Majumdar - Gau Īyavai Ava Studies

GAUDlYA-VAISNAVA STUDIES
-.
, t >
GAUDIYA-VAISNAVA STUDIES
A. K. MAJUMDAR
JIJNASA
CALCUTTA
First Published : January, 1978
Author
Published by Sris Kumar Kunda JIJNASA Publishing Department 1A College Bow Calcutta 700009
Sales Centres : 133A Rashbehari Avenue, Calcutta 700029 33. College Row, Calcutta 700009
Distributor : BEST BOOKS IA College Row Calcutta 700009
Printed by : B. K. Dhur Academic Binders (Printing Division) 11 Panchanan Ghosh Lane Calcutta 700009
CONTENTS
I.
EARLY HISTORY :
131
Religion 1, Decay of the Vedic Religion 1, Post-Vedic Religions 4, Bhakti 6, History of early Worship of Vinu 16, Bhagavata religion 19, Paficaratra 22, Vaisnavism 24, References 28. II.
RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA
: 3259 Introduction 32, Krsija 33, Radha 43, Radha-Krna in Gaudiya-Vainavism 53, Srl-Caitanya 56, References 58. :
III.
6096 Introduction 60, Ethics 63, Tattva 69, Maya-Sakti and 'Creation 74, Jiva 77, Relation between the Jiva and Bhagavat 79, Acintya-bhedabheda 87, Bhakti 91, References 95.
PHILOSOPHY
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Bhp. Cr. Ed. HV Mbh. f5at. Sat. Br. VP. Bhagavata-puraw Critical Edition published by the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona. Harivarh&a ' MaMbharata Satapatha Brahmana do Vist}U-puraiia
PREFACE 1 accepted with alacrity the Burdwan University's invitation to deliver :the first lectures of the Brajalal Adhikari Memorial series during 26 to 28 November, 1975. Firstly, this -gave me an opportunity to pay my tribute to the memory of a great yogin, who preferred to lead an obscure life, to the extent of deprecating any attempt at writing his biography. All that is known about him, apart from his life as a model householder, is that Brajalal Adhikari was probably the earliest disciple of Sri Lahiri Mahas"aya, one of the greatest yogins of modern times. Paramaharhsa Yogananda has given an account of this maM-yogl in his work Autobiography of a Yogi. Unfortunately no account is available of the spiritual life of Brajalal Adhikari. Secondly, the Burdwan University asked me to speak on Gaudiya Vainavism, thus giving me an opportunity to discuss certain topics which I could not incorporate in my book Caitanya, His Life And Doctrine, A Study In Vaisnavism, mainly for want of space. Therefore the present- tract may be considered as a supplement to the monograph published in 1969. My preoccupation with this unfashionable subject is likely to attract unfavourable criticism. Hence some explanation seems to be necessary for venturing to publish these lectures. Everyone, or almost everyone, is agreed that Indian culture, -excluding modern imported culture, is religious. And unless one understands the culture of a nation one cannot understand their history. Hence it is incumbent upon every student of Indian history to study the history of the development of Indian religions and philosophies. Similarly, a student of the history of Bengal must study the rise and development of Gaudiya Vainavism. Fortunately, as far as religious history is concerned, basic data are abundant, and it is possible to trace in some detail the history of our religion and philosophy, from the Vedic age to modern times. This is in strange contrast to the political history of the ancient days about which little is known with certainty except the names of kings and their probable dates, because the records are inadequate.
VI
Though it is possible to establish a link between our religion and the Vedas, the fact is that, today, with the exception of the followers of Arya Samaj, no one practises the Vedic religion, which gradually passed into oblivion after the advent of Buddha. Later,, the religion which Buddha preached also passed away. Then began a new phase in the history of religion in India. Great religious teachers appeared. The doctrines they preached did not involve, as in Buddhism, the rejection of the authority of the Vedas. Indeed the teachers of Vedanta were careful to uphold the supremacy of the Vedas as scriptures, but their doctrines were not Vedic so far asreligion was concerned. Their link with the Vedas was through the Upanis.ads, which they held as the highest truth. This new trend, was inaugurated by Samkaracarya (c.A.D.788820), and the great Saiva and Vaitjava teachers who followed him. They differed from Samkaracarya on many essential points, but all of them upheld thesupremacy of Vedanta, which they firmly coupled to a doctrine of personal devotion to a deity. Sri-Caitanya's message was for the entire country, but it had special relevance for Bengal, which he rejuvenated. He infused an emotional content into our national life which persists till today.. But divorced from his austere moral and ethical principles the superficial emotion lapsed into hypocrisy, and consequently led to national degeneration. It was this type of degraded Vais.navism that became the target of Raja Rammohun Roy's withering criticism.. The Raja went to the other extreme, and endeavoured to form a religion out of metaphysical concepts divested of all emotional contents. His attempt failed. Sri Ramakrsna Paramahamsa succeeded because he adopted Sri-Caitanya's fundamental principles. Swaml Vivekananda gave equal importance to Raja-yoga, Karma-yoga,. Jnana-yoga, and Bhakti-yoga. Have these saints succeeded in uplifting their fellowmen? Looking at the disgraceful condition of our country, the crushing poverty, corruption, and ineptitude at every level of life, the answer must be negative. Talk of culture or religion is virtually meaningless in present Indian society. Swaml Vivekananda's selection of the U.S.A. as one of his main fields of activities is significantReferring to his countrymen, he said that 'to a hungry man, bread is God'. His countrymen are more hungry and more destitute today
vu than they were in his time. I often wonder what Swami Vivekananda, or for that matter, &ri-Caitanya would have done had either of them been living today. We have failed to live up to their expectation. What is our failure due to? This reminds me of a verse of the Mahabharata (12.289.19): ,
alpaka&=ca yatha rajan vahnili Sdmyati durbalah dkranta indhanaiti sthulais=tad=vad yogo'balal} prabho
(O king, just as a weak flame is extinguished by the addition of a heavy load of wood, similarly, a weak person is crushed under the great strength of yoga.) My grateful thanks are due to the authorities of the Burdwan University for permitting me to publish these lectures. I would particularly like to mention the kindness which I received from Mr. A. K. Banerji, the Registrar of the Burdwan University who sadly passed away a few days ago. I am also grateful to Sri Binayendra Nath Banerji without "whose active encouragement this book would not have been published. I shall be failing in my duty if in this connection I omit the name of Dr. Ram Chandra Adhikari, who founded this endowment in memory of his father. I have had the privilege of knowing Dr. Adhikari for nearly three decades. He has always treated me with the affectionate love due to a younger brother. Dr. Adhikari has been a renowned physician in Calcutta, but his main interest in life has always been Indian philosophy. His published works, including those on Kashmir Saivism, testify to his scholarship. What is even more striking is his simple life of a philosopher. I have not come across anyone who is as indifferent to worldly successor pelf though lie is ever mindful of his duty towards his family and numerous friends. Gaudiya Vaisnavism is a vast and intricate subject. It should be explained by one who leads the life of a true vaisnava. I beg that the Vainavas with their proverbial tolerance will excuse my audacity. 7 December, 1977 Kartiikar, Sripalli Santiniketan A. K. Majumdar
CHAPTER I
EARLY HISTORY
1. Religion The word 'religion' is hardly susceptible to any rigid definition. Broadly speaking the term has reference to one's creator, and to the obligations imposed by reverence for His Being, and of obedience to His Will. In the case of atheistic doctrines like Buddhism and Jainism, reverence and obedience is transferred to the promulgators of the creed. The basis of every religion is a system of beliefs and doctrines which are regarded by the followers of that religion as conducive to their spiritual well-being. However, it would not be correct to say, that a religion is nothing else than the acceptance of a doctrine. A religion lays down a code of ethical conduct for its followers; it prescribes rituals, observances, ceremonies, and modes of worship, and these do often extend to the matters of food and dress. All these obligations and prohibitions form: the integral parts of a religion. Ritual is the expression in action, as distinct from thought, of man's attitude towards the non-empirical aspect of reality. It expresses his hopes and aspirations. It is an attempt to reconcile his mundane everyday life with the spiritual and the other-worldly. Faith correlates rituals with theology, and the triad form the basis of a cultus or a sect. But just as a religion or a sect thrives on a distinctive set of rituals, their decay is also due to the latter. The rituals have a tendency to proliferate, and a time ultimately arrives when formula vanquishes faith, ritualism displaces devotion, and submission to a dogma replaces the quest for spiritual bliss. 2. Decay of the Vedic Religion This ancient land has witnessed the rise, development, and decay of many religious faiths. Their history is beyond the scope of the present work, but it is necessary to refer briefly to the causes that led to the virtual disappearance of the Vedic religion based on the Karmakanda, At the earliest stage, the Vedic religion must have been very simple, and shall have consisted of the obligatory rites like the installa-
tion of the household fire, and the recitation of the Gayatri. Only a married man could light the garhapatya fire, so that it may have had a social significance as well. But this simplicity seems to have been lost quite early, and increasingly elaborate sacrifices were devised as a means to gain merit, which alone could provide a niche in heaven for the sacrificer and his wife. It is now widely believed that the Vedic religion meant the chanting of the Vedic hymns or the mantras. The hymns were certainly chanted or sung, but that did not form the principal part of the Vedic religion, at least as explained by the Purva-rmmamsa writers. Jaimini (1.2.7) has made his position very clear when he said : 'As these passages [the mantras, that do not concern themselves with ritualistic action] form only syntactically connected whole with the^passages prescribing the vidhis, they are to be considered as commendatory to the vidhis.'1 Thus, according to the Purva-mlmarhsa school, the Veda is concerned mainly with the sacrifices. They divide the Veda into two parts, the. Mantra and the Brahman a, and it is the latter which contains the vidhis (mandatory passages) relating to the sacrifices. The mantras, which are found in the Samhitas, are referred to as mere arthavadas, that is praises of the 'vidhis, or hortatory passages. The mantras are assumed to serve the purpose of reminding the sarificer or the priest as to their duty while performing a sacrifice, which is performed to bring material benefit to the sacrificer either in this world, or in the next. The Mlmarasakas had a long tradition in support of their view. Even when the hymns of the Rgveda were being composed, the main features of the sacrifices had.been evolved, and it is apparent that the complicated ritualistic system began in the early Vedic age. As the rituals developed, protests were-made. For example, the Mundaka Upanisad (1.1.4-5 and 1.2.7) says: 'There are two vidyas (lores) to be known, as indeed the knower of-Brahman says : the higher {para) and the lower (apara). Of these the lower is the Rgveda, the Yajurveda, the Samaveda, the Atharvaveda, siksa (phonetics or pronunciation), kalpa (aphorisms about solemn sacrifices), vyakarana (grammar), nirukta (derivation of words), chandas (metre, [and] Jyotisa (astronomy). Now, the higher is that by which that Imperip||),ble {dksara) is apprehended....The sacrifices are unsafe (leaky) boats constituted by eighteen (persons), in which is expressed the lower work; the fools who greet thess actions as the highest good are subject to old age and death.' 2
EARLY HISTORY
The Kafhopanisad (1.2.4) states that 'what are known as vidya and <avidya are widely opposite, and contradictory'. The Brhadaranyaka {1.4.10) states : Whoever worships "He is one and I another", he knows not, He is like a sacrificial animal for the gods...' The Chandogya Upanisad (3.17.4) emphasizes tapas (austerity), dana (alms giving), arjava (uprightness), ahirhsa (non-violence) and satya-vacanam (truthfulness) as the proper gifts for priests in a symbolical sacrifice. The Praina Upanisad(1.1.15-16) states: 'The performers of the Prajapativrata beget sons and daughters. They indeed possess the world of Brahman who are established in tapas (austerity) and brahmacarya (continence). To them belongs the stainless world of Brahman, who are not crooked, nor false [and are without] maya (trickery).' Though these passages denonuce the Vedic sacrifices, the Upaniads in general treat the Vedas as authoritative, and occasionally quote Vedic verses in support of their statements.3 The Upanisads further emphasize that,, brahma-vidya is to be imparted only to the srotriyas (who have studied the Veda), whq, engage in their duties, and who have properly performed Sirovrata*-. It seems that the study of the Vedas, and the performance of sacrifices etc. were considered to be preparations for acquiring the knowledge of Brahman. Thus the Brhadaranyaka (4.4.22) says : 'The seekers of Brahman wish to realize it through the regular reading of the Vedas, sacrifices, charity, and austerity.' Therefore MM. Kane has remarked : 'These passages make it clear that the study of the Veda and performance of sacrifices enjoined by it are accepted by the Upaniads as preparatory and as cleansing the mind of its lower passions, and as making a person worthy of receiving the knowledge of the highest truth about One Supreme Spirit, and that the Upaniads do not altogether condemn and give up the Vedas and sacrifices.'5 The reason for this ambivalence possibly lies in the nature of the Upanisads. The Upaniads are collections of revelations. These texts did not i present a systematic philosophy, and in any case, were never intended to be religious texts. Vedic religion could not be supplanted by the Upaniads ; therefore the efficacy of the Vedic religion had to be admitted. What seems to have been intended was the assertion of the realization that the Vedic sacrifices and the acquisition of the knowledge of Brahman were not compatible, and while performing the former the latter could not be obtained. This is practically the position adopted by
GAUD1YA-VAISNAVA STUDIES
Samkara.6 The position of the Uapaniadic seers will be intelligible if the opinion expressed in the Glta is taken into consideration. The Glta (2.42-45) first unequivocally condemns the performance of Vedic rites, and then declares (3J4-16) the performance of such rites to be obligatory. It should be noted, however, that what is condemned in 2.42-45 is the performance of sacrifices which are intended for personal happiness in the other world after death, but those sacrifices which bring do.wn rain which is necessary for the growth of crops is recommended. In other words Srl-K.rs.na condemns sacrifices for gaining personal merit, but recommends those which are for general good. In the Mahabharata it is found that economic forces were at work which made the Vedic sacrifices increasingly unpopular. For example, the sage Pulastya says {Mahabharata 3.80.35) to Bhisjtha : 'O Prince, a poor man cannot perform sacrifices, because it involves the services of many men and a large number of things.' Therefore the sage recommended visit to the tlrthas as an alternative means of acquiring merit. Other methods of acquiring religious merit recommended in the Mahabharata are gifts to the brdhmaqas, and fasting. Gifts to the brUhmanas are recommended in the Vedas also, but such gifts were to be made on the occasion of a sacrifice. But the type of gifts recommended in the epic is different. Various gifts are recommended and their merits described; and the acquisition of merit depended exclusively :on gifts to a brahmaija, irrespective of the occasion, and more expensive the gift the greater was the merit of the donor. This attitude persists even now. However, the pilgrimages, thefastings, and the donations which are recommended in the Mahabhar rata, are non-Vedic. They were the results of economic changes, when the society was divided into rich and poor classes. In course of time, the brahmarjas, due to their insatiable greed, had made the Vedic sacrifices so expensive, that it was no longer possible for a poor man, or even a man of moderate means to perform' such sacrifices. On the other hand, even the richest man could not perform the Rajasuya and the A&vamedha sacrifices, which were almost royal prerogatives. Sc during its declining days, the Vedic religion must have appeared as the staggering of religious practices at different levels, determined on the basis of financial and political strength of the practitioner.3. Post-Vedic Religions The way out of this arid zone was shown by the Gita. It is, how-
EARLY HISTORY
ever, apparent that the Gita was not properly understood nor appreciated before Sarhkara wrote his commentary at the beginning of the ninth century A.D. By that time Buddhism had come and almost gone. This is not the occasion to discuss the essential features of Buddhism, nor the causes of its decay. It may, however, be pointed out that no less a scholar than MM. Kane is of the opinion that'there is a good deal of truth in A. Coomaraswami's contention that the more profound is one's study of Buddhism and Brahmanism the; more difficult it becomes to distinguish between the two or to say in what respects Buddhism is really unorthodox.'7 This is true so. far as Buddhism and Brahmanical philosophies are concerned. But "at the level of religion there is this profound difference between the two systems that, Buddha did not allow any form of Vedic sacrifices, or indeed any Vedic ritual to creep into his religion. It may even be said that, Buddha's permanent legacy to Hinduism was the removal of Vedic sacrifices as an aberration. Later the Mimamsakas tried their best to revive the Vedic sacrifices. Jaimini probably flourished a century after Buddha, and Sabara probably in the 3rd century A. D. ; Prabhakara and Kumarila came several centuries later. In spite of their brilliant efforts, Purva-mimamsa failed to restore the popularity of Vedic sacrifices, and it was studied as an aid to the interpretation of religious, and more particularly of legal texts. It is difficult to say how far Kumarila and Prabhakara were successful in combating Buddhism. The main blow against it was struck by &amkaracarya (A.D. 788-820). But Sarhkara's success was to a large measure due to the degraded condition of later Buddhism. Buddha had preached a sublime ideal, and the example of his personal life was the inspiration, which sustained faith in him and in his doctrine. But in course of time, other elements were found to be necessary to maintain Buddha's message as a living faith, and propagate it as a world religion. The Mahayana'form of religion supplied the essentials of a popular cult, of which the most attractive element was the worship of the Buddha image. This led to the introduction of rituals, and Buddhism, like the Vedic religion was smothered under the ramification of the rituals. As Swami Vivekananda has said: 'The most hideous ceremonies, tne most horrible, the most obscene books that human hands ever wrote or the human brain ever conceived, the most bestial forms that ever
passed under the name of religion, have all been the creation of degraded Buddhism.'8 Samkara's main and permanent contributions were to Indian philosophy and monasticism, with which the present work is not concerned. He is reputed to have introduced the pahcayatanapUja or form of worship, in which five deities, namely, Vinu, Surya, Siva, Ganesa, and Devi (Sakti) were worshipped. 8a The images of four of these deities were placed in four corners of an imaginary square, while the image of the main deity of the worshipper was placed in the centre. This form of worship continued but was soon overtaken, by the personal cults of Vinu, Siva, and 5sakti. We are here: concerned only with the worship of Visnu. The change in Hindu religious rites was brought about by th& puranas. The dates of the puranas are uncertain, but it may be tentatively accepted that most of the major puranas were composed between the fourth century A.D. to the sixth century A.D. They re-oriented the religious outlook of the people and introduced practices which stemmed the tide of Buddhism and made Brahmanical Hinduism popular. ,The old Vedic gods, like Indraand Varuna receded into the background, and new deities like Devi, and Ganesa came to the fore. Vedic sacrifices were given up, and Pauranika mantras came to be used along with the Vedic almost in all rituals. The Puranic mythologies had the same appeal to the masses as the Buddhist Jfttakas. Ultimately by about the seventh century A. D., the Pauranikas completed their task by absorbing Buddha in the Brahmanical pantheon as an avatara of Visnu. 4. Bhakti The puranas contain instructions for ritualistic worship, but the main element in Pauranic cult religions was bhakti or devotion to a particular deity. Bhakti, which.means faith or devotion, is an essential element in every religion. Traces of bhakti may be detected in some of the Rgvedic hymns addressed to Indra and Varuna, from which it appears that the Vedic sages had reached the stage of sakhya-bhakti.9 But as explained already, the Vedic priests diverted the attention of the people by elaborating the sacrificial rituals, which were admixtures of magic and speculation.10 The idea of attaining the Ultimate Reality through devotion ia found in the Upanisads in a germinal form. Thus the Ka$ha (1.2.23>
