BVT 3 :: Modern Scholarship on Bhaktivinoda Thakur

---

It is not altogether surprising that many of those in the West who have come into contact with the Krishna consciousness movement have undertaken research into Bhaktivinoda Thakur, in great part inspired by this autobiography. Most notably, Shukavak N. Das broke the ground in 1999 with his seminal work, A Hindu Encounter with Modernity. Shukavak noted the effect the discovery of this work had on him as a university student trying to reconcile the worlds of his spiritual path and the empirical ethos of scholarship.

"… [my] book is about how Chaitanya Vaishnavism began to change under [Bhaktivinoda Thakur's] influence as a modern reformer. But even more importantly, it is about my struggle as a Western devotee to enter the world of Hindu devotionalism and at the same time maintain relevance in the modern West. Hindu Encounter with Modernity was the completion of my spiritual, intellectual, and emotional conversion, my normalization, into this world of Hindu devotion, and Sva-likhita-jīvanī was my pathway into that new world.

Bhaktivinoda comes to Chaitanya Vaishnavism from the position of an outsider, and so we, as his Western followers, can easily identify with him. And he does so at a time of extreme cultural and technological change, which is not unlike our own time. [Bhaktivedanta Swami] consistently repeated Vaishnava tradition irrespective of how contrary it seemed to modern views and he made no attempt to rationalize the tradition for his audience. Bhaktivinoda did just the opposite. For example, he applied a rational analysis to the dating of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, a devotional text foundational to Chaitanya Vaishnavism. In his Kṛṣṇa-saṁhitā Bhaktivinoda dates this Purāṇa to about 1000 A.D. This is completely contrary to orthodox Vaishnava teaching. He comes to this conclusion based on a critical analysis of internal evidence within the Bhāgavata itself and the archeological research of other scholars. My guru [Bhaktivedanta Swami] never accepted such an approach and certainly not such a conclusion. He strictly taught the traditional view that the Bhāgavata-purāṇa was a work from 5,000 years ago. (JVS 23)

Clearly, one of the elements that draws the interest of Western scholars is Bhaktivinoda Thakur's effort to reconcile modern ways of thinking with the scriptural traditions. As Shukavak Das points out, Bhaktivedanta Swami followed a rigid literalist approach to traditional knowledge, a kind of intellectual straight jacket for anyone accustomed to modern methods of scholarship. In effect, Bhaktivinoda Thakur legitimized the application of direct perception and rational thinking, at least in certain domains, which in the most traditional Vaishnava circles is looked upon with distrust. For them, the testimony of the scripture and "realized souls" are considered authoritative on all matters even if they go against experience and logic.

At the basis of the Thakur's synthesis of modern and traditional ways of knowing, which recurs again and again in his writings, starting with his pivotal “Bhagbat” speech (1869), is the concept of the sāragrāhī, "one who takes the essence," which he opposes to the bhāravāhī, "a bearer of burdens." This idea plays a consistent role in how Kedarnath Dutt approached religious questions, especially in the period leading up to his initiation by Bipin Bihari Goswami, as well as in the most productive part of his literary career and his most original works such as Kṛṣṇa-saṁhitā. The latter book is often highlighted as evidence of Bhaktivinoda's rationalism, where he makes the distinction between madhyama-adhikārīs, rational devotees who are essence seekers and those with delicate faith (komala-śraddha) who are unable to understand the human dimension of the scriptural authors or the figurative nature of much of their contents.

Bhaktivinoda talks about Kṛṣṇa-saṁhitā in his Autobiography also:

"When I published Kṛṣṇa-saṁhitā the people of this country expressed many opinions on it. Some said that it took a new philosophical position. Some liked it, in particular the younger and better-educated. But no one could really understand the essence of the book. I was trying to show that Krishna-tattva is transcendental. Some people thought that my entire description was a symbolic (ādhyātmika) interpretation, but they were altogether wrong. There is a subtle difference between the transcendental (aprākṛta) and the symbolic that generally no one can grasp. The reason for this is the absence of knowledge about the transcendent substance. [165-166] 

A high point in Bhaktivinoda scholarship came with Volume 23 of the Journal of Vaishnava Studies under the visionary editorshop of Steven J. Rosen (Satyaraj Das) which marked the 100th anniversary of Bhaktivinoda Thakur's disappearance in 2014. That issue brought together several scholars besides Shukavak N. Das like Jason D. Fuller, Abhishek Ghosh, David P. Carter and others who have written extensively and with insight on the Thakur.

In particular, Dr. Ghosh has shown how Bhaktivinoda Thakur was able to co-opt the Hegelian idea of historical evolution towards a goal that is the self-realization of the "world spirit." However, though Bhaktivinoda Thakur agreed with the premise of progress, but differed with him on where this progress was directed. Whereas Hegel believed that the evolution of the human species culminated in the Europe of the 19th century, Bhaktivinoda held that its goal lay in the fuller realization of the eternal truths of God-realization that were the millennial genius of the Indian spirit.

Human evolution does not end with material science and technology and the other features of the advanced nations, but with the ultimate goal of spirituality, love of God. The "end of history" can only lie in the universal spiritual liberation of humankind. This transformative idea seems to have been coming into vogue throughout Bengal in the late 19th century; for example, it is integral to Vivekananda Swami's teachings. It inspired the nascent nationalist movement with a renewed sense of confidence and pride and thus played a significant role in the awakening of consciousness that led to Independence in 1947.

