Part Two of Acintya-bhedābheda: Getting the Story Straight

Dvitīya Siddhānta
Second Conclusion

Ananta, Sundarānanda, and Haridāsa

Ananta Vāsudeva [Puridāsa Svāmī (?)], Sundarānanda Vidyāvinoda, and Haridāsa Bābājī of Navadvīpa have come together and conspired to antagonize the Śrī Mādhva-Gauḍīya-Vaiṣṇavas who are followers of Śrīman Mahāprabhu. It is necessary to briefly say a few words about these conspirators.
 

Sundarānanda

First of all, I am providing an introduction to the author of the “Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda” book, Śrī Sundarānanda Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya. Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya took birth in East Bengal, in the Malakar Tola area of Dhaka city, in a renowned Sāhā vaiśya [merchant] family. His father was the late Vrajendra-kumāra Rāya, and his mother the late Yāminī-sundarī Dāsī. The name Sundarānanda’s father gave him was Śrī Subodhacandra Sāhā Rāya. Subodha Bābu’s ancestors led their religious lives in the disciplic succession of a caste Gosvāmī who belonged to one of the thirteen sahajiyā apasampradāyas [pseudo-lineages]. Subodha Bābu got married while still a student completing his material education. His wife’s name is Śrīmatī Tilottamā. Śrīmatī Tilottamā is the only daughter of her father Gokulacandra; her mother’s name was Jñānadā-sundarī Dāsī. Gokula Bābu had his residence in the Murshidabad city of West Bengal. Due to a variety of unfortunate events, Subodha Bābu’s father, Vrajena Bābu, was deeply in debt and sought the aid of his son’s father-in-law, Gokula Bābu, who paid off a considerable portion of Vrajena Bābu’s debt.

Subodha Bābu, after completing his B.A. at university, was released from the jaws of the prākṛta-sahajiyā lineage by the honorable Tridaṇḍisvāmī Śrī Śrīmad Bhakti Pradīpa Tīrtha Mahārāja. And he made an act of receiving the grace of Jagad-guru Oṁ Viṣṇupāda Paramahaṁsa-svāmī Śrī Śrīmad Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura. Gradually, as he frequented the world-renowned Śrī Gauḍīya Maṭha, he became deeply acquainted with  the current of Vaiṣṇava philosophical conclusions, its conceptual reasoning, and logics. After some time, he was engaged in the position of editor for Śrī Gauḍīya Maṭha’s main publication, the weekly Gauḍīya magazine. During the period that he was the editor of this magazine, by the grace of Jagad-guru Śrīla Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, he propagated the siddhānta tenets of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas who adhere one-pointedly to the guidance of Śrīman Mahāprabhu. After some time, he gave up his material life and accepted vānaprastha, leading a maṭha-based lifestyle.

Subodha Bābu was also his father’s only son. Reminded of his father’s lack of wealth and severe debt, and overcome by a weakness of heart, he fled the Gauḍīya Maṭha without informing anyone. Thereafter, taking what he had learnt in the Gauḍīya Maṭha, he accepted a job at the Indian Press in Allahabad for a wage of 75 [?]. When the manager of the Gauḍīya Maṭha, Śrīyuta Kuñjabihārī Vidyābhūṣaṇa, found out about Sundarānanda’s dire financial situation, then, because of his natural fondness for someone of the same caste and to accomplish a far-off, future purpose of his own, he made an arrangement for Sundarānanda’s monthly remuneration and helped him get out of debt after roughly a year. Till then, he lived in the maṭha and was engaged in Kuñja Bābu’s service.