EARLY HISTORY
and the Mundaka (3.2.3) declare : 'The Supreme Soul (atmari) is not to be attained by expositions (of a teacher), nor by intellect, nor by much learning; He is to be attained only by the one whom He chooses; to such a one only doth the Supreme Soul (atmari) reveal His form.' The seer proclaims in the Sveta&vatara (6.18) : 'I, desirous of moksa (liberation), surrender myself as my refuge to that God who in former times created Brahma, who transmitted to him (Brahma) the Vedas, and-who illuminates the intellect of the individual soul.' Here the words used are 'ahaifi saranarh prapadye1, which serves the basis of the doctrine of prapatti preached by Ramanuja. The word bhakti, however, is not used in the principal Upaniads, excepting in the last verse of the SvetMvatara, where the word has been used in the same sense in which it has been used in the Gita and later works'on bhakti. The verse (6.23) declares : 'To one who has the highest devotion (bhakti) for God, and for his spiritual teacher (guru) even as for God, To him these matters which have been declared Become manifest [if he be] a greatsoul.' Though the efficacy of bhakti as a means for God realization was conceived by the Upanis.adic seers, it was preached as a doctrine for the first time in the Gita. This aspect of the Gita will be discussed in the next chapter. The other great texts on bhakti are the Visyu-purana and the Bhagavata-purana. The Visnu-purana was probably composed between A D . 300-500. Vacaspati (A.D.841) has quoted from the Visnupurana in his commentary on the Yogabhasya, which shows that it was held to be an authoritative text as early as the ninth century. It was, however, Ramanuja (A. D. 1017-1137) who accepted Visnu-purana as an authoritative scripture, and quoted from it profusely. Ramanuja, however did not mention the Bhagavata at all. But by the time of Madhva' (13th century) the work had become famous, and Madhva wrote the Bhagavata-tatparyaya,, in which he dealt with the principal ideas of the Bhagavata, so far as they supported his views. Thus Madhva omits any reference to the Rasapahcddhyaya chapter of the Bhagavata. The Bhagavata was held in the highest possible esteem by SriGaitanya, and forms the principal and the basic text of his school
of Vedanta, which will be discussed later. Sri-Caitanya's contemporary, Vallabhacarya (A. D. 1479-1531) held that the. Bhagavata was the supreme authority in case of doubt. But he was most probably influenced by Sri-Caitanya, so far as the Bhagavata was concerned. Thus we find that all the-Vaisnava acaryas have relied on either one or both of the principal Vaisnava puranas in interpreting the Vedanta texts, but not Samkara. The great Acarya may have had his own reasons for this omission as pointed out by Prof. S. N. Das Gupta who writes : 'It is highly probable that at least one important school of ideas regarding the philosophy of the Upaniads and the Bramha-sutra was preserved in the Puranic tradition. Samkara's interpretation of the Upaniads and the Brahma-sutra seems to have diverged very greatly from the semi-realistic interpretation of them as found in the Puranas. It was, probably, for this reason that Samkara seldom refers to the Puranas ; but since Samkara's line of interpretation is practically absent in the earlier Puranas, and since the -extreme monism of some passages of the Upaniads is modified and softened by other considerations, it may be believed that the views of the Vedanta, as found in the Puranas and Bhagavadgita, present, at least in a general manner, the oldest outlook of the philosophy of the.Upanis.ads and the Brahma-sutra'11 There may have been another reason for Samkara's reluctance _to attach importance to the Puranas. Samkara had denied the women and Sudras the right to acquire the knowledge of Brahman,12 and in social matters he seems to have strictly followed Manu. The Puranas also revere"the authority of the Vedas and Manu, but as the Bhagavata (1.4.25) says : 'Women, Sludras and nominal brahmanas being beyond the pale of the three Vedas, the Sage (Vyasa) composed for them out of compassion the Bharata tale.' The Devlbhagavata (1.3.21) states that 'as the study of the Ve"das is not admissible for women, &udras, and nominal brahmanas, the puranas are compiled for the purpose of benefiting them.' However, the Mahabharata contained the Gita, on which Samkara commented, and the Puranas contain a large number of Vedic mantras, and in many cases, reveal the secrets of the Vedanta philosophy. Nothing is known about the authors of the Puranas; therefore, it is impossible to say anything definite about the motivation which prompted the writing of this massive religious literature. Praise
EARLY HISTORY
of sectarian deity was certainly the basis of the Puranas, most of which contain detailed directions for worship. There may also Jiave been the desire to provide religious literature for the iudras and women. The relevance of Buddhism to the iudras can be inferred from the following statement of Kumarila in the Tantravartika : 'The dicta of s"akya and others were all opposed, except a few relating to self-restraint, charity and the like, to all the fourteen sources of learning, (and) were promulgated by Buddha and others that had strayed from the path of the three Vedas and did acts contrary (to the Veda) and that those dicta were presented by them to those who were deluded, who were outside the pale of the three Vedas, who mostly comprised the fourth varna (i.e., sudra) and those that had lost caste.' 18 Kumarila's statement shows the strong appeal which Buddhism hejd out for the sudras. Buddhism also appealed to the women from the very beginning, and Buddha was induced to permit women to join his monastic order, though he assigned them a position lower than that of men. Still Buddhism provided the women, as it did the Sudras, a way of salvation which wasdenied them by both Kumarila and Samkara. The pur&qas were of immense help in the revival of the sanatoria dharma. The sudras and women could be placated through the Purcinas, for though they were prohibited from uttering the Vedic mantras, they could use the pauranika mantras in performing their rites and ceremonies. After the disappearance of Buddhism this right was withdrawn from the sudras.Xi The means of attaining salvation was also made simple. The recital of the mantra 'Om namo Nardyanaya' with heartfelt devotion was sufficient for salvation. This was the basic mantra, as the Matsya says ; Om nama Narayaneti mula-mantra udahrta. The Narasimhapurana (63.5.6) says : kim tasya bahuvir=mantraih kim tasya bahuvir-=vrataih om namo NarayarTeti mantrah sarvartha-sadhakah imam mantram japed yas=tu sucir=bhutva samahitah
10
sarva-papa-vinirmukto Viriu-sayujyam apnuyat The Vamana-purana (94.58-59) says : kirti tasya bahubhir=mantrair= bhaktir'yasya Janardane namo .Narayaijay=eti mantrah sarvartha-sadhakah Visnur=yesam jayas=team kutas'tesarirparajayah yesam indivara-syamo hrdayastho Janardanah It is both expressly stated and implied that in order-to gain salvation by this method the heart must be purified of all extraneouselements, and there must be devotion for Visnu. About the efficacy of japa or silent recital of a mantra, in the Gita (10.25) SIri-Krna says: yajnanamjapa-yajno'smi. Manu (2.85-7) also says : vidhi-yajfiaj=japa-yajno viSisto dasabhir=gunaih upams'uh syac=chata-gunah sahasro mauasah smrtah ye paka-yajnas=catvaro vidhi-yajfia-samanvitah sarve te japa-yajflasya kalarh n=arhanti odaslm japyen=aiva tu sarhsiddhyed brahmano n-atra samsayah kuryad anyan na va kuryan= maitro brahmana ucyate
' Japayajna (meditation on pranava) is:ten times more fruitful than vidhi-yq,na(likeDarSapatirnamasa etc.) ; if it is upaifisu japa (which is muttered so softly that it cannot be heard a person sitting close to the devotee), it is hundred times more fruitful; and mental japa is a thousand times more fruitful. This fourpaka-yajfias(VaiSvadeva-homa, bali-karma, nitya-Sraddha, and feeding the guest) sxxAvidhiyajnas (jyotistoma etc.) are not as efiBcacious as one sixteenth of japa-yajna. There; is no doubt that brahamanas will attain their goal by means of japa only. Whether
EARLY HISTORY
11
a person] performs Vedic sacrifices or not, he may be called brahmana [if he performs the japa and] is kindly disposed [that is, does not kill animals which were obligatory in some Vedic sacrifices]'.15
In the previous verse (2.84) Manu declars that all the Vedic sacrifices, that is their results, are liable to decay, only the pranava is eternal. Incidentally it may be stated here that according to SriCaitanya, pranava was the quintessence of the Veda.16 But neither the sudras nor the women had the right to utter this sacred syllable. Therefore, the puranas substituted the chanting of the names of Vinu to render their appeal universal. So did Sri-Caitanya himself. Here we might try to answer the question as to what was the social effect of the vaisnava-bhakti movement ? Did it ameliorate the position of the weaker sections of the society, particularly of women and the sudras ? Here it is necessary to point out that the vague term Hinduism lumps together two distinct entities, religion and society. Of these two, religion was far more flexible and tolerant than society. All the great teachers from Buddha to Srl-Caitanya aimed at religious reformation, they did little if anything to reform the society. The most distinguishing feature of the Hindu society is the caste system, and none of the Vaisnava acaryas interfered with it. It is indeed remarkable that all the five great Vaisnava acaryas, namely, Ramanuja, Nimbarka, Madhva, Vallabha, and Caitanya were brahmanas. It is sometimes claimed that Sri-Caitanya removed caste disabilities. It is true that he did so in religious matters to a certain extent, but he did not remove the social disabilities of lower, castes. In religious matters however, Caitanya was extremely catholic. Practically at the beginning of his missionary life, Advaitacarya had requested him : Advaita bolen yadi bhakti bilaiba stri-sudra adi yata murkhare se diba vidya-dhan kul-adi tapasyar bade tor bhakta, tor bhakti ye ye jane vadhe se-papitha-sav dekhi maruk pudiya candal nacuk tor nam gun gayya (Caitanya-Bhagavata, 2.6).
12
-Caitanya readily agreed to this request, and Vrndavana-dasa says :

candaladi nacaye prabhur guyagrame.
There can be no doubt about the veracity of these statements, for the ranks of the Gaudiya-vainavas were greatly inflated by recruits, from the lowest ranks of the society. Secondly Sirl-Caitanya once said-: kiva vipra kiva nyasl sudra kene naya yei Krsna-tattva-vetta sei guru haya This was said to Ramananda, a sildra who demurred at instructing the Master. Here Caitanya was following an ancient tradition. Manu (2.238) says : Sraddadhanah subham vidyam adadit=avarad api antyad api param dharmam stri-ratnam duskulad api
,('One should faithfully learn benefician lessons even from a lower caste mani.e., a sudra, and marry into even a low family if the bride is highly qalified.')
Medhatithi has interpreted param dharmam as laukika dharma, but Kulluka says that the words mean moksopayam atmajnanam. That Kulluka is correct seems to follow from Manu 2.2.41 where he recommends that when a person is studying under a guru of lower caste, the student should follow him and serve him generally, but as Kulluka has explained, the higher caste student should neither wash the feet of a guru of a lower caste nor clean his plate with the leftover of his meal. Here Kulluka quotes a verse from Vyasa which says that 'after the brahmana has become 'proficient in the lessons he learnt from a ksatriya teacher, the brahmaya again becomes the ksatriya's guru.'' This was exactly the relation between Sri-Caitanya .and Ramananda. It is interesting to note that the Mahabharata (12.159. 29-30) states : Sraddadhanah subham vidyam hinad=api samacaret
EARLY HISTORY
15
suvarnam api c=amedhyad adadlt=eti dharana strl-ratnam dus.kulac=api visad=apy=amrtarh pivet adusta hi striyo ratnam apa ity=eva dharmatah
('One should respectfully learn useful lessons from low people and collect gold" even from impure places. The jewel of a wife may be accepted from a low family and nectar may be extracted from poison ; women, jewels, and water are never contaminated.')
It is evident therefore that Sri-Caitanya had had the sanction of the highest authorities for the approach he made to Ramananda.
Among the Ga.udiya-vaisrfavas, non-brahmarias are known to have
initiated brahmaiâs as the latter's gurus. They are Narahari Sarkar,. a vaidya, Narottama-dasa, a kayastha, and Syamananda, a sad-gopa. These instances are also covered by the rules of Manu and the Mahabhixrata quoted above. Did the brd.hmai}a disciples of the non-brahmaqa teachers eat the leavings .off his guru's plate ? Not so far as we know. It should be noted here that Sri-Caitanya himself never ate food cooked by a non-brahmana. It is recorded as an extraordinary instance in his biography, that he accepted cooked food from a Sanaudia-brahmaija which was forbidden to a sannyasi. But Sri-Caitanya broke the rule only when he heard that his preceptor, Madhavendra Puri, had accepted food from the same Sanaudia brahmajja1'1. Available evidences do not provide any incident from Caitanya's life, which could be used as an example by his followers to violate caste rules. The two main rules of caste are prohibitions against inter-caste marriage and dining, and both have operated amongst th& GandlysL-vaisnavas as rigorously as amongst the smartas. The observance of the caste rules, however, should not be held as a sign of failure on the part of Gaudiya-vainavism or its founder. Sri-Caitanya was entirely successful in accomplishing what he had set out to d o : namely, to reclaim the fallen into the fold of Vais.navism by introducing to them the way of bhakti &n-Caitanya's saihkirtana was an organized mass movement, aimed at religious revival? and the masses responded magnificently. But the outcastes remained out-
14
side the caste society, and the large number of heterogeneous casteless vaisnavas came to form almost a separate caste. Such was the power and magnetism of Caitanya's call, that these people continued to remain in the fold of Hinduism, and it was among these poor and despised vaisnavas that devotional fervour found its true and steadfast votaries. They were the flowers of the bhakti-seed which SriCaitanya had sown, and if they were wild flowers, it was because the society did not tend to them. We may here refer briefly to the caste:'problem in religious matters. Ramanuja was initiated into Vaisnavism by the sudra saint Mahapurna. At Ramanuja's request, Mahapurnajand his wife came to stay with Ramanuja, who placed half of his house at his guru's disposal. One day, while Ramanuja and-Mahapurna were away, their wives went to the well to fetch water, and a few drops from the Mahapurna's wife's pitcher fell into the pitcher of Ramanuja's wife, Raksakambal. Raksakambal was furious, and abused the preceptor's wife in unmeasured language, and of course threw away the water. Shortly after Mahapurna returned, and on hearing this incident, left Ramanuja's house with his wife. When Ramanuja returned, Raksakambal gave him a garbled version of the incident placing the blame on Mahapurna and his wife, but the great Acarya understood everything, and out of disgust for his wife, immediately left his house, and became a sannyasin. Even so the &ri-vaisnava brahmanas, or the Aiyangars, have been as caste-conscious as the smartas. The famous saint Tukaram of Maharashtra-was a sildra, and is reputed to have made some brahmana disciples, but his is a solitary example, and exercised no influence on caste barrier in Maharashtra. In Assam, Samkaradeva and his principal disciple, Madhavadeva, were kayasthas, but -'had many brahmana disciples. But soon there was a reaction. Many of the brahmana disciples of-Madhavadeva, seceded from him, and came to bs known as bamunia gosains. They êstablished separate sects, where caste rules were strictly observed. In this respect saint Tulsidas may appear today to be a reactionary, but his attitude towards the caste problem seems-to have correctly reflected the prevailing social atmosphere. Tulsidas advocated the êxclusive right of the brahmanas to be spiritual teachers, and sarcastically referred to the sudras who arrogated the status of brahmanas. However, from Tulasl's lamentation, it appears that some Judras
EARLY HISTORY
15
were respected even by the brahmanas, and Tulasi probably had a dig at Ravidas the shoe-maker, Dharna the Jat, and Sena the barber, ana1 other low-caste religious teachers of the bhakti cult. The entire Hindi speaking area came under the influence of Tulasidas, while the influence of the saints he derided remained localized. This could hardly have been possible if the sudras had not readily acquiesced in their low status. North India was at this time under the Mughal emperors, and it cannot be said that they'helped the brahmanas to assert themselves, or to dupe the sudras. If the sudras had really wanted to break away from the the thraldom imposed upon them by the brahmanas, they could have grouped themselves into a separate sect like the Sikhs in the Punjab, or the Lingayats in Karijataka. The submission of the iudras to the superiority asserted by the brahamanas was due to a complicated historical evolution of socioreligious forces which cannot be analyzed here. It is, however, evident that neither did Sri-Caitanya, nor did his principal followers, strive against the contemporary social current. It was the age of Raghunandana in Bengal. Raghunandana was possibly the most ^reactionary mrti writer, but within half a century, his authority was recognized all over northern and western India, where by common consent .he was known by the honorific, .'smarta-bhatfacarya or simply 'smarta'. The vaisnava-bhakti movement began with Ramanuja in the eleventh century and culminated in Sri-Caitanya about five hundred years later. It was, however, primarily and fundamentally a religious movement. As in those days the society and religion were to a certain extent mixed up, any new religious movement may be expected to have had some social undertone's, but in the case of Vainavism, those were not of a pronounced nature. As we have stated above, there were at least three non-brahmana preceptors among the Gaudiya-va/s#ava.s, but Gaudiya-vainavism was sustained by the brahmana families of Nityananda and Advaitacarya. There is a tendency among modern historians to trace all the evils in ancient and medieval India to caste system and the degraded position of women. We are not defendidg these iniquitous systems, but would only point out that the position of the Sudras was not as degraded as is usually imagined. Regarding the position of women, in Bengal at least, where Dayabhaga prevailed, they enjoyed considerable rights of inheritance and of controlling pro-
16
GAUDIY-VAISNAVA STUDIES
perty. Moreover, the social picture presented by near contemporary authors like Vrndavanadasa or Kr?nadasa Kaviraja does not present a dismal position of the women in Caitanya's time. The women and sudras could neither learn the Vedas nor listen to Vedic recitations. This deprivation seems to cause greater agony in modern minds than was probably felt by the peasants, artisans, and housewives in ancient India. Learning Vedic Sanskrit was not easy even in those days, and in any case, intimate knowledge of the Brahmana texts could haveserved no useful purpose. The gist of the principal Upaniads, which are the kernel of the Vedas, were to be found in the Gita and the BMgavata-purana. These could be read or listened to by anyone, irrespective of sex or religion. Indeed daily recital from the Bhagavata was a part of the Gaudiya-va/s#ava ritual. 5. History of Early Worship of Visnu Visnu is mentioned several times in the Rgveda itself, and also in other Vedic literature. European scholars, and following them Indian scholars also, are of the opinion that Vedic Viiju wasdifferent from the Pauranic Vinu, and probably indicated the Sun god. The arguments in favour of this theory are so intricate and subtle, that it is no use discussing them here. But it may fairly be asked as to why did the Vedic seers address the Sun god as Visnu,. and why did the name Vinu, not only survive, but became the presiding deity of the largest religious sect in India? It should be noted that whatever modern scholars may say, medieval scholars, Jiva Gosvamin for example, held that the references to Vinu in the Rgveda was to the patron deity of the vaisnava. He need not have been wrong, for the tenth Prapathaka of the Taittiriya Aranyaka contains the formula ; Narayanaya vidamahe Vasudevaya dhlmahi tan-no Visnufy pracodayat, thus identifying Vinu with. Narayana and Vasudeva. This part of the Taittiriya Aranyaka is considered to be a late interpolation, -but Narayana has been identified with Visiju in the Baudhayana Dharma-sutra (2.5.24). written between c. 600 B.C. to 300 B.C. It is significant that the conception of some of the avataras,. with which Vinu came to be identified later, was fairly developed in the Vedic age. For example, the central story ,of the Vamana or dwarf incarnation, namely, the request by the dwarf for as much.
