Wednesday, June 22, 2022

Variant Readings




There is a popular verse glorifying Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī: ​

śrī-caitanya-mano'bhīṣṭam​
sthāpitaṁ yena bhū-tale​
svayaṁ rūpaḥ kadā mahyaṁ​
dadāti sva-padāntikam​
This is a verse that many gauḍīya-vaiṣṇavas sing to honor Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī. This verse is usually sung while performing maṅgalācaraṇa.​
Recently, a few individuals have been asking me why I sing the third quarter of this verse (svayaṁ rūpah kadā mahyam) slightly differently as — "so'yaṁ rūpaḥ kadā mahyam". I was especially asked this by Sriman Dravida Prabhu during one of the talks that I gave.​
The reason for my preference of this reading is simple. This verse originally occurs in the Prema-bhakti-candrikā of Śrī Narottama Dāsa Ṭhākura, and in many of the old editions of this work, the preferred reading is — so'yaṁ rūpaḥ.​
There is also a Sanskrit commentary on the Prema-bhakti-candrikā by Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura, and in the commentary too he has preferred the reading "so'yaṁ rūpaḥ". This is highlighted in "Image 1" attached to this article.​
A book named "Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu" authored by Sri Bhakti Pradip Tirtha Maharaja mentions both the readings. This too is attached to this article as "Image 2".​
The meaning of the verse doesn't change much at all in this variant reading. While the phrase "svayaṁ rūpaḥ" means "Rūpa himself", the phrase "so'yaṁ rūpaḥ" means "that very Rūpa". Not much of a difference in meaning.​
In this way, both readings have been mentioned by various authoritative sources. My preference is to side with the reading of Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura, since his copy of the manuscript was closer in time to Śrī Narottama Dāsa Ṭhākura, and hence I sing it as — "so'yaṁ rūpaḥ" instead of "svayaṁ rūpaḥ". Both readings are grammatically correct. 🙂🙏







Sunday, June 12, 2022

Jñāna-mudrā in Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇava Culture


Mudrās are specific gestures made using the hands for certain ritualistic or spiritual purposes. The jñāna-mudrā is one such mudrā, wherein the tarjanī (index finger) is joined to the anguṣṭha (thumb). This is specified in various tantra texts, for example:​

aṅguṣṭha-tarjanībhyāṁ tu​
jñāna-mudrā prakīrtitā​
Translation: The jñāna-mudrā is formed by joining the index finger and the thumb. (Kaulāvalī-nirṇayaḥ, 7.44)​
This mudrā is often displayed by great ācāryas of Vedantic traditions, especially by the revered Śrī Ādi Śaṅkarācārya.​
At the same time however, we do not see any of the mūrtis of the six gosvāmīs displaying this mudrā. The deity of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī in the Rādhā-Dāmodara temple are also not in this mudrā. Why is it so that the mūrti of Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī (the greatest Vedāntācārya of the Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇava-sampradāya) does not display the jñāna-mudrā?​
The reason is that in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhuḥ, the jñāna-mudrā is associated specifically with those who are in śānta-rasa. The Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhuḥ (3.1.24 - 26) describes the anubhāvas (after-effects) of the individual who is experiencing śānta-rasa. One of the anubhāvas is:​
jñāna-mudrā-pradarśanam — "Displaying the jñāna-mudrā". (Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhuḥ 3.1.24)​
Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī says in the Durgama-saṅgamanī commentary on this verse — jñāna-mudrā tarjany-aṅguṣṭhayor yutiḥ — "The jñāna-mudrā is displayed by joining the index finger and the thumb".​
Śrīla Prabhupāda too specifies this in the Nectar of Devotion as follows: "When they speak, they join together the forefinger and thumb. (This is called the jñāna-mudrā position.) They are not against the atheists, nor are they particularly inclined to the devotees." (Nectar of Devotion, Chapter 35).​
Clearly, the Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇava position is that this mudrā is displayed mainly by those who are experiencing śānta-rasa. However, none of the Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇavas are in śānta-rasa, because Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has come to give ONLY FOUR rasas out of five — cāri bhāva-bhakti diyā (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Ādi, 3.19).​
The śānta-rasa is excluded in Mahāprabhu's flow of bhakti. The reason is that this particular rasa is mainly for the brahma-vādīs and paramātma-vādīs. The Caitanya-caritāmṛta clearly spells it out:​
śāntera svabhāva—kṛṣṇe mamatā-gandha-hīna​
paraṁ-brahma-paramātmā-jñāna pravīṇa​
Translation: It is the nature of śānta-rasa that not even the smallest intimacy [towards Bhagavān] exists. Rather, knowledge of impersonal Brahman and localized Paramātmā is prominent. (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya, 19.218)​
None of the Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇavas are interested in śānta-rasa. Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇavism begins with dāsya-rasa. Therefore, initiated names do not end with "śānta" (as in Hari Pārṣada "Śānta"). Instead, names end in "Dāsa" (Hari Pārṣada Dāsa). ​
This is the reason why we do not find any of the mūrtis of the six gosvāmīs in jñāna-mudrā. Even if some vaiṣṇava-sampradāyas have their respective ācārya-mūrtis in this mudrā, the Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇavas prefer other mudrās viz. āśīrvāda-mudrā (giving benedictions), chanting japa, namaskāra mudrā (folded hands) or writing some bhakti-śāstra.​ 🙏
— Article and Translations by Hari Pārṣada "Dāsa". 13 June 2022.

