Here's a chance for you to examine the underpinnings of your faith, or not.
Here's the question:
There was this great spiritual personality who preached widely about love of God. He inspired many people to reawaken their dormant love of God, and explained that we are all servants of God. He always presented himself as a servant of God, and denied it whenever anyone claimed that he himself was God.
Later on, however, a follower who had never met him personally wrote a book about him that became a major lens through which he was viewed and interpreted by people in general. A doctrine developed that deified him, and people began to worship him as God Himself, although he himself always denied that while present, and never taught or instructed that he should be worshiped in that way.
Who am talking about? Did you guess Jesus Christ?
I'm talking about Caitanya Mahaprabhu.
The pattern of deification of Caitanya Mahaprabhu closely resembles the deification of Jesus Christ.
Think about all the philosophy and historical analysis that you have to deconstruct the deification of Jesus Christ. Now apply that same critical view to Caitanya Mahaprabhu. What happens?
Krishna tells us to worship Him as the Supreme. He says "I am the source of all material and spiritual worlds".
Caitanya Mahaprabhu says: "I know no-one but Krishna as my Lord."
So where does the idea that Caitanya Mahaprabhu is God come from?
I know that Krishna das Kaviraja claims it in Caitanya-caritamrita, and in there he also has Rupa and Sanatana Goswami's proclaim it.
However, do we find Rupa Goswami proclaiming this prior to this in his own voice, in one of his books, for example?
So I am thinking about Rupa Goswami. Krishna das Kaviraja claims that Rupa Goswami accepts Caitanya Mahaprabhu as the Godhead Himself. Is this true? And if so, what is the source of Rupa Goswami's conviction? I am going back to study the writings of Rupa Goswami in more detail to detect this.
This was the discussion between Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya and Gopinath Acarya. According to Caitanya-caritamrita, Sarvabhauma accepted Caitanya as a great devotee, but Gopinath insisted that he was the Godhead Himself.
Of course we have this whole philosophical argument or position that incarnations must be scheduled and foretold in scripture, which is why Hare Krishna's don't accept as God either Jesus (who they accept as a saktyavesa-avatara or empowered son of God) or Sai Baba (who they regard as a fraud).
Gopinath Acarya makes a weak argument around this, which essentially just establishes that the Gaudiya Vaisnavas are willing to put this idea aside when it suits them. Twisted and stretched interpretations of standard scriptures fail to convince Sarvabhauma, who points out that the Lord is known as "Tri Yuga", one who appears in three yugas. That precludes His appearance in this Kali Yuga.
How that meshes with the prediction of the Kalki-avatara I'm not sure...
Gopinath Acarya ends with: "Because you don't accept it, it is to be understood that you don't have His mercy".
Essentially this says that the very tenuous and indirect sastra-pramana ("what it really means is...") is secondary and post-facto to understanding Mahaprabhu as God. Gopinath Acarya is saying that it is his direct personal experience of Mahaprabhu that has convinced him that Mahaprabhu is the Godhead, and his scriptural arguments are an attempt to reconnect this direct mystical experience with an established exoteric tradition.
In Bhagavad-gita Krishna says that direct perception by realization is the perfection of religion (pratyaksavagamam dharmyam).
Whether this was actually going on (people proclaiming him as God in this way around him) while Mahaprabhu was present or became a later doctrinal development is not clear. The stories in the Caitanya-caritamrita are either selected or developed (or both) to support the doctrines of the author.
Even in the Caitanya-caritamrita it is recorded that Mahaprabhu would deny it and cover his ears if someone tried to proclaim Him as the Godhead.
Is he the Godhead or just a great devotee - a saktyavesa avatara?
Does it make a difference? Generally we are happy for people to understand Jesus as God, as long as they follow his instructions. Mahaprabhu's instructions are definitely beneficial for all people (and they don't include worshiping him as God).
Thinking deeply about that statement of Gopinath Acarya, that by the mercy of Caitanya Mahaprabhu one can understand that he is God, I am thinking now:
Suspended disbelief is no longer sufficient for me. Accepting an official doctrine, taking someone else's word, riding on someone's realization is not enough. I want to know for myself.
So now I am daily praying a prayer written by the great devotee Narottama das Thakura: "sri krishna caitanya prabhu, doya koro more"
"Sri Krishna Caitanya, please give me your mercy."
So if you made it this far, here's your chance: examine the underpinnings of your faith, and preach! Can you say something to help me out here?
Jesus and Sri Caitanya
Just a few more thoughts...
One difference between Jesus and Sri Caitanya's divinity is that we know the contemporaries of Mahaprabhu considered him already God. Rupa and Sanatana Gosvamis acknowledge this in the mangala verses to most of their works (and Rupa even wrote two astakas in glorification of Caitanya). Some of the biographers knew Sri Caitanya personally (Murari Gupta and Kavikarnapura, though he was still a child then), whereas others were disciples of people that knew him (Vrndavana dasa, Locana dasa, Krsnadasa Kaviraja etc.).
