seeing through the eyes of scriptures
For the pleasure of the vaisnavas here is the commentaries of the acaryas to Bhagavad Gita .2.66 and some comments :
nasti buddhir ayuktasya
na cayuktasya bhavana
na cabhavayatah shantir
asantasya kutah sukham
One who is not connected with the Supreme [in Krishna consciousness] can have neither transcendental intelligence nor a steady mind, without which there is no possibility of peace. And how can there be any happiness without peace?
Commentary by Srila Prabhupada
Unless one is in Krishna consciousness, there is no possibility of peace. So it is confirmed in the Fifth Chapter (5.29) that when one understands that Krishna is the only enjoyer of all the good results of sacrifice and penance, that He is the proprietor of all universal manifestations, and that He is the real friend of all living entities, then only can one have real peace. Therefore, if one is not in Krishna consciousness, there cannot be a final goal for the mind. Disturbance is due to want of an ultimate goal, and when one is certain that Krishna is the enjoyer, proprietor and friend of everyone and everything, then one can, with a steady mind, bring about peace. Therefore, one who is engaged without a relationship with Krishna is certainly always in distress and is without peace, however much he may make a show of peace and spiritual advancement in life. Krishna consciousness is a self-manifested peaceful condition which can be achieved only in relationship with Krishna.
Commentary by Sri Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakur
Krishna makes his statement clear by stating the effects of the opposite condition.
For one who has not controlled the mind (ayuktasya), there is no intelligence, no prajna, fixed on the soul. For one who not having such prajna arising from controlled mind, meditation on the Supreme Lord (bhavana) also is not possible. Not performing meditation (abhavayatah), he does not have peace, the cessation of agitation from sense objects. This peaceless person does not have bliss (sukham) from the soul.
from http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/verse-02-65.html :
Rudra Vaisnava Sampradaya:
Sridhara Swami's Commentary
Lord Krishna now reveals the controlling of the senses as a means of attaining spiritual intelligence in a converse way. The Lord states that one with an uncontrolled mind can never possess spiritual intelligence even if well versed in the Vedic scriptures and the teachings of the bona-fide preceptor in the line of Vedic disciplic succession in one of the four authorised Vaisnava sampradaya's. Why is this true? Because with an uncontrolled mind it is not possible to have spiritual intelligence, without spiritual intelligence one cannot meditate and without meditation it is not possible to realise the Ultimate Truth. So one who has an uncontrolled mind is bereft of this, for one who cannot meditate, who is unable to enlighten themselves within there is no peace and where there is no peace how can there be happiness.
Brahma Vaisnava Sampradaya:
Lord Krishna is explaining the defects due to the absence of happiness as referred to in this verse. Without being happy there is no possibility of concentration of the mind. Without concentration of the mind there can be no meditation and without meditation it is not possible to have inner awakening or soul-cognition. Therefore it has been declared that these things are not possible for one without concentration. Santih or peace refers also to liberation. Santi, moksa or liberation and nirvana all have a similar meaning denoting termination of the samsara or worldly existence.
Sri Vaisnava Sampradaya:
One who is unable to concentrate and focus their mind in meditation on Lord Krishna is known as ayukta devoid of spiritual intelligence. One who attempts to control their senses by their own efforts without securing the grace of the Supreme Lord merited by devotion. To these living entities no clear, definitive illumination in consciousness can develop; ergo , because one will not be able to internally realise the ultimate reality of the Supreme Lord through the medium of the eternal soul as having name, form, qualities, pastimes, abode and sweetness. Thus without being able to comprehend and contemplate on the nature of the eternal soul there can be no tranquillity. Nor is it possible to dispel the compulsive urge and inclination to experience sensual objects. To those who are not tranquil, who are addicted to sensual objects and who are submerged in sense gratification; how can they ever possibly attain eternal blessedness and transcendental bliss. Again as stated previously are the disastrous consequences that result in the inability to govern the tempestuous senses.