Friday, June 10, 2022

The Injunction to Wear Tulasī-mālās


Although vaiṣṇavism is ultimately a matter of one's inner mood and disposition towards Bhagavān, there are still some external symbols that vaiṣṇavas are supposed to display on their bodies.​


One such important external symbol is the tulasī-mālā. There is a specific injunction in the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa for wearing a Tulasī-mālā. This injunction is as follows:​
tataḥ kṛṣṇārpitā mālā​
dhārayet tulasī-dalaiḥ​
padmākṣais tulasī-kāṣṭhaiḥ​
phalair dhātryāś ca nirmitāḥ​
Translation: An individual must wear mālās offered to Krishna. Such mālās can be made out of tulasī leaves, lotus seeds, tulasī wood or the āmalakī fruits (Indian gooseberry). — (Hari-bhakti-vilāsa 4.307)​
We should note that this verse is a vidhi-vākya (injunction). The term "dhārayet" (must wear) in the verse specifies the injunction. Grammatically, the term "dhārayet" is the causative imperative (ṇij-anta vidhi-liṅ) verbal form of the root √dhṛñ. ​
Thus, this verse is specifying an injunction to be followed by all vaiṣṇavas. To not follow an injunction given in the vaiṣṇava-śāstras can potentially lead to pratyavāya i.e. negative results (according to Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Ādi, 4.35). Therefore, all vaiṣṇavas are expected to wear mālās.​
A doubt arises — No specific number of rounds have been specified in this injunctive verse. How many rounds should a devotee wear around their neck?​
The answer is hidden in the verse itself. The above-mentioned verse is a vidhi-vākya (injunction), and the term "mālā" (mālāḥ) in the verse is in plural case. Although at first sight, the term "mālā" appears to be singular in case, but the plural case is clearly revealed in the final adjective "nirmitāḥ" at the end of the verse. The commentary on this verse by Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī also specifies the plural term "mālāḥ". Thus, the verse is specifying that one is expected to wear "multiple mālās".​
The exact number is still not specified. This is a unique situation where:​
(i) we have an injunction.​
(ii) a plural term is used in the injunction.​
AND​
(iii) an exact number is not ascribed to the plural term.​
For such situations, there is a specific nyāya (maxim) mentioned in the Mīmāṁsā-śāstras. This is the maxim named Kapiñjala-adhikaraṇa-nyāya (maxim pertaining to the number of partridge birds).​
In the Vedas, there is a statement found — vasantāya kapiñjalān ālabhet — "Offer multiple Kapiñjala birds in the spring sacrifice". This statement too is an injunction that has a plural case in the term "kapiñjalān". The exact number of Kapiñjala birds is not specified. However, according to this maxim, the number is fixed as 3 (three).​
Similarly, in the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa injunction on wearing mālās, the exact number of mālās has not been specified, but a plural term "mālāḥ" has been used. Thus, according to Kapiñjala-adhikaraṇa-nyāya, the number is set to three. In this way, a devotee is expected to wear three mālās. The three rounds that we see nowadays are nothing but another way of wearing three mālās. Devotees sometimes wear more than three rounds to get extra results — adhikasya adhikaṁ phalam — "Greater efforts lead to greater results". (Sanskrit Proverb)​
We see also in the verse that mālās can be made out of many things viz. tulasī leaves, Indian gooseberry etc. A question naturally arises — Why then do almost all vaiṣṇavas prefer mālās made out of tulasī wood?​
The answer is that in the next few verses of the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa, special emphasis has been laid on mālās made out of tulasī wood. The verses mention tulasī wood multiple times — tulasī-kāṣṭha-sambhavām (Hari-bhakti-vilāsa 4.309, 310), tulasī-kāṣṭha-sambhūte (Hari-bhakti-vilāsa 4.312) etc.​
A vaiṣṇava should not hesitate to wear tulasī-mālā at any point of time. The Hari-bhakti-vilāsa (4.318) clearly says — na jahyāt tulasī-mālām — "Never give up a tulasī-mālā". A vaiṣṇava should not think that they're ineligible to wear a tulasī-mālā because they're unclean or because they sometimes indulge in activities that are unwholesome. Bhagavān himself says:​
tulasī-kāṣṭha-mālāṁ ca​
kaṇṭhasthāṁ vahate tu yaḥ​
apy aśauco 'py anācāro​
mām evaiti na saṁśayaḥ​
Translation: Persons who wear a tulasī-mālā around their neck attain me without a doubt, even if they're most unclean or engaged in forbidden acts. — (Hari-bhakti-vilāsa 4.322)​
The tulasī-mālā is best the ornament of the vaiṣṇavas. It does not need further ornamentation by adding diamonds, pearls etc. In fact, pearls and diamonds have negligible spiritual value in front of tulasī. Devotees who wish to wear other jewellery can certainly make separate mālās, but the three-round tulasī-mālā is supposed to be like a queen ruling over the kingdom of the vaiṣṇava's neck. She should be given her distinct and unique position.​ 🙂🙏
— Article and Translations by Hari Pārṣada Dāsa. 11 June 2022 (Nirjalā Ekādaśī).
PS: The maxim on Kapiñjalas is also sometimes applied in statements that are not injunctions. For an example, one can see either the BBT Purport or Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura's commentary on Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (10.90.42). The devotee in the photograph is Garib Das ji, popularly known as "Tulasī Bābā" and he stays in Govardhana.