EARLY HISTORY
17
space as would be covered by his three steps, has its counterpart in the Rgveda (1.22-17-18) where the principal exploits of Vinu are the taking of three steps to render the earth steady. The Kurma or tortoise avatara was probably suggested by the legend in the Satapatha-Brahmana (7.5.1.5) that, Prajapati having assumed the form of a tortoise created living beings, and that as the words kurma and kayapa mean the same object, all creatures are said to be descended from (or belonging to) Kasyapa. The Statapatha-Brahmana (1.2.11) also alludes to the-lifting of the earth in the Boar {Varaha) incarnatioa and states 'a boar called Emusa raised the earth up and he was her lord Prajapati.' Varaha is also mentioned in the Rgveda (1.61.7) where Vinu is said to have pierced Varaha, and in (VIII.77.10) where Visnu brings to the worshipper a hundred buffaloes, rice cooked in milk, and the Varaha18. The story of many avataras including Matsya, Varaha, and Vamana are given in the Mahabharata, but it is difficult to say as to how the Vedic legends were mixed up with Vinu. Proper Vis.nu worship involved the worship of an image and the identification of Vasudeva. Origin of image worship in India is a thorny problem. There are a few passages in the Rgveda (IV.24.10 and VIII. 1.5) which indicate the existence of the image of Indra, but scholars have interpreted these passages to yield a different meaning. However, there are passages in the Rgveda and other Vedic literature where the deities are spoken of as having physical attributes. Yaska (c.800 to 500 B.C.) in his Nirukta (VII. 6-7) has considered the question of the form of the Vedic deities and put forward three views : (1) the deities have an anthropomorphic form : (2) they have no anthropomorphic form, and (3) they may partake of both characters, that is, the deities though non-anthropomorphic, may yet assume various forms to fulfil certain missions. This last view contains the germ of the avatara doctrine. It is, however, clear that in Yaska's time, image worship was prevalent, but not accepted by all, and conflicting views on image worship were held by the learned men of the time. By Panini's time, image worship seems to have gained in popularity. Panini's date is also uncertain, but he flourished after Yaska sometime between 500 to 300 B.C. Panini teaches (V.3.99) that an image, by attending which a person maintains himself and which is not for sale, has the same name as the god whose image 2
18
it is, for example, an image is called Siva or Skanda. The Kasika-vrtti explains, that the 'rule (jivikarthe capanye) applies to the images of gods which are made means of subsistence to the order of brahmanas, not by selling them but by exhibiting them (from door to door. Thus Vasudevah, (means) "the idol of Vasudeva", (and) Sivah, "the idol of Siva." Panini again teaches (IV.3.98) that Vasudeva and Arjuna were objects of veneration, and Vasudevaka is a person who is a votary of Vasudeva, and Arjunaka (not Arjunaka) of a person who is a votary of Arjuna, but that the word indicated divinity. Patafijali also gives the interesting information, that the Mauryas, who were greedy of gold, established or manufactured images, to which this rule would not apply, but it would apply to the images of gods that were in Patafijali's days used for puja. Patafijali flourished between c. 150-100 B.C., therefore it is apparent that the worship of Vasudeva had become current by about the third century B.C. Manu does not mention the name of any image or deity but states (4.39) that images of gods are to be circumambulated ; (4.130) that one should not voluntarily step over the shadow of the gods, (4.153) that during festivals (parvans) one should go to the images for protection, and (9.285) that one who destroys the flag of a temple, or images shall repair the whole, and pay 500 (panas) as fine. Manu, however, assigned to the devalaka brahmarias (one who maintained himself by attending on images either for a salary or by appropriating what was offered to the deity) a low position and forbade them to be invited at a sraddha. This stigma is also referred to in the Narada Pancaratra (Bharadvaja Sarhhita, 4.29) which says that one should never make the images of gods (area) the means of livelihood. This attitude towards the devalakas persisted through the ages and Locana-dasa in his Caitanya-mahgala (p. 100) quotes with approbation a Sanskrit verse which means that, though a devala is always serving gods, he does not obtain any result thereby, like a fish or a snake, which cannot obtain any merit by constantly bathing or. living on air. The Mahabharata mentions temples many times and some images also, but it appears from the epic that the kings performed Vedic sacrifices in order to gain merit. Neither the Ramayana nor the Mahabharata provides any instance of a king erecting a temple.
EARLY HISTORY
19
In the Glta (11.46) Arjuna refers to the four-armed image of Vinu, and Varahamihira in the Bxhatsarhhita (57.31-5) recommends that a Vinu image 'should have eight, four or two arms : his breast should be adorned with the Mvatsa mark and the kaustabha jewel; his complexion should be the colour of the atasi flower ; he should wear yellow garments, ear-rings, jewelled crown ; (when eight armed) his right hands should show a sword, a mace, an arrow and abhaya mudra, while his left hands should hold a bow, akhetaka,19 a discus, and a conch ; if he is four armed his right hands should display abhaya mudra and a mace, his left hands holding a conch and a discus ; in a two-armed image of Vinu, the right hand should be in the abhaya mudra, the left one holding a conch.' Much more detailed description of Visnu images can be found in the Matsya-purana (chs. 258-264), the Agni-puraya (chaps. 44-53) and the Vnq.yAharmotta.ra (III. 4ff) and other puranas, the Caturvarga-cintamarti of Hemadri (Vrata-khanda, vol. II, pt. 1, pp. 76-122) as well as in the Vaikhanasagama, a Paficaratra work. Salagrama stone was also worshipped from a fairly ancient time, since it is mentioned by Samkara in his commentary on the Brahma-sutra (1.2.7 ; 1.2.14 ; and 1.3.14). As we shall see later there are evidences of &<Xlagrcima&il(i worship at a much earlier date. 6. Bhagavata religion The term vaisnava was unknown in ancient times. It is sometimes said that the Mahabharata uses the word vai$riava in a solitary verse. But the verse -referred to does not belong to the text of the MahQbhQrata, but to the chapter on phalairuti. i For reasons which are not quite clear, the ancient worshippers of Vinu were known as Bhagavatas.. The Bfhatsamhita, while indicating the different sects, states that the Bhagavatas worship Vis.nu. The Varaha-puraw (128.22-31) while describing the initiation (diksa) of a iudra as a devotee of Vinu calls him a bhagavata. The Visnu-puraita (6.5.74-6) makes the position clear when it states, 'The word bhaga is applied to the six qualities collectively, namely, fullness of sway, manliness (or energy), glory, auspiciousness, knowledge, and indifference to worldly objects. The noble word bhagavto applies to Vasudeva and to no one else'. 20 The worshipper of Vinu was therefore called a bhagavata* The
20
earliest known authentic bhagavata was the Greek Heliodorus. He was the ambassador of the Tndo-Bactrian king Antialkidas to the court of Kaslputra Bhagabhadra of Vidisa (near Gwalior in Madhya Pradesh). An inscription engraved on the shaft of a pillar records that BMgavata Heliodorus had erected the pillar in honour of Devadeva Vasudeva. Another Greek source also throws welcome light on the early worship of Krna. Qintas Curtius, a Greek historian of the first century B.C., observes on the authority of Alexander's contemporary historians, that the soldiers of Porus carried the effigy of Herakles while fighting the Greek army. Megasthenes also refers to the worship of Herakles by the Sourasenoi in whose lands were situated the cities of Methora and Kleisobora, and through it flowed the river lobares. He further observes that the two gods, Herakles and Dionysios, were worshipped by the Indians living, in the plains and on the hills respectively. Herakles has been identified with Vasudeva-Krsjja, and Sourasenoi with the Surasenas, a tribe which lived in the Mathura region which is identical with Greek Methora, while lobares has been indentified with the Yamuna. About the time when Heliodorus was having his column erected at Besnagar, Patanjali in his Mahabhasya was quoting a quarter of a verse which states that, 'Vasudeva killed Karhsa'. Patanjali also refers to painted shows, where the party of Vasudeva were dressed in black and that of Karhsa in red. Patanjali also speaks of Ugrasena as z. member of the Andhaka clan, Visvaksena as a Vrni, and also mentions Baladeva, Satyabhama, in its shortened form Bhama, and Akrura. 21 Taking .all these evidences together it is evident that, by the fifth century B.C. and most probably earlier, Vlnu, had not |only been identified with Vasudeva Krna, but that, the main stories of Krsna and of persons connected with him as related in the Mahdbharata and th.-'HarivaMa were well-known. The doctrine with which Panini and Patanjali were familiar was the Bhagavata doctrine. Ample evidences indicating the existence of a powerful Bhagavata sect are available from the records of the Gupta emperors. Samudra-gupta adopted the emblem of Garudadhvaja, which indicates his leanings towards Visnu worship, though'there may have-been doctrinal difference between him and
EARLY HISTORY
21
ihis successors, who, from the time of Gandra-gupta II called themselves parama-bhagavata. Candra-gupta IPs daughter, Prabhavatl-gupta, was married to the Vakataka king Rudrasena II. The ancestors of Rudrasena II were Slaivas, but Rudrasena was a devotee of Cakrapani (Visnu). This change in faith "may have been due to the influence of Prabhavatl-gupta, who describes herself as atyanta bhagavad-bhakta. Many other royal families also adopted the epithet parama-bhagavata. During the Gupta age, the incarnations of Vinu were also worshipped. Kalidasa in the Raghuvam&a (Canto X) describes Vinu, Jying on the great serpent on the ocean of milk while Lakml rubbed Ms feet, was born as Dasaratha's son for Ra.vana's destruction. In the opening verse of the Meghaduta, Kalidasa states that Ramagiri was a sacred spot because the daughter of Janaka (Sita) had taken her bath there. Later in verse 46, the Yaka calls the cloud Sarmgino varriacaure (you have stolen the complexion of Krna), and in verse 52 Kalidasa.refers to Balarama's abstention from fighting in the Kuruketra war, his addiction to wine, and pilgrimage to the river Sarasvati; all these incidents are given in the Mahabharata. Verse 5,7 of the Meghadut a -refers to the Vamana incarnation, while verse 15 refers to Krna decked in a chaplet of peacock-feathers dressed as a cowherd (barhaneva sphurita-rucina gopa-vesasyaVi$hnoh).22 From the name of the Pallava king Visnugopa (c. A.D. 350-375) also it is apparent that the early life of Krna, spent among the cowherds, was an object of devotion. But Varaha seems to have been the popular incarnation of Vinu in the Gupta age. A Damodarpur inscription of the time of Budhagupta (c. A.D. 475-500) refers to the gods Svetavarahasvamin and Kokamukhasvamin, both representing the Varaha incarnation, whose temples stood on-the Himavac-chikara (peak of the,Himalayas), apparently at the present Varahachatra at the confluence of the rivers KauSikl and Koka in Nepal. An inhabitant of North Bengal, who probably visited these temples on a pilgrimage, constructed temples for the installation of these two deities near Damodarpur in the Dinajpur district. The Calukyas of Badami adopted the boar as their emblem, and most of their records, as well as those of their feudatories, begin with an invocation to the Varaha incarnation of Vinu. Another image of Varaha, with an inscription of the time of HQna king Toramana (c. A.D. 500) recording the erection of
22
a stone temple of Narayana who has the form of a boar, has beens found at Eran. 7. Pancaratra The Slatapatha Br&hmana mentions a purusa named Narayana,, who, at the instance of Prajapati, performed three sacrifices. The Slatapatha Brahmar}a also states that Narayana also performed a pahcaratra-satra (a five day long sacrifice) and thereby obtained superiority over all beings, and 'became all beings'. Scholars usually trace the origin of the Pancaratra doctrine to these passages of the Slatapatha Brahmaqa. There is, however, little in favour of this indentification, except the common word 'Pancaratra. What renders this identification unlikely is that the basic idea of thePancaratra doctrine is non-Vedic, and the emphasis of the Pancaratra texts is on image worship. The Pancaratra doctrine is called the vyuha-vada, according to which Vasudeva .was the transcendent deitygod before creation. From Vasudeva emanated-the Sarhkarsaya-vyuha (phase or conditioned spirit) and also prakrti (the indiscrete primal matter of the Samkhyas). From the association of Samkarana and Prakrti sprang, the Pradyumna-vyuha and manas (buddhi or intellect of the Samkhyas). From the combination of Pradyumna and manas arose Aniruddha-vyuha and aharhkara; from the combination of Aniruddha and aharhkara emerged the mahabhutas (elements with their qualities) and Brahman who fashioned the earth and all that it contains. Vasudeva is the sole possessor of the six ideal guqas, namely, jnana, bala, vlrya, aiharya, iakti, and tejas, while each of his three emanations possesses only two of the gunas in turn. This was the basic Pancaratra doctrine, which was developed later,, but it is not possible to discuss those later variations here. Vasudeva and Sarhkarana are the names of- Krsna and Balarama, and Pradyumna and Aniruddha are the names of Krna's sons. All these names occur in the Mahabharata, and may indeed have had some connection with-epic. But the link cannot be traced now. The Pancaratra doctrine is said to be expounded in the Narayaniya section of the Santi-parvan, but we have shown elsewhere that this section is a late interpolation.23 It is important to remember, that the Gita does not mention* Pancaratra, or the vyuha doctrine. Secondly, while some puraqaz
EARLY HISTORY
23
have assimilated the vyuha doctrine in some form or the other, a large number of the pur anas revile the followers of Paficaratra. Medhatithi on Manu (2.6 where Manu has defined dharma) groups the Paficaratras with heterodox sects such as Paiupatas, Nirgranthas (Jainas or Buddhists) and other non-Vedic sects. As late as the thirteenth century, Hemadri quoting from the Vayu-purai}a said that, t'if a brahamana adopted the Pafi.cara.tra religion, he lost all his Vedic rites', that is, the result of Vedic sacrifices. One of the reasons for this hostile attitude seems to be that, the Paficaratras initiated and admitted within their sect women and sudras. This catholicity also indicates their non-Vedic origin. Though its origin is not known, the Paficaratra is an old doctrine. A passage occurring in the Buddhist canonical commentaries (c. first century B.C.), called the Mahaniddesa and the Cullaniddesa, mentions the worshippers of Vasudeva and Balarama, who undoubtedly stands for Samkarana. It is remarkable that the Buddhist canonical work Ahguttara Nikaya, which gives a long list of religious sects, does not mention the Bhagavatas, nor are they mentionedlin the inscriptions of Asoka. It is possible therefore that in the pre-Christian era the Bhagavata religion was confined to particular areas, while Paficaratra was popular in other regions. It is difficult to come to any firm conclusion regarding the Brahmanical religion in early post-Buddhist period, that is, during a century or two before and after the beginning of the Christian era. The Ghosundi (Chitorgarh district, Rajasthan) inscription of the first century B.C. records the erection of a compound wall around the stone called Narayana, which was the object of worship (puja-sila-prakaroNarayajâ-vatika) for the divinities Sarhkarana and Vasudeva (bhagavadbhyarh Samkarsana-Vasudevabhyam), by one Sarvatata, who was a devotee of Bhagavat and had performed an Ahvamedha sacrifice.2* The puja-sila is undoubtedly Magrama-sila, of which there are many varieties, of which one is called Vasudeva and another Samkarana.25 The inscription refers to Vasudeva and Samkarsana as anihata (respected or unconquered) and sarve&vara (supreme soul). The Nanaghat (Maharashtra) inscription of the same age belonging to the queen of a Satavahana monarch, who had performed numerous Vedic sacrifices, begins with an invocation to the gods Dharma, Indra, Samkarana, Vasudeva, the Moon, the Sun, the four lokapalas,
24
namely, Yama, Varuna, Kubera, and Vasava (Yama and Varuna are different from Dharma and Indra). > Apparently in an effort to stem the spread of Buddhism, the leaders of Brahmanical Hinduism were attempting to evolve a popular religion by adopting every possible means. In this process of vulgarization, the Bhagavatas also seem to have suffered for the Atri-smxti states sarcastically; 'Those who are devoid of Vedic studies learn sastras (such as grammar, vedanta, logic etc.), those who are wanting in sastric lore become readers of purQifas for others; those who cannot be readers of puraqas become tillers; but those, who are broken down even there become bhagavatas.2B The date of the Atri-smrti cannot be determined, but this verse was probably written before the rise of the Guptas, who elevated the Bhagavata to, what may be called, a state religion. As we have seen Medhatithi (c. A. D. 825-900) singles out the Pancaratras for denunciation, and Bana in the Harsacarita, written in the middle of the seventh century A.D., mentions the Bhagavatas and the Pancaratrikas as distinct from each other. The Harsacarita's commentator, Slamkarakavi, explains Bhagavata as Vist}u-bhakta. (devotees of Vinu) and the Pancaratrikas as Vaisqava-bheda (a sect of Vinu worshippers), indica^ ting that though both the sects worshipped the same deity, their difference was recognized. The development as well as the decay of Pancaratra may have been due to the association of this doctrine with image worship. Vedic religion was based on the performances of sacrifices. It seems, however, that the Pancaratra, from its inception, comtemplated image worship. Therefore, when image worship began to replace the Vedic rituals, the new rituals had to be borrowed from Pancaratra. Ancient Indian sources do not give any evidence on this point, but three inscriptions in Kambuja (Cambodia) of the 7th, 9th and the 11th century indicate that Pancaratra rites were followed in Visjju and &va temples27. The influence of Pancaratra rites in ancient India, however, may be deduced from the fact, that at present in almost all Vaisjjava temples the rituals are adopted from the Pancaratra texts. 8. Vaisnavism The word 'vaisyava', though not found in the Mahabharata, has been used by ancient kings as an epithet in the post-Gupta age.
EARLY HISTORY
25
Such usage, however, indicates a votary of Vinu, and not a sect. Vainavism, or a vaisjjava religious order, in the sense the word is understood today, was first established by Ramanuja (A.D. 10101137), though this sect, known as the Srl-Vainava sect, was older than Ramanuja. Sri-Vaisnavism has a long history. During its protracted period of development, it amalgamated three strands of thought, namely, bhakti, Paficaratra, and Vedanta. It was the crowning glory of .Acarya Ramanuja to have fused these doctrines into a single creed and philosophy. Sri-Vainavas trace their history from the Alvars, a group of highly gifted Tamil poets. The word Alvar means 'one who is immersed in God', and this is the proper description of the twelve Alvar poet-saints. They flourished at different ages, and though it is difficult to determine their dates, they may be assigned to the period between the sixth to the ninth century A.D. The Alvars included not only brahmanas, but non-brahmatias also like Tiruppaniilvar, who was a pahcama, or low-caste. One of the Alvars was a woman, the famous Andal, who is said to have married the deity &ri-Rarhganatha. The Alvars were followed by Nathamuni, who is called an Alagiya, or Acarya. While the Alvars were inspired devotees, the Alagiyas had their inspiration modified by learning and scholarship. Nathamuni collected the extant vaisriava hymns of the Alvars into a colossal collection called .the Nalayira Prabandham, which consists of 4000 hymns composed by the twelve Alvars. Nathamuni's grandson was the famous Yamunacarya who died in A.D. 1038 reputedly at the age of 120 years. Yamunacarya wrote extensively on the Paficaratra tenet, and made a bold attempt to prove that Paficaratra was not a nonVedic doctrine. In course of his discussion of this problem in his Agamapramanya, Yamuna states the purvapaksa view as: 'It cannot be ascertained whether the authors of the Paficaratra works based them on the teachings of the Vedas or gave their own view and passed them on as being founded on the Vedas At a social dinner the Brahmins do not sit in the same line with the Bhagavatas or the followers of the Paficaratra. The very word satvata indicates a lower caste 28 , and the words bhagavata and satvata are interchangeable. It is said that a scltvata of the pancama caste
26
who, by the king's order, worships in temples is called a btegavata... The Pancaratra texts are adopted by the degraded satvatas or thebhagavatas...'' However, Yamuna's conclusion is: 'The fact that Manu describes the pancama caste as satvata does not prove that all satvatas are pahcamas. Moreover, the interpretation of the word satvata as pancama by the opponents would be contradictory to many scriptural texts, where satvatas are praised. That some satvatas live by image-building or temple-building and such other works relating to temple does not imply that this is the duty of all the Bhagavatas2 9 . It seems from Yamuna's arguments that he was neither a satvata nor a bhagavata (he was born in a high brahmana family), but wanted to retrieve the position of the Pancaratra texts which had acquired ill-repute having been associated with low-caste builders of images and temples. What seems probable is that after Samkara had resuscitated Brahmanical Hinduism, and re-established the supremacy of the Veda, it became necessary to link all religious texts to the Veda, in order to establish their authority. Hence Yamuna's effort to show that the Pancaratra texts were as valid as the Veda. Yamuna's task was completed by his spiritual successor, Ramanujacarya. Yamuna had a disciple named Sailapurna (Nambi) one of whose sisters Kantimatl married KeSava Yajvan or Asuri KeSava. Their son Ramanuja was born in A.D. 1037. Details of Ramanuja's life are known, but it is sufficient to say here that, after mastering Vedanta, he studied the devotional literature of the Alvars under one sildra teacher named Kaficipurna. Once Ramanuja heard one of Yamuna's disciples, MahapQrna, reciting Yamuna's Stratra-ratna, which so attracted him that he started with Mahapurna for Srirangam to see Yamuna. But by the time they reached Jsirirangam, Yamuna had died. It is said that after Yamuna's death, three fingers of his right hand were found folded and clenched. Seeing this Ramanuja made three promises, and one by one the three fingers unfolded. Ramanuja's promises were : (1) to convert the people to the prapatti doctrine of Vainavism, and make them -well versed in the Dravida Vedas, that is, the works of Alvars, (2) to write a commentary on the Brahma-sutra, (3) to write many books on Slri-Vainavism. Ramanuja lived long enough to redeem all the three promises. Ramanuja's services to Vainavism are inestimable. He firmly
EARLY HISTORY
27"
grafted the devotional creed of the Alvars and the ritualistic creed of the Pancaratra to the Vedanta doctrine, so that henceforth it was impossible to deride the Visnu worshippers as non-Vedic. Pancaratra rituals could now be adopted in temples without any stigma being attached to it. It is related that Ramanuja went even to Puri to introduce the Pancaratra ritual in the Jagannatha temple, but was unsuccessful. He was however successful elsewhere, and as we have stated above, today almost all the Vainava temples follow the directions of the Pancaratra texts in their rituals. But as a result of its incorporation with Vaisnavism, the Pancaratra ceased to exist as a separate doctrine. Three other schools of Vaisnavism were established by Nimbarka, Madhva,.and Vallabha known respectively as the Harhsa, Brahma, and the Rudxa-sampradaya. A verse in the Padma-purana states that there are only four Vainava sects, namely, &rl, Brahma, Rudra and Sanaka, of which the last is evidently the Hamsa-sampradaya founded by Nimbarka. As the Gaudiya-vainavas are not mentioned as a separate sect in this verse and for some other considerations which need not be discussed here, it is sometimes assumed that Gaudiya-vaisnavism does not represent an independent school but are allied to the Biahma-sampradaya established by Madhvacarya. We have shown elsewhere that arguments for such a view are not convincing.80 While all the vaisyava schools tacitly or otherwise recognize the Sakti aspect of Vinu, it was Sn-Caitanya who first revealed its ontological significance, and elevated the doctrine of akti into a definite metaphysical category. He also explained and demonstrated the spiritual aspect of madhurabhava, and elevated Radha-Krna cult to an idealized symbol of unity of the Sakti and Saktimat. Third was his Bhedabheda doctrine, which was quite different from Madhvacarya's Bheda doctrine. The fact seems to be that, while we connect the four vaisiiava schools with four great acaryas, namely, Ramanuja, Nimbarkar Madhva, and Vallabha, in reality their sects were much older. What the acaryas did was to have interpreted the Brahamsutra according to the tenets of the particular sect to which he was initiated, and secure for it a firm mooring with Vedanta. Srl-Caitanya brought into Vaignavism entirely new ideas and concepts, which were unknown to any vaisyava sect. Hence the Padma-purana does not mention the Acintya-bhedabheda school established by him, nor can the Gaudiya-
28
c
vaisnavas show any list of former teachers as the other sects can do. Sri-Caitanya infused new life into Vainavism, and added to it a new dimension, as it were, by introducing Radhika as the idealized representative of bliss. Since his time, the whole of India have recognized Radhika as the eternal consort of Krna. The hallowed spots of Vrndavana, where Radha and Krna and the gopis sported and danced their rasa-lila were discovered by !ri-Caitanya and his followers under ihis guidance. The importance of the restoration of Vrndavana can hardly be over-estimated. It gives perspective to the Krsna legends, and serves as a focal point to the Vainavas from all over India in the same manner as Jerusalem serves the Christians. So far as Bengal is concerned, it would be no exaggeration to say that he created a people out of a shapeless mass of dispirited humanity. The great Bengali literature of the sixteenth century was inspired by devotion to him. It is in his biographies where for the first, and for the only time, we get a picture of medieval Bengali life. After him darkness envelopes our social history till we reach the nineteenth century. So striking indeed is the effect of his biographies, that even today he does not seem to us to be far removed in time. The fifth anniversary of Slri-Caitanya's birth centenary falls in 1986, that is only about ten years from now. Though he and his message belong to the world, yet we may lay special claim on him, as we have been his main legatees, we, who speak the language that Sri-Caitanya spoke. Let us hope that his fifth birth centenary will be observed in a manner befitting him.
