā Devī is worshipped with the remnants of Bhagavan. All Vaiṣṇavas will accept that prasāda. The ṛṣis have also declared that, viṣṇo nirveditānnena yaṣṭavyaṁ devatāntaram – other Devas and the Pitṛs should be worshipped with the remnants of Viṣṇu. These remnants when offered to the other Devas are nirguṇa. All these topics are not meant for casual discussion. Those persons who have some qualifications will understand the rules and their meanings by approaching Gurudeva.
Pure Hari-Bhakti vs. Mixed Philosophies
We harbour no ill-will towards Hari Sabhās (gatherings where the glories of Hari are sung). On the contrary, wherever I hear the Holy Name, I have respect. We have no desire for these Hari Sabhās to come to an end. Rather, we pray to Bhagavān that all these assemblies will immediately relish and propagate pure Hari-bhakti. They should not imitate the anārya assemblies that propagate mixed philosophies which are averse to adhikāra-tattva (understanding the level of qualification and inclination of the members).
We hold no negative view toward Hari Sabhās (the gatherings where the glories of Hari are sung). On the contrary, wherever the Holy Name is heard, we offer our respect. We have no wish for these Hari Sabhās to close. Instead, we sincerely pray to Bhagavān that these assemblies may quickly adopt and propagate the pure Hari-bhakti. They should avoid imitating the anārya gatherings that promote mixed philosophies and do not pay attention to the knack of the audiences. If they choose names like Hari-bhakti Dāyinī (“the society for distributing Hari-bhakti”) or Hari-bhakti Pracāriṇī (“the society for propagating Hari-bhakti”), it is essential that their activities genuinely support pure Hari-bhakti. We pray that they avoid engaging in philosophies or mundane rituals tied to other inclinations.
Āryan descendants with various inclinations are free to come together and form groups like the Ārya Dharma Rakṣaṇī, the Kālī Sabhā, the Śiva Sabhā, or the Gaṇapati Sabhā. Those inclined towards karma can create a Yajñika Sabhā. Those drawn to jñāna can establish an Adhyātmika Sabhā or Brahma Sabhā. Each will be engaged, enriching their commitment to their respective paths. We would be delighted to see this. However, the members of the Hari Sabhā should focus on relishing and spreading pure, unadulterated Hari-bhakti.
Our advice to the members of the Hari Sabhās is to first seek guidance on pure Hari-bhakti from qualified Vaiṣṇava gurus in order to truly appreciate and relish it. It is inappropriate to give teachings without first having received proper instruction. If the intention is not to promote pure Hari-bhakti, it would be more appropriate to rename the gathering as ‘Ārya Sabhā.’ Otherwise, like selling vegetables at a fish market or fish at a grocery store—will only cause confusion.
A brahmacārī or sannyāsī feels pain seeing fish in a grocery store. Similarly, pure devotees of Hari are equally dismayed when they attend a Hari Sabhā and encounter discussions on topics like the Manu Saṁhitā, homas, yāgas, the Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa, Bāula songs, harmoniums, or the rasa-śāstras such as Ujjvala Nīlmaṇi being presented to a general audience. This kind of confusion does not belong in a true Hari Sabhā, where there is no contamination of irrelevant philosophies. However, any assembly that fails to understand its members’ spiritual qualifications and mixes incompatible philosophies is, without a doubt, a misguided endeavor.
[This is an abridged version of the essay “Viśuddha Sāmpradāyikatāī Ārya Dharmera Gaurava” of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, published in Sajjana Toṣaṇī, Vol. 03 issue 03 in 1886.]