Friday, June 3, 2022

Bhakti Intrinsic to the Jiva's Existence




[This article has been written to justify the stance taken by certain Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇava ācāryas that Bhakti and prema are intrinsic in the heart of the jīva. This article does so while maintaining complete respect to the other opinion that Bhakti is bestowed by a nitya-siddha devotee. The purpose of this article is not to spite any particular individual, institution or philosophical position. This is a somewhat lengthy article mainly for those who are interested in this particular topic.]​
A popular adage says that — "If two people have the exact same opinion on all topics in the world, then one of the two is irrelevant". Needless to say, differences of opinion may arise even between two ācāryas of the same disciplic succession.​
Problems especially arise when those of us who are marred by limited sense perception try to gaze into the domain of the unlimited spiritual world. Thus, answers to simple questions such as — "Is bhakti an intrinsic part of the existence of the jīva?" are almost impossible to give without getting into a convoluted discussion about jīva-tattva.​
The Pandora's box opens up with two popular verses — one from the Caitanya-caritāmṛtam and the other from the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhuḥ:​
nitya-siddha kṛṣṇa-prema ’sādhya’ kabhu naya​
śravaṇādi-śuddha-citte karaye udaya​
BBT Translation: Pure love for Krishna is eternally established in the hearts of the living entities. It is not something to be gained from another source. When the heart is purified by hearing and chanting, this love naturally awakens. (CC, Madhya, 22.107)​
nitya-siddhasya bhāvasya​
prākaṭyaṁ hṛdi sādhyatā​
BBT Translation: Such devotion eternally exists within the heart of every living entity. The awakening of this eternal devotion is the potentiality of devotional service in practice. (Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhuḥ, quoted in CC Madhya 22.105)​
The issue here is that some previous authorities will not exactly translate the verse in this fashion. They do not agree that prema is an intrinsic part of the eternal existence of the conditioned jīva, or that it somehow "naturally awakens". According to them, the conditioned jīva has no eternally existing prema and can only get it when it is bestowed by an existing nitya-siddha devotee who is eternally in possession of such prema.​
On the other hand, other authorities say that prema is intrinsic to the existence of the jīva. It merely has to be "discovered" and is not begotten from an external source. These two viewpoints are certainly contradictory, and a resolution is definitely needed.​
If we study the entire matter carefully, we will realize that the ācāryas who wrote that prema is "intrinsic" to the jīva as well as the ācāryas who wrote that it is "bestowed" upon the jīva are both correct in their own ways. None of these ācāryas were making a siddhāntic adjustment when they made their respective statements. Let's explore how this is so.​
The sandarbhas specify that there are many intrinsic qualities of the nitya-siddha jīva. These intrinsic qualities are merely covered up in the nitya-baddha jīva. This is specified in verses of Viṣṇu-dharma quoted in Prīti-sandarbha (5):​
ādarśasya malābhāvād​
vaimalyaṁ kāśate yathā​
jñānāgni-dagdha-heyasya​
sa hlādo hy ātmanas tathā​
yathā heya-guṇa-dhvaṁsād​
avabodhādayo guṇāḥ​
prakāśante na janyante​
nityā evātmano hi te ​
jñānaṁ vairāgyam aiśvaryaṁ​
dharmaś ca manujeśvara​
ātmano brahma-bhūtasya​
nityam eva catuṣṭayam​