With Jesus things are a bit different. The earliest texts of the New Testament are the letters of Paul, whose only contact with Jesus was a vision on the road to Damascus. The Gospels are generally believed to be written not by the apostles, but by authors living approximately a century after Jesus' death.
Moreover, the divinity of Jesus was not at all settled until the fourth century (this is the central point of the important Arian controversy).
Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu may have often said he wasn't Krsna, but the biographers also report that he would display various forms of Krsna and accept worship as Krsna, especially in Navadvipa, in Srivasa's house.
This may also not be conclusive enough, though. After all, do not also many contemporaries of Sai Baba believe he is God?
Sastra and grace
I don't think Gopinathacarya's argument is weak.
Though we give a lot of emphasis to the authority of sastra, sastra itself is, in a sense, not enough. "Sruti is divided" (srutayo vibhinnah), as logic is inconclusive (tarko'pratisthah) says the Mahabharata. The Katha and Mundaka Upanisads tells us that God cannot be grasped by our own endeavour, whether it is austerity, study or listening to others; only to those whom he chooses does God reveal himself.
Scripture is the highest authority and is self-evident or "self-luminous", but sometimes some things block that, just as the self-luminous sun can be blocked by the clouds.
Some of our acaryas quote some scriptural passages to support Sri Caitanya's divinity, but it is doubtful how helpful they are to convince others. Some of the sources are obscure and perhaps questionable (Ananta-samhita), some of the quotations mentioned on the page you linked to in your other post cannot be found in the source text that is given. And the verses from more mainstream sources (Bhagavatam's krsna-varnam tvisakrsnam, or the Mahabharata's suvarna-varno hemangah and sannyasa-krc chamah santah, for example) are easily interpreted by others, like Sridhara Swami, without referring to Sri Caitanya.
I suppose one could extend the question and ask how do we know that the divinity of Krsna is proclaimed in all the Vedic texts? If you read the Rg-veda, for example, you will find more than a thousand hymns praising various gods (Indra, Agni, Soma, Varuna, Savitr, etc.) and only very few that praise Visnu. Why then do Vaisnava acaryas insist that these texts praise Krsna (or Radha-Krsna according to our Gaudiya acaryas)? Madhvacarya argues very strongly and elaborately that Visnu is praised first and foremost in the Rg-veda, and only secondarily the devas. In a purport to the Caitanya-caritamrta, Srila Prabhupada even claims that a verse from a famous hymn to Visnu (RV 1.154.6) actually praised Radha and Krsna and Vrndavana!
So how do we understand this? Or why do all those that follow the Vedas not worship Radha and Krsna, since these texts praise the divine couple? In another purport to the Caitanya-caritamrta (I believe it is in the section of Gopinathacarya's discussion with Sarvabhauma), Srila Prabhupada argues that Sri Krsna's name, form, and attributes cannot be known by our material senses (atah sri krsna-namadi na bhaved grahyam indriyaih); but when our senses are purified by the process of devotional service they are revealed. This is why, he argues, non-devotees cannot see Krsna in the Vedas and other non-Vaisnava texts (certain Puranas, etc.).
I suppose this won't really convince the unconvinced. But how often do our desires and wishes make us see what we want? An advanced Vaisnava sees Krsna everywhere, but a materialistic person may see sex or sources for sense enjoyment (kim anyat kama-haitukam?) Sometimes we look for something else and are blind to a lot of things (see this post of Madhava Ghosh Prabhu)
I'm happy you brought up this question, though. Several good devotees have told me that they are not convinced that Sri Caitanya is God, and many devotees do not think very deeply about it (which is perhaps not needed for some!). Expressing doubts is often seen as "offensive", which keeps a lot of people silent about where their faith really is at.
On what do I base my faith in Sri Caitanya's divinity? Partly on my own limited but undeniable experience of Sri Caitanya's grace, partly on Krsnadasa Kaviraja's exquisite theological explanation of Sri Caitanya's identity (in the Adi-lila), partly on my faith in my spiritual master, Srila Prabhupada and other acaryas who seem to have a lot of faith in Sri Caitanya. My faith is not free from doubt (asamsaya), but enough to worship our golden avatara and follow the teachings he gave us.
(I don't have my library here with me, so I can't give exact references. Please ask me if you need any.)
'veda' knows everythng...
try this: THE DIVINITY OF SRI CAITANYA MAHAPRABHU
link: http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/madhvacarya/Caitanya.html
found it here: http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/caitanya.htm
personally, this doesn't bother me particularly at this time. for now i just accept these arguments. when it comes to the point where i have to find out about my siddha-svarupa, or probably some time before that, i'll think about it more deeply, i guess...
ys phani.
Thanks for the link Phani. I
Thanks for the link Phani. I was looking on Veda's site last night actually, but I didn't find this.
I'll go through these carefully.
ys,
sda