After Subodha Bābu received dīkṣā, he became ‘Sundarānanda’ and ultimately was decorated with the title ‘Vidyāvinoda’, becoming known thus as Sundarānanda Vidyāvinoda. Gradually, he preferred to hide his previous name and title, and the fact he was born to a Sāhā merchant family that was in the business of selling alcohol, and used the name his guru had given him to boost his prestige. That said, it is the duty of the guru-sevaka to introduce himself only by the name his guru has given. At present Subodha Bābu has in every way completely severed his ties with his world-renowned jagad-guru, one who is both dearly beloved to Kṛṣṇa and nondifferent from Him as the para-tattva (absolute truth) worshipped by hosts of exalted, liberated personalities. But till this today, Subodha Bābu deceives the world by selling the name that exalted personality gave him, refusing to give up the thirst he has for gathering prestige. Though we have witnessed firsthand his malice towards guru and Vaiṣṇavas, it is in the text of his Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda that such malice is refulgent and on full display, like the constellations on a dark moon night. We will expose the fact of this in the various ‘Siddhāntas’ (chapters) of this Acintya-bhedābheda book.

Sundarānanda Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya is now no longer the Sundarānanda Vidyāvinoda of old. Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī has said in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa:

yathā kāñcanatāṁ yāti kāṁsyaṁ rasa-vidhānataḥ |
tathā dīkṣā-vidhānena dvijatvaṁ jāyate nṛṇām ||

[Just as bell metal is turned to gold by the application of mercury, a person can attain the status of a brāhmaṇa by the process of dīkṣā.]

Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya once carried this quotation from Hari-bhakti-vilāsa atop his head with utmost regard and, as per the orders of his guru-pādapadma, underwent the upanayana-saṁskāra (sacred thread ceremony) after accepting dīkṣā. Now, because he has given that up, he has reverted back to being a Sāhā merchant. Even though he has not started a liquor business like the Sāhā vintners, he has filled himself up with the intoxicant of malice towards his guru, and thereby he has become deprived of knowledge and forgotten himself. Therefore, we will only refer to him as Subodha Bābu or Sāhā Bābu in certain places. If one studies the teachings of Śrīman Mahāprabhu, one learns the following:

arccau viṣṇau śiladhīr guruṣu naramatir-vaiṣṇave jāti-
buddhir-viṣṇor vā vaiṣṇavānāṁ kalimala-mathane pāda-tīrthe ’mbu-buddhiḥ |
śrī-viṣṇor-nāmni mantre sakala-kaluṣahe śabda-sāmānya-buddhir-
viṣṇau sarveśvareśe tad-itara-samadhīr yasya vā nārakī saḥi ||

(Padma Purāṇa)

That person who thinks the worshipful deity is a chunk of stone or wood, who thinks gurudeva is an ordinary mortal, who judges pure devotees by their caste, who thinks the nectareous water that has washed the feet of Viṣṇu or the Vaiṣṇavas is ordinary water, who thinks the name and mantra of Viṣṇu, who removes all degradation, are ordinary sounds, and who thinks that other demigods are equal to the Supreme Lord Viṣṇu—such a person is a nārakī, or someone barreling towards hell. Someone who is a nārakī can never be called a Vaiṣṇava. This is especially the case when someone tries to lead a religious life after regarding their supremely liberated gurudeva as a mortal and discarding him. Such a person can never be considered a Vaiṣṇava. Though it is considered an aparādha to judge a Vaiṣṇava by their caste, we have been compelled to share what background Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya belonged to. Because he has abandoned Oṁ Viṣṇupāda Sākṣād Guru-pādapadma Śrīla Prabhupāda, he has made his conduct and conceptions unacceptable. We learn from the words of Padma Purāṇa quoted in the first Vilāsa of Hari-bhakti-vilāsa who a Vaiṣṇava is:

gṛhīta-viṣṇu-dīkṣāko viṣṇu-pūjā-paro naraḥ |
vaiṣṇavo ’bhihito ’bhijñair itaro ’smād avaiṣṇavaḥ ||

In other words: “Those acquainted with scripture deem that only one who has received dīkṣā initiation into the practice of a Viṣṇu mantra and is inclined to the worship of Viṣṇu via this mantra is to be called a Vaiṣṇava. Everyone else, or in other words, persons who give up their guru and the mantra he has given, is deemed an Avaiṣṇava [a non-Vaiṣṇava]. Therefore, because Subodha Bābu has given up his guru, he has in the category of the Avaiṣṇavas. So there is no fault to view him in terms of his caste. Rather, the truth will be safeguarded by using the proper words to describe what is. Legally and religiously speaking, concealing the truth is a punishable offence.