Translation: O King! Just as pristine clarity is seen in a mirror in the absence of dirt, similarly when rejectable material influences are burnt to ashes by the fire of transcendental knowledge, the innate happiness of the soul becomes naturally manifest. ​
In a similar manner, by the destruction of rejectable material influences, qualities such as avabodha (complete awareness of the self) are merely *discovered*. Such qualities are never *produced* , for they are an intrinsic part of the living entity's eternal existence. ​
Thus — jñāna (eternal knowledge of the self etc.), vairāgya (detachment from matter), aiśvarya (transcendental opulences) and dharma (all sorts of religiosity) are four eternal qualities of the *liberated* soul. — (Viṣṇu-dharma, Quoted in Prīti-sandarbha, 5)​
Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī himself elaborates further as follows — tad-vaimukhyenānādinā labdhac-chidrayeśa-māyayā tad-anubhava-lopādeḥ sambhavāt kathañcit sāmmukhyena tad-anugrahān nivṛttiś cāsti​
Translation: "Due to beginningless disinclination towards Bhagavān, Māyā detects the fault of the jīva and causes the lopa (disappearance) of the experience of the self and Bhagavān. Somehow by becoming inclined to Bhagavān and by attaining his mercy, that same Māyā is removed". (Prīti-sandarbha, 5)​
It is very clear from this paragraph by Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī that Māyā is able to cover up certain intrinsic qualities of the baddha-jīva, and these qualities are merely *uncovered* when such Māyā is removed by the mercy of Bhagavān.​
However, previously in the Paramātma-sandarbha (47), Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī had said for the baddha-jīva that — tadīya-jñāna-abhāvāt — "Such a nitya-baddha soul has lack of knowledge of Bhagavān". Some interpret the term "jñāna-abhāva" (lack of knowledge) as prāg-abhāva (negation prior to appearance). ​
However, the Prīti-sandarbha quote above has clearly mentioned that it is "lopa" (disappearance) of that jñāna which is nitya-guṇa (intrinsic quality) of the jīva. Clearly, the terms abhāva (lack) and lopa (disappearance) do not tally with each other. Neither does anyone have the eyes to look into the window of anādi-kāla and determine if it was abhāva (lack) or lopa (disappearance) of intrinsic jñāna of the jīva which caused its bondage in this world.​
In the same Prīti-sandarbha, it is specified that although the jīva is in a conditioned state right now, but there is a potential eternal spiritual body waiting since time immemorial to be assigned to the jīva in the spiritual world. This is specified in the Prīti-sandarbha as follows — anantā mūrtayas tatra vartante, tāsām ekayā saha muktasyaikasya mūrtiḥ bhagavatā kriyate — "Unlimited [eternal] bodily forms exist in Vaikuṇṭha. Out of those unlimited eternal forms, the liberated soul is assigned one form by Bhagavān". — (Prīti-sandarbha, 10)​
These potential bodies in the spiritual world are all eternal, because the Bhagavat-sandarbha firmly establishes the siddhānta that in the spiritual world none of the spiritual bodies are ever "created" at a certain point of time. They are all eternally existing. Creation of new bodies does not take place in the spiritual world. This means that the potential eternal spiritual bodies of all the conditioned jīvas are already waiting in the spiritual world. These spiritual bodies are replete with all spiritual guṇas (qualities), and are merely waiting to be assigned to the jīva by the mercy of Bhagavān as and when these jīvas become fully accepted by Bhagavān. ​
