Bursting the fake claims !!
सीतानाथ समारम्भां रामानन्दार्य मध्यमाम्।
अस्मदाचार्य पर्यन्तां वन्दे श्रीगुरू परम्पराम् ।।
Do Ramanandacharya & Ramanujacharya follow same tradition?
Shri Ramananda Sampradaya is entirely different from the Shri Ramanuja Sampradaya. It is completely futile and ignorant to say that Bhagavan Ramanandacharya comes in the guru parampara of Shri Ramanujacharya. Because the Ramanuja Sampradaya originated in the Kali Yuga, while the Shri Ramananda Sampradaya has been in existence since ancient times. It is an eternal Vedic tradition whose guru parampara has been established in all four yugas. However, some people have maliciously attempted to spread this misconception that Bhagavan Ramanandacharya comes in the guru parampara of Shri Ramanujacharya, but there is absolutely no truth to it. This is a completely baseless claim that has been refuted countless times.
One by One we will counter the misconceptions spread by some kids:
1• Sri Ramanandacharya got Sri Ram Mantra Diksha from Sri Ramanuja Sampraday
Refutation: A Big Big No! Sri Ramanuja Sampraday never gives Sri Ram mantra as a diksha mantra as their own Acharya’s have claimed this;
Shri Rangacharya of Ramanuja Sampraday has clearly stated in Durjanakaripanchanan
'नह्येते मन्त्रा अस्मत्कुलपरम्पराप्राप्तमन्त्रत्रयव्यतिरिक्ता लक्ष्मीनाथमारभ्यास्मादाचार्य पर्यन्तं केनचिदाचार्येण कस्य चिच्छिष्यस्योपदिष्टा’
Apart from our lineage's three sacred mantras, namely Shri Mannarayana Rahasya Trayam, no acharya, starting from Shri Lakshminath up to our current acharya, has taught any of their disciples these mantras (of Shri Rama, Krishna, and others).
And why Sri Ram & Sri Krishna mantras are not given, this has been cleared by him in response to 4th question of Purva Paksha in his same book Durjanakaripanchanan;
देवत्वादिना मनुष्यादधिकस्य पशुत्वादिना न्यूनस्य च देवपश्वोः प्राणित्वेन मनुष्य साम्यं एवं विशेषभावस्वरूपप्रतिपादकत्वेन रामकृष्णादिमन्त्राणां साम्यम् तत्तप्रायघटितमन्त्रात्मक वाक्यजन्यशब्दबोधेभ्यो विषयितया व्यावृत्तानां व्यापकता गुणविशेषादीनां प्रतिपादनेन न्यूनाधिकभावक्षेति ॥
"Just as the God surpass humans, and animals are inferior to humans, similarly, the Shri Narayana Mantra, Vishnu Mantra, and Vasudeva Mantra, and other mantras like Shri Ramakrishna Mantra, are all equally representative of the divine form and are equal in expressing the essence of the Supreme Being. However, since they lack the quality of universality and other attributes, they are considered inferior to the Narayana Mantra."
From this, it is clear that the Ramanuja Sampradaya has never had a tradition of initiating in Shri Ram Mantra. And when there is no tradition of initiation, there is no question of the sampradaya being unified. Few children might raise the questions now that in the Ramanuja Sampradaya, there was devotion to Lord Rama, as we have studied the oldest commentary on Valmiki Ramayana and all that. Please note that the discussion here is not about whether devotion to Lord Rama existed in a particular sampradaya or not. The discussion is specifically about the fact that the Ramanuja Sampradaya does not involve the initiation by Rama Mantra, as stated by their previous Acharyas.
These days, some people spread the misconception that Ramanandacharya comes in the guru parampara of Ramanujacharya. Such false beliefs were debunked during the Ujjain Kumbh Mela in 1921. When Ramanujis were badly defeated by Ramanandis in Shastrarth.
Following is the proof from "Peasants and Monks in British India"
The catalyst for the conflict was provided in 1918 by a visit to Ayodhya by the head of the Shri Vaishnava Totadri math in south India. Particularly galling to many Ramanandis was the fact that the Anantacharya (eternal leader) from the south refused to prostrate before Sita and Ramchandra images in two major Ramanandi temples, refused to accept prasad.
Pinch also mentions about the Kumbh in the next page and says that Ramanuj Sampraday was defeated in the debate. The Ayodhya debate, which occured in 1919 or 1920, did not in any way signal the end of the matter. Indeed, according to Ramanandis it only created the need for the more august "historical" debate at the 1921 Ujjain kumbh. The specific question to be addressed was whether the sacred books of the south Indian Shri Vaishnavas offended Ramchandra; implicit to the debate was whether Ramanuja was regarded by Ramanand as a monastic predecessor. The Ramanuji side was defended by Swami Ramprapann Ramanujadas of the Totadri math; Bhagavadacharya argued on behalf of the radical Ramanandi position. The jury took little time in deciding in favor of Bhagavadacharya and stating that hence forth the Ramanandi sampraday was to be independent of Ramanujacharya and south Indian Shri Vaishnavas. The guru parampara placed Ramanand twenty-second in descent from Ramchandra and included no mention whatsoever of Ramanuja, 70 Crucial to the Ujjain victory was the discovery of a fifteenth-century guru parampara that made no mention of Ramanuja; this parampara was said to have been authored by Agradevacharva, as grand-disciple of Ramanand, and was uncovered by the aforementioned research committee (Puratatvanusandhayini Samiti).
