The catur-sloki Bhagavatam is accepted by the various Vedantic traditions as one of the main sections in the Bhagavata Purana. These four verses are considered to be the original Bhagavata Purana in seed form, and to contain the meaning of the whole text. They describe the nature of the Absolute and its relation to the phenomenal world; thus naturally we find tensions among the various interpretations of the Vedantic schools. In this essay, I suggest that the catur-sloki Bhagavatam describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead - the Absolute, as inconceivably one with and different from His multifarious energies. I discuss the catur-sloki Bhagavatam based on Jiva Gosvami's explanations in Bhagavat-sandarbha. I also hint at Sri Krishna Caitanya's explanations of the catur-sloki Bhagavatam as presented by Krishnadas Kaviraja Gosvami in Sri Caitanya-caritamrita. This essay may interest readers who would like to know more about the Gaudiya-Vaishnava doctrine and to examine how the Gaudiya-Vaishnava tradition responds to seemingly contradictory statements in the revealed scriptures (sabdha) that refer to the Absolute or the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

This paper aims to present the contribution of Bhaktivinoda Thakur to the establishment and development of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). It regards his personal life as the role model for the practitioners of Vaisnavism, and it considers his input in expanding preaching techniques, both innovative and traditional ones.

The purpose of this essay is to compare the doctrine of Sri Caitanya, the founder of the Gaudiya-vaisnava tradition, with those of Nimbarka and Vallabha. To what extent are they related? Which one is most appealing? There are four Vaisnava sampradayas [established doctrine transmitted from one teacher to another]. Their acäryas (founders, teachers) are:
 
Ramanuja  (1017 – 1137 CE)
Madhva  (1238 – 1317 CE)
Nimbarka (±1400 CE)
Vallabha  (1473 – 1531 CE).

They have all written a devotional commentary on the Vedic scriptures, in particular the Vedanta. Initially, I wanted to discuss all four sampradayas, but this is beyond the scope of this  essay. I have chosen Nimbarka and Vallabha because they are historically closer to Sri  Caitanya (1486 – 1533 CE). Throughout this essay, I have inserted the meaning of Sanskrit words from the Monier-Williams dictionary (Bontes 2001) in square brackets.

Purnacandra Goswami talks in his book about some unspoken obstacles, or impediments, on the path to  bhakti. Some of them, like institutionalism and lack of freedom, may exist in any religious organization, but being  subtle and difficult to spot, they are often not discussed. Although not a sociologist, but a practitioner of  bhakti-yoga  in the International Society for Krsna consciousness (ISKCON) for over 26 years, the author makes relevant philosophical and sociological observations. He speaks mainly to the ISKCON audience, but the principles he discusses apply to any religious institution. The book can be of  interest to those Vaishnavas concerned with building a better ISKCON, and especially to those, the author gives tools and practical hints how to bring about changes they want to see.

Purnacandra Goswami begins with the philosophical definition of pure  devotional service (bhakti)  from the Srila Rupa Goswami's sixteenth-century book on bhakti, Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu. Srila Rupa Goswami describes pure bhakti as an activity performed favorably intending to please the Lord without any selfish motivation for knowledge (jnana), or any desire for personal enjoyment (karma).

Bengal's Caitanya Mahaprabhu (1486-1534 CE) is recognized as one of the main players in the dramatic wave of emotional bhakti (devotion) for Krsna (accepted as God by his devotees) that swept the Indian subcontinent in the fifteenth century. Mahaprabhu's melodic repetition of Krsna's names and ecstatic dancing (kirtana) were not entirely novel, but his intensity of expression and irresistible influence were unprecedented. Although exceedingly popular with the masses wherever he wandered (he toured India on foot twice during his relatively short lifetime), among the ecclesiastical echelons he was at times condescendingly referred to as a bhavuka, or sentimentalist. (Prabhupada, 1973, 32).

Which should you trust more - your head or your heart? This question was raised at the 2007 Great American Think-Off, a national philosophy contest that gives common people the chance to debate over some of life's more perplexing questions. The live audience in New York Mills selected as a winner an arts' administrator from Minneapolis, Joe Kaiser, who argued that in making decisions, one should trust the heart more than the head. On the one hand, heart's decisions come from our experience, intuitive feelings, and instinctive knowing without the use of rational processes. A decision that comes from the head, on the other hand, involves analytical thinking and methodical examination of things. Do these two modes of decision making automatically exclude each other? Furthermore, if we would apply these two outlooks to the religious life, then in meeting with God, what should be the prevailing attitude? Interestingly enough, the second place at the debate went to the 'head', a position defended by Paul D. Allick, an Episcopal priest (Locke, 2007, [online]).