Sampradaya Sunday

A certain person, in a certain discussion, quoted a classic verse (with typos and all):

sampradaya vihina ye mantraste nishphala matah
atah kalau bhavishyanti chattvara sampradaya
sri brahma rudra sanaka vaishnava kshiti pavana
chattvaraste kalau bhava hy utkale purushottaman.

"If one receives a mantra from someone who has no links to any one of the four sampradayas, then that mantra will have no effect. Therefore there will arise four sampradayas [ Sri, Brahma, Rudra, Kumara ] who will purify the whole world. These four sampradayas will originate from the influence of Lord Purushottama in the region of Utkala."

Stray verses like this are too many to poke my attention. But the simplistic summa summarum thrown at the end got me all going and wild. Hold on to your hats, gentlemen... Tsadada-da-da-daaah:

"So the only means to attain perfection is by following one of these 4 sampradayas, which are all Vaisnava-sampradayas. Sankaracharya didn't follow any of them, so how can he be a bona fide spiritual master?"

I would reply in greater detail if I were not at a net cafe and without my reference library. Bear with the shabby scribblings that follow.

The origins of this verse, attributed to Padma-purana, are dubious at best. As far as I recall, it is partially referenced in Jiva Gosvami's sandarbhas, and in full as above — I believe for the first time — in Baladeva Vidyabhushan's writings in the 1700-1800s. I'd have to look up the references, I remember spending some time tracking down the verse with some of its fellow peculiarities some years back.

Padma-purana itself is a treasure-house of interpolations, its different editions varying widely, and unsurprisingly some editions containing material essential to certain Hindu factions being published almost exclusively by them. Reportedly some renditions now even contain verses penned by Rupa Goswami, a 17th-century devotional theologian.

Let's anyhow accept the verse as valid and worth consideration, just for argument's sake. The four sampradayas there are said to be tied with Purushottama, or Vishnu. It is then hardly surprising if the said sampradayas are Vaishnava-sampradayas, no? Shankara also had a Vaishnava side to his personality, often unacknowledged, as it wasn't as overt as the emphasis of the personalists.

The verse doesn't however say, yasya panthaM, yasya satyaM, yasya jIvanaM vinA kenApi na gacchati, even if it is favorite ammunition among some sectarian Vaishnavas. It is not the way, the truth or the life of all spirituality. It merely attempts to systematize and legitimize the sects of a certain Hindu substratum, and bears little effect for the rest of Indic religious traditions.

A matter of great curiosity is the fact that the Madhva-sampradaya, to which the Gaudiyas profess belonging to, actually hails from the Hamsa-avatara as the root-teacher of their paramparas or disciplic lineages. They indeed would not credit the Gaudiyas as an orthodox branch if were to get down to the details of the Madhavendra-Lakshmipati connection, even if some courtesies are occasionally exchanged between the traditions.

The whole sampradaya and parampara facade is such a bottomless can of worms. It was best put by Todke Baba of Shivapuri when I asked of his sampradaya. "This sampradaya, that sampradaya. It yields but headache, disturbance and quarrels. Men waste their lives away in minute debates of doctrinal sophistry." I heartily agree with him.

If it works, then go for it, and do it. "Just do it." (Nike 3.14) There's little gain in dwelling in a state of spiritual stagnation while making oneself believe one is on a progressive path, clinging to the feeble straw of being legitimized and therefore insured by one's heritage. "Because it says so in the scriptures, and as I go through the prescribed motions, it follows I must be advancing and quite happy." For its not being so, for having to face that it doesn't add up, would amount to an existential crisis of cataclysmic dimensions.