And infact in Indian sadhus is it mentioned:
“Ramanuj Sampraday was outcasted in the next kumbh and was not allowed to take part in Shahi Snana”
"Indian Sadhus" -G.S. Ghurye page 173
"The report of Kumbha Mela at Ujjain in 1932 does not list Ramanuji ascetics as having taken part in the procession."
Reinventing Ramanand: Caste and History in Gangetic India William R. Pinch Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 30, No. 3 (Jul., 1996) Page 552
The debunking of this baseless misconception that the Ramananda Sampradaya falls under the Ramanuja Sampradaya was done by the Ramanandis themselves during the 1921 Kumbh Mela. However, some people have a tendency to repeatedly face defeat and still return with their defeated faces held high.
2• Bhaktamal gives description of Chatuh Sampraday in which Ramananda Sampraday is not mentioned and mentions that Sri Ramananda belongs to Sri Ramanuja.
Refutation: A complete fake! Sri Nabhadas Ji belongs to Sri Ramananda Sampraday whose Guru was Sri Agradevacharya. Who has said about the Guru parampara of Shri Ramanand samprday whose written manuscript which was given as a evidence in 1921 Ujjain Kumbh and that was accepted by Ramanuj Samprday as their defeat, clearly sates that;
No mention of Sri Ramanujacharya in the lineage of Sri Ramanandacharya clearly sates that both Acharyas belongs to two different lineage. And just use little brain 🧠, if Guru of Sri Nabhadas, Sri Agradev Swami (incarnation of Sri Shatrughan Ji) following the Guru parampara which mentions no name of Sri Ramanujacharya. Can you imagine His shishya will mention someone else in His lineage doing Guru-Droha, going against His Guru? Never! Even Gita Press Gorakhpur says with star mark that in manuscripts also says Ramananda is mentioned and at some place Ramanuj is present but Sri Nabhadas Ji would have written only about one Sampraday without start mark. And scriptural evidence and according to 1921 it has been established that Ramanuja Sampraday can't come their and Ramananda doesn't falls in Ramanuja Sampraday.
Originally the Chappy is;
रामानंद उदार सुधानिधि अवनि कल्पतरु।
विष्णुस्वामी बोहित्थ सिन्धु संसार पार करु॥
मध्वाचारज मेघ भक्ति सर ऊसर भरिया।
निम्बादित्य आदित्य कुहर अज्ञान जु हरिया॥
जनम करम भागवत धरम संप्रदाय थापी अघट।
चौबीस प्रथम हरि बपु धरे त्यों चतुर्व्यूह कलिजुग प्रगट॥
And second thing, now let us see the word “Udaar” in the first line;
Regarding sampradāya of Rāmānanda and Rāmanuja, Dr. S. Radhakrishnana has made a very subtle observation in his book, Indian Philosophy Vol II, which is as follows—
“Ramanuja preaches equality in worship and proclaims that bhakti transcends all caste distinctions. He admitted the pariahs to the temple at Melkote. But it is by no means clear that he was prepared for a wholesale defiance of the accepted order. Out of deference to tradition he concedes that freedom is open only to the three upper classes, and others will have to work their way up and wait for the next birth. We cannot, therefore, say that he was in full sympathy with the logical implications of his teaching. A later Vaisnava teacher, Ramananda (thirteenth century), protested against caste distinctions. “Let no man, he says, ask a man’s caste or sect. Whoever adores God is God’s own.” His apostolate of about twelve included a Brahmin, a barber, a leather-worker, a Rajput and a woman. Caitanya preached the religion of devotion and love to all men irrespective of caste or class. ....”
(IInd Edition Reprint 1948, P. 709)
And infact Vedantakarikavali by Shri Buchchivenkatacharya of Ramanuja Sampraday clearly states;
अपशूद्रनये भक्तौ शूद्रानधिकृतिः स्फुटा ॥ ८.१३॥
Therefore here the word “Udaar” can't be used for Ramanuja Sampraday alone Jagadguru Ramanandacharya is fit for that.
Jagadguru Śrīmad Rāmānandācharya ji adopted people of all castes, gender etc. he did not hesitate to adopt even Malechha, that is why the word “Udāar" (Generous) has been exclusively used for him. As Śrīmad Rāmanandacharya was HIMSELF Śrī Rām as said in scriptures,
“rāmānandaḥ svayaṃ rāmaḥ prādurbhūto mahītale"
Śrīmad Rāmānandacharya is Śrī Rāma himself who appeared on this earth in the form of a great Muni (sage) out of his causeless mercy and compassion on all Jivas.