Thus, when some ācāryas say that prema is eternally dormant in the heart of the jīva, the meaning is that it is dormant in the hearts of *THESE ETERNAL SPIRITUAL BODIES*. Each spiritual body in the spiritual world has all sense organs, including a heart. Prema is intrinsically and eternally present in that very heart that the jīva possesses in the spiritual world. The ācāryas never say that prema is dormant in the conditioned heart of the material body of the jīva. The eternally existing spiritual body is thus the upādāna-kāraṇa (substantial cause) and the mercy of Bhagavān or the nitya-siddha is the nimitta-kāraṇa (instrumental cause) of the manifestation of prema. In this way, the apparent contradictory opinions are harmonized, and such harmonization should be sought by all sāragrāhī vaiṣṇavas.​
If prema were to be "introduced" to the jīva at a certain point of time by an external agency, then such prema will also have to be introduced in the heart of the eternal spiritual body that the jīva is going to get post liberation. That event itself will change the constitution of the eternal spiritual body, and a body which has undergone a fundamental constitutional change will cease to fall in the category of "eternal". Vipariṇāma (transformation) is a function of the material world, not the spiritual world.​
Thus, when it is said that prema is "bestowed" by a nitya-siddha devotee, it only means that the nitya-siddha devotee bestows a realization of that specific flavor and those specific details of the prema that is already dormant in the eternal heart of the eternal spiritual body that is waiting to be assigned to the jīva post liberation. It doesn't mean that the nitya-siddha literally pours half a gallon of prema in the heart of the conditioned jīva. ​
The nitya-siddha cannot bestow prema in the conditioned heart of the material body, since the conditioned heart is a product of māyā and is thus an unfit container for receiving prema. Neither can the nitya-siddha generate such prema in the eternal heart of the eternal spiritual body, because such a body is already eternally perfect and is simply waiting in a dormant state in the spiritual world. Therefore, the "bestowing" of prema by a nitya-siddha devotee is nothing but revelation of the eternal perfected identity (siddha deha) that exists already in the spiritual world.​
Some gurus bestow this perfected identity at the time of dīkṣā and this is known as siddha-praṇālī. Some other gurus do not bestow it at the time of dīkṣā and expect the sādhaka to achieve the direct mercy of Bhagavān in order to get the revelation of their siddha-deha. Both processes work equally well. The sages at Daṇḍakāraṇya who met Lord Rāma wanted to be situated in conjugal rasa with the Lord, but did not have any siddha-praṇālī bestowed upon them. They attained their svarūpa simply by the mercy of the Lord. Thus, siddha-praṇālī is not a compulsion upon every guru and sādhaka. There are also other practical issues with the siddha-praṇālī system, which are beyond the scope of the article.​
In this way, the two differing opinions of previous ācāryas are harmonized. A devotee faithful to his guru-janas should not think that his gurus merely gave some temporary siddhānta in this regard according to time, place and circumstance. If it is possible to reconcile and justify the views of one's guru-janas from śāstra, then the disciple should definitely take that route.​
---​
rucaṁ no dhehi brāhmaṇeṣu ​
rucaṁ rājasu nas kṛdhi | ​
rucaṁ viśyeṣu śūdreṣu ​
mayi dhehi rucā rucam || (Śukla-yajurveda 18.48) ​ ​
|| oṁ tat sat ||
— Hari Pārṣada Dāsa. 04-June-2022. 🙏