It is needless to say that if it suits him, Subodha Bābu does not hesitate to give up his guru again and again. Initially, he gave up his family Jāti-gosvāmī guru and took shelter of the Gauḍīya Maṭha. Later he gave up the practices and conceptions of the Gauḍīya Maṭha and surrendered to Ananta Vāsudeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Mahāśaya. After that, he began following Haridāsa Bābājī of Haribola Kuṭīra. After some time, he also gave him up as well, externally. At present he is living in some unknown whereabouts in Navadvīpa, running after his family guru again. The siddhānta of such a guru-tyāgī [guru renouncer] can never stay the same. Like a running deer, he roams hither and thither, through various versions of truth and falsity. At one point, out of greed for the money provided him by Kuñjabihārī, who was of the same caste, Sāhā Bābu worshipped and praised him, coming up with many inventive new siddhāntas. Then, thinking that the vaiśya Sāhā family heritage was comparatively inferior, he became enamoured with the glories of Ananta Vāsudeva, who was from a kṣatriya-kāyastha family, and actively concealed Ananta Vāsudeva’s transgressions, resorting to total falsehoods to put profuse praise of him into print. After that, whether it was because of a loss of faith in Ananta Vāsudeva or because he personally lacked genuine jñāna and vijñāna [knowledge and realization], he once again established a bond with Haridāsa Bābājī of Navadvīpa’s Haribol Kuṭīra. At present, there has occurred an unprecedented iteration of the logic expressed in the statement “yogyaṁ yogyena yujyate – those who deserve each other find each other.” Haridāsa Bābājī, Ananta Vāsudeva, and Sundarānanda—the three of them are like the three points of the trident in Rudra’s hand, but with the aim of destroying bhakti-tattva. These three have come together, consulted with each other, and, in Sundarānanda Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya’s name, compiled three books entitled “Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda”, “Gauḍīyāra Tina Ṭhākura” and “Gauḍīya Darśanera Itihāsa o Vaiśiṣṭya”.

Ananta Vāsudeva

Now we will provide some introduction to Sundarānanda’s third guru, Ananta Vāsudeva. His previous name was Śrī Anantavāsa Vasu. He lived in the famous village of Vajra-yoginī in the Dhaka district of East Bengal. His father’s name was Śrīyuta Rādhā-Govinda Dāsa Bābājī. Ananta Vāsudeva introduced himself to everyone as the youngest son of this renunciate Bābājī Mahāśaya. Because Bābājī Mahāśaya’s financial situation was rather precarious, he had Anantavāsa live at the home of a prominent sahajiyā and teacher of the Pali language, Śrīyuta Amūlyacaraṇa Vidyābhūṣaṇa Mahāśaya. It was with this Mahāśaya’s all-round assistance that he had Anantavāsa taught till the I.A. [?] stage. Later, by great fortune, Ananta took shelter at the feet of the founder of the Gauḍīya Maṭha, the crown-jewel of ācāryas, the topmost liberated personality, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura. Śrīla Sarasvatī Ṭhākura took notice of Anantavāsa’s powerful memory and facilitated him in earning a B.A. degree. After passing his B.A., with the help of Kuñja Bābu, the impoverished Anantavāsa accepted a job at a post office for an ordinary salary. After some months, as per Śrīla Prabhupāda’s wishes, he left his job and became engaged in the service of the maṭha. His father, Rādhā-Govinda Bābājī Mahāśaya had been faithful to the sahajiyā religion for a long time. As fate had it, even during Anantavāsa’s education, he happened to be in the company of a fullblown sahajiyā like Amūlya Bābu. If, in the early stages of life, the poisonous seed of the apasampradāyas sprouts in a person’s heart, it is very difficult to get rid of it. I have heard hundreds of praises of this Amūlya Vidyābhūṣaṇa from Anantavāsa’s own mouth. Maybe it was gratitude for having been raised on Amūlya Bābu’s grain, or maybe it was because he received core, formative instruction on religious practice from him, but Anantavāsa always had special regard for Amūlya Bābu.