(-Nārad Panchrātra Vaishvānar Samhitā)
Śrīmad Göswāmi Tulsidās Ji who Himself belongs to Sri Ramananda Sampraday has also used the word “Udāar" frequently with Śrī Rām in Śrīmad Rāmāyaṇam:—
एहि महँ रघुपति नाम उदारा। अति पावन पुरान श्रुति सारा।।
(Śrīmad Rāmāyaṇam 1.10.1)
अवतार उदार अपार गुनं। महि भार बिभंजन ग्यानघनं।।
(Śrīmad Rāmāyaṇam 6.111.6)
परम चतुरता श्रवन सुनि बिहँसे रामु उदार।
(Śrīmad Rāmāyaṇam 6.38)
सुनहु उदार सहज रघुनायक। सुंदर अगम सुगम बर दायक।।
(Śrīmad Rāmāyaṇam 3.42.1)
मन भावत बर मागउँ स्वामी। तुम्ह उदार उर अंतरजामी।।
(Śrīmad Rāmāyaṇam 7.84.8)
तब कि चलिहि अस गाल तुम्हारा। अस बिचारि भजु राम उदारा।।
(Śrīmad Rāmāyaṇam 6.27.7)
मैं बानर फल खात न बारा। आयसु दीन्ह न राम उदारा।।
(Śrīmad Rāmāyaṇam 6.34.4)
पुनि प्रभु कहहु राम अवतारा। बालचरित पुनि कहहु उदारा॥
(Śrīmad Rāmāyaṇam 1.110.5)
ताहि देइ गति राम उदारा। सबरी कें आश्रम पगु धारा।।
(Śrīmad Rāmāyaṇam 3.34.5)
Therefore scriptural, historical and logical evidence shows alone Srimad Jagadguru Ramanandacharya fit for the wors “Udaar” not Ramanujacharya.
And infact the other saints of that period also has mentioned about 4 Sampraday;
जानहु श्री सनकादि अरु ब्रह्मा रुद्र उदार ।
कह 'मलूक' वैदिक यही सम्प्रदाय हैं चार ॥95॥
रामानन्दाचार्यजी श्रीके शुभ आचार्य ।
कह 'मलूक' सनकादिके श्रीनिम्बार्काचार्य ॥96॥
कह 'मलूक' श्रीब्रह्मके हैं श्रीमध्वाचार्य ।
विष्णुस्वामि श्रीरुद्रके सम्प्रदाय आचार्य ॥97॥
(-Sri Malook Shatak 95-97)
Sri Swami Khoji ji Maharaj appeared in 1575 (Vikram Samvat) writes about lineage of Sri Ramananda Sampradaya in his Sri Samprday Kalpadrum;
प्रथम दया करि सीय, रामसों बीज बुलायो ।
पुनि हनुमन्त हि आपु, मन्त्र उपदेशि दृढायो ॥
ब्रह्मा तथा वशिष्ठ पराशर व्यास शुकादिक ।रामानन्दाचार्य सींचि, विस्तारयौ चहुं दिक ॥
जय सन्ताप विनाशिनी छाया, सुख पावै सबै ।
सम्प्रदायश्री देवद्रुम, फूलै फलै सुपल्लवै ॥
And the Valmiki Samhita, was also presented as evidence during the 1921 Kumbh Mela, which was accepted by Ramanuja Ram Prapanna Das Swami of the Ramanuja Sampradaya, thereby declaring defeat of Ramanuja Sampraday’s false claim. In that evidence from the Valmiki Samhita, it is clearly written that the Shri Ramananda Sampradaya originates from Lord Shri Sita Ram. Following shlokas were given from Valmiki Samhita as a proof which are;
Rishis asked Maharishi Valmiki:
पूर्वं तु राममन्त्रोऽयमासीत् स्वग्र्येषु केवलम् ।
पृथिव्यां कथमायातस्तन्नो ब्रूहि दयानिधे ! ||३०||
Earlier, the Shadakshar Sri Ram mantra was limited to the celestial gods in heaven. How did it come to Earth? Oh compassionate one! Please enlighten us.
Maharishi Valmiki said:
इदं तु परमं तत्त्वं देवानामप्यगोचरम् ।
पृष्टं युष्माभिरनधं कथ्यते श्रृणुतर्षयः ! ||३१||
This supreme essence is even beyond the perception of the celestial gods. You have asked about this divine entity, free from sins, due to your affectionate inquiry. Therefore, I shall explain it to you.
भगवान् रामचन्द्रो वै परं ब्रह्म श्रुतिश्रुतः ।
दयालुः शरणं नित्यं दासानां दीनचेतसाम् ||३२||
Lord Sri Ram is indeed the supreme Brahman, as proclaimed by the Vedas. He is supremely merciful, always offering refuge, and remains ever attentive to His servants and the needy.
इमां सृष्टिं समुत्पाद्य जीवानां हितकाम्यया ।
आद्यां शक्तिं महादेवीं श्रीसीतां जनकात्मजाम् ॥ ३३॥
Lord Sri Ram, after creating this universe for the welfare and desires of people, imparted the supreme mantra called the Shadakshara Taraka Mantra to Mahadevi Goddess Sita, who is the primeval energy.
तारकं मन्त्रराजं तु श्रावयामास ईश्वरः ।
जानकी तु जगन्माता हनूमन्तं गुणगारकम् ॥३४॥
After hearing the Taraka Mantra from Lord Shri Ram, Mother Janaki, who is the mother of the universe, recited it to Hanumanji, who is an ocean of virtues.
श्रावयामास नूनं स ब्रह्माणं सुधियां वरम् ।
तस्माल्लेभे वसिष्ठर्षिः क्रमादस्मादवातरत ॥३५॥
By hearing the Taraka Mantra, Hanumanji, with his pure intellect, disseminated it to Sri Brahmā. Consequently, Sage Vasishta, through the course of events, received the mantra from Sri Brahmā.
