This is a letter written by Srila Babaji Maharaj in response to some recently published comments on the article we are published named –
“Those mātājis they cannot act as ācārya to give dikṣā or sannyāsa but can give śikṣā if at all they are tattva –vettvi-viduṣi realized souls”
Below you can find some of the comments, and after the answer given by Srila Babaji Maharaj
Comment No. 1
There are many scriptures, but we don’t follow everything. We follow Vaishnava scripture, and in sat kriya sara dipika it is stated that Matajis can be given the renounce order.
Comment No. 2
If we accept Bhāradvāja Saṁhitā as our pramāṇa, then we would have also to accept that it allows only a brāhmaṇa to be a guru. It says:
prapitsur mantra-nirataṁ prājñaṁ hitaparaṁ śucim |
praśāntaṁ niyataṁ vṛttau bhajed dvija-varaṁ gurum ||38||
“Thus, one who is desirous of surrendering with faith, should take shelter of a guru who is always engaged in chanting the mantra and is a knower of bhakti-siddhānta (prājñam), is always engaged, without any desire for personal benefit, in showering mercy on fallen souls (hita-param), who is always pure in heart or free of sins, peaceful, and always committed to his prescribed duties (ordained by his guru or by varṇāśrama). Such a guru should be the best of the twice-born (dvija-varam meaning brāhmaṇa).”
According to this definition of a brāhmaṇa, the majority of male gurus of the Gauḍīya sampradaya would not meet the qualifications. The verse requires a guru to have undergone the various saṁskāras, beginning from one’s birth. These saṁskāras are described in smṛti-śāstras. They also require birth in a brāhmaṇa family. According to the smṛtis, these saṁskāras cannot be performed for one who is not born to brāhmaṇa parents. The above verse from Bhāradvāja Saṁhitā also talks about the six activities of a brāhmaṇa: studying śāstra, teaching śāstra, performing yajña for oneself, performing yajña for others as a priest, giving charity, and accepting charity. If we apply this definition of a brāhmaṇa, then most gurus of the Gauḍīya sampradāya would not qualify. If, however, we do not accept this definition, then we apply śāstra selectively. That is considered a defect—ardha-kukkuṭī-nyāya. This means we accept what is convenient and reject what is troublesome.
Comment No.3
Seems to me like very out of line smarta Brahmin nonsense talk.
Answer given by Srila Shyam das Babaji Maharaj–
All glories to Śrī Śrī Guru and Gauranga
To whom it may concern.
Dear / Devotees,
Daṇḍavat praṇāma to you all. I beg for all your blessing to survive in gauḍīya bhajan. Try to know my unalloyed sincerity unto the Lotus feet of our guru-varga to protect the absolute dignity of our sampradāik vani vaibhava. Gauḍīya Goṣṭhī Pati Śrī Śrīla Bhakti Siddhānta Sarasvatī Gosvāmī Ṭhākura Prabhupāda Paramahaṁsa Guru said that— “You have already left the way of praṇipāt –paripraśna to avoid connection with the absolute truth and you have accepted the way of tarka path (logic) to get lost forever in the ocean of Maya. What we can do for you!”
Actually, our challenging mood or audacity can through us away into the ocean of Maya forever. Only this kind of benefit we can get, nothing else. Serving temperament and humble mood lost, means everything lost. Actually, pure attma is never confined within body limit, they are beyond the limit of varṇāśrama- dharma, because this is only applicable for bonded jivas at least having some faith in Vedic injunctions. Also, man-women conception is very sensitive issue for those bonded jivas, which is the only reason for why Śrīman Mahāprabhu was very very strict about this point. Of course, surely that doesn’t mean that mātājis are all useless. They have the very vital part to play in our Vedic society as ideal mothers. By the causeless mercy of Śrīla Saccidananda Bhaktivinod Ṭhākura we know the essence of all Vedic śāstra. He has pointed out that “vritta brahmanism” is far more practical and important than “soukra brahmanism”, but still we should not break the social system based on varṇāśrama- dharma. As per the following śloka quoted from Śrī Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta we know the absolute siddhānta vichar of Śrīman Mahāprabhu –
kibā vipra, kibā nyāsī, śūdra kene naya
yei kṛṣṇa-tattva-vettā, sei ‘guru’ haya (CC Madhya 8.128)
“Whether one is a brāhmaṇa, a sannyāsī or a śūdra — regardless of what he is — he can become a spiritual master if he is kṛṣṇa tattva vit.”
We know the following śloka from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 7th canto that—
viprād dvi-ṣaḍ-guṇa-yutād aravinda-nābha-
pādāravinda-vimukhāt śvapacaṁ variṣṭham
manye tad-arpita-mano-vacanehitārtha-
prāṇaṁ punāti sa kulaṁ na tu bhūrimānaḥ (ŚB 7.9.10)
If a brāhmaṇa has all twelve of the brahminical qualifications [as they are stated in the book called Sanat-sujāta] but is not a devotee and is averse to the lotus feet of the Lord, he is certainly lower than a devotee who is a dog-eater but who has dedicated everything — mind, words, activities, wealth, and life — to the Supreme Lord. Such a devotee is better than such a brāhmaṇa because the devotee can purify his whole family, whereas the so-called brāhmaṇa in a position of false prestige cannot purify even himself.
He who is kṛṣṇa tattva vit he is surely guru, but due to some specific reasons usually mātājis cannot act as an acārya (but can act as śikṣā guru) or even they should not step into renounced order. Manu saṃhitā never approved the free (or fanciful) lifestyle of mātājis, so they should be under the sweet control of father, mother, brother or husband etc. Due to shortage of time and space only we like to quote some selected evidence in favour of the above siddhānta vichar.