REFERENCES 1. See Jaimini-sutra 1.2.1 : amnayasya kriyarthatvad ...; 1.2.7 : Vidhina tvekavakyatvat... 2. The 'eighteen' here represents either (1) the sixteen priests, the sacriflcer and his wife, or (2) the four Vedas, each including the Samhita, Brahmana as well as the corresponding Srauta-sutra, plus the six VedaHgas mentioned in the previous verse. Sarhkaracarya in his commentary on the BrahmasUtra 1.2.21 holds this verse (Mimdaka, 1.2.7) as part of condemnation of apara-vidya.
REFERENCES
29'
3. Aitareya 2.5 quotes Rgveda IV. 27.1; PraSna, 1.11 quotes Rgveda 1.164.12 ; BrhadSranyaka, 2.5.15, 17, and 19 quote respectively jkgveda 1.116,12;_ 1.117,22 ; VI.47.18, 4. See Mundaka 3.2.10 , BrhadSranyaka, 4.4.22. 5. P. V. Kane : History of DharmaSSstra, V, part 2, Poona, 1962, p. 918. 6; Commentary on the Brahma-sUtra 1.1.1. 7. A. K. Coomarasawamy : Hinduism, and Buddhism, p. 452 ; quoted in Kane, op. cit., pp. 1006-007. 8. The Sages of India in the Complete Works ofSwami Vivekananda, Vol. Ill, pp. 264-65. 8a. A late example of the pancayatana plijS is given in a letter of Maharaja Ajitsirhha of Jodhpur issued on 3rd September, 1714, involving Hari, Amba, Siva, Surya and Vinayaka, New Indian Antiquary, I.p.446. 9. For details see Kane, op. cit. pp. 950-51, and A.K. Majumder, Bhakti Renaissance, Bombay, 1965, pp. 1-6. 10. See A.B. Keith . The Religion and Philosophy of the Vedas, Harvard Oriental Series, 1925, p. 260. 11. S. N. Das Gupta: A History of Indian Philosophy, Vol. III. Cambridge, 1952, (Reprint), p. 496. 12- See Sarhkara's commentary on the Brahma-sUtra,1.3.'58. The disability of women for perfomimg Vedic rites is due to Manu 2.66 ; 9.18 and Yajfiavalkya, 1.13. 13. Tantravartika on Jaimini sUtra, 1.3.4, Anandasrama ed. p.195, quoted by Kane, op. cit., p .926. 14. Earlier nibandha writes like Sridatta allowed the ndras to recite pauranika mantras. But Kamalakara in his Nirnayasindhu written in A. D. 1612, allowed the Sudras merely to listen to the puranas read by a brahamana, and denied the SUdras the right to recite a pauranika mantra. The Narasimhapur3na also lays down that a Sndra should listen to the recital of the puranas by a brBhmana. 15. According to Medhatithi these verses are arthavadas and are intended to praise the excellence of japa. He adds that since the slaughter of animals is; recommended in the Vedas, its prohibition could not have been intended by Manu. Kulluka does not call the verse arthavada, but concludes that 'amity towardas all is not possible if animals are slaughtered in a sacrifice, therefore those addicted to japa without performing such violent acts, will achieve deliverance, hence the praise of japa, but not for prohibiting the sacrifices, which are recommended in scriptures.' But Sarvajaanarayana writes that this verse (2.87) prohibits animal slaughter. Other commentators like Raghavananda, Nandana, Ramacandra, and Manirama seem to agree with Sarvajfianarayana. Govindaraja says that this verse (2.87) is meant to praise those brShmanas who adopt japa being unable to perform Srauta or sm&rta form of worship. 16. Caitanya-caritamrta, 1.7.121, 123. 2.6.158-59; 2.25.78. 17. Caitanya-caritamrta, 2.17.163-76. It is, however, possible that food was cooked by Sri-Caitanya's attendant Balabhadra Bhattacarya. Sri-Caitanya.
30
GAUDIYA-VAISNAVA STUDIES was accompanied by another brahmaija attendant during his south India tour, presumably for cooking his meals. In Varaflasi he stayed as a guest in Chandraiekhara's house, but took his meals with Tapan MiSra. Candrasekhara was a Vaidya. Caitanya-caritamrta, 2.17.79-89; 2.19.206-210. MM. P. V. Kane in History of Dharmasasfra, II. pp. 718-19 has suggesetd that ( the elements of the story of the destruction of HiranyakaSipu by Visiju in the man-lion form are supplied by the story of the slaughter of the demon Namuci by Indra at dawn with foam of waters, since Indra had agreed, with Namuci that he would not slay him by day or by night, with the palm or with the fist, or with staff or bow etc., (Sat. XII. 7.3.1-4, S.B.E. Vol. 44. pp. 222-223). Sat. Br. XII 7.3.4 quotes j?g VIII. 14.13 which narrates that Indra cut off the head of Namuci with the foam of waters.' The suggestion may be valid, but it should be noted that the Mahabharata, which relates the story of the Nrsimha incarnation (3.273. 56-60 Bombay Ed.) also relates the story of Indra's killing Namuci with the foam of water (Cr. Ed. 9.42. 29-31 and Bom. ed. 9.45.37-8). It should be noted, however, that the MahSbhSrata does not mention that Nrsimha killed Hiranyakasipu under peculiar circumstances, which may have been taken later from the Indra story as suggested by MM. Kane. The Critical Edition, published by the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, omits the verse referring to the killing of Hiranyakasipu by Nrsimha. Khefaka means club, particularly the club carried by Balarama. Here gada has been bestowed to the right hand, hence the word probably indicates a shield as a suggested by J. N. Banerjea, The Development of Indian Iconography, Calcutta, 1956, p. 396, f.n. The Vi$nu-purana 6.5.78-9 states that the term bhagavan may be applied in a secondary sense to those persons who know about the creation and dissolution (of the world), about the origin and final destiny of beings, and also know what is vidya (knowledge) and avidya (nescience). Knowledge, strength, power, sway, manliness, splendourall these in their entirety excluding the three gunas (and their effects) that are to be avoided, are expressed by the word bhagavat.' It is in this secondary sense that sages and kings were addressed as bhagavan and deva respectively, îva is rarely described j as bhagavat. Mahabhasya edited by F. Kielhorn, for Karhsa, Vol. II, pp. 36 and 119'; for Ugrasena Visvaksena and Baladeva, p. 257 ; Bhama, Vol. I, p. I l l ; and Akrura, Vol. n , p. 295. The references are to Meghadnta ed. by S. K. De, Sahitya Akademi, New Delhi, 1957. &arthgino varna caure reminds one of Vmdavana-dasa's description of Madhavendra Puri in the Caitnya-bhagavata, Adikhania, VIII:
:18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
Madhavendra katha ati adbhuta-kathan megha-darasana-matra hay a acetan 23. A. K. Majumdar: Caitanya, His Life and Doctrine, Bombay, 1969, pp. 9-35. 24. Epigraphia Indica, XXII, 204-05. Evidently, Sarvatata was a king. D. R Bhandarkar, who edited the inscription, suggested that he was a Kanva king.
REFERENCES
31
25. J. C. Ghosh, Indian Historical Quarterly, IX, p. 276, q. by. P. Banerjee, Early Indian Religions-, Delhi. 1973, p. 71 26. AtrisaifihitB, verse 384, quoted by P. V. Kane, History of DharmaSastra, Vol. V, part 2, pp. 979-80. MM. Kane has most probably quoted from Jivananda's edition. 27. For details see A. K. Majumdar, op. cit. p. 28. 28. Dr. S. N. Das Gupta, History of Indian Philosophy, HI, 15, here quotes a verse in the foot-note introducing it as 'Thus Manu says', but adding at the end of the verse, Agamapramanya, p. 8'. Presumably the verse was quoted from Yamuna's AgamaprSmSnya, from which the entire passage is taken. The verse corresponds to Manu 10.23 except that the third padas differ. The verse according to Manu 10.23 states : "The sons of a vrStya vaiSya male and a vaisy3 female are known as sudhanvacarya, karSsa, vijanma, maitra, and satvata". A watya according to Manu 10.20, is a male born of brahmana parents, but being without the benefit of the sacred thread safhskBm, is as bad as a son born of apratiloma union, that is, a varna-samkara. 22. S. N. Das Gupta, A History of Indian Philosophy, Vol. Ill, Cambridge, 1952 Reprint, pp. 15 and 17. 30. A. K. Majumdar, op. cit., pp, 260-269'
CHAPTER II

I. Introduction The basic principle of Gaudiya-vais.navism is rooted in the RadhaKrsya tattva. It has provided perennial inspiration to Bengali literature, and has also been expressed through anthropomorphic forms. This tattva is also the central subject of Gaudiya-va/swava theology and philosophy. Gaudiya-vais,navism presents the Radha Krsna-tattva in its most developed form. The help of imageries is taken to present the ideaL at common human level of understanding, but essentially the Radha-Krsria-tattva of Gaudiya-vainavism is a metaphysical reality presented symbolically. In other words, a paramarthika or supramundane, upra-physical, and supra-mental reality is transferred semantically to vyavaharika^ or empirical reality in terms of Sanskrit poetics or even in the language-of everyday life. As Ren6 Grousset has said: 'India and her vast literature have also given the world the example of two unequally representative states of the soul. One, developed particularly in the Krishnaite churches, is compounded of trusting devotion (bhakti) , the love of God, of tenderness and surrender to Him. This is not peculiar to India and may also be found in Christianity and in Shi'ite Islam. It finds expression here, especially in Bengali poetry, in charming images (little cows and shepherd-girls, alike symbolizing pious souls, raised to ecstasy by the flute-notes of the divine cowherd ) ; but also in that excess of erotic symbolism which has always been the inevitable characterisitc of certain religious faiths.'1 The result of presenting realized ideal as idealized real has not always been very happy. Radha and Krsna presented as typical pastoral lovers are often indistinguishable from mortals. Popular criticism is most often directed against this aspect ofGaudiyavais.navism. Actually Radha seems to have been originally a folk deity, and for about a thousand years or more, she had been associated in popular literature with erotic love. Sri-Caitanya uplifted Radha from her plebian association, and created her as the hladinl-Sakti or personified energy of bliss.
33
Unlike Radha, Krsna as a deity was enshrined in existing literature, of which the most important are the Mahabharata (Mbh),
the Hari-varii&a (HV) , the Visvu-purana (VP) , and the Bhagavata-
pur3&a (Bhp). 2. Krishna We need not discuss the problem of the historicity of Krna, for today few scholars doubt the central story of the Mbh in which he is the dominating figure. His early life, however, is not given in the Mbh, but in the HV, which is also known as the Khila or supplement to the Mbh. As P.L. Vaidya, the editor of the HV has remarked, ths HV 'forms part and parcel of the Mahabharata. In fact it is the nineteenth parvan of the Epic, though traditionally it had only eighteen parvans.'^ According to the same authority, the HV was composed 'at about A.D. 300, which is the latest date that can be assigned to the composition.'2 The HV received considerable additions after A.D. 400, but the broad features of Krgna's life are quite clearly delineated in the earlier part. As has been shown above, Panini knew about Vasudeva and Arjuna, and by Patafijali's time the incident of KamsVs death a the hands of Vasudeva was quite well known. Though Patanjali came later, Panini was either Buddha's predecessor, or cdntemporary. Hence we would like to observe that in our humble opinion the composition of the central theme of the Mbh and the HV was completed before Buddha's birth. The Mbh gives thejname of Krs.na's father, Vasudeva, in innumerable places, and at the end ( 16.7-8 ) 8 describes his death. Vasudeva's end was very tragic. After all the Yadavas had died in a fratricidal fight, Krsna and Balarama left their mortal coils, and of the Yadava males Vasudeva alone remained. Vasudeva then parted his soul-from his body by a yogic process (16.8.15). The story has all the appearance of truth. As for Krna's early life allusion to some details are made incidentally in the Sabha-parvan (38.1-11 ) by Sisupala while denouncing Krna. Sisupala refers to Krna's upbringing by the milkmen (gopa), and the killing of the following by Krna, namely, Putana, a bird (Bakasura), a horse (ke&l), and a bull (Aristasura). SiiSupala also refers to the upturning of the. cart (iakafa), uplifting of Govardhana, and the killing of Kamsa. From the unanimity of 3
34
the MSS. tradition, it may be concluded that these incidents in Krna's life are based on a very old tradition, and the later texts like the HV and the puraqasfilledin the details. Actually there was no scope in the Mbh to describe these details, and the HV begins with a request from Saunaka to the reciter SQta for the narration of the history of the Vrnis and the Andhakas. In reply Stita related that after the story of the Mbh had been related by VaiSampayana, Janamejaya requested the former to relate the history of the Vrnis and the Andhakas. This tradition can be correlated to the Mbh. Parva-sathgraha chapter (1 .2.233) where it is said that the whole story has been exhaustively related in eighteem parvans and the dynasty of Hari and the future has been narrated in the Khila. It is clear, therefore, that the HV is just as authentic or as unauthentic as the Mbh. This claim cannot be made for the VP or Bhp. It is apparent however that both these puranas developed out of the HV, and in a sense the Bhp successfully blends legends and myths with a distinct philosophy. A comparative .study of these three texts is likely to yield a rich harvest, but it cannot be attempted in the present work. We shall therefore confine our attention mainly to the Mbh and its supplement or Khila, the HV. In the Mbh itself Krna is identified many times with Vinu. In the Sabha-parvan (33) to which reference has been made above, Bhima proposed that Krna should be accepted as the foremost among those who were present at Yudhis.thira's Rajasuya sacrifice, and therefore the arghya (respectful oblation) should be offered to him. Objecting to this Sisupala pointed out that how could Krsjja be honoured when his father Vasudeva was present. Sis"upala also pointed out that among the assembled kings Drupada was the seniormost ; if Krna was regarded as an acarya (teacher) then Drona was his senior ; if Krna was taken as a rtvij (priest) then Vyasa being present, he could not be offered the arghya (2.34.6-9). In reply Yudhisthira pointed out that Bhis.ma knew the truth about Krna better than anyone else ; and all other assembled kings by their silence had given their consent to Bhlma's proposal (2.35.2-6) . Then Bhisma got up and said that Krna was not only the foremost among warriors, he was not only the most deserving to be worshipped by the assembly, but he was fit to be worshipped by the three worlds :
35
na hi kevalam asmakam ayam arcyatama' cyutah trayanam api lokaknam arcamyo maha-bhujah (2.35.9) Who in this world is greater than KeSava? nrnarh loke hi ko'nyo'sti vis"itah kesavad rte (2.35.18.) Sri'Krna, Bhirria declared, 'was the rtvij, guru, acQrya, snataka, and king, in a Word, he was all in one, and one in all. Krna was" the origin and(i dissolution of the world. He was the unmanifested prakrti, the primal lord. Krsna was the intellect, mind, the mahattattva, the five elements, namely, air, fire, water, space, and earth. The sun, the moon, the stars, and the planets were all based on Krna.' (2.35.19-25). Then Sahadeva began to praise Krna, and referred to him as the killer of Kesi, and declared that he would place his feet on the head of any king who would oppose Krna's worship. All the kings remained silent and gave their tacit consent. Then Narada came out with an eulogy of Krna (2.36.2-9). This was followed by further disputes in which Sisupala referred slightingly to the deeds performed by Krna, which have been related above. Krna then cut off Sisupala's head, but this story is too well-known to be repeated here. The point is that, fairly early in the story, the Mbh establishes the divinity of Krna. Krna's super-human power was again revealed in Kaufava court. He had gone there just before the fatal Kuruketra war to effect a peace between the Kauravas and the Paqdavas. As Duryodhana refused to listen to any reason, Krna had to tell him some^home truths about him (Duryodhana). This enraged Duryodhana, and later he hatched a plot to arrest Krna. On hearing this, Krna revealed his cosmic form or Vi&va-rupa (5.129) which overawed Duryodhana and his associates. Next we come to the delivery of the Glta on the battle field. The circumstances which led to its recital, and the texMtself are so wellknown, that we need not discuss them here. We would only restrict ourselves to the discussion on one point. But before proceeding further, it may be emphasized that the divinity of. Krs.na is not revealed in the Glta alone, or for the first time in the Mbh. As we. ; ,
36
have shown, his divinity was first proclaimed by Bhima, Sahadevat and Narada during Yudhithira's Rajasuya sacrifice. And with the exception of SiSupala, all the kings accepted, his divinity. Later, heshowed his miraculous power in the Kaurava court. Therefore his promulgation of the Gita does not come as a surprise to the reader of the Mbh. It is, however, usual to read the Gita as a separate text, which, we submit, is not the proper way of reading it. The Gita is part and parcel of th& Mbh and must not be torn asunder from the larger text. Many renowned scholars have suggested that the Gita, and the passages in the Mbh where Krna is identified with VinUj or is otherwise deified, are later interpolations. All therpassages I have quoted are included in the Critical Edition of the Mbh published by the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute and edited by thebest available modern scholars, and these passages have a continuous MSS. tradition. Therefore, at the present stage of our knowledge, these passages have to be accepted as integral parts of the Mbh. Indeed if they are deleted, the Mbh will lose its narrational coherence. Secondly, so far as the history of vaisqava faith and movement i& concerned,these are the most important parts of the Mbh, which indeed endowed the epic with semi-Vedic authority. Regarding the teaching of the Gita, the only topic to which we shall discuss briefly is the karma-yoga or doctrine of karma, because it seems to be the most misunderstood part of the Gita. It is now fashionable to describe the Gita as a gospel of action. It indeed callsfor action to start with, but had it ended there, it would have been an ordinary text, unworthy of the veneration which has been showered on it ever since &arhkara wrote his commentary more than a thousand years ago. A detailed, discussion of the teachings of the Git&is not possible here, so I limit myself to quoting a few verses which have to be regarded as maha-vakyas for the purpose of interpreting the text. Krs.na first says: na karmanam anarambhan naiskarmyam puruso'snute na. ca sannyasanad eva siddhim samadhigacchati (3.4)
('Freedom from activity cannot be achieved by abstaining from action. body becomesiperfect by merely ceasing to act.') No-
RADHA-KMSHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA
37
In the next verse he says : na hi kagcit ks.anam api jatu tithaty=akarmakrt karyate hy=avas'ah karma sarvah prakrtijair=gunaih
(3.5)
('Indeed nobody can ever cease to act even for a moment. All are helplessly forced "to act by the gunas.')