भूमौ हि राममन्त्रोऽयं योगिनां सुखदः शिवः ।
एवं क्रमं समादाय मन्त्रराजपरम्परा ॥३६॥
Indeed, this sacred mantra of Lord Rama is a bestower of happiness to the yogis in this world. Thus, following this sequence, the lineage of the supreme mantra is established.
(-Valmiki Saṃhitā Chapter 2 Verse 30-36)
And in fact Valmiki Ramayan Shiromani tika which is one of the ancient commentary on Valmiki Ramayan which was written by Acharya Shiv Sahaya He has clearly mentioned his Guru parampara in that;
He has clearly mentioned that he belongs to a Lineage which starts from Lord Sri Sitaram in whose middle Aacharya Shukdevacharya (commentator of Shrimad bhagavatam is present who is infact 8th Aacharya of Sri Ramananda Samprday) is their and up to his own Aacharya He worships the whole Lineage.
And infact you can see the Historical fact of a Muslim Scholar who was contemporary of Srimad Jagadguru Ramanandacharya who wrote about Sri Ramanandacharya and His lineage in his work — Click Here
See more mentions of Sri Ramananda Sampraday from scriptures: Click Here
Ending up with bursting a claim that Ananda Bhashya was not mentioned by Ancient Ramanandis Acharyas;
—By Sri Anubhavanandacharya student of Sri Anantanandacharya.
—By Sri Anantanandacharya in Anant Sikshamrit
—By Sri Anantanandacharya in Sad Vidyarth Nirnay
—By Sri SurSuranandacharya in Sri Vaishnav Dincharya
—By Sri Bhavanandacharya in Bhavana Trayam
—By Sri Saketniwasacharya in Sri Ramananda Vedant Saar
—By Narharyanandacharya in Anant Tattvamrit
—By Yoganandacharya in Bhakti Traynirupanam
—By Kilhadevacharya in Sadhan Bhakti Darpanam
And infact above all mentions are excerpted from official book of Chatuh Sampraday:
https://www.amazon.in/Chatuh-Sampraday-Digdarshan-Harishankar-Vedanti/dp/9381954585
which includes official letters of all 4 Vaishnav Sampraday head.
So, Yes! Anand Bhashya was authored by Jagadguru Ramanandacharya Himself.
This has been an ongoing trend since ancient times, where the Ramanuja sect always criticizes the Ramananda sect, although it is a different matter that they have also faced defeats from time to time. Nowadays, the new followers of Ramanuja sect show more interest in the Ramananda sect than in their own sect. They continue to attack the tradition of the Ramananda sect, even though the tradition of the Ramananda sect is well-established in the scriptures. Criticizing a tradition that has its roots in the Vedas is like spitting in the air with one's mouth wide open, akin to spitting on the sun.
Thank You For Reading 🌸🌸
Please Chant SitaRam SitaRam SitaRam
All Glory To Srimad Goswami Tulsidas Ji
All Glory To Anand Bhashyakar Srimad Jagadguru Ramanandacharya Ji
Comments
Shri Rama
Shri Janaki
Shri Vishvaksena Bhagavan
Shri Shathakopa Alvar (Nammalvar)
Shri Natha Muni Swami Ji
Shri Pundarikaksha Swami Ji
Shri Rama Mishra Swami (Manakkal Nambi)
Shri Yamunacharya Swami (Alavandar)
Shri Mahapurna Swami / Parankusha Dasa (Periya Nambi)
Shri Ramanuja Swami Ji
Shri Kuresha Swami Ji
Shri Devanandacharya Ji
Shri Madhavacharya Ji
Shri Garvadacharya Ji
Shri Purushottamacharya Ji
Shri Bopadeva Ji
Shri Gangadharacharya Ji
Shri Sadanandacharya Ji
Shri Rameshwaracharya Ji
Shri Dwaranandacharya Ji
Shri Devanandacharya Ji
Shri Shriyanandacharya Ji
Shri Shrutanandacharya Ji
Shri Chidanandacharya Ji
Shri Purnanandacharya
Shri Shriyanandacharya
Shri Hariyanandacharya Ji
Shri Raghavanandacharya Ji
Shrimad Ramanandacharya Ji
**This is the complete Ramananda lineage.**
---
After this, another lineage is found which begins from Sita Ji.
Sita Ji gives a mantra to Hanuman Ji.
Hanuman Ji gives the instruction of that mantra to Brahma Ji.
In this way, this lineage continues up to Shukadeva Ji.
Beyond this, it does not continue further.
This lineage is described in Chapter 8 of the *Agastya Samhita* and in other scriptures.
This lineage has also been accepted by acharyas such as Swami Raghavacharya.
---
Some Ramanandis, by misinterpreting scriptures or through other arguments, attempt to prove the Ramananda Sampradaya as an independent Sampradaya, which is incorrect.
The Yogendra Math of Barrackpore, which is a monastery of the Ramananda Sampradaya, traces its lineage from Ramanuja Acharya.
---
In *Sri Vaishnava Matabhaj Bhaskar*, which is composed by Jagadguru Swami Ramanandacharya, in the mangalacharana verse 5, Ramanuja Acharya Ji has been saluted as a previous acharya—
“Having respectfully bowed to the ancient acharyas along with Yatipati, this is composed with proper adherence to the scriptures—listen to that.”