Although it would certainly be worthwhile to explore all the insights and discoveries made by the above-named and other scholars, it would expand this introduction beyond what is reasonable. Nevertheless, I take this opportunity to heartily recommend those interested in the position of Bhaktivinoda Thakur in the sampradāya and in history to read their work. In particular, Shukavak’s book should be read by anyone interested in Gaudiya Vaishnava history. It is an excellent introduction to the times and mores of 19th century Bengal, providing context to the life of Bhaktivinoda Thakur for those coming from a non-Indian devotee/researcher perspective.

The principal purpose of this new edition of the Autobiography and of this introduction is not to explore the ways the Thakur used to find a rational basis for Gaudiya Vaishnavism, important a subject as it may be. Rather, I would like to look at the Thakur's life and his evolution as a believer in Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and bhakti-yoga practitioner, structuring it around his relation to his guru, Bipin Bihari Goswami.

The import of this aspect of the Thakur's life has not been looked into in depth by most of those who claim to be in a disciplic succession that includes Bhaktivinoda Thakur's name, and I would like to use this occasion to highlight this guru-disciple relationship as a supplement to the Thakur's account of his own life.

It should be noted here that I personally left the International Society for Krishna Consciousness in 1979 to take shelter of Lalita Prasad Thakur, Bhaktivinoda Thakur's son and initiated disciple, when I learned about these issues of disciplic succession. This is the same tradition of rāgānugā bhakti to which Bhaktivinoda Thakur adhered.

I made my choice primarily because of the claim made by followers of Siddhanta Saraswati to be the only legitimate bearers of the tradition of an unbroken disciplic succession from Lord Chaitanya or even Lord Brahma. They include Bhaktivinoda Thakur in this unbroken succession but make no mention and offer no notice, what to speak of homage, to his initiating guru or to the dīkṣā paramparā that the Thakur bequeathed to one son but not to another.

One should not think that my purpose in presenting Lalita Prasad Thakur's point of view is to oppose or subvert the work of ISKCON or the Gaudiya Math, who have done an immeasurable service in preaching the Holy Name and fulfilling Bhaktivinoda Thakur's wishes around the world, rejuvenating not just the entire Gaudiya Vaishnava school with its many branches, but increasing interest in all schools of Vaishnavism. I am not at all interested in increasing party spirit, which Bhaktivinoda Thakur himself warned against. I consider Srila Prabhupada A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami as the one who gave me spiritual direction in life. I have been blessed by his grace by which I came to my Diksha Guru, Sri Sri Lalita Prasad Thakur, and through him to a personal connection with Srila Saccidananda Bhaktivinoda Thakur, and to the disciplic succession through Bipin Bihari Goswami and leading to Jahnava Mata, Nityananda Prabhu, Vamsivadanananda Thakur and Vishnupriya Devi. That is now my particular spiritual heritage, along with the heritage of Gaudiya Vaishnavism in general.

The issue of initiation and disciplic succession is a complex one, and different people will place their faith where their authorities and personal proclivities tell them to. All who are honest in their attempts to follow Bhaktivinoda Thakur can be sure that he looks upon their work with kindness. Nevertheless, in the interests of the truth that usually lies in old traditions, I feel it necessary to take this opportunity to introduce Bhaktivinoda Thakur's initiating guru to a larger public, and to look at his life from the pivotal moment in 1880 when he took initiation from him. Though there are larger theological issues of significance involved, my primary purpose here is merely to establish the related historical facts.

In the traditionalist view, the disciplic succession of mantra-gurus is not simply a matter of transmitting teachings, but is a channel of mercy descending from and leading back to Lord Chaitanya and his personal associates, the "Avatar Generation." The mantra taken at initiation is the connection by which one is made a member, a participant and a servant in the world of Chaitanya Lila, and thereby Radha-Krishna Lila. "Unbroken" is taken in a concrete sense pertaining to initiation, not a figurative one related arbitrarily to the significant historical individuals whose teachings have been influential.

I do not personally believe that God's grace is restricted or bound in any way by any scriptural rules. Spiritual legitimacy can not be restricted by any external legalistic considerations. The Holy Name is also wholly independent in its grace-giving power. Old traditions may be examined, but great care must be taken not to discard them without thoroughly understanding their meaning and purpose. We must be doubly careful not to preach the doctrine of the necessity of Guru -- and of initiation -- while arbitrarily ignoring the principle when it so suits us.

---

Other articles in the introduction

BVT 1-2 : Invocation and Introduction to the Autobiography
BVT 3 :: Modern Scholarship on Bhaktivinoda Thakur
BVT 4 :: Bhaktivinoda Thaku and his thirst for knowledge.
BVT 5 :: Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Christianity
BVT 6 :: Bhaktivinoda Thakur in Jagannath Puri
BVT 7 :: Bhaktivinoda and the Meat-eating issue
BVT 8 :: Initiation from Bipin Bihari Goswami
BVT 9 :: Bipin Bihari Goswami in the Thakur's Writings
BVT 10 :: Lalita Prasad Thakur
BVT 11 :: Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Sampradaya
BVT 12 :: The Authenticity of the Autobiography

Other articles inspired by the Autobiography:

A Bengali Zamindar's education in the 1840's
Bipin Bihari's testimonial to his best disciple Kedarnath Datta
Longfellow and Bhaktivinoda Thakur's poems

And also,

Hari-nama-cintamani related posts
Siddhi-lalasa