These simple truths had to be forcefully pointed out to Arjuria, .as he was contemplating to run away from the battle-field, the most ignoble attitude for a ksatriya prince. But it is-apparent that Krna is not denouncing naiskarmya or 'freedom from action', or 'nonaction', which is the complete state of passivity. He merely says that such a state cannot be obtained by laziness or by a supine attitude. Then Krga describes the various stages of spiritual development ând at the end declares : asakta-buddhih sarvatra jitatma vigata-sprhah naisjcarmya-siddhirh paramam sannyasen=adhigacchati (18.49)
('When a man's intellect is free from all attachments, and he has achieved mastery over self, and is free from desire, he attains perfection in naiskarmya, 'that is, the perfect state of non-action.')
This indeed, according to the Glta, is the ultimate stage in a man's spiritual journey, which he can attain after rigorous sadhana extending over countless births. There is ho short cut to it, as Arjuna had contemplated. What is karma ? Krna says : karmano hy=api boddhavyam boddhavyam ca vikarmanah akarmanas'ca boddhavyam gahana karmano gatih (4.17) ('You toust realise what is action and what is forbidden actidh; you miis -also realize non-action. Mysterious is the nature of karma.')
38
Then he says: karmany=akarma yah passed akarmani ca karma yah sa buddhiman manus.yeu sa yuktah krtsna-karmakrt (4.18)
('He who sees that there is non-action in action, and that there is action in non-action is indeed wise, he is a yogi; he indeed has completed [the performance] of all actions.')
Here the bperative verb is 'pa&yet,' from which it follows that in order to get release from karman, it is sufficient to see or to realize the truth about karma, and immediately, the seer goes beyond the domain of karma, akarma, and vikarma, and he becomes united, yukta. This is a very well-known passage and has been very fully interpreted by the famous Qcaryas. Hence there is no need to dwell upon it at length, except to point out that Krna did not preach a mere gospel of action, a view which is given wide publicity by th politicians. Krna, however, does not say that cessation from action is thehighest state. He says : mat-karma-krn5mat-paramo mad-bhaktah samga-varjitah nirvairah sarva-bhuteu yah sa mam eti pandava (11.55)
('My devotee, who works for me alone, who makes me the central and ultimate object of his attainment, who is free from [other] attachment, and who iswithout hatred towards any creaturethat man, O Pandava, attains me.')
As &arhkara has said, this verse condenses the teaching of the Gita (sarvasya gita-Sastrasya sarabhutoartho). Commenting on this verse from the standpoint' of the Gaudiya-vaisnavas, Baladeva Vidyabhusana says that karma here means building temples in honour of Krna, cleaning such temples, as also maintaining flower gardens and tulasi groves dedicated to Krna. Baladeva also points out that bhakta here means the person who is engaged in the nine fold attributes of bhakti. The reference here is to the famous verse of the Bhp (7.5.23).
39
sravanam kirtanam Vinoh sinaranam pada-sevanam arcanarh vandanarh dasyam sakhyam atma-nivedanam Sravana and khtana means remembering His Name, pQdasevanam means service (paricarya); arcanarh means worship puja)', vandanam is obeisance (namaskara); dasyam means the adoption of the attitude of His servant; sakhyam means to worry about His welfare ; ntmanivedanam means complete surrender of the body to Him, like the surrender of cattle to the butcher ; one must not even think as to how to maintain oneself. This ideal of total surrender to Krna can, therefore, be traced to Krgna's owri saying, and is in conformity with his last exhortation to Arjuna : man-mana bhava mad-bhakto mad-yajl mam namaskuru ' mam=ev=aiyasi satyam te pratijane priyo'si me sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekarh saranam vraja aham tva sarva-papebhyo mokayiyami ma Sucah (18.65-66).
('Make me the only subject of your meditation, be my devotee, worship me, and offer sacrifices to me alone, and you will attain me. You are dear to me. Lay down all duties in me, and seek refuge in me alone. I shall rescue you from all sins, do not grieve.')
It is important to remember that this doctrine was preached by Krna in the Mbh. There are many scholars who are of the opinion that the Gitci is a late interpolation. It is difficult to agree with this view, but this problem cannot be discussed here. Objections are based even on the ground that Safijaya, who recited the Gita to Dhrtarastra, being at Hastinapura, could not have known, far less have heard, what was happening at Kuruketra. The answer to this objection is that Safijaya was present at Kuruketra, and the description of the entire war is his report to Dhrtarastra whom he visited periodi-
40
cally to keep the blind king posted with the news fromtthe battlefield. Actually on the last day of the battle, Safijaya was captured, and was about to be executed by Satyaki when Kjna intervened and saved his life. However, at the end of the Gita (18.75) Safijaya adds that he could overhear the dialogue between Krna and Arjuna due to the boon granted him by Vyasa. This is a miracle, but no religion is free from miracles. The immaculate conception of Virgin Mary is a much greater miracle. Gaudlya-vainavism lays more stress on Krsna's early life. One reason is that Gaudlya-vainavism is concerned with the madhura aspect of the Lord which was manifested in Vrndavana. For, a Gaudiya-vainava devotee has to adopt a certain bhava to enjoy the corresponding rasa, relish or delight. Of these the higher bhavas, namely, sakhya, vatsalya and madhura, cannot- be attained if the devotee cherishes in his heart a sense of the majesty (aiharya) of the Lord. He has to be adored and worshipped in terms of everyday life as was done by the cow-herd boys, the milk-maids or YaSoda, which is reflected in Sri-Caitanya's early life at Navadvipa. Therefore, to the Gaudlya-va/sâvas, the most important texts are those which deal with Krna's early life, hence the importance of the Bhp. We have already referred to the VP and the Bhp. According to scholars, the VP was composed between A.D. 300 to 500, and they hold that the Bhp cannot be placed earlier than the 6th century A.D.* These dates, particularly, of the Bhp are not accepted by all scholars, but for our present purpose, they may be accepted. It may, however, be pointed out that if the earliest date for the VP can be A.D. 300, then the HV must be dated at least a couple of centuries earlier. The most important and well-known part of the Bhp is the rasalila episode described in-thetenth canto (29-33). The Bhp gives the most elaborate description of the rasa-lila but it was by no means an innovation. The rasa-lila is first described in the HV in eighteen verses (63.18-35). Though the description is short, it contains all the elements found in the later versions. Krna is said to be klsora, which means a boy below fifteen years of age, which is admitted in the Bhp also (10.43.39). The milk-maids were however in their youth. The sport was held at night and the milk-maids sucked the beauty of Krna's face which was like a moon on earth. Krna appeared even more beautiful, dressed as he was in yellow silk. He had on him armlets and a chaplet made of flowers. The milk-maids
41
called him 'Damodara'.5 They embraced Krs.na and pressed him to their breasts. Though forbidden by their husbands, parents, and . brothers the milk-maids used to seek out Krna at night being eager for dalliance with him. ta varyamanan patibhur matrbhir=bhratrbhis=tatha Krsnarh gopamgana ratrau mrgayanti rati-priyah The milk-maids formed a circle and sang songs about Krna {gayantyah Krnacaritam, 63.25). The rest of the passage need not be translated, for it is evident that later writers elaborated on the basis of the HV. The singing of Krsjjacarita indicates that some songs, possibly in a Sanskritic language, regarding Krna were prevalent when the HV was written. These traditional songs seem to have been referred to as the gopi-gita by Hemacandra in the 12th century.6 The VP takes practically one chapter to describe the rasa-llla (5.13). Here the description is by the sage Parasara. He first describes that, after the lifting of mount Govardhana, the milkmen of Vraja, awe-struck by Krsjja's prowess, chanted a eulogy. Krna apparently did not relish that a barrier of respectful adulation should divide him from his friends. So, after remaining silent for a while, he said with simulated anger (pranaya-kopa): 'O milkmen, why praise me unless you cherish a feeling of shyness towards me. What is the necessity of discussing that I am praiseworthy. If you love me, and if you would praise me, do so in a friendly manner. I am neither a god, nor a gandharva, nor a yaksa, nor a demon. I am your lifelong friend, you should not consider our relation in any other manner' (5.10-12). (The description of this episode in the HV is similar but slightly different.) Then the gopas left, and the clear autumn sky, the bright moon, fragrance of the lotus flowers, and humming of the bees induced in Krna a wish to sport with the gopis. So he began to sing, and the gopis flocked around him. The rest of the description agrees with the HV and the Bhp. It is stated (vv. 59-60) that Krna
42
was a kiiora, and that the gopis came to him though they were forbidden to do so by their husbands, parents and brothers. The VP (5.13.24) relates that after the gopis had assembled,. Krna left them for some time. Then the gopis began a search to find him (5.13.25-41) but failed. So they repaired to the banks of the Yamuna, and began to sing his carita. Then Krsna reappeared and the rasa-lila began. The gopis, who were unable to join the-rasa-lila, meditated upon him as the embodiment of Parabrahma (5.13.22), and at the end (5.13.62) it is stated that Krna pervaded everyone, just as the five elements, namely, the sky, air, fire, water, and earth pervade everything. This is the esoteric substratum of the rasa-lila, but as we shall see, here the VP was not alone. An early allusion apparently to the rasa is found in the Yogavasisfha, which is a pre-amkara advaita text. The Yoga-vasisfha (Nirvaria, Purva, 64.33) while describing Vinu's incarnations refers to his birth as Krna or Janardana and states : am-avatara-lilabhih kurute jagatlm sthitim ekah kanta-sahasrani tulya-kalam nimeavat
('By his sport in [this] incarnation he preserved the stability of the world; and one lord sported with a thousand beloveds simultaneously and it appeared like a moment.')
The available printed commentary explains that the reference here is to the sixteen thousand wives of Krs.na7. This explanation does not seem to be convincing, and it is more likely that the reference here is to the rasa-lila. Two secular texts of a fairly early date mention rasa-lila. The first is Vatsyayana's Kama-sutra (6.10.25) where the hallisaka and rasaka, which apparently were composed of songs and dance, are mentioned. The commentary explains hallisaka as a 'dance in which the women form a circle and dance around one man, just as the gopis danced around Hari.'
43>
mandalena ca yat strinam nrttam hallisakam tu tat neta tatra bhaved eko gopa-strinam yatha Harih. The commentary in which this verse is quoted was composed' about the middle of the 13th century, but about a century earlier Hemacandra (A.D. 1082-1149) in his Abhidhana-cintamat}i had quoted1 the first two padas of this verse, and in his Defincimamala, after giving rasaka as the synonym of hallisaka explains it as maqdalencr striqWrn nrttam. It is apparent therefore, that the verse quoted in the commentary to explain hallisaka was handed down from an earlier age. It is evident that the story of Krs.na's rasa-lild. with the gopis was based on an ancient, continuous, and widely prevalent tradition. It was around these traditions that the vaisqava faith developed^ and spread out all over-the country as a vital religious movement. 3. Radha A famous Christian writer, Miguel de Unamuno, has said: 'Tobelieve in God is to desire his existence, and what is more, to act as though he existed.' The Gaudiya vaisnavas believed in the HladiniHakti of the Ultimate Reality, whom they:personified as Radha. Krsna, as we have seen, was a historical person, but Radha's claim to historicity is dubious. Not to speak of the Mbh, or the HV>, she is not mentioned in the VP or even in the Bhp. There is, however, a fairly ancient literary tradition which depicts. her as a village belle and the typical amorosa. The earliest text in which Radha is coupled with Krsna is theGatha-Saptaiad, an anthology of Prakrit verses ascribed to the Satavahana king, Hala, who flourished about the.3rd century A.D. 8 Three. verses in the SaptaSati mention Krna; none of them are by Haia. The first verse (1.89) mentions Radha and Krna thus: 'O Krna, your act of removing the dust from Radhika's eyes,. by blowing through your mouth, is depriving other ballavis (milk-maids) of their dignity.' The word ballavi means a milk-maid or a go pi, and has been* used in this sense in the Gita-Govinda.
-44
In the second verse (Saptaiatl, 2.12) the women of Vraja {Vraja-vadhu) smile surreptitiously looking at the face of Krna while YaSoda says: 'Even now Damodara is to me a little boy.' The third verse (Saptasati, 2.14) describes that while dancing, <he expert or the clever gopi {niunar i.e., nipur}d,-gopi) kisses the image of Krna reflected on another gopi's cheek. Thus we have not only references to Krna, Yasoda, gopis, and Radha, but that Krna is still a young boy, his dalliance with the gopis is secret, and he shows a preference for Radha which causes jealousy among other gopis. Yasoda, as well as the gopis, and Krna's dance with them are mentioned in the HV, which, as we have seen, has been assigned by the scholars to about A.D. 300, which would make the Sapta&ati and the HV almost contemporary works. It would follow, therefore, that even when the HV was being written there was a tradition that among the beloved of Krna, Radha was the most favourite. More details are given in an ancient Tamil work under a slightly different form. The Tamil classic Silappadikaram mentions god Mayavan (lit. the great-dissembler), his elder brother Balarama, and his (Mayavan'sj wife Nappinnai or Pinnai. They were worshipped by the cowherds and milk-maids, and many of their boyhood games played in the quarter of the cowherds are mentioned. One of the games was the kuravai dance in which only girls took part and assumed the roles of Krna and Balarama. In the description of a kuravai dance jgiven in the Silappadikaram, a dancer places a garland around Mayavan's neck and says: 'Is Pinnai ... so beautiful that he, who had won great reputation by measuring the universe, would not look at Lakml dwelling in his own breast?' Then the girls stood in a circle and said: 'We shall sing' in honour of him who broke the kurunda tree in an extensive upland (of the Gokulaj.' The song which follows mentions how Mayavan once used a calf as a stick to knock down fruits, which like the child Krna's uprooting of the tree is found in the Bhp. Then is mentioned Mayavan playing on his flute, the dancing of Pinnai and Mayavan on the ftanks of the Yamuna, and the theft of Pinnai's clothes by Mayavan. It is also stated that Mayavan had a sea-coloured complexion, and once he hid the sun with his discus. His brother, Balarama, is, however, of fair complexion. Among Pinnai's choristers is the Vedic t>ard Narada, who keeps correct time to her strains by playing upon
45.
the first string. Mayavan tended cattle at Gokula near DvarakaOnce his hands were tied with the churning rope of Asodai (YaSoda) . In conclusion the girls sang: 'Vain is the tongue that will not praise him who triumphed over the deceit of the foolish schemer Kamsa, and who went as the messenger of the five Pandavas to the hundred (i.e., Kauravas)... Vain is. the tongue that does not say Narayana.' Elsewhere, the hero of the Silappadikaram, Kovalan, and; his wife, Karmaki, the heroine, are thus compared with Krna and Pinnai:'Is this lord who eats good food Krsjja nursed by Asodai in the village of cowherds? Is this lady (i.e., Pinnai)... the brightest lamp of our (cowherd) community, who gave succour. to the lord of the blue gem, on the banks of the river Yamuna ?' The identification of Krna and Mayavan, already evident fromthe narration, has been made in the last passage. One wonders whether Mayavan is taken from Indra's epithet :mayavl found in the Rgveda, in which case the implied reference may be to Upendra,. or 'younger brother of Indra', one of Krna's epithets found both in the Mbh and the HV as well as in later literature. Nappinnai has been identified with Radha. But it should benoted that Nappinnai is Mayavan's married wife. Radha too is accepted as Krna's wife by certain Vaisnava sects, the most: prominent among them being the Nimbarkas. But no explanation has yet been found for the substitution of Radha's name by Nappinnai on Pinnai. In the kuravai dance, the girls alone take part and to this extent it differs from the rasa. But it is stated in the VP. (5.13.25-29> that, when at the beginning of the rasa-lila, Krs.na left them temporarily, the gopis continued their amusement or pastime by behaving like Krna, and saying to each other : 'I am Krsna, seehow beautifully I walk.' Another said ; 'I am Krna, listen how sweetly F sing.' Another gopl said : 'You wicked Kallya, keer> quiet. I am Krna.' Other goph pretended to have uplifted the Govardhana or to have killed the Dhenukasura. Thus they imitated,
the Mas of ~K.%$w.(Kxsi}aysa lilaya sarvam adade 5.13.27).
There is thus some similarity between the kuravai and part of the rasa dance as given in the VP. The songs during the kuravai also seems to be similar to the K\st}a-llla songs sung by the gopis as mentioned in the HV. It is possible therefore that these songs in
46
Tamil in the South and in Prakrit in the North maintained the tradition of Radha. That is, Radha lived in the folk tradition in north and south India, though in slightly differeut versions. It is difficult to say as to when Radha first stepped into Sanskrit literature. It appears that the earliest Sanskrit writer who mentioned Radha was Bhatta Narayana, the author of the Beqlsathhara. Bhatta Narayana's date is not known, but for good reasons he is supposed to have flourished about- A.D.700, though earlier dates have been suggested by some scholars.9 The second matigala verse of the Benlsarhhara states : , .. 'Radhika became angry [with Krsna] in course of their sports on the banks of the Kalindi and lost all interest in the rSsa dance. As she walked away bedimmed with tears, Krna planted his steps on the marks left by her steps, and his hairs stood on end, and she looked at him with a happy face. May-their reconciliation lead you .to prosperity.' The VP (5.13.30-41) also states that when the gopls lost sight of Krsna they began to search for him, and traced his movement by his foot-steps which had covered the imprints left by the steps of a 'lucky damsel' (krtapuqya madalasd. 5.13. 33) who had preceded him. Later the go pis found that Krna had left that woman due to her pride, and had gone away in another direction. The Bhp also relates the same story, namely, that Krsna disappeared from the gopls having taken one of them with him, and the gopls while searching for him said : 'Whose footprints are these? As a she-elephant follows a male elephant, so did this fortunate woman-accompany the son of Nanda with his hands on her shoulder. Verily she must have worshipped Krna, for him to have taken her to a lonely place forsaking us.' {Bhp, 10.30.27-28). The Bhp (10.30.38-39) relates that later this woman, who is not named, became proud,fand said that she was unable to walk any further and Krna-should carry her on his shoulder. Krna told her to climb on his shoulders, and disappeared. Then : she began to lament. Then all the gopls began to 'pray for Krna's, appearance. Here occurs the famous verse of the Bhp beginning with Suratanatha te'sulka-dasika (Bhp, 10.31-2) and then Krna reappeared (Bhp, 10.31.2).