The Public Exposé of the Guru's Faults




If we analyze all the statements that any individual has made in the duration of their entire lives, we are sure to come across various statements that may be faulty from the point of view of śāstra. It is a fact that in the material world, no individual except Bhagavān is free from the tendency to commit mistakes. Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana has correctly noted this fact in his treatise named Siddhānta-darpaṇam:​

jīva-vākyeṣu labhyante​
jīva-dharmā bhramādayaḥ​
vede tu naiva te santi​
sarvajña-vacanoccaye​
Translation: In the statements made by all living entities, we find inherent faults viz. illusion etc. Such faults are not present in the Vedas, since they are the words of the omniscient Supreme Lord. — Siddhānta-darpaṇam (1.23)​
Even if someone claims that their guru is very expert, still it is impossible for any expert jīva to avoid mistakes in the framework of the material world.​ This is not necessarily the fault of the jīva. The very framework of the material world in which the jīvas are operating is prone to generating unlimited faults. Thus, even the most expert gurus end up making mistakes and even the most expert book editors end up admitting their erratum/corrigenda. Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa remarks:​
puruṣasya vyāvahārikasya vyutpannasyāpi bhramādi-doṣa-grastatvāt​
Translation: Even a person very expert in all dealings is affected by defects viz. illusion etc. — Commentary to Tattva-sandarbha (Anuccheda 9).​
Knowing this well, the previous authorities have said that it is the duty of the disciple to never speak about the faults of their gurus by naming and shaming them in public (especially in regards to philosophical faults). A common Sanskrit term for a disciple is — "chātraḥ". This term is explained by the grammarians as follows:​
guru-doṣācchādanaṁ chatraṁ , tac-chīlam asya​
Translation: To cover up the faults of the guru is known as "chatra". One whose innate nature is to do so is known as a "chātra" (disciple).​
It is also the instruction of Śrī Rāmānujācārya to never speak publicly about the flaws of any vaiṣṇava (what to speak of the flaws of one's guru-janas). He says in the Prapannāmṛtam:​
vaiṣṇavānāṁ ca janmāni​
nidrālasyāni yāni ca​
dṛṣṭvā tāny aprakāśyāni​
janebhyo na vadet kvacit​
Translation: Birth in a low-class family, oversleeping, laziness, and whatever other faults present in vaiṣṇavas should never be revealed to a second person. One should especially never disclose such things publicly — (Prapannāmṛtam, 65.50)​
Śrī Narottama Dāsa Ṭhākura has said that the guru is a bandhu (friend) of even the adhamas (fallen ones). If we truly believe that the guru-janas are our well-wishing friends, we too should exhibit our friendship towards them by never speaking of their faults by naming them in public. To engage in public naming and fault-finding of one's guru-janas on the pretext of rendering service to the vaiṣṇavas is nothing but a type of concealed envy of one's own confidential friend. In his commentary to Hari-bhakti-vilāsa, Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī specifies this:​