Kumara Vaisnava Sampradaya:
Kesava Kasmiri's Commentary
In order to strengthen the previous verse Lord Krishna points out all the contrary results incurred by one with an uncontrolled mind. One who has not subdued their senses by controlling their mind is bereft of determinative resolve. The intellect of one with spiritual intelligence determines the truth ascertained in the Vedic scriptures. It is not possible for an undisciplined living entity to have belief of the calibre necessary to contemplate matters relating to the ultimate truth. Without having understanding of God there is no peace and also no end to attachment for sensual objects. How can there possibly be permanent happiness which is inexhaustible and unaffected not in the least by sorrow if one is lacking peace of mind. Although material happiness is surely derived by experiencing worldly objects, the deceptive results of this perilous interaction is very succinctly summed up subsequently in verse 38 of the final chapter of Bhagavad-Gita.
Comment : I was reading how some Swamis in Udupi misunderstand Srila Prabhupada and his Bhagavad Gita http://www.dvaita.org/shaastra/gita/prabhupada_review.shtml
they also have misunderstood Lord Caitanya as is clear by the letter of one sannyasi from there.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada wrote a letter to the" Madhava brethren" ,this is copied from the website of Jagat Guru Swami/Nrsingha Maharaja
Originally published in The Harmonist, Vol. 31, May 1935]
There is a fundamental justification in seeking to approach the past history of a sect, especially in this country, on the basis of the prima-facie authenticity of the guru-parampara as preserved in the sect. We would be more scientifically employed if we turn our attention to obtaining greater information by comparative study of the different records instead of resorting to gratuitous assumptions against the validity of the preceptorial lists.
For this very cogent reason we must accept as historically valid the existing preceptorial list of the Madhva-Gaudiya Vaisnava sect till its authenticity in any particular is conclusively impugned by specific historical evidence. We have had no cause up till now to suspect the truth of any portion of this list.
This list discloses the fact that the Supreme Lord Sri Caitanya accepted Sri Isvara Puri as His preceptor. Sri Isvara Puri was a disciple of Sri Madhavendra Puri.
Sri Madhavendra Puri is a most renowned Vaisnava. He is, in fact, the great founder of the society of transcendental lovers who adhere strictly to their all-absorbing passion for the amorous transcendental hero, Sri Krsna, This constitutes a great development of the original doctrine of Sri Madhvacarya. In spite of this peculiarity of the teaching of Sri Madhavendra Puri, the list of the former gurus shows that Sri Madhavendra is descended from the line of Ananda Tirtha in the ascetic order of the Madhva Vaisnavas. There is really nothing against the genuineness of the list of the gurus of the line of the Madhva Vaisnavas.
Some misguided critic may try to rashly propose to disconnect Sri Madhavendra from the line of the gurus of the Madhva Vaisnavas, by asserting that the Madhva sannyasins are known as Tirthas and that no Puri sannyasin can have admittance into their ecclesiastical order. But the solution of this apparent difficulty is offered by an incident in the authentic career of the Supreme Lord, Sri Krsna Caitanya. He is stated to have embraced the order of the Bharati sannyasins. But He was also stated to be a disciple of Sri Isvara Puri. This irregularity is to be ascribed to the practice of attaching their surnames by the older associations. The different guru-paramparas show the same line. So we cannot discredit those records by basing our arguments on assumptions and ordinary argument from current practices.
Moreover, whenever there is any congregational gathering of the different schools of Vaisnavas, the Gaudiya Vaisnavas, as a class, introduce themselves as belonging to the line of Sri Madhvacarya. These are hard and indisputable facts and cannot be lightly explained away by inferences based solely on certain practices of either sect.
If, however, the Gaudiya Vaisnavas actually preferred to brand themselves as Madhva Gaudiyas as a matter of history, enquirers would naturally be anxious to know whether the servants of the Gaudiya Vaisnavas subscribe in-toto to the professions and practices of the Madhvas or whether they differ from the older school in some other points. In case they have a distinctive reference, enquiry should naturally start to make a list of the differences between the two schools. This comparison should necessarily be made in regard to their practical activity, social procedure, philosophy, theology and different performances due to all these, - or, in other words, the examination should embrace both their exoteric and esoteric differences.