As per ‘Samskar Dipika’ compiled by Śrīla Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī we can find the following śloka, first chapter 2nd śloka.
brahman-kṣatriyaḥ-visaham āśramo vidhi bodhitah
strī – śūdrā – dwija bandhu namāśramaah prati sheditaha
Aśrama adhikāra (right) is approved for those brahmanas – kṣatriyaḥ and vaiśyāḥs in śāstra. strī – śūdrā – and dwija bandhu, I mean fallen Brahmins – they have no right to step into any āśrama because this is strictly prohibited in śāstra.
Also Śrīla Saccidananda Bhaktivinod Ṭhākura has confirmed this point in Śrī Śrī Caitanya Śikṣāmṛta 2nd chapter or 2nd rainfall 4th chapter on the topic of the utility of those women in gṛhastha life – “For those women gṛhastha āśrama is suitable for them or in some special cases vānaprastha can be possible, except that any other āśrama (or renounced order) not to be accepted by them. Any special powerful women by achieving the right of entering into brahmacārya or sannyāsa āśrama on the strength of para-vidyā – dharma – if at all came out successful or can come out successful, surely that should not be accepted as evidence for those women having soft shradhya (like you), soft body and soft intellect (or mind).”
Ok still if you like to kick out Bharadvaja saṃhitā even after watching the kṛpā of Śrīman Mahāprabhu on Bharadvaja Ṛṣi at Śrī Dham Mayapur (all Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas honour that special place as Bharadvaja Tila as per Śrī Navadvip dham parikramā khaṇḍa), but how it is possible for you to avoid Śrīman Mahāprabhu and His instructions based on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam? Not even single evidence you can quote in favour of your opinion to establish your false ego. Repeated use of this word –male guru- male guru- male guru by you can confirm your strong desire to become a female guru by violating the instructions by Gauḍīya guru varga. Your Gurudeva (?) could give you fitting answer to your challenging mood, but alas he is no more here on this earth with us. By watching the apparent angry mood of Shankar Bhagavan against the Prajāpati Dakṣa to give him heavy punishment, if you are not ready to accept him as Vaiṣṇava Raja then what it concerns to us, because we can realise very easily that you are blind. Actually kapat jivattama can never attain maṅgala but niskapat – yayati or Ajāmila or Saubhari Ṛṣi they could attain maṅgala because at least there was no duplicity inside their heart.
I am less interested to pass any remark about the present toxic or dirty situation created by some demons in the holy place of Nama-Hatta established by Śrīmān Nityānanda Prabhu (though Nama-Hatta is eternally present still was brought down by Him) by the help of which whole world can get perfect guidance. When we can see the following evidence from Śrīmad Bhagavatam 7.9.10 Sloka that–
viprād dvi-ṣaḍ-guṇa-yutād aravinda-nābha-
pādāravinda-vimukhāt śvapacaṁ variṣṭham
manye tad-arpita-mano-vacanehitārtha-
prāṇaṁ punāti sa kulaṁ na tu bhūrimānaḥ (ŚB 7.9.10)
If a brāhmaṇa has all twelve of the brahminical qualifications [as they are stated in the book called Sanat-Sujāta] but is not a devotee and is averse to the lotus feet of the Lord, he is certainly lower than a devotee who is a dog-eater but who has dedicated everything — mind, words, activities, wealth, and life — to the Supreme Lord. Such a devotee is better than such a brāhmaṇa because the devotee can purify his whole family, whereas the so-called brāhmaṇa in a position of false prestige cannot purify even himself.
Then where from the question of disqualification of most of our Gauḍīya ācāryas (Gauḍīya guru-varga but not those present ācāryas) coming? Surely all scriptural evidence cannot be accepted by us, but those sattvik Purāṇas and Saṁhitā can be accepted those which are in favour of Śrīmad Bhagavatam. Śrīmān Mahāprabhu also wanted to advocate this siddhānta vichar. He told that Pancharātra and Śrīmad Bhagavatam expressing same siddhānta vichar. From Hayaśīrṣa Pancharātra you can get the clue from C.c. Madhya 20/237 or from Narad Pancharātra or from many other sources Śrīmān Mahāprabhu quoted many evidences (you can go through sanātana-śikṣā or rūpa-śikṣā etc.).
In Hari bhakti vilas all different countless evidences can be found quoted from different śāstras by Śrīla Sanātan Gosvāmīpad as per the direct instruction of Śrīmān Mahāprabhu but surely you will be in big confusion regarding the authenticity of those evidences if you are not enjoying full kṛpā of our Gauḍīya guru-varga. As for example the topic of initiation or the topic of guru– śiṣya testing process or their symptoms etc. You can try to understand those topics analytically (without guru–ānugatya) but externally you can find just the opposite of what our guru-varga done. If at all I have taken shelter unto the lotus feet of any sad guru (Sarasvat Gauḍīya guru-varga) from our own sampradāya then how it is possible for me to ignore or insult Gauḍīya guru-varga like Sad-Gosvāmīs or Śrīla Saccidananda Bhaktivinod Ṭhākura or Śrīla Bhakti Siddhānta Gosvāmī Ṭhākura Prabhupāda or Śrīmān Mahāprabhu who is our saṅkīrtan piṭhā. Surely my rude behaviour and fanciful crazy mind can take me away from Gauḍīya guru-varga forever. Even I cannot have my right to identify myself as a Gauḍīya devotee, rather those Gauḍīya guru-varga can identify me as a traitor or as a spy of Kali.
Gaura Hari Hari Bol