---
The words *Yatipati* or *Yatiraja* are used for Ramanuja Acharya Ji.
---
Historians, scholars of Hindi literature, and gazette records have also described the Ramananda Sampradaya as originating from the Ramanuja Sampradaya.
---
In Kabir’s *Panchmatra*, while answering the questions of Gorakhnath, Kabir said:
“Our origin is Adi Narayana; we are a branch of Ramanuja.
The yogi absorbed in the sound ‘Ram’—so speaks Shri Guru Ramananda Ji.”
---
Similarly, in *Bodh Sagar*, by saying “First describe the Shri Sampradaya; follow the conduct of Ramanuja Acharya,” Sant Kabir Ji has given his guru lineage, in which he has placed Narayana, Lakshmi, Vishvaksena, Pundarikaksha, Rama Mishra, Yamunacharya, Purnacharya, Ramanuja, Devacharya, Hariyananda, Raghavananda, Ramananda, etc., in the order of guru and disciple.
---
Agradās, in his self-collected *Anandatattva Dipika*, has written Ramanuja as the original guru.
---
Nabhadas, *Bhaktamal*, edition and commentator Rupkala, Chappay 662:
In *Bhaktamal*, the guru lineage given by Nabhadas includes Lakshmi, Vishvaksena, Shathakopa, Bopadeva, Srinath, Pundarikaksha, Rama Mishra, Yamuna, Devacharya, Hariyananda, Raghavananda, Ramananda, and while mentioning them, he has described Ramananda as a propagator of the “method of Ramanuja.”
Similarly, Rewa ruler Raghuraj Singh has also accepted the above view.
In the Sanskrit *Bhaktamal* also, the disciples of Ramananda have been called “born in the lineage of Ramanuja.”
Other commentators of *Bhaktamal*—Rupkala Ji, Baijnath Prasad, Shri Rasrangamani, etc.—have also described Ramananda as “born in the lineage of Ramanuja.”
## * Additional Historical and Textual Evidence**
Many Ramanandi scholars have praised Ramanuja Swami in their own works. Similarly, many scholars of the Nimbarka Sampradaya have also established the connection of Ramananda Swami with Ramanuja Swami.
Ancient guru lineages of seats such as Galta, Rewasa, the place of Shri Balanand Ji, Bhindara, Pindori, Paldi (of Khoji Ji), and Tila Ji’s seat all connect Ramananda with the Ramanuja Sampradaya. Likewise, elder saints of the Ramanuja Sampradaya have regarded Totadri as the original seat (Mool Gadi) and *Sri Bhashya* as the authoritative doctrinal commentary.
Whenever Ramanuja acharyas faced difficulties, Ramanandi akharas assisted them militarily. They helped them win debates. When Nathpanthis attacked the scholar Prativadi Bhayankara of Kanchi, Dhiramdas, along with Naga ascetics, protected and supported him. Many times Ramanandi sadhus even carried the palanquin of Ramprapanna Swami, a disciple of Rangacharya.
---
In *Shri Ramarchana Paddhati* (edited by Pt. Ramtahal Das, pp. 34–35; and Pt. Ramnarayan Das, pp. 2–3), Ramananda Acharya himself traces his lineage to Ramanuja Acharya.
While commenting on Tulsidas in *Indian Antiquary*, the lineage of Ramananda obtained by Baba Mohandas is given, which connects him to the Ramanuja Sampradaya.
---
Ramanandi Paramhans Janakivallabhadas Ji writes in the first edition of his work **"Gativodh Uttarardh,"** on page 201, line 15:
> "By refuting Ramanujacharya’s *Shri Bhashya*, the *Ramananda Bhashya* and *Janaki Bhashya* were falsely composed and published on the Brahma Sutras. Both these commentaries are currently in circulation, and at this time, the *Ramananda Bhashya* has also been refuted due to internal disputes."
This very *Ramananda Bhashya* is known as the **Ananda Bhashya**.
The editor, Swami Shri Bhagavadacharya, writes in the **"Tatvadarshi Visheshank"** (Year 8, Issue 8-9, page 54, second column, point number 3):
> "I have a letter from the Mahant of Shingra in my possession, in which it is written: 'I am the author of the aforementioned Ananda Bhashya'."
From the two pieces of evidence cited above, it is evident that the *Ananda Bhashya* was written by Raghuvar Das, the Mahant of Shingra, by piecing it together from here and there. Consequently, how can anyone place their trust in those who manufacture such fake traditions?
—
**Section 1 (Page 72, Line 5):**
> "In *Bharat Nirmata*, author Krishnavallabh Dwivedi, editor of *Hindi Vishwa Bharat*, writes on page 72, line five, that Ramanuja's liberal ideology later flourished and thrived particularly in Northern India under the leadership of Swami Ramananda, a renowned saint in his lineage of disciples. Ramanuja was born in 1017 AD and passed away in 1137 AD."
**Section 2 (Page 79):**
> "It is written on page 79 that Ramananda separated from the *Shri Sampradaya* and established his own independent sect, which came to be known as the **'Ramavat'** Sampradaya.”
---
Shri Krishnananda Baghambari Ji of Prayag has also written in the book titled **"Shri Vaishnavachar Pradip"** that the Ramanandis originated from the Shri Ramanuja Sampradaya itself.
