Submitted by: Narasimha Dasa

To avoid sahajiya association, we must first understand who sahajiyas are.

Some sahajiyas are easy to spot. They artificially manifest symptoms of ecstasy to make a show and win followers. They associate freely with women and often take intoxicants to “enhance” their kirtanas and bhajanas, and they are not well educated regarding Gaudiya Vaishnava siddhanta. Srila Prabhupada jokingly suggested that if such persons come to our temples to show their theatrics, we could test them by kicking them in the face. If they remain tolerant, they may be accepted only then as great devotees. In other words, Srila Prabhupada must have felt that there was practically no chance of such persons being actual great devotees, otherwise he would not have chided in this way and opened the door for us the mistakenly commit Vaishnava aparadha.

But there are others who follow strict sadhana, perform exemplary austerities and are externally free from attraction for women and intoxicants. They are very sober, more or less puca Brahmins; they know the shastras and they chant regularly on beads according to vows, usually far more than 16 rounds daily. Lalita Prasad and his descendants are examples of what Srila Prabhupada called “first-class” sahajiyas.

Why are these sadhus considered sahajiyas to be avoided? It is because they don’t accept all the conclusions of the paramahamsa acharyas, such as Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura.  They believe they are so advanced that they fail to fully recognize or accept the guidance of maha-bhagavatas. They are apparently proud to have a difference of opinion with great acharyas, as if this would prove they are on the same level or higher than recognized maha-bhagavatas.

In the beginning, before He had manifest his real swarupa as a nitya-siddha associate of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura accepted customary diksha from Vipinavihari Gosvami according to standard Vedic procedures. But He later neglected his so-called diksa-guru when it became apparent that he was not fully conversant with siddhanta and made some contradictory statements. Therefore he was neglected by both Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura.  The same is true of Lalita Prasad, the oldest son of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura.

There would be no way for us to understand that these two sahajiyas were not great Vaishnava gurus unless we had been warned by Srila Prabhupada and our param-gurus on these matters. In fact, Yasoda-nandana and Guru Kripa used to go to learn bhajanas from Lalita Prasada until Srila Prabhupada forbid them.

Such kind of sahajiyas may have first-class sadhana and partial knowledge of siddhanta, but because they are at odds with the nitya-siddha associates of Lord Caitanya regarding the meaning of diksha and the guru-parampara, they and their followers are to be avoided.  These people are directly opposed to the eternal paramapara of nitya-siddhas due to jealousy and misunderstanding of scriptures.  Like the maya-iskcon gbc, they claim that one must absolutely have a so-called “living guru”. They therefore think they can circumvent Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Srila Gaurakishora and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta because they believe these great souls have no real living diksha connection from Baladeva Vidyabhusana through the line of Jagganatha Babji Maharaja. So they have concocted their own line based on external Vedic principles, with approximately 3 or 4 devotees that have no scope or idea how to preach Krishna consciousness in any practical way. Such persons are so shameless that they dare to criticize Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura and Srila Prabhupada.

I will continue to work on this article with your advice and help. For now. here is another article based totally on Srila Prabhupada’s original Chaitanya-Caritamritas, which I sent out a few years ago.

This article attempts to give some broader perspectives regarding the eternal guru-parampara.

your servant, Narasimha das