Impacted by Jagad-guru Śrīla Prabhupāda’s limitless scriptural knowledge and powerful language, the sprout of Anantavāsa’s poisonous sahajiyā seed could not make any growth. However, after the enactment of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s disappearance pastimes, the smoldering fire inside him that would burn up whatever he had of the current of pure Mādhva-Gauḍīya-Vaiṣṇava thought, ever so gradually became an inferno. The sahajiyās explain that the very act of conversing and relating intimately with a married woman is itself transcendental pārakiyā-mādhurya-rasa. Ananta Vāsudeva, inspired by this notion deep down, was attracted to the idea of free, uninhibited amour. When Anantavāsa took shelter of Jagad-guru Śrīla Prabhupāda, he became known as Śrī Ananta Vāsudeva Brahmacārī and he became bound by a vow to engage himself in the service of his guru-pādapadma and observe resolute celibacy till the end of his life. Impressed by his external renunciation and scholarly brilliance, the devotees of the Gauḍīya Maṭha put him in the position of ācārya. It is very difficult for ordinary, conditioned souls to maintain the position of a Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava ācārya. And that is exactly what took its toll on Ananta Vāsudeva.

Vāsudeva, taking the opportunity afforded him by the position of ācārya, would provide a profuse amount of bhajana-śikṣā to the learned, scholarly ladies Śrīla Prabhupāda had showed some favour to, like Asīmā, Nīlimā, and others. Later, because people began to listen to the various kathās Vāsudeva would speak, he made an act of assuming sannyāsa and concealed the name Ananta Vāsudeva Brahmacārī, becoming known everywhere by the name Śrī Bhakti Prasāda Purī. By the concerted efforts of Sundarānanda and other excellent writers, Anantavāsa began to be popularized everywhere as being a very distinguished individual. As a result of this, one very learned young lady of the renowned Nāga family of the Dhaka district (who was a B.A. student at the time) became his disciple. He used to give her various types of confidential bhajana-śikṣā as well. Needless to say, this lady was a very qualified individual in every way; she came from a distinguished family, had a very noble and reputable character, and was very beautiful and virtuous. After receiving dīkṣā, she became known as ‘Garimā’. Over time, as Garimā received special advancement in bhajana from her gurudeva, her relatives compelled Śrī Śrīmad Bhakti Prasāda Purī Mahārāja to wed her. Once the marriage rituals were conducted in Allahabad, he left his sannyāsa garb and accessories, as well as his sannyāsa name, etc., and turned back into Anantavāsa Vasu. Even though Sundarānanda Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya saw this spectacle with his own eyes, in order protect the sahajiyā-dharma, he continued to preach that this was an exemplary incident in the life of a Vaiṣṇava.

Haridāsa Dāsa

Seeing Ananta and Sundarānanda’s sāhajika-prīti, or natural fondness for sahajiyā practices, who joined them like a bride in her finery? Haridāsa Bābājī of Navadvīpa. He has published many sahajiyā books and created many new, never-before-published books, ascribing them to the names of various Vaiṣṇavas of bygone ages. And he continues to do so. And through Anantavāsa he publishes Vaiṣṇava literatures, concealing all of Anantavāsa’s previous names and calling him ‘Purīdāsa Gosvāmī’. These books have not been printed for some innocent reason. Embedded with a whole series of statements that encourage the sahajiyā train of thought and overturn statements that go against said train of thought, a whole new set of editions has been published in a whole new dhārā [current], so many people in learned circles eye these editions with doubt. These editions are distributed free of charge only among the sahajiyās themselves. Not one copy has been given to the disciples and grand-disciples of Jagad-guru Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Prabhupāda. And they have pressured the people to whom they have distributed these books to make a pact to the effect that they will not show these books to anyone from the Gauḍīya Maṭha. The fact this is happening will allow the community of learned and intelligent readers to infer just how trustworthy the authenticity of these editions is.