—
The head of the Jaipur Royal Assembly, Pandit Shri Durgaprasad Ji, and Pandit Shri Kalyanvallabh Shastri Ji have written in the 'Bhikshu-shiksha' section of **"Chaturvarnya Shiksha"**: *"Ath Shri Ramanujaya iva Shri Ramanandayo’pi,"* which means that Shri Ramananda Ji exists within the disciple lineage of Shri Ramanuja Swami. On this matter, there is also the signed consent of 243 scholars from the Mithila region and other provinces, including Mahant Sitaramdas of the Sadhu Pathshala, Durgakund, Kashi.
In the following books:
1. Shri Sitaram Stotra, 2. Shri Bhagavat Pujan, 3. Chaturdash-Rahasya, 4. Gyan Rasikavali, 5. **"Guru-Parampara"** written by Shri Ramananda Swami, 6. Shri Vaishnava Dharma Nirnay, 7. Dwarka Mahatmya, 8. Shri Vaishnava Matabjabhaskar, 9. Laghu Gyan Prakash, 10. Shri Vaishnava Siddhanta Sar, 11. Pakhand Dalan, 12. Shri Ramstavaraj Tika, 13. Shri Sitaramanuja Chaturdash Niketan, 14. Divya Tattva Kaumudi, 15. Shri Vaishnava Dharma Sandarbh, 16. Bharatiya Charitambunidhi, 17. Karya Vivaran, 18. Nirnay Panchak Sangrah, 19. Tulsi Granthavali, 20. Satyarth Prakash (Chapter 11), 21. Shri Bharat Charit Chandrika, 22. Bharatvarshiya Upasak Sampradaya, 23. Bhakt Ur-vasi, 24. Bhaktamal, 25. Shri Bhagavata Charitamrit Sar, 26. Shri Hari-bhakta Sahasranam.
In all these twenty-six books, it is stated that Shri Ramananda Swami belongs to the lineage of Shri Ramanuja Swami. If one wishes to know more, they should refer to the **"Vaishnavamataabjabhaskar"** (and its appendix) edited by Pandit Shri Ramtahaldas Ji, as well as **"Vaishnavamataabjabhaskar"** and **"Prastut Prasangsiddhi"** edited by Pandit Shri Balbhadradas Ji.
---
Similarly, in the third chapter of the book titled **"Nijaguru,"** composed by the honorable Shri Raghunath Prasad Ji of 'Bari Jagah' in Shri Awadh (Ayodhya), it is written:
> *Shrunu vatsa pravakshyamai guruvarya paramparam |*
> *Ramanujanvaye jato Ramanandah pratpavan ||*
Advertisement/Public Notice, Vikrami Samvat 1977, Phalguna Krishna 8.
"We all belong to the Guru-lineage of Shri Ramananda Swami, which comes under the Shri Ramanuja [Sampradaya]."
**Signatories:**
1. Mahant Rama Manohar Prasad, Ayodhya
2. Mahant Ramdas, Rajgopal
3. Mahant Sarayu Das
4. Mahant Kamaldas, Khud Garhi, Hardwaripatti Hanumangarhi
5. Mahant Raghavdas, Patti Ujjainiya
6. Mahant Girdharidas Ji, Garhi
7. Mahant Ramkishor Das, Raghoji Temple, Ramghat
8. Mahant Narayandas, Ratan Sinhasan, Janmabhoomi
9. Adhikari Mohandas, Nirmohi, Janmabhoomi
10. Adhikari Kunjbiharidas, Amardas Sthan
11. Adhikari Hitnarayandas, Narhan Temple, Ramkot
12. Adhikari Rampadarthdas, Sidhipur Temple
13. Pandit Ram Narayan Das, Shringar Bhavan, Ramkot
**Petitioner:** Pandit Ram Narayan Das, Teacher at Rajgopal Pathshala.
*Harisingh Press, Faizabad.*
—
The book titled **"Shri Sampradaya Dikpradarshan"** was published in Vikrami Samvat 1979 (1923 AD). Edited by the honorable Mahant Shri Ram Manohar Prasad (titled 'Vaishnavabhushan'), the head of the Brihat Sthan in Shri Ayodhya, for the benefit of inquisitive Vaishnavas.
**Introduction/Statement:**
Our Shri Ramananda Swami’s compositions, **"Shri Vaishnavamataabjabhaskar"** and **"Shri Ramarchan Paddhati,"** are approximately six hundred years old and are available to this day. Because these texts begin with an invocation (*Mangalacharan*) to Shri Ramanuja Swami, all of us Ramanandi Vaishnavas are within the Shri Ramanuja Sampradaya. Since "Shri Sampradaya" is another name for the Shri Ramanuja Sampradaya, we all belong to the Shri Sampradaya as well.
—
Ramanand digvijay, introduction pg. 14
It is sometimes said that Ramananda established a new Vairagi Sampradaya due to disagreement with the caste rigidity of the Ramanuja Sampradaya. However, there is **no solid evidence** for this claim.
---
## **Refutation of Opposing Views**
### **Objection:1**
*Bhaktamal* was interpolated by followers of the Ramanuja Sampradaya.
### **Refutation:**
This is not possible. What benefit would Ramanujis gain by altering *Bhaktamal*? If such interpolation had occurred, where were the Ramanandis at that time? Why did they not object? Were they asleep? No Ramanandi acharya claims that *Bhaktamal* is adulterated.
---
### **Objection:2**
In *Sri Vaishnava Matabhaj Bhaskar*, the term *Yatipati* refers to Raghavanandacharya.
### **Refutation:**
Show any text where Ramananda Acharya himself uses *Yatipati* for Raghavananda. If not, how can this claim be made? If disciples of Ramananda said so, provide proof.
---
## **On Baudhayana**
### **Objection:3**
Baudhayana and Purushottamacharya are the same, and in *Shri Ramayana Rahasya*, Baudhayana states Shukadeva as his guru.
### **Refutation:**
Baudhayana and Purushottamacharya are not the same. Baudhayana was an ancient sage (around 6th century), whereas Purushottamacharya belonged to the 13th–14th century, appearing after Garvadacharya.
Even if Purushottamacharya were called Baudhayana, the ancient sage Baudhayana and Purushottamacharya would still remain distinct individuals.
In the Rewasa lineage, which traces back to Ramanuja, Purushottamacharya’s name does not even appear.
There is no authentic source stating that Baudhayana’s guru was Shukadeva. Some Ramanandis cite a text called *Shri Ramayana Rahasya*, but no such text is available, nor is its authorship known.
Shri Kaliprasad Shastri, the editor of the journal "Sanskritam" from Shri Ayodhya Dham, has written in the first and second volumes of the text "Vidvadvrittam" (Volume 1, page 181; Volume 2, pages 17, 46, 139, and 190) regarding five individuals named Purushottamacharya. The details are as follows:
The Five Purushottamacharyas
No. 1 (Volume 1, Page 181):
dyayan khristasya dvadashyam shatavdyamutpannah | asya grantho vedantamanjusha prapyate | arya dvaitasampradaya uktah |
(He was born in the 12th century AD. His text Vedanta Manjusha is available. He is said to belong to the Dvaita school.)
No. 2 (Volume 2, Page 17):
He was born in the 12th century AD. He was a scholar in the court of King Lakshman Sen of Nadia and wrote a commentary (Vritti) on the Sutras of Panini’s Ashtadhyayi.
No. 3 (Volume 2, Page 46):
He was a Kshatriya King of the Kalinga region, with his capital at Cuttack. He authored the text titled Vishnu-bhakti-kalpalata.
No. 4 (Volume 2, Page 139):
A follower of the Vallabha school, this Purushottamacharya was born in the 18th century AD, four generations after Balkrishna (the son of Vitthalnath Dixit). He composed Bhashya-Prakash (a commentary on the Anubhashya), Suvarna-Sutra (a commentary on Vitthalnath’s Vidvan-Mandana), and the text Prasthan Ratnakar.
No. 5 (Volume 2, Page 190):
This Purushottamacharya lived in the year 1982 Vikram Samvat.
Now, we present an evidence-based overview regarding the Sage "Bodhayana." Please read carefully.
No. 6 "Vidvadvrittam" Volume 1, Pages 34-35:
shruyate brahma-sutrananupari vrittirasidasya yasya uddharo ramanujacharyena kritah, vedantashankarabhashyanuvadabhumikayan, da0 thivo mahashayasyapyam vicharah | iyan bodhayanavrittih, kritakotinamnyasidinti prapathva hridaye |
It is heard that there was a commentary (Vritti) on the Brahma-Sutras authored by him (Bodhayana), which was utilized (retrieved/excerpted) by Ramanujacharya. In the introduction to the translation of the Shankara Bhashya of the Vedanta, Dr. Thibaut also holds this same view. In the Prapancha Hridaya, it is mentioned that this Bodhayana-Vritti was known by the name 'Kritakoti'.
The year 976 of the Ramanuja Era (Ramanujabda) is currently passing, corresponding to "Samvat 2000".
Some Ramanand Acharyas have also certified Baudhayana as their Guru in their Mangalanushasana because Baudhayana is the former Acharya of our Sri Vaishnava sect.
Lord Bodhayana is considered a primary ancestral teacher (*Purvacharya*) of the Ramanuja school of thought (Sampradaya).
In the *Vedanta* special issue of the magazine *Kalyan*, it is written that there are three prominent Acharyas of the Ramanuja Sampradaya: **1. Vyasa, 2. Jaimini, and 3. Bodhayana.** Among them, the commentary (*Vritti*) by Sage Bodhayana is very famous.
In the text **"Vedartha Sangraha"** composed by Shri Ramanuja Swami, it is written:
*Shriyainamah Shripatayenamah Purvacharyebhyonamah Namovedanta Vishadikaranadikshaya Paramagurave Bodhayanamaharchaye.*
(Salutations to Lakshmi, salutations to the Lord of Lakshmi, salutations to the ancestral teachers. Salutations to the supreme teacher, the great sage Bodhayana, who was consecrated in the mission of clarifying the Vedanta.)
In the *Shariraka Mimamsa Bhashya* (Sri Bhashya), at the beginning of Chapter 1, Quarter 1, under the aphorism *athāto brahmajijñāsā*, Shri Ramanuja Swami writes:
*bhagavad-bodhāyana kṛtāṃ vistīrṇāṃ brahmasūtravṛttiṃ pūrvācāryāssaccikṣipuḥ tanmatānusāreṇa sūtrākṣarāṇi vyākhyāsyante -*
(The previous teachers abbreviated the extensive commentary on the *Brahma-Sutras* composed by the venerable Bodhayana. Following their views, the words of the aphorisms shall now be explained.)
The author of the *Hindi Vishwakosh* (Encyclopedia) in Volume 20, Section 19, has accepted Lord Bodhayana as an ancestral teacher (*Purvacharya*) of the Ramanuja Sampradaya.
Since Baudhayana is the predecessor of the Ramanuja sect and the Ramanand sect itself originated from the Ramanuja sect, Baudhayana has also been certified as the predecessor by Ramanandi.
---
### **Objection:**
We follow Vaikhanasa scriptures.
### **Refutation:**
This is incorrect. Ramanandi worship is primarily based on the Pancharatra system. No Vaikhanasa texts are practically used. *Agastya Samhita* also belongs to Pancharatra and is listed among the 108 Pancharatra texts in *Padma Samhita* and *Kapinjala Samhita*. *Shri Ramarchana Paddhati* also prescribes Pancharatra worship.
---
### **Objection:**
We use bow-and-arrow symbols, not conch-disc.
### **Refutation:**
In the verse 62 of Shri Vaishnav Matabja Bhaskar, there is a provision for wearing Shankha Chakra. In the published book available today, this verse has been adulterated and bow and arrow have been inserted by removing Shankha Chakra.
The conch-disc tradition exists. Rajendra Das Ji Maharaj himself stated he received it. However, it is given only to selected qualified disciples. Bow-arrow symbols are also used.
---
### **Objection:**
Are Vishnu, Krishna, or Rama parts (amsha) of something?
### **Refutation:**
The term *amsha* applies to dependent beings (jivas), not to God. If God had parts, He would be divisible and thus not eternal. Therefore, there is no difference between the avatar and the Supreme.
Tulsidas describes marks like Bhrigu’s footprint on Rama’s chest and depicts him as four-armed at birth. If Tulsidas himself makes no distinction, who are we to do so?
*Agastya Samhita* (Chapter 3) clearly states Rama is an incarnation of Narayana. Hence, making distinctions is inappropriate.
Shri vaishnav matabaj bhaskar shlook 80-82
On the ninth day of the bright fortnight of Chaitra month (Madhu month), when there is Punarvasu Nakshatra and Cancer ascendant, Lord Vishnu himself appeared in the form of Shri Ram.
### **Objection:**
In *Ananda Bhashya*, the lineage of Ramananda Acharya is described as independent from Ramanuja Acharya.
### **Refutation:**
First of all, *Ananda Bhashya* is not a work written by Ramananda Acharya. The person who wrote this text was Bhagavadacharya. He composed it together with Raghuvaracharya. He himself has written this in his book *Bhagavadacharya Biography*.
He considered the Ramananda Sampradaya to be independent, and he wrote this text in order to prove that independence, and then propagated it as if it were written by Ramananda Acharya.
This text has been compiled by cutting and modifying *Janaki Bhashya*—this has also been admitted by him.
And *Janaki Bhashya* itself is not a work of Ramananda Acharya; rather, it was written by Ramprasad Ji.
In his autobiography, at the end, he explains the reason for accepting all this and says:
“I accept my untruths based on the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi, while others continue to support untruths—this is the difference between them and me.”
---
### **Objection:**
There are differences in worship methods and mantras between the Ramananda Sampradaya and the Ramanuja Sampradaya; therefore, Ramananda is independent.
### **Refutation:**
There are indeed some fundamental differences between the Ramananda Sampradaya and the Ramanuja Sampradaya in terms of mantra, method of worship, etc.
However, from the standpoint of philosophical doctrine, both traditions follow the Vishishtadvaita system.
Then is it not possible that Ramananda adapted the Ramanuja Sampradaya according to the needs of his time—making the mantra, the object of worship, and the method of worship more accessible and liberal—while keeping the original philosophical doctrine unchanged?
---
### **Objection:**
In the guru lineage attributed to Agradās, the Ramananda Sampradaya is considered independent.
### **Refutation:**
If Agradās had actually established a guru lineage, then certainly Nabhadas would have followed it.
But the lineage propagated in the name of Agradās—its original ancient manuscript is neither available anywhere, nor has it been mentioned by any earlier acharya.
Nabhadas himself, being a disciple of Agradās, composed *Bhaktamal* on his guru’s instruction—could he have forgotten his own earlier acharyas? This would be astonishing.
From the time the question of separating the Ramananda Sampradaya from the Ramanuja Sampradaya arose, only from that time onward this lineage began to be propagated.
Along with this, many newly fabricated texts began to be circulated in the name of Ramananda Swami.
Ramchandra Shukla, in his *History of Hindi Literature*, rightly stated that one must remain cautious regarding such texts.
Making arbitrary alterations in ancient texts (for example, replacing “Ramanuja” with “Ramanuk”) cannot be considered an impartial or scientific method.
---
### **Conclusion (implicit from the arguments)**
Thus, on the basis of lineage, scriptures, historical testimony, and philosophical consistency, the Ramananda Sampradaya is shown to be connected with the Ramanuja Sampradaya, and claims of complete independence are refuted.