47
Here we have to consider as to where did Bhatta Narayana get the story of Radhika. His allusions may have been partly borrowed from the VP or the Bhp, but the name of Radha, and her reconciliation with Krna must have been taken from some other source. It is evident, therefore, that the Prakrit folk-lore, to which reference has been made above, was Bhatta Narayana's source, unless he had access to some Sanskrit text which is now lost. No reliable information is available about Bhatta Narayana's life. The untrustworthy KsitUa-vaihsavaUcarita, however, relates that Bhatta Narayana was one of the five brahmaqas whom king Adisura brought from Kanauj to Bengal. Historians usually disbelieve the story of king Adisura, but we would suggest that one should maintain an open mind regarding Bhatta Narayana's immigration to Bengal. Bengal became the home of Radha-K.rs.na worship, and it was in Bengal that Jayadeva wrote the Glta-Govinda. Secondly, the influence of Prakrit on the Radha legend was most pervasive in Bengal, and survives in the name of Radha's husband Ayan. 10 The worship of Krr>a and the milk-maids began about the time when the Berp.sanih.Ura was written. A mutilated inscription from Pabhosa (Prabhasa), a place about thirty-two miles southwest of Allahabad on the Yamuna, states, 'Sri-Krstia-Gopi-rupakartta' (maker of images of Sri-Krna and the gopis). On palaeographic grounds, Biihler ascribed this inscriptions to the 'seventh or eighth century A.D.' About the same time Dimboka composed a verse which has t>een included in Vidyakara's Subhasitaratnakosa (verse No. 980). It has been translated by Prof. Ingalls as follows : The pilgrim sJin the street have .warded off the painful cold with their broad quilts sewn of a hundred rags ; And now with voices clear and sweet They-break the morning slumber of the city folk With songs of the secret love of Madhava and Radha. It is apparent that the gopis and Radha were deified at about
48
the eigth or ninth century at the latest. But the verse shows that Radha was worshipped by the poorest section of the people. W&would suggest that at this period she was worshipped by someparticular esoteric sect like the later-day Bauls. Her consecration as a Brahmanical deity came a little later. The Matsya is one of the oldest of the puranas and has been assigned to the period between A.D. 200 to 400. 11 The Mastya mentions Radha in a single verse (13.36) but assigns to her the same place in Vrndavana which RukminI held at Dvaraka. That is, according to the Matsya, Radha was Krsna's wife. This, it may be recalled, was the Tamil tradition. Later, as we know,. Radha became the symbol of parakiya-prema, but the tradition, persisted that she was Krna's wife. In an inscription from western India issued in the Saka year 940 (A.D,1018)) it is said that Visnu (Sauri) is heated due to his separation from Laksmi (Kamala)12. Another example of a slightlydifferent type is afforded by the Belava copper plate of Bhojavarman,. probably issued in the first.half of the twelfth century, which states: 'He (Hari) again in this world, appeared as Krsna, who sported, with one hundred milk-maids as the leading figure of the Mahabharata ' l s . On the other hand, three inscriptions of the Paramaraking Vakpati Mufija issued in A.D. 974* 982, and 986 contain the following verse : 'May the active body of the enemy of Mara (Krsna) which the face of Laksmi could not please, which the waters of the ocean could not cool, which the lotus of his lake of his own navel was powerless to pacify, and which could not.be soothed by the fragrant breath issuing from the thousand mouths offsleija, may that body -of Krna so- heated by Radha's separation protect you' 14 . Thus we come across six traditions: (1) The earliest tradition was that Krsna sported with the gopis in Vrndavana. This is found in the HV, and developed in the VP,. and the Bhp. This tradition is found in the Pabhosa and the Belava inscriptions. (2) Radha was the wife of Krsna. This is the Tamil tradition,, and is found in the Matsya-puratja. As mentioned above Nimbarka's sect accepts this tradition. Even Rupa Gosvamin effected a regular marriage between Radha and Krs.na in the tenth act of his LalitaMadhava.
49
(3) Radha was Kfs.na's favoured beloved. This tradition began with Hala's Gatha-sapta&atl, and found its culmination in Jayadeva's Glta-Govinda. It may be noted that other Prakrit verses, besides the three in the Sapta&atl, have been found mentioning Radha. These verses do not give any indication that Radha was worshipped, nor does the Glta-Govinda. (4) A Sanskrit literary tradition which is first seen in the Benlsarhhara. This tradition may have been derived from the Prakrit traditions. The Saduktikanâmrta (which is an anthology of verses compiled by an official of king Lakmanasena, A. D. 1179-1205) contains eleven verses which mention Radha. One of the verses was written by Lakmanasena himself, two by Umapatidhara, and one by Sarana, both of whom were attached to Laks.manasena's court and are mentioned in the Gita-Govinda. These verses probably indicate that the love of Radha. and Krna was the Sena monarch's favourite theme, and his court-poets tried to please the king by their treatment of this episode which culminated when Jayadeva produced the masterpiece. (5) The worship of the gopls and Radha began by the eighth or the ninth centuries at the latest. At the beginning, Radha may have been a folk-deity, but by the fifteenth century Radha and Damodara were being worshipped in Gujarat as the family deities of a ruling chieftain". (6) Last was the tradition of the later purarias. We have seen that Radha is mentioned in the Matsya as Rukmini's counterpart. The Skanda states in the Prahlada-sathhita, that she is one of the eight gopls, while the Bhavisyottara includes her among ten gopls. These two purilijas in their present form were written about 7th century A. D. though there may have been later interpolations. Elaborate accounts of divine Radha is found in later puranas like the Padma and the Brahmavaivarta. Radha is also treated in some detail as a divinity in the Sakta puraqas like the Devi-bhagavata and the Maha-bhagavata. It has been shown by Dr. R. C. Hazra that the chapters dealing with Radha. in the Devi-bhagavata have been lifted from the Brahmavaivarta. It does not, however, detract from its intrinsic importance. The evidence of the Sdkta pur&nas is important, for it shows conclusively that by this time the divinity of Radha. 4
50
had become such an integral part of the Brahmanical faith, that even the Saktas had to accept her as a divinity. It is difficult to establish the dates of these puraijas, particularly the sections dealing with Radha.XT Generally it may be held that most of these purarias were composed some time after the tenth century, and some portions of these puranas may have been composed very much later, as late as the fifteenth or even the sixteenth century. The puraqas were inflated from time to time by the addition of fresh materials to suit the exigencies of the time. They indicate the growing popularity of Radha. As already pointed out, Radha is not depicted as a divinity in the Glta-Govinda, though most of the puraijas which proclaim her divinity seem to have been composed in Bengal. It may be suggested, therefore, that unless there is good evidence to the contrary, the materials on Radha in the later purarias should be held to have been composed after the Glta-Govinda, that is, after the twelfth century A.D., roughly between A.D. 1200 to 1300. This conclusion is at least partly supported by the fact that, Gamges"a Upadhyaya in his Tattvacintamatfi (c. A.D. 1200) condemned the practitioners of parakiya-prema, and held them to be unfit for the study of navya-nyaya. It seems that the people whom GamgeSa had in mind were a peculiar sect of vaisnavas, whose doctrine later found an exponent in Ramananda Raya. (It may be recalled that the famous lyric, which Ramananda sang during his memorable first meeting with SrI-Caitanya, was in Brajabuli, ,and not in his native language, Oriya.) Some time later began the period of Vaisnava literature in Bengal and Mithila. Of the Vainava poets, the most * famous were Candidasa and Vidyapati. There were probably three poets named Candidasa, of whom only one, namely, Ananta Badu Candidasa was the author of the Srl-Krsqa-klrtana and about two dozens of the current 1200 and odd poems ascribed to Candidasa. Dr. S.K. Chatterjee has suggested that-'Ananta Badu Candidasa may have flourished 'about A.D. 1450, or even possibly, 1400.'17 It is not possible to discuss the problem of Candidasa's date here, but we are inclined to assign Ananta Badu an earlier date, sometime between A.D. 1250 to 1350.
RADHA-KR1SHNA AND SRI-CHA1TANYA
51
The great va/sjâva poet of Mithila was Vidyapati, whose songs became as popular in Bengal as they were in Mithila, for culturally Bengal and Mithila were closer then than they are now. The date of Vidyapati also is not known, but he is believed to have lived between A.D. 1350 and 1450. It is thus clear that a solid infrastructure of Vaisnava theological and devotional literature in praise of Radha-Krna existed in Bengal before the birth of 5>ri-Caitanya in February 1486. It is difficult to affirm, however, that in spite of Her being admitted to the Brahmanical pantheon Radha was worshipped by the upper castes. The available epigraphic evidence shows that centuries before Sri-Caitanya, the vaisgavas in Bengal included only lower castes like the banias and the valafikas (bauris)18. It is true that the official records of Vijayasena and Vallalasena describe them as Parama-mahesvara, while, in Lakmagasena's records the phrase is substituted by Parama-vaisnava or Parama-narasiriiha both for himself and his father. It has bees stated above that Laksmanasena patronized Radha-Krna literature ; that does not indicate however that he was a devotee of RadhaKrna. He is more likely to have been a worshipper of Vinu which is indicated by his epithet Parama-narasirhha. This conclusion is supported by the negative evidence that though his courtpoet composed the Dasavatara-stotra in praise of Krna, he did not write any stotra in praise of Radha. Other evidence also corroborates the conclusion that the upper classes in Bengal did not.worship Radha before the advent of 3riCaitanya. His biographies relate that when he first began to preach his doctrine, total emphasis was on nama-sarhklrtana. His contem-temporary, Murari Gupta, while describing Caitanya's ecstatic state during the Navadvipa-lila writes (2.1.25-26):
V
kacic = chrutva Harer nama gitam va vihvalah ksitau patati srutimatrena dandavat kampate kvacit kvacit gayati Govinda Krna Krna = eti sadaram sannakaijjhah kvacit kamparomancita-tanur-bhrsam
52
( 'On hearing the name of Hari or songs about Hari, he falls on the ground,, sometimes in a perturbed state, sometimes like a log of wood. Sometimes "with great devotion he utters the names of Govinda or Krsna in tuneful succession. - Sometimes his voice is choked and his body shivers and horripilates again and again.')
Narahari Sarkar, another contemporary has written that SriCaitanya 'induced feminine mode of delicacy and grace in males', and that 'not to speak of the vaisriavas, the vedantins (monists) and even the visayins (men of affairs) danced in the attitude of prakrti.'1* Both Murari Gupta and Narahari Sarkar had witnessed the Navadvlpa-lila, though Murari saw it from a much closer range than Narahari. Secondly, Narahari was influenced by the Gaura-nagara doctrine, wherefore he may have attributed certain attitudes to Caitanya's early life which really developed later. Whatever be the explanation for the discrepancy between the two accounts, it is evident that the name of Radha did not figure in Sn-Caitanya's kirtana before he went to Puri. Even when Caitanya left Puri on his south Indian tour, he had the name of Krssna alone on his lips. It was Raya Ramananda who told him that 'to attain KrsQa, one should adopt the attitude of a gopi, and continuously meditate on the dalliance of Radha and Krsua. One must give up the ideas of magnificence associated with Krsrja, and submit to the gopls, otherwise one can never attain him, as indeed even Lakml failed to do, though she worshipped him.' Caitanya then asked : 'What is the highest object of meditation ?' Ramananda replied : 'Radha and Krija'. This is the first time that the name of Radha enters in Caitanya's biography. It was also Ramaaanda who first discoverd that Caitanya was the incarnation of Radha and Krs.ija in one body. To him Sri-Caitanya declared : 'You know my essential-categories, Ma and rasa, hence I have revealed this form to you. My complexion is not fair, but it appears fair due to its contact with the body of Radha, who touches none but Krna. I concentrate my mind on her emotional feelings, and thus I taste the delicious sweetness of Krsija.'
t
gaura-amga nahe mor Radhamga-sparsan gopendra-sut vina tefiho na sparse anya jan
53
tafir bhave bhavita ami kari atmaman tave nija-madhurya-ras kari-asvadan (2.8.238-39) This revelation was the foundation of Gaudlya-vazâva mysticism. 4. Radha Krishna in Gaudiya-Vaisnavism We have been discussing up to now the historicity of Kj4a, development of Krna legends, and development of Rtdha cult. This type of historical analyses, however, is irrelevant for the understanding of Radha-Krna-Wva as it developed in Gaudlyavais.navism. J n Gaudiya-vaisnavism, Radhika is the idealized form of an ontological conception, none the less real because she is ethereal. The pious gosvamins of Vrndavana went into great details in describing her. It is in their language that Radha takes a definite form, a human form of superhuman love and adoration, and Radha-Krs.nallla adds a human dimension to the subtle theological and philosophical discussion. The vivid description of Radha. and of her union with Krna are related in everyday human terms ; still it is Ills.; a divine sport, for no ordinary human being can take part in nor perceive it. Baladeva Vidyabhusana in interpreting lokavat tu Ilia kaivaiyam (Brahma-sutra, 2.1.33) makes out that Ilia or sport is the overflow of the joy within. God is self-sufficient. He is not constrained. by an inner necessity to create, nor does He depend on others. But he is also fecundity. His joy overflows into existence. This spontaneous outflow is symbolized by the theory-of Ilia. In this Ilia, Radhika is Krsna's hladinx-iakti, but she is not the part nor the representation of the hdkti; she is the iakti herself in its fullest amplitude. Sri-K.ris.aa is the Purria-iaktimat, Radha is the Purnft-Sakti, or as Baladeva Vidyabhusana writes, Radha adyah purriah iaktayah. In the commentary he explains that by adyah (et cetera) is meant Candravali. But Radha. is superior to Candravall, her nearest rival, as Rupa Gosvamin points out in his Ujjvala Nilamani:
54
tayor apy = ubhayor madhye Radhika sarvath = adhika. maha-bhava-svarup = eyam gunair ati variyasi hladini ya maha-saktih sarva-sakti variyasi tat sara-bhava-rup = e'yam iti tantre pratisthita
(Among the two, Radha and Candravall, Radhika is always superior. She is the realization of the principal emotion, being the concretized form of the ideal hladinl-Sakti (the energy of bliss), which is the best or the most potent of all the Saktis. In Radhika the cognizable properties or attributes or accidents of material and non-material world have been conceived as inhering in or affecting the essential nature underlying the phenomenon of madhura-rasd).
The gopis or milk-maids are Radhika's kaya-vyuha, though they differ from her in form and nature. The delight of rasa does not sparkle nor increase without a sufficient number of partners ; therefore, the Vta.ja.-devis, that is the gopls, are manifested as helpmates in the Vraja-/i/a of Radha-Krna. This Ilia, the divine sport, has been described in everyday human terms. In the Ujjvala-Nilamai}it Rupa Gosvamin has written : darSan-alimgan = adinam anukulyan nievaya yunor ullasam arohan bhavah sambhoga iryate
( The j youthful couple look at each other, [ then ] they embrace and their delight mounts, then their passion is said to be replete.)
Commenting on this verse, JIva Gosvamin writes : 'anukulyad iti kamamayah sambhoga vyavrttal}', that is, 'sexual pleasure is excluded'. For, the description here is of preman, which is as different from kama as gold is from iron. As Krnadasa Kaviraja has said : atmendriya-priti-iccha tare bali karn Krs.nendriya-priti-iccha dhare prema nam (1.4.141) But Sri-Kr,na-tava is really kama-tattva. Siri-Krgna-iija iskama-blja and 6rI-Krna-gaja/ri is Kama-gayatrl. These were jmpart-
55
ed by Ramananda to Sri-Caitanya, and by SrI-Caitanya to Sanatana Gosvamin. {Caitanya-caritamrta, 2.8.109, 2.21.104). But kama, according to Panini (3.3.153), means wish, desire, or longing for an object; for example, kamo me bhuhjita bhavan means, 'my wish is that you should eat'. (3.3.153). The object of desire, or of love is also kama. The desire for Krna, and its object, Krna,, are both kama, hence the kama-blja and the kama-g&yatri are aids to attain Him. This kama is not physical desire. Though essentially the mundane {prakrta) kama and the celestial (aprakrta) kama have their origin in desire, the former is gross and the latter is pure, which form their basic difference. From the action of the mundane kama, the phenomenal world is created ; unless the kdma is vanquished, it is not possible to go beyond the realm of maya and obtain the state of perpetual emotion (nitya-bhava), mahabhava, or even reach the level of bhilva (pure emotion). Similarly, it is not possible to attain maha-caitanya (super-consciousness) without freeing the self from the celestial kama. Therefore, in the union of Radha-Krna, kama has to be excluded. As Dr. Gopinath Kaviraj has said : The mystic Ma of RadhaKrna is in reality a pleasant variation of the sweet melody of kama (kama-kala-vilasa) ... ThoughSrl-Krnais the Parama-purusa(ultimate reality), He is unable to visualize maha-caitanya, unless He is united with Radha. But the union of Radha with Krna is not possible till she has drawn to herself the poignancy of the entire realm of universal emotion, which she has to hold and retain within herself as she proceeds alone in her adventurous journey of love towards the Parama-purusa, and at the end she dedicates herself at his feet. By dedicating herself, Radha takes her eternal place in the essence of Srl-Krna, and it is only then, and not before, that Sri-Krna can be called united with Radha, or qualified by Radha. At other times, 5>rI-Krs.na being bereft of his kakti is apitrna (imperfect), and is therefore incapable of conquering (celestial) kama. As Krsnadasa Kaviraj has said : Radha-samge yada bhati tada Madana-mohanah anyatha visva-moho'pi svayam Madana-mohitah (Govinda-lilamrta,
13.29)
56
( When Krsna is with Radha, He attracts the universe; alone He may still attract the universe, but is Himself influenced by Cupid.)
In the rasa-maitdala, Radha and Krna are surrounded by the sakhis; with each sakhl there is one Krsna, and they begin to dance. The dance over, they leave the rasa-maridala, leaving behind Radha, Krna, and the nitya-siddha-aakhis {nitya sakhis are those whose partiality is for Radha in distinction to the sakhis whose partiality is for Krs.a). Then Radha and Krna begin to dance the rasa-Ma. Ultimately even the nitya-siddha-sakhls also depart from the rasamaydala, leaving Radha alone with Krna to consummate her destiny, which is to be merged with Krna, and the dance of duality ends in ultimate unity. pahilahi raga nayana-bhamga bhela anudina badhala abadhi na gela na so ramana na ham ramani duhufi mana manobhava peala jani (Caitanya-caritamrta, 2.8.152-53) From this unity of Radha-Krna emerges the ultimate rasa: Raso vai sah ; He indeed is rasa. By himself Krsna is advaya-jnanatattva. As Krnadasa Kaviraja has said in the Caitanya-caritamrta : advaya-jnana-tattva Vraje Vrajendra-nandan (2.20.131) and again, advaya-jfiana-tattva Krna svayam bhagavan (2.22.5) United with Radha, he is advaya-rasa-tattva. Sri-Caitanva SrI-Caitanya is worshipped by the Gaudiya-vaisqavas as dual incarnation of Radha and Krsna. A verse attributed to Sanatana Gosvamin says : Radha-Krna-pranaya-vikrtir = hladini-saktir = asmad ekatmanav = api bhuvi pura deha-bhedarh gatau tau Caitany=akhyam prakatam adhuna tad=dvayam c=aikam aptam Radha-bhava-dyuti-subalitam naumi Krna-svarupam (Radha, the hlMinl-Sakti of Krsna is thefinalevolute of Krsna's sentiment of love; hence though they were originally a single entity, later they
RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHATTANYA
57
appeared in the world in two bodies. The two entities, now having attained unity, is manifested in Caitanya, to whom I bow, I and who is ] the esserice of Kr$na variegated by the brightness of the emotion of Radha. )
In his Stavavall, Raghunandana-dasa Gosvaminsays that, 'Krsna, having once fallen in love with his own beauty reflected in a mirror, and desiring to taste his own sweetness as it was tasted by Radha, was born in Gauda, in one indivisible body with fair complexion belonging to Radha who was his own. In his sanikirtana, Caitanya has merely sung with delight his own sweet names.' Krnadasa Kaviraja has quoted this verse in the Caitanya-caritamxta, as also the following, which seems to have developed the idea: J>ri-Radhayah pranaya-mahima kidrso v=anay=aiv= asvadyo yen=adbhuta-madhurima kIdrSo va madiyah saukhyam c=asya mad=anubhavatah kldrsam v=eti lobhat tad.bhav-adhyah samajani Saci-garbha-sindhau Harlnduh
(What is the nature of Radlia's glorious love ? What is the nature of love she finds in me? What is the nature of the bliss she feels in loving me ? With this hankering, the moon that was Hari was born in Sacl's womb [ as Caitanya ].)
Thus to the Gaudlya-va/sflaras, Jsrl-Caitanya combines in himself the attributes of Krna, the Rasaraja, and of Radhika, the embodiment ot the Mahabhava : the conscious saktimat with the emotionally impulsive love of sakti. In SrI-Caitanya, the limited vision of the devotee gets a glimpse of the infinite mystery of Radha-Krna-/f/a, which he himself is said to have revealed to Ramananda Raya : tabe hasi tare prabhu dekhaila svarSp rasaraj mahabhav dul ekrap (Caitanya-caritamrta, 2.8.233) Devotional love of the madhura type cannot find its fulfilment so long as there is separation:between the devotee and the Lord-beloved. Distinction implies obscuration, which is an impediment to the complete consummation of love. To accomplish it, the object of devotion has to appear as its recipient and also as its bestower. In this idealistic scheme, attainment of bliss is the highest goal, which has been idealized and realized in the unity-in-duality of Radha-Krna. Caitanya, the personification of this doctrine, concretizes in himself passionate love in its plenitude symbolized by Radha, and Krna, the symbol of eternal bliss.