Purīdāsa’s cleverness in compilation

Sundarānanda Vidyavinoda Mahāśaya has compiled and written the book Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda using these editions. We compared a few of the statements he has borrowed from Purīdāsa Gosvāmī's editions with statements in other editions and found many changes. Below I cite an example from the Tattva-sandarbha compiled by Purīdāsa:

“yat khalu purāṇa-jātamāvirbhāvya, brahma-sūtrañca praṇīyāpy aparituṣṭena tena bhagavatā nija-sūtrāṇām akṛtrima-bhāṣya-bhūtaṁ samādhi-labdham-āvirbhāvitam; —yasminneva sarva-śāstra-samanvayo dṛśyate, sarva-vedārtha-lakṣaṇāṁ gāyatrīm-adhikṛtya pravartitatvāt | * * * gāruḍe ca—‘artho’yaṁ brahma-sūtrāṇāṁ bhāratārtha-vinirṇayaḥ | gāyatrī-bhāṣya-rūpo ’sau vedārtha paribṛṁhitaḥ || * * * brahma-sūtrāṇām arthas teṣāṁ akṛtrim-bhāṣya-bhūta ityarthaḥ | pūrvaṁ sūkṣmatvena manasyāvirbhūtam, tadeva saṁkṣipya sūtratvena punaḥ prakaṭitam, paścād-vistīrṇatvena sākṣāt śrī-bhāgavatam iti | tasmāt-tad-bhāṣya-bhūte svataḥsiddhe tasmin satya-vācīnam anyad anyeṣāṁ sva-sva-kapola-kalpitaṁ tadanugatamevādaraṇīyam iti gamyate|”

We have compared this excerpt from Tattva-sandarbha with a very old edition of Tattva-sandarbha printed in Devanāgarī script and with Satyānanda Gosvāmī’s Tattva-sandarbha, which was published with a Bengali translation in 1318 [Baṅgāba] and observed that the above excerpt does not match in three places, as we show below. It is needless to say that the Devanāgarī edition and Satyānanda Gosvāmījī’s editions read the same. Readers, note that the portions that have been left out of Purīdāsa’s version have been printed and provided below in clear, bold letters:

“yat khalu ‘sarva’ purāṇa-jātamāvirbhāvya, brahma-sūtrañca praṇīyāpy aparituṣṭena tena bhagavatā nija-sūtrāṇām akṛtrima-bhāṣya-bhūtaṁ samādhi-labdham-āvirbhāvitam; —yasminneva sarva-śāstra-samanvayo dṛśyate, sarva-vedārtha-‘sūtra’-lakṣaṇāṁ gāyatrīm-adhikṛtya pravartitatvāt | * * * gāruḍe ca—‘pūrṇaḥ so’yam-atiśayaḥ’| ‘artho’yaṁ brahma-sūtrāṇāṁ bhāratārtha-vinirṇayaḥ | gāyatrī-bhāṣya-rūpo ’sau vedārtha paribṛṁhitaḥ || * *”

—Tattva-sandarbha 19, 21 Anuccheda—(The Satyānanda and Nāgarī editions)

In other words, the word ‘sarva’ after the words ‘yat khalu’, the word ‘sūtra’ after the words ‘sarva-vedārtha’, and the words ‘pūrṇaḥ so ’yam atiśayaḥ |’ after the words ‘gāruḍe ca—’ have been left out of Purīdāsa’s edition. This gives clear indication that no book published by Purīdāsa or Ananta Vāsudeva can be accepted as authentic.