nāsūyeta mā doṣa-dṛṣṭiṁ kuryāt​
Translation: One should never envy the guru i.e. one should never see faults in him. — Dig-darśinī Commentary to Hari-bhakti-vilāsa (4.347)​
The famous intellectual genius named Paṇḍitarāja Jagannātha has also made the following statement in this regard:​
guru-dveṣa-dūṣita-matīnāṁ puruṣāyuṣeṇāpi na śakyante gaṇayituṁ pramādāḥ​
Translation: The errors of those individuals whose minds are infected by envy of their own guru-janas cannot be counted even in the entire lifetime of a human being. (Manoramā-kuca-mardinī).​
If we flip the pages of history, we do not see a vaiṣṇava ācārya who has written publicly about the faults of his own gurus by naming them. They might have opposed a philosophical stance taken by their guru-janas, but never by dragging the names of their guru-janas in it. The topmost vaiṣṇava is supposed to be — anya-nindādi-śūnya-hṛdam — "Free from the tendency to critique others" (Upadeśāmṛtam, 5).​
In the past, there have been various instances in which vaiṣṇava ācāryas had to proclaim points of view contrary to those of their guru-janas. In almost all such instances, they did so without directly naming their gurus in such discussions. On many occasions, Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura takes a point of view contrary to his previous ācāryas, but he never publicly names the ācārya that he is contradicting on a specific point. This is the vaiṣṇava way of dealing with philosophical differences with one's own guru-janas.​
Public fault-finding and mob justice by name-checking one's gurus is the śūdra's way of dealing with philosophical flaws. On seeing such public naming and shaming of one's guru-janas, one's philosophical opponents derive extreme vicarious pleasure and shower heaps of false praises upon the newfound boldness of the immature disciple. Here is a newly composed sarcastic verse dedicated to such disciples who publicly name and shame their own guru-janas:​
दोषान् वदन्ति स्वगुरोर्जना ये​
लोकेभ्य उच्चैरहहातिधार्ष्ट्यात् ।​
ख्यातिं लभन्ते कुधियः प्रकाश्य ​
स्वाम्बास्तनस्थान् तिलकालकान् ते ॥ [इन्द्रवज्रा]​
[Meter: Indra-vajrā (same as Gurvaṣṭakam)]:​
doṣān vadanti sva-guror janā ye​
lokebhya uccair ahahāti-dhārṣṭyāt​
khyātiṁ labhante kudhiyaḥ prakāśya ​
svāmbā-stana-sthān tilakālakān te​
Translation: Alas! Those ill-minded individuals who out of extreme audacity speak of their own guru's faults openly in front of others are the very same ones who attain popularity by revealing to others the secret moles and marks on the breasts of their own mothers. (Self-composed)​
May the kind-hearted vaiṣṇavas excuse any transgression of etiquette in writing these words __/\ò__ 🙏
— Article Composed by Hari Pārṣada Dāsa. 03-June-2022.
PS: The article is speaking mainly about philosophical issues. It is not the intent of the author to address other issues (besides those pertaining to the core philosophy) in this article of limited words.

Crookedness that Confuses

        ~ Crookedness that Confuses ~ ​ ​ (Two Freshly Composed Verses) ​ ​ श्रीराधा सरला त्रिभङ्गवपुषा साकं त्वया संस्थिता हस्तं सा ददती तव...