REFERENCES 1. Rene Grousset: The Sum of History, translated by Helen and A. TemplePatterson, Hadleigh, 1951-, p. 99. la The HarivaMa, Being the Khila or Supplement to the Mahabharata ed. by P. L. Vaidya, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona. 1969, Vol. I, Intr., p. xxvii. 2. Ibid, p. xxxix. This date is assigned for Chapters 1-98 of the Critical Edition. For the rest Dr. Vaidya suggests A D . 400, ibid, p. xv. 3. All references to the Mbh are to the Critical Edition published by the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. 4. P.V. Kane, History of the DharmaSastra, Poona, Vol. V, 1962, p. 909, For the date of the Bhagavata-purSna see R. C. Hazra : New Indian Antiquary, Vol. I (1938-39), pp. 522-25. According to Dr. Hazra, the Bhagavata-nuraw was probably composed during the first half of the sixth century A. D. 5. 'DSmodara is a word of uncertain meaning, but is derived from daman which means a chaplet or garland. Udara or abdomen is the centre of the body. In rasa-Ilia the milkmaids arranged themselves in a circle with Krsna in the centre. If they are conceived as a garland (daman) Krsna may be referred to as the Damodara or 'centre of the garland'. 6. DvyaSraya-mahakavya, 3.7.; TrisasfiSaMaka-purusa-carita, tr., Vol. IV P. 14. 7. Tatparyaprakasa commentary on the Yogavasisfha, published with the text, 2 volumes. Bombay, 1918. The commentator was most probably reluctant to admit the BhP as an authority. 8. For the date of Haia see my Concise History of Ancient India, Vol. I, p . 224 fn. 20, to be published shortly. 9. For a discussion of Bhatta Narayana's date, see introduction to the BenlsamhSra by A. B. Gajendragadkar, p. 15, who accepts the date suggested by Julius Grill, which is 6th or 7th century A. D . 10. Actually the Prakrit form is Aihan, Ahibannya or Ahimanyu. It is interesting to note that the Sanskrit form of Abhimanyu is found in the Sanskrit verse, quoted in the Sri-Krsna-k'irtana. The form Aihan is found in the late Mahabhagavata-purana ( c. A. D. 1200 ). 11. Kane, op. cit. ,Vol. V, p. 900. 12. Surat Plates of Caulukya Kirtiraja, ed. by D. B. Diskalkar in K. B. Pathak Commemoration Volume, p, 294. 13. N. G. Majumder : Inscriptions of Bengal, III, p. 19, v. 4. 14. Indian Antiquary, VI, p. 50, Epigraphia Indica, X X m , pp. 108, 111.
REFERENCES
59-
15. Mandalika-mahakavya, ed. H. D. Velankar, Bharatiya Vidya, XIV, P.36. 16. For dates of ths puraifas seeR. C. Hazra : Studies in Puranic Records ; and. Studies in the Upapuranas, 2 volumes, Calcutta, 1958 and 1963 ; and P. V. Kane, History of the DharmaSctstra, Poona, Vol. V, Part 2, Poona, 1963,. pp. 887-912. For a discussion of the purUna materials on Radha, see A.K. Majumdar : A Note on the Development of the Badha Cult, Annals of theBhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol. XXXVI, 1956, pp. 231-257. 17. S. K. Chatterjee in History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. VI, Delhi Sultanate, Ed. R. C. Majumdar, Bombay, Second Edition, 1967, p. 512. 18. For references see A. K. Majumdar: Caitanya: His Life and Doctrine, Bombay, 1969, p. 79, f. n. 14. 19. For this passage and its translation see ibid, pp. 140, and p. 144, note 6,. where I have translated praktti as 'milkmaid' though the word literally means 'female'.
CHAPTER III
PHILOSOPHY
I. Introduction
Ukrhkara has said : 'manusya-loke hi sastr=adhikarah' (on Glta 4.12), for man's quest for God is at the bottom of human existence. In ancient and medieval India, human life was considered to be a transitional stage in the soul's journey to its destined goal of permanent bliss. Men of contemplative and spiritual nature were born again and again in this ancient land even in the darkest periods of her history to guide the seekers of truth. And they uplifted the society, and brought to the multitude the much needed r'ay of hope. Those guides, or gurus, were the seers and the saints. There were others, few in number, whose doctrines have left an imperishable mark-on the history of our country. They are called avataras, scions of godhead descended from heaven to earth to redeem man. Their mystical quests have opened perdurable routes over which have travelled countless followers in man's eternal pursuit of the Ultimate Reality. The attitude of the avataras has been summarised by Buddha. The Majjhima-nikciya records him as saying: 'One, who indulges in theoretical speculation on the soul and the world while he is writhing in pain, behaves like the foolish man with a poisonous arrow plunged into his flank, whiling away time on idle speculation regarding the origin, the maker, and the thrower of the arrow, instead of trying to pull it out immediately.' Hence Buddha promulgated the four noble-truths, which relates to duhkha (suffering), duhkhasamudaya (causes of suffering), dul}kha-nirodha (removal of suffering), and the duhkha-nirodha-marga (the way to remove suffering). (Atfguttara-nikaya, 3.61.6 ; Digha-nikaya, 22.4.5.) . The ways or margas opened by the avataras, seers, or saints to remove the sufferings of human-bondage are known as the sadhanamargas, which it is difficult to render into English. The word sadhana is derived from the root sadh, meaning ' to go straight to any goal or aim', 'attain an object', or, ' to be successful'. Sadhana,
PHILOSOPHY
61
therefore, means 'accomplishment', 'fulfilment', or 'completion'. In a secondary sense, sadhana also means 'worship', or 'adoration'. Thus the phrase ^sadhancL-marga may be rendered as ' the road which, leads to the fulfilment of human destiny through contemplation, or worship of God'. Every religious leader, who has started a new order or sect, has opened a new path or sadhana-marga. And a religious order has enjoyed supremacy and esteem so long its followers, enamoured of an easy life or the attractions of cheap popularity, did not recklessly meander into the byways of pseudo-spiritual pastures. Then the precious vista was lost, and a new avatar a appeared to open another way. Not that the older one was wrong, or that the new mode was superior: changing time demands new forms. As Sri-Ramakrsna Paramahamsa used to say: 'The coins of the Sultanate are not used as legal-tender in the Nawab's regime.' Every important sect or sampradaya has to justify its existence on logical basis, which has led to the establishment of various schoolsof philosophy. In Indian content, however, the word ' philosophy' needs explanation. Philosophy is the rationalization of experience. But then, what is experience? Western philosophy can be broadly divided into two complementary parts, epistemology and metaphysics, both of which are integral parts. of Indian philosophy. But while Western metaphysics is the interpretation of either observable or recorded phenomenon on the basis of a logical system, Indian philosophy, properly called darSana, attempts at systematizing the experience of reality. Dar&ana means realization, which is more important than the systematic exposition of philosophical view or logical analysis. This intuitive realization can be achieved only through sadhana, and only those, who have followed the path and reached the goal, are entitled to give discourses on darsana. Others have been sternly rebuked by &arhkara: atmaha svayam miidhah anyan ca vyamohayati sastrartha-sampradaya-rahitatvat Srutahanim asruta-kalpanam ca kurvan/ tasmad asampradayavit sarva-sastravid = api murkhavad=eva upeks.aniyah
( A man who does not belong to a sect, has no access to the elucidation of the scriptures by any sect; so he cannot explain the scriptures in accordance with the Vedas [ or tradition ] and has recourse to non-Vedic [ or non-traditional, i.e., false ] explanation, thereby ruining himself and misguiding others.
62
Therefore, a man who does not belong to any sect should be ignored as a fool, even if he knows all the scriptures. On Gita, 13.2.)
Again in introducing Chapter 15 of the Gita, Slamkara says: viraktasya hi samsarad bhagavat-tattva-jfiane adhikaro na anyasya iti
( Only a man who has no attachment to material life is capable of realizing 'the supreme reality.)
These are formidable injunctions, using the word in its legal sense. It becomes, therefore, difficult for people like ourselves to talk on Indian philosophy. As Professor A.LArberry has commented, 'the obscurities of a doctrine based largely on experience [ are ] in their very nature well nigh incommunicable.' The communication gap is very pronounced in all systems of Indian philosophy. It is only the teachers of Gaudiya-vais.navism, the Gosvamins, who have presented the analysis of the nature of religious emotion and fervour in all its aspects. The love of Krsna (Krsna-rati) was installed as the dominant feeling (sthayibhava, root emotion), which through its appropriate excitants (anubhavas) and auxiliaries- (vyabhicari-bhdvas) becomes the bhakti-rasa in the mind of the devotee. The texts on rasa are the most outstanding contribution of Gaudiya-vainavism to Hindu philosophical literature. It is necessary to remember that Gaudlya-vaisnavism is basically a form of Vedanta philosophy. Vedanta is often identified in popular mind with Samkara's Nlni&esa-advaita doctrine, but in fact all the Vainava schools from the Visistadvaita of Ramanujacarya to the Acintya-bhedabheda of 5>n-Caitanya are expositions of the Vedanta philosophy. The distinguishing feature of Gaudiya-vaina\ism is that, while the older schools accept only the prasth&na-trayis ( Upanisads, Brahma-sutra, and the Gita) as the authoritative texts, Sri-Caitanya added, what may be called, the fourth dimension to the Vedanta philosophy, by including the Bhagavata-puraqa as equally authoritative. Explaining his ^doctrine to Sanatana Gosvamin, Sri-Caitanya said: Krsna-bhakti-rasa-svarup Sri-Bhagavata tate Veda-s"astra haite parama-mahattva ataev Bhagavat karaha vicar iha haite pabe sutra-^rutir artha-sar (Caitanya-caritamrta, 2.25.110-11)
PHILOSOPHY
63
To support this contention the third verse of the Bhagavata has been cited here: nigama-kalpa-taror = galitam phalarh Suka-mukhad amrta-drava-samyutam pivata Bhagavatam rasarh alayarh muhur=aho rasika bhuvi bhavukah (1.1.3)
('The Bhagavata is the fruit of the kalpa tree [which is capable of conferring any bounty asked for], i t (the Bhagavata) has descended from the mouth of iuka mixed with ambrosia. Ye virtuous readers, drink again and again this elixir of Bhagavata [till ye have attained the final beatitude].)
This claim can be sustained after a deep analysis of the Bhagavata which cannot be attempted here. It is a large text, and none too easy, though it contains many mythological episodes which are usually its main attraction at a popular level. 2. Ethics There is one story in the Bhagavata which is often cited by its modern critics as an example of its ethical content. It is the story of Ajamila, related by Suka under the following circumstances. Pariks.it asked &uka as to how a person can be saved from going to hell. In reply Suka stated : 'If a person does not expiate for his sinful acts mentally, physically and verbally by due penances, he will have to go to hell. Therefore, before the body is assailed by physical infirmities a person should make suitable amends for his sins as an expert physician treats diseases.' The explanation failed to satisfy Parlk|it, who said that since people repeat their crimes, penances were as useless as washing an elephant which after bathing again covers itself with dirt. In reply 6uka admitted that a sin cannot be wholly expiated by the mere performance of penances, if the sinner is under the influence of ignorance. 'But just as burning flames of fire destroy clusters of bamboo trees, similarly persons steadfast in their religious faith uproot their sins by the observance of religious austerities (tapas = meditation connected with the practice of personal self-denial or bodily mortification), by brahmacarya (continence), by Sama and dama (suppression of mental and physical cravings,) by tyaga (charity), by adherence to truth (satya), and purity (iauca). But some persons devoted to Vasudeva destroy all their sins by bhakti,
64
as sun destroys the mist. O King, a sinner is not as cleaned by tapas etc. as he is by dedicating himself, heart and soul, to Krna. The pious scidhus have recourse to this path. As the rivers cannot purify a jar of wine, so the penances cannot absolve a person of his sins if he is averse from Narayana. Krna's devotees, Suka added, 'are purified of sins, and do not see the noose of Yama even in their dreams' (6.1.1-18). Up to this point, Suka was practically elucidating Srl-Krna'steaching in the Glta (9.30-1) : api cet suduracaro bhajate mam ananyabhak sadhur = eva sa mantavyah samyag vyavasito hi sah kipram bhavati dharmatma sasvac = chantim nigacchati Kaunteya pratijanihi na me bhaktah pranas"yati
(Though man be dipped in the gravest sin, let him but love me in utter devotion, and he is to be regarded as virtuous ; (for) he has made the correct endeavour. Holiness shall soon refashion his nature to eternal peace. O son of Kunti, of this be certain : he that loves me shall not perish.)
The undertaking given to the devotees in the Gita is a part and parcel of Vedanta, and the pith and substance of bhakti-yoga. If the Lord had not given this assurance to his devotees, His gospel would have ceased to be the message of universal love. Just as the validity of political or economic doctrines depends on their theoretical possibilities of leading towards an ideal social life, so a religious creed becomes acceptable when it points the way to the redemption of one and all, including particularly the sinners. The saints do not need Him for their salvation, at least not to the extent as the sinners do. As the Bhagavata (1.7.13) says : atmaramas = ca munayo nirgrantha apy = urukrame kurvanty = ahaitukim bhaktim ittham-bhuta-guno Harih
IKi'.lxr. / /.NBHKCSOEHICAii
* 65
, i s ^ e igtepyP'rJJ^r>'5.grace;rtbatsypo thejlihetated soulsjiwhdlia've cut asunder their knots of b mdage and have found delight in thp ^.tjnaa.rajs deycted to Him for no [ apparent 1 reason.)
;i(>".-ia.- ' ; / : ;.vrt r : v: 5 tf J . . ,'.o :- y: < i, :,\'; ISO.^-J v>ii
G ta niim^? M (3 : -1L7-A8^SQ ay Jthat one,; who has foundj'deli|bt^nd îtisfaC)1jiop,wdpeafiQ imfhe. Atmaa;: is*io. longer,obliged to-perform fi _,any .jciad (Of action,-, fHe,-r|as;nthiag torgain in this wo"rid by action, d i n g tOilosg-tjyTrefrainingfroin actioni Therdfore,:'a stated jr th&,BJiQgavafa says, they haVe:Eeaourse to 'bh&kti! wKicB;for the sinner is a necessity if he wantSitO redBem^his:erriitg:self.i!5 3 z.i ,i ,,Wev.can:nowjtak<emp the Ajaraita epiS6de"whien'ednhot'fee1 under-, Stood propeiiy if torniftrom its' proper coffteft.- As-sMie\l : aboVci in to.-tPafUcsit'si rejoinder abou-tbe:iftefncatfy-GTperiiaiiefes,r;/uka aid that a devotee of Krr;aJiCa!anot M-eiv&H-^p'pr6^ched Bjf'" the OJieseingcES. of tYinuannrAs.vari e^ffl^leiihe" relates Âjadiila's story. J:ir:::>:.':V ' i
,I.\I \Thfere Was-a'&aA/Mjrty in Kaifatij, named;-Ajamila;'^lio lived with shis maid-'servant.^He Was dev6iarof'aliig6tflt'6irefenil7(5fl(/fcdtra), .icomteitted1 tlgh^wayi rotlBSfy;5 'indulge;d- : irf !: iaAbft l ng,"ahd cheated .vpeopiei:in 'order' tb 4r6fifitaiS;"hls' fainH/ cbrhsris!tirigi;6F ten1 'sons 'raised b y - h t o o a that-maid-seWarit. AjSmila Was extre('m'feiy-?ond"6f' his i youngest sonv'Jtlamed Narayan^, : i AnSit Wa^ ;o4i-fiifn;that'1ne:fixed 'his t mmd:at the^me.'of his'death 3 . ;t -Then h6- saVv tfi'He messengers1' of :Sieath (YaMa'tiu'tdygppiSaftfiing Mtn^'hte M&sfefiskid #ah ;i grfe^ i: fear, . aadi.exclaim*d2:i ^Nataya'ha, NSfay&na^ Irirniyaiat^ly; tne'r retainers pp p gers of Deaths aridêêmigsSri^s 1 h?r!Haiiir M to"vs>nd
^ a / g e j ^ Ajanjila'js.soyj.-.juvc)
(
r . i:: t :: : n r . : : r , z . i (< i \ u i
.vlhe'^messengersrof death' related rie-'^vJcfetd deied^cbnirriitted by *- j: j .Theyj hpwewer; recalied: thati Ajamilay!>t fee^giri'v^tH-.^was hottsebo.lden>;K;ne dajwhe wentoithe ftfrtst d t t h e bidding Kc and .theie he v?ita4S!ted '*las'civi6lis-^ce'nef-;o!"]6veiudm caujJle. "JlCh5sisceaer;imp*essedhimi'i^):;prof61iindly he:practically lost'.His seosesând feli^loMetttiy in'%ve fvftfi:&at Itwas;tD maimtaimher;- t h a t /$%&&.& had'tinned a" criftiihal. lv ;thej 'messengers ofiYama>':pointedfOQl$ that ;SitfCe- Ajamiia fhad himself of his sinsvby any expfetfory rites, 'he would have -Hto, go>; tto; Yama'.&ataade' for pnoper atonement; -^PO'thiS'the "enfissaftHari'-iirejained.t thai.'ia sMnsef isâott pftrifised^sb mueli :; by ; 'the 5
66
observance of expiating ceremonials and other means as by uttering the name of Hari'. Their dialogue was a long one, at the end of which the 'messengers of Yama' retired, and, as Ajamila regained life, the 'emissaries of Visnu' also left. But Ajamila had heard their conversation. That was enough for him. He was seized with sincere repentance. He promised that he would now get rid of nescience, he would be a friend to every one, peaceful, and kind. He decided to root out his ego, and fix his mind on Bhagavat. Thus resolved, Ajamila repaired to Hardwar (Gamgadvara), and there he began to practise yoga. Thereafter, by means of steady application, Ajamila succeeded in isolating his 'self from its attributes, and he realized the identification of his soul with Brahman. At this stage, the emissaries of Vinu returned to him, and took him to Vaikuntha. The moral of Ajamila's story is that, as pointed out by MM. Kane, 'a single heart-felt invocation of the name of God, a single act of faith after repentance, and complete surrender to God's will, cancels the result of a whole life of crime and sin. 1 In other words, 'eternal damnation' is not a part of Hindu religion or ethics. It should also be noted that Ajamila did not go to heaven by uttering the name of God on his death-bed; he was granted a reprieve to purify himself of his past misdeeds. According to Vedanta, the Self is 'nityasuddha, mukta, and buddha'. As soon as a man realises it, he cuts through the bondage of Maya, and regains his primal state. Ajamila's story is an example of this well-known doctrine. It has to be pointed out in this connection, that all such stories as that of Ajamila and others found in other texfs are arthavadas, or laudatory passages, meant for praise and must not betaken as a vidhi or 'absolute rule'. Such arthavada passages abound in the Vedas and their validity has been discussed in the Jaimini-sutra (1.2.1-9). There, Sabarasvamin has explained that, if the result of a particular action is very highly praised, people are likely to be induced to perform that action. Therefore, the arthavada passages by lavishly praising the results of an action, induce people to act according to the 'vidhi' or rule. The rule or vidhi in the present instance is that one should meditate on the name of Narayana. Ajamila's story exaggerates the result of reciting His name, but thereby it serves the
PHILOSOPHY
67
purpose of recalling people to the path of devotion. As the Mimamsa rules of interpretation were very well-known in ancient India, stories like that of Ajamila were never misunderstood. Finally, there is some Upanisadic sanction for Ajamila story. The CMndogya Upanisad says (7.1.4) : nama va Rg-vedo Yajurvedah Sama-veda...(name indeed is Rg-veda, Yajur-veda, Sam-veda). Though this passage and those which follow do not preach -the meditation on Name as it came to be understood later, it is difficult to deny that they contain the germ of the idea. However, the importance of the last idea before death is more clearly expressed in the CMndogya (3.14.1) which states: 'Now, verily a person consists of purpose (kratu-maya). According to the purpose which a person has in this world, thus does he become on departing hence. So let him form for himself a purpose.' Again the Chandogya (8.1.6 and 8.2.10) discoursing on the nature of the soul says: 'As here on earth the work which is won by work {karma-jita-lokd) becomes destroyed, even so there the world which is won by merit (punyajita-loka) becomes destroyed....Of whatever object he becomes desirous, whatever desire hs desires, merely out of his conception it arises. Possessed of it he is happy.' In lid (17) the dying person's prayer i s : 'O purpose {kratu), remember. The deed (krta) remember.' And the Brhadaranyaka (4.4.5) says : '... But people say : "A person is made [not of acts, but] of desires only." [In reply to this I say] "As is his desire, such is his resolve ( kratu); as is his resolve, such the action he performs ; what action {karma) he performs, that he procures for himself." ' The Gita (8.5-6) also says : antakale ca mam eva smaran muktva kalevaram yah:prayati sa mad-bhavam yati n = asty = atra samSayah (A man who at the hour of death leaves his body with his consciousness absorbed in me, will be united in me; be certain of that.) yam yam v = api smaran bhavam tyajaty = ante kalevaram tarn tam ev = aiti kaunteya sada tadbhava-bhavitah
68
GAVDii^-'vkiMkwA STUDIES
(Whatever" a^rHan rememb'ers last, whetfi'he'iis ledvftig the bodyj V/IU b e b y W a t - aoi\the hereafter; because iTthat iswill be what his i t o &t'jisr|ife,) t; lxu.-;\/^ > . n. <*.-! Comirfentingion^hsse twjKversesiSarakara
\v.\ .-.'.-y.i t mi - i . i . !v;\?.\i\\,! .--.>i:i\\m-.V i i'
i. ,-v-vul . ,v,,mar#aa-ka!e,pajra^ i nyvj ;rparjtyajya,4ar^rarii'yah ; gacch3tisa.y : ai^r;av3in i
,,., >v ,,,,
u v. .>, na.YfitL, .Yarij.-jtarh d.evata-,Yies.aib[ pintay.an ,., , rw.xv -, -,;; parityaj^ti praQar;yiyogar)kaJ|e,:kalevatarii ,.,.,, ,,();it
,abh.yast9 yena^Mad-bhaya bh^vitah san,. .. ,
, ., ,.(
.Al ^Theman^whQ^t.Jlje hour of,,death, remembers^ Visnu^ and dies, attains, the . Va.ijnava-fa^va, (essential nature of Vis'nu). There 'can' be no doubt regarding 'this, "whichever god''""a man tvh"inks 'of a'f the ' Hb'ur' df 'death; he aitaiiis'that J ' f)'articularl^'remeVnbered*istate'i6f scohdWic>n \bhSid).' >TadbhBta'tneanSi 'the: feeling. ^W-tievotion or*;farth; he wboiby repeated, acts ofdevotioniis practised in Tememuberiag.him i stad-bh&ya-bhpyitq,)* . - > . i e . - i > ;. : .... > I . M I ' .;):::<?