As we said previously, Sundarānanda Vidyāvinoda, the newly-wedded Bhakti Prasāda Purī (Purīdāsa Gosvāmī or Ananta Vāsudeva) and Haridāsa Dāsa of Navadvīpa are conspiring together, publishing various books under various names, to undermine the āmnāya [sacred knowledge] of the Śrī Brahma-Mādhva-Gauḍīya-Vaiṣṇavas. Among these publications, there is a newly composed, recent book (ṭīkā commentary) by the name of “Śrī Caitanya-mata-mañjuṣā” published by Śrī Haridāsa Dāsa, which Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya has mentioned on page 19 of his “Kayekṭi Prārambhik Kathā” introduction, writing as follows:

“The ‘ārādhyo bhagavān vrajeśa-tanayaḥ’ verse at the start of ‘Śrī Śrī Caitanya-mata-mañjuṣā’ by Śrī Kavi Karṇapūra Gosvāmī’s śrī gurudeva, Śrī Śrīnātha Cakravartī, clearly proves that the philosophy of the tattva-vāda-guru Śrīman Madhvācārya is different from Śrī Kṛṣṇa-caitanya-candra’s philosophy.”

Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya references this statement in his second footnote: “2 | Śrī Caitanya-mata-mañjuṣā—published by Śrī Haridāsa Dāsa 466 Caitanyābda, Śrīdhāma Navadvīpa.” The thing to really pay attention to here is that the aformentioned tippanī-grantha [commentary text] was first printed in Kṛṣṇa-nagara, Nadiyā, by Śrī Śailendra-govardhana Brahmacārī at Śrī Bhāgavata Yantra [press?], which is run under the supervision of Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya. There is no mention of a commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam called “Śrī Caitanya-mata-mañjuṣā” written by Śrī Śrī Nātha Cakravartī Mahodaya in any of the Gosvāmī’s granthas, past or present. This text has appeared from the fertile mind of Śrī Haridāsa Dāsa Bābājī Mahāśaya and has only first seen the light of day on Śrī Śrī Gaura Jayantī 466 Caitanyābda [same as Gaurābda], or the Christian date of 28^th February, 1953.

Subodha Sāhā’s inconceivable subterfuge

We have previously stated that these three persons—Sundarānanda (Subodha Sāhā), Ananta Vāsudeva (Purīdāsa) and Haridāsa Dāsa—have come together and are publishing various books to accomplish some ignoble aim in the distant future. Here we present to the readers some strikingly clear evidence of this. Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya’s “Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda” book was published on 30 Govinda, 464 Gaurābda, on Śrī Gaura’s appearance day (9^th of Caitra 1358 Baṅgābda; 23^rd of March 1951, Christian year). How is it possible that he could reference Śrī Haridāsa Dāsa’s Śrī Caitanya-mata-mañjuṣā, which was first published on Śrī Śrī Gaura Jayantī 466 Śrī Caitanyābda (16^th of Phālguna 1357, 28^th of February, 1953 Christian era)—a book that was published two years later? We cannot even begin to understand how this is possible. But we do know from ancient history that Vālmīki Muni wrote Rāmāyaṇa even before the birth of Rāma. Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya has referenced “Śrī Caitanya-mata-mañjuṣā” as having been finalized two whole years before it was actually written, finalized, and published.

The fact that the book Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda references Śrī Caitanya-mata-mañjuṣā leads us to understand that Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda was published after Śrī Caitanya-mata-mañjuṣā. If that is not the case, then the date of Mañjuṣā’s publication mentioned is a mistake or printing error. Otherwise, Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda was printed later and “464” was printed by mistake, maybe by the printer’s error. Or page 19 of Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda’s introduction was swapped out with a previous version of the page two years later and rebound. Or should we believe that the printing and publication of both books is correct? No matter how one may try to reconcile this, Vidyāvinoda Mahāśaya cannot escape the fact of the sort of devious work he has done. Because, this is a punishable offence. Whatever was done, we call it conspiracy, artifice, and suppression of the real truth. But the fact that he published a statement from the future, from 466 Gaurābda, in 464 Gaurābda and referred to it as something of a past year is a sort of acintya, or inconceivable, feat that goes well with the imaginative feats he has displayed in Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda itself. It is by such inconceivable feats that he has published Acintya-bhedābheda-vāda, or rather, shall we call it Acintya-abheda-vāda (“The Doctrine of Inconceivable Oneness”)?

[Translated from Śrī Gauḍīya Patrikā, Year 9, Issue 4 (15/6/57), after page 144]