The Influence of Nityānanda
How far there was any definite organisation of his followers it is difficult to say.
Tradition ascribes to his leading disciple, Nityānanda, more than to anyone else, whatever there was of this activity.
The institution of the ascetic order of vairāgīs, under the banner of Chaitanya, is popularly accredited to him. It is certain that such mendicant followers did develop in subsequent years in considerable numbers.
It was Nityānanda's son, Vīrabhadra, who definitely admitted within the fold of Vaishnavism the degraded remnants of the Buddhist mendicant orders, both male and female.
This would tend to confirm the tradition concerning Nityānanda’s leadership in the early organisation of the sect.
There seem to have been some coolness between Nityānanda and Chaitanya toward the end of the latter's life. During the last 6 years there is no record of a meeting between the two. There was no open rupture, but the intimacy of the early years is lacking.
At the end of the Caritamṛta a mysterious message from Advaita to Chaitanya is recorded, which scholars interpret as referring to some sort of divergent action on the part of Nityānanda.
This action was doubtless the revolutionary social step which Nityānanda took in enrolling as Vaishnavas and disciples of his the Subarṇa Baṇiks, the goldsmith caste, wealthy indeed, but low in the social order.
This definite application on such a large scale of the principle undoubtedly implied in Chaitanya's teaching, may have been too much for Chaitanya's inherited regard for the Hindu social system.
Chaitanya had preached equality in worship, indeed, and proclaimed that bhakti transcended all caste distinctions, but it is unlikely that he was prepared for a wholesale defiance of the accepted order.
Nityānanda's more vigorous temperament led him into a revolutionary step that was as logical as it was intensely distasteful to Hindu society.
Such a flouting of Hindu custom could meet with but one fate - the united and vigorous protest of orthodox Hinduism.
Nityānanda’s renunciation of his ascetic vows, and his marriage late in life, had already set an indelible stain upon his Brāhminhood.
His leadership in this further defiance of Hindu law and order resulted in his being outcaste. Thus it was that the vigorous application of Chaitanya's principles was associated with the name of Nityānanda.
The very boldness of the action, and the following it created, served to give Nityānanda a primacy in the movement, which has descended as a heritage to this day among the Gosvāmīs who claim descent from him.
Once admittance into Vaishnavism had been gained by one large section of the low-caste population, the way was prepared for other similar elements to press for entrance.
Here at the very beginning, during Chaitanya's lifetime, a division arose in the sect which has been lasting:
Nityānanda’s action in admitting the lower elements of society to discipleship did not meet with the approval of Advaita, the veteran scholar of Śāntipura, who, together with Nityānanda, had been commissioned by Chaitanya to care for his followers in Bengal.
He held himself aloof from participation in it, and evidently did not believe in any such revolutionary practice of the ideas proclaimed by Chaitanya.
His descendants continued to maintain this conservative attitude, while Nityānanda's descendants, on the other hand, have continued to accept the discipleship even of disreputable elements in the social order.
There was no other single leader among the immediate followers of Chaitanya who wielded an influence in any way comparable to that of Nityānanda.
Advaita, while a Brahman and a highly-respected scholar, was not in a position to lead a popular movement.
He was very old, and evidently did not carry his own sons with him in devotion to the Vaishnavism of Chaitanya. It is recorded that he disowned all his sons save one, because of their lukewarmness in the faith.
This one disciple died without issue. Thus the second chief branch of the Gosvāmīs of Bengal are all descendants of the unbelieving sons of Advaita.
Manifestly they were not likely to create a very enthusiastic following in the early days of the sect, before it had attained to fame and power.
Of the other immediate associates of Chaitanya, each had his own following and developed a considerable body of disciples, but there is little evidence of their exerting a decisive influence upon the character of the movement.
Of course, the six scholars at Vrindāvan were honoured as the fathers and theologians of the movement, creating its authoritative books, and acting as censors of all that affected its thought and welfare.
But they were far away from Bengal, and necessarily removed, as ascetics and recluses, from the ordinary life of the lay disciples of Chaitanya.
Thus the field was left clear for Nityānanda, and his became the dominating influence in the development of the sect:
He, in fact, became its real head. Practically all Gosvāmī families of Bengal owe some sort of allegiance to him.
Indeed, one may say of the sect as a whole, that, as far as Bengal is concerned, it owed its existence very largely to Nityānanda and his descendants.