'"! We have i discussed atrjsome length the story;<rf:Ajamilft. And its > implications,! *ofefute the charge ibrowghtagainst Indian phiJLo&ophy > that it has-no ethical content, mlt would b?, ,a digrssiQ^. from, our 'present purpose t to go into titen proble^n, pf the comparatiM&ryalue if-ethics and dievotion in; celigion. We mayy howey^r,-.cife here o the 'iopinioaiof :Aldous< Huxley,as sxpnesspd in hiSjbookT^-.-P^gwjtu'a/ Philosophy, wh'ere: he/ispeaksôf,: ttree forms .1 of -modesn! vidfllatry which corrode culture and obstruct the pr9gressly3f civilization. Thefirst is technological idolatry, which attributes human redemption . and liberation to material progress only,rrrthe gadget culture. The second or political idolatryattributesrhumaBrihappiness exclusively to social and economic organizations. And.lastly.comes moral idolatry: this consists in th& woishipjof êthical ideals instead of God in an attempt to acquire virtue, which is treated as an end in itself and not wr as a We'an-iftfr ah1 eVd'. "' Cbmnrentifag bn {his form of idolatry Huxley
states:
|
' '
" " " " ':
" - " = ' ' ( i - " ^ ' "
'The idolatroiis' !wi6;rship"bf 'ethical'v'lflues'm and for themselves defeats its own objectand'defektii it net-only 1 beeause there is a lack of all-round deveiopm'ehtj, but &Isb and above all because even the highest forms of moral iHolat'fyâre^'Goti-'ec'lipsing and therefore
. . i PHILQSQSHY; ., v ;,- i t
69
igurantee the' idolater against the enlightening and liberating knowti.

l e d g b o f R e a l i t y . ' >>* > ' >- : ; ' . . . ' . T H . T : -;. : i nui,, ; , - J W : ; I : > ; a u>
In' a''sense, Indian religious-philosophy is si!pra-ethicii'.li:;Everylir actibn produces results. Thereforeth'e 'cessation of Activities''or ;; thedeîc'ation of its'1 Quits' to Krâ'(;Gâ:' ! ^^28) l Wds^bnside] i ed > i essential to"* render a maniiapp'y.' This happiness must Be "real and not apparent^ eternal'and' perpetual arid ! hbt ttarisitoiy'and ephe'rrier1-*^ al. Aii'the sadhana-margas were devised' to '1'ead '48 this Mmrriutn borium, b'lily the definition of'h'appihess'd'ifie'red."'" ; 1 ; l i ' : ! ':r ''"''
3. .
Gaudiya-va?^Havism, as(1we;âVe said, Is"one : bf the schools 6f" Vedantav; Indeed it was thei'last offshdbtUl6f the mighty1 'VBdas*ta> tree.: Since'tlie formulation of thd :Acititya1bheda'bBeda pliilbso'phy^ of Gaudlya7vainavisnii fthere has-been no lOtheo major, interpretation of Vedanta) doctrine: Vedanta began with the vision of the Vedip,,; seers recorded in. the Upaniads.; ; It was: systematically airiangednin^v the Brahma-sutra. - Acarya \ Samkara in the beginning, of the ninth) century A.D.; uprooted the decadenttBuddhism andMEe-established Vedanta on a logical rbasis, refuting the, validity^ allt)iOther: conteoi-. porasyiSystems of philosophy..! :T,heniieameiseveral.gEeat commenta,t/(i tors vof the. Srahma-siitra. Last waSi'Baladeva VidyalpthSsarjia, whQv' wrote his Gavindabha&ya commentary.'& -the, BrahmanSUtra .in thfti< eighteenth ucentary to establish-the\Acinfeya>-bhedabheda\philosQphyi of the>Gaudiya-va/savas. n. in--:w " < i1 :;,\v, , nThepfoblems dealt with in' Vedanta :may! be resolved into> thredvi( namely, nature of the Ultimate Reality, nature of the. individual") soul,-arid the relation'between the Ultimate Reality and the indivi- ' dual oul.- To Sathkarathe individual Soul was identical with Brafa-^ man^ orf1 Ultimate' 'Reality. 'According1'to ; Ramanuja,' Brahmatt t comprises within himself elements of plurality, includirig matters.! withj itg; yaripus mqd\$catipps,.)ap1d.,S9uls .of differenf,.,classes and degrees. tiQt (soul).,and acit (matterâre entirely deppn^fsnt on and., subsfi/vient^Bvara^who pervades an^ ,rules, all, things,, mat^ri^,,, .and"tton,-materialv,fts -the antgty<itnir}r or the in.-4weHirig-self.IlilT('he, ( Bhedlibheda sq^qojj.pf Niffibark'a recognises both id^jntity and di- | fference between Brahman and the jha. The unity ar^d.iffeje.nc.e,,,,
70
that exist between the individuals and Brahman is held to be natural and unconditional. The difference between the views of Nimbarka and Ratnanuja is that, while the latter considers that the souls and the matter qualify the nature of Brahman and are in that sense one with it, Nimbarka repudiates the concept of permanent modification of the nature of Brahman by the souls and matter. According to Madhvacarya, the difference between Brahman and individual souls is real and ultimate, and does not disappear even in the state of release. The freed souls come close to God, but never become on& with him. According to Vallabhacarya, individual souls come out of Brahman, like sparks from fire. The jlva is supported and controlled by Brahman. The limitation of the jlva is that, it can enjoy ananda but can never be ananda-maya. Brahman is \hs ananda-maya; He gives ananda to the jlvas. As the giver and the receiver cannot be one, Brahman and the jlva can never be identical. The position of the Gandiysi-vaistiavas is different from all these schools. One of the reasons for this difference is that, the Gaudiyavaisnavas relied to a much greater extent than any other school on the Bhp. The main doctrine of the Gaudiya-va/sava.s were formulated by the gosvamins in the sixteenth century, with the Bhp as their principal text, and their works provide the guidelines to the philosophy of this school. Their main spokesman was Jlva Gosvamin, who has explained the philosophy of his sect in his famous safsarhdarbha, namely, Tattva-samdarbha, Bhagavat-samdarbha, Param&tma-samdarbha, $rl-Krsna-samdarbha, Bhakti-sariidarbha, and Prlti-samdarbha. It will be observed that there is no Brahmasariidarbha. The reason will be apparent presently. It should her remembered, however, that, though Baladeva Vidyabhusana wrote the commentary on the Brahma-sutra on behalf of the Gaudiyavaisnavas, we have to rely more on Jlva Gosvamin than on Baladeva for the exposition of the Gaudiya-va/snava or Acintya-bhedabheda school of philosophy. At the beginning of the Tattva-samdarbha, Jlva. Gosvamin establishes the superiority of the Bhagavata as the chief, original, and unerring source of revelation and as the best of all pramanas. Jlva Gosvamin mainly relies on three verses of the Bhagavata, namely,. 1.1.2, 1.2.11, and 1.7.5. Of these the most important is 1.2.11 which is as follows :
PHILOSOPHY
71
vadanti tat tattvavidas = tattvam .yaj = jfianam advayam Brham = eti Paramatm = eti Bhagavan iti Sabdyate
('The tattva, which those who are cognizant of reality, call advaya Jnana is expressed by the designation of Brahman, Paramatman, and Bhagavat.')
Here the words tattva and advaya may be explained first. Tattva means reality, but Baladeva Vidyabhuana in his Siddhantaratna has explained that, there are five tattvas, namely, Isvara, jiva, prakrti, kala, and karman; jlva is spirit, prakrti is nature, karman is the efficient {nimitta) cause and constitutes acts done not by real ego but by the empirical ego in phenomenal existence, causing rebirth and bondage, and kala is the ksobhaka or the source of provocation. Therefore, a tattavid, or 'one who knows tattva,' is one, who knows all these categories. The fundamental tattva is, however, Bhagavat-tattva, 'the reality of ultimate reality', or 'representative reality'. Still difficulty arises with the explanation of advaya-tattva, for having accepted the existence of five tattvas, it is necessary to admit one Reality without a second. Hence Jiva Gosvamin explains Isvara . {Tattva-samdarbha, para 51) as non-dual due to the absence of any similar or dissimilar self-determined reality (advyatvancasya svayamsiddha-tadrs-atndrs'-tattvantar-abhavat). The Jlva, being conscious, is a similar reality {tadrsa-tattva), but Isvara is self-determined (Svayarh-siddha) while the other four tattvas are determined by Him. He is possessed of three saktis or powers, namely, svarupa, tatastha and bahiramga, also known as para, jlva, and mayo, respectively. Of these svarupa or para-idkti is intrinsic, the bahiramga is extrinsic, and the tatastha, as the name implies, is that form of divine energy, which, while being distinct from both, is yet related to both. Isvara being the saktimat is the locus or substratum and the jiva, the prakrti, the kala, and the karman are His manifestations, and are determined by Him. Hence there being no other similar or dissimilar self-determined Reality, Isvara is advaya. As for advaya-jhana, it may be pointed out that Brahman or Ultimate Reality is described in the Brhadaranyaka (3.9.28) as Vijnanarh Anandath Brahma (Brahman is knowledge, is bliss) and the
72 .
Taittiriya (2.1) calls him Sat yam Jnqnafc.rApaytatfiv{z$&}ity, knowledge, and infinite). To ans.wer.Jthis.ppssjj)ie objection, it is pointed out that Advaya is not mere, knowledge, jqriCpnscjpflsness, it is a unity of'consciousness, existence, and, bîss,', . Tji&j Iqttycf or essential principle, indicating the highest good (parama-purusartha), implies, by the .ûalifieation.of,^^, .the upity _pf biggest knowledge of conscibusRes;r,.(^j77a)1[,aH.4rthe, .highest bliss,:(pmffliffrsi4kfwh?8:$cwell as of eternal reality (nityatva). .The .LfltiinateJReality lys aJso.palle^.a^Yaj^ because its own.jnfinite saktis pr energies.aê,its only accompanying attributes (sya-âkêjkar} sahfyatvat) Jbut.the âjftis cannot e,xist wjithout His, ultimate existence . as .thpir, par.aipiakfqyq ipiiramasray^mâm vina tasgni aqiddfigtvafili..-, Th|s theory, of perpetual ^p-^nhexence (samavpya) of Saktifna-tandjiis v sflî|,is.o.ne.(o|"the mpstynpprtaqt con^ributionSj of Gaudiya-yai5na-yisnj.1,oV?<janta phjlo^sophy. .^ ',-,-/"';,-, , , , v ; , \ ; n-;;::/ ItshaS been! stated abovs;thait, while Jivai Gosvamia has Written' the^ BJiagavat-samdarbhamd thePmamatma-sawidarbha,fhe has written Brahma-sarhdarbha. The reason is that, he has stand on t^hp,second line of,t|ie,y,erse quptedj^bpy^jjfromj VQta.^.2.}. 1), -ijajnejyj Brahmgti^Barat)iptmefi: B,hqgayqt jt Thjs7bas .been.êxplajned,by ^va rosyamin as,; &akti-y#xga-la}<sjin{i~jl tadfiharmatiriJttfltH kfvalfmjpQnajn,.Bjahtneti sabdyate, aptftzyomftw. jchqktypmsa^m^p^ Param^nj^ti, part-,, bhagavqîti*^. (By brahman ys,,teicme.d^ puje, cpnscip.V-Sness which,, is other, fthaft.thp particular attributes char^ctprji^by.fthejrpjup ^{,\h.e~sqjctis ^, ,the; ,Paramatma.n indicates.; consdpusnes$,,conditipneA by,[th.e-y/v<z-5flA:/:/, whjphjis] a; par;t of the , cit&akti an4 by-.the. abundance pf, the^ mqyq-aJfti, .which ,Gpnsists of... the .inward regiila^pj- (in all be^g^);;,the Bhagayat is.the qpns,cious,-;, ness(conditioned by^he^qon^pjete ,ai^d perfect manifestation, of,all., the,;vfato'.'?,; Gau4iya^vainayismiljs ,CG)nperne|[ji;majnly wjth Para-,, matman,, an<j particularlynw,ith Bhagayat, who is identified, with,-. : manifestation of the mainly in relation to the jivd-'iak'ti-anA mdya-Mktii andi fontJitSiparticularipurpose^jiTThe Faramatman possesses ,the ^powers of creation<sustfiBaaeei;.and;dissolution Qf; the world, being; also :thet; inward/regulator .oi$heijim* .totrtbej&nctioaofth&Paramatman'\
IKtaBHILOSOPHV ' / ' 10 . .
73 ,
operates only:*o long as thsijiya is at a: lower level of consciousness,-, andris ignorant of. the;ltrue; nature: of reality /> According! to Jiva Gosy^rnjn, thpJcsetra of.the Glta (13:lr-2) is. matter, or material; body.-, as fhe seat of,.the-,conditioned self or jtvcnonly relatively, forithe Paraimatman<is the. one; and real ksetrajfiu. Balad&va" Vidyabhuanacommenting on the Giffi (13.2) explains.that the jiva is Metrajha iml the..-.$pnse that -al tenant -.(prajavat) has the use of the k'setra for his; < perspnaj enjpyjnent and liberation, bur the Paramatman is-" -like the i king.(fajayfft) and, thus4hef Paramatman'is the real k$etrajna. > ! -i the rela'tfbn1 of Brahman 'to' Bhaâvat is,' one of difference in npn- , differentie.1 ' The distinction arises from the degree 'of realization of ^ the 4w6 kihds'bf devotees Who follow the'paths Qfjhanq a.n^bhaktit respbctively. The 'fcWo1 f'orml in their essence are Vdentjca.li, j and.^ the.''._ apparent difference is due1 to ^he'dlflference of vision basediupon difference of the mo3e of wdrStifp' (upasaMShetidnadahana-bhedalj). .In, the Bhakti'-sariidiifbha (pp. 259^60) Jiva tjqsva'rniri explains that vision'l {saniMUkhya} depends on tii'e fflfferente o'f; capability''br respectivity' ' iadkikan-bheda).' The"jfta'tiins' obtain the' vision of Îrvi5ea Brah-'' man, the bhaktds of Savi5ea-B'h)agaVat,Malnd me mixture "of jhana " and MaMlea'ds^'slirrendeV; of karma! T tlefe . iiva 'Has' quoted1 'a " verse-frorn" the'-BhagavM'(liSOie) acboi-ding to 'which theifeare" ' only itHt'eg ways-W-libeVaWon,1 hamef jf' ')nhfia-yMa, kdrtna-yoga^ and ^ bhakti-yoga. Though Ji"va''GbsVam'fn adds1' thla'f iiarma'is excluded1^ from bhakti, it is apparent that karma-yoga and jnana-yoga are also admitted as ways of liberation, albeit of attf';Mferribf''V&r/ety.' 'iliere Jiva Gosvamin has added the following verses from the Bhagavata {12.20.7-8)1>' *JMna 'Secures1 "the object of fhose whb;'fed distaste for all worldly actions, 'dbnside'ririg'fhem to' fie the:source^ 'ot miseries." Karman isfoi((those!wMo d6nnBt"cbnsider acddns as miseries and are1' ( desirous of the fruits of action. v ff byfbrt'u'it'v1 a'êTsbn acquires reverence for the themes relating to me, and is neither disgusted' with the frufts^tif aciibp, nor 'is jnordinaklyâttacned, to them, he can seculre"t'ne "acdbm'plisnmen^bf 'ini'otiject^siddhi) by b'hakti-yoga? In the BhagavQtrsamdarbha, (section .74),^however," Jiva Gosvamih has explained that the<vision of undifferentiated'Brahman isincoin-1 ple|ej the vision ;isn:perfecti;-wlken the > Bhagavat^v/gÂH1 appears accpmpflnied;,-.by ^H jHis i iaktisi. nForithisofull - or jprtoper vision" bhakthfaa the : onlyr \ meanti {bhakttr=:ewesamyag
74
darsana hetuh). Since Brahman is without sakti, even for itsmanifestation (prakasa) it has to depend on Bhagavat. But it must not be supposed that Bhagavat is real and Brahman is unreal, for thescriptures state that both are real. As no transformation or vikarais possible in the Bhagavat, Brahman cannot be said to be his vikara. Bhagavat and Brahman are two aspects of Reality, related as angin (principal) and ahga (subordinate) who are revealed by the svarupasakti through bhakti and jhana. Brahmanubhava or perception of" Brahman is included (antargata) in Bhagavadanubhava. But when through bhakti-yoga Bhagavat is realized directly, Brahman does not appear as distinct, but is completely merged in that realization. Hence bhakti-yoga is superior to jMna-yoga which leads to moksa, consequent upon the knowledge or jhana of Brahman. Hence the devotees of Bhagavat do not put a high value on moksa In short, the Ultimate Reality is one without a second, (Ekamevadvitiyam), but it is postulated that there are hierarchical gradations in the manifestations of the same Reality. Bhagavat represents. the highest and the most perfect state of Reality where His powers and attributes are fully differentiated and perfectly developed; Paramatman is that phase of the Reality or the Godhead which is immanent both in the conscious jlva and in the non-conscious material, prakrti; while Brahman represents the transcendental undifferentiated Reality without any attributes or kakti. 4. Maya-sakti and Creation It is now necessary to give a brief explanation of maya-sakti,, which has been referred to above. Jiva Gosvamin in the Bhagavat samdarbha (p.92) has quoted the following verse from the Bhp (2.9.33) as a definition of the maya-sakti: rte'rtharh yat pratiyeta na pratlyeta c = atmani tad vidyad atmo mayam yath = abhaso yatha tamah ('Know that to be my mSya which can be cognized without the cognition of the highest truth, but is not self-revealing, like lustre or darkness.') Commenting on this verse, Sridhara interprets maya as that which is manifested without any object and is not yet perceptible in its own nature, like an illusory image