Re: Diary of chanting aspirant

Dear Damodara Svarupa dasa, Nityaananda! Gauraanga! Hare Krishna! Pranaams. I apologize for your disappointment. In the pure branch of our Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy, we do not read or allow and are not even remotely interested in critical hagiographies of pure devotees. We consider it an offense to have a critical mentality about the lives of pure devotees. Neither do we associate with people who write critical biographies of even non-perfected devotees, what to speak of the associates of the Lord...shrivanti gayanti grinanti sadhavah.

Whatever other traditions want, they may do, but we Gaudiyas have our own principles.  Nowadays openess, universal acceptance, interfaith, critical views etc. have become the favorite path of many religious traditions but we have our own restrictions as given by Lord Gaura Himself which I have explained in the next paragraph. Therefore, a comparison of our philosophy with other philosophies may not be appropriate.

Our Vedic scriptures do not need any evidence/proof from modern day science to support the Vedic scriptural injunctions. Even if the modern science has apparently some mundane proof against a Vedic injunction, we will still accept the Vedic injunction. We place our full faith in the perfected souls who have composed the Vedic scriptures and not on the imperfect scientists who are hampered by the four imperfections of bodily identification. We absolutely do not need scientific proof or critical hagiographies to awaken our faith in the Acharyas and the Vedic scriptures. That necessary faith awakens in our soul simpy by chanting the Holy Names.

This seems to be the part where the shoe pinches. What do we accept as the truth and which part of the truth is not at all acceptable? This raises yet another question: which veil should be thrown over that part we don't like to hear?

It is not above any shoe pinches at all. Swami BG Narasingha also does not accept all parts of the Sva Likhita Jivani as authentic because of some quite offensive statements (not merely dry statements as you say) against the Acharya and the lack of faith in the conception and character of the person who received this letter and kept it with him for a long time. Shrila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada also had many fundamental philosophical differences from the person who received this letter.

The truth remains that some actual actions of the Acharyas simply cannot be understood by our defective mundane vision. However additionally there are some falsified mundane actions which are attributed to the Acharyas and sometimes to the Lord Himself, which simply cannot be the truth and which were never performed by the Lord or the Acharyas. So stating untruth as the untruth is actually for removing the veil over the untruth and not to hide or cover the truth. Obviously we will feel pain if some gross untruth is spread about our Acharya Shrila Sacchidananda Bhaktivinoda Thakura. Of course that pinches the sincere followers of Shrila Bhaktivinoda Thakura.

The answers are stereotypic.

The answer is simple. Because the Sva Likhita Jivani was not officially authorized or published by Shrila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada himself, we do not accept all parts of it as authentic. We accept the authorization of an Acharya to verify the authenticity of a book written by another Acharya. This may seem 'stereotype" but it is the safest path for our own spiritual lives and thus we accept this one.

You said it yourself: "tell us how a great soul become a saint". This person already is a great soul. It doesn't tell about their struggles and, more important, how they overcame these obstacles on their way to God. There's no teaching by example here and the disciple is left on his own again. He has yet again to find out for himself...

A pure devotee even though perfect right from the beginning is subjected to many trials, tribulations and obstacles in his life directly by the Lord, in order to show us the ideal example of how to face these difficulties in our own lives. An ideal biography will certainly describe these difficulties which a pure devotee had to pass through but in a very respectful and absolutely non-critical manner. I have to confess that even "hagiography" is not fully correct word to express what I am stating. I will post an ideal biography of Shrila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada written by Shrila Bhakti Pradipa Tirtha Maharaja as an example after some time.

I at least was hoping for a very open minded approach to the truth.

Honestly, in the philosophy of Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, we have a limit to which we can be open-minded. The Lord severely chastised His intimate associate Shrila Mukunda for being very open-minded to various other philosophies not favorable to Bhakti. The sincere followers of Lord Gauraanga have to accept this "restriction" in our Gaudiya philosophy and remain within the constraints of open-mindedness which is allowed by the Lord Himself so that one does not step over the authority of the Lord Himself and does not displease Him. This may look like a "limitation" or "restriction" in our Gaudiya philosophy but it is ultimately for saving us from the grave dangers of a multitude of speculative philosophies which have become popular in Kali Yuga. A little restriction is most beneficial for our spiritual benefit.

I hope this helps somewhat to comfort your disappointment. This is a friendly discussion and is not a tense discussion meant to prove one over the other. I rather feel it has been an interesting discussion which have brought to light many finer points which would not have been discussed without your valuable contributions. I am sorry if you felt offended in any way but that was not my intention at all.

Daaso'smi, Swami Gaurangapada.

Comment on this Post