If we take up the practical activities of the Madhva and the Gaudiya Vaisnavas for the purpose of such comparison, we find that the former put themselves under a severe reserve in their propagatory methods, whereas the latter are vigorously proselytizing. The Madhvas keep up the old habits and ideas, whereas the Gaudiya Vaisnavas have advanced towards and utilized everything facilitating the true cause of devotion. The former are very fond of arcana according to the pancaratrika system; whereas the latter, though not different to adopt arcana, yet in addition to that, they perform bhajana like the Dasakuta section of the Madhva community. The Gaudiya Vaisnavas give more stress to bhajana than to arcana of the Vyasakuta section of the latter community. The habits and customs of the Southern Indian Vaisnavas are different from those of Northern Indian Gaudiya Vaisnavas, though both of them have a common base and origin as their guiding principle.
Turning to their respective social procedures we find that there is one great point of resemblance. Brahmanas are alone considered to be eligible for the service of God by the Madhva community. Brahmanas are accordingly in sole charge of the religious institutions of the sect. They alone conduct all public and private worship. This is also the practice of the Gaudiya Vaisnavas. But in this matter also there is an important distinction between the two. The point has already been referred to in connection with propaganda and proselytization. The Madhvas are not prepared to go outside the pale of the caste brahmanas for imparting initiation for worship. In this they are in one sense too narrow in comparison with the method of the Gaudiya Vaisnavas. Sri Caitanya accepted all who possessed the real inclination for leading the exclusive spiritual life and bestowed on them even the position and function of the acarya. Thakura Haridasa, the great acarya of the Gaudiya sect, was a Mohammedan by parentage. Most of the Gaudiya Vaisnava Gosvamis were not caste brahmanas.
In another respect, however, the Madhva practice is more lax than the practice of the Gaudiya society. No person is entitled in the Gaudiya community to mantra-diksa unless he or she is prepared to submit unconditionally to follow the instructions of the acarya in every particular of actual conduct. By this test caste brahmanas are also liable to be ineligible for the service of God in the Gaudiya community, if they are not prepared to give up their unscriptural mode of life by submitting to the autocratic rule of the acarya.
Gaudiya Vaisnavas claim to follow the real principle of the scriptural varnasrama institution in the organization of their spiritual society. Whereas the Madhvas follow the hereditary principle which is seldom applicable in the present age when few persons possess either the habit or the inclination to follow the spirit of the sastric regulation.
Judged by the test of loyalty to the spirit of the scriptural regulation, the Gaudiya community may justly claim to be far more conservative in their social practices than the Madhvas.
comment: Actually some followers of the Madhava sampradaya in Udupi are under the misconception Srila Prabhupadas Bhagavad Gita as it is is contaminated with Sankacaryas comments
this is of course all nonsense, and they reject Lord Caitanya based on Him haven taken sannyasa from Kesava Bharati.Somehow a channel of Lord Caitanyas mercy needs to be distributed to these followers of Madavacarya that has failed to understand Lord Caitanya's mercy.In Vrindavan some vaisnavas also find faults with Caitanya Upanisad though they
are supposed to be Gaudiya vaisnavas.They do not accept there is more than 108 Upanisads and accuse Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura here invented this Upanisad that is their great misfortune.Actually both the Tattva vadis in Udupi and the Cast Goswamis in Vrindavan have no real faith in Lord Caitanya nor in the Mahamantra this is their great misfortune.
I like to mention again that it is important we in ISKCON do not serve grains on Janmastami as this will certainly be seen by other vaisnavas as a deviation ,which it is.....
strict vaisnavas never takes grains on Visnuttava apperancedays, and this was confirmed by mother Govinda dasi that Srila Prabhupada never took grains on these days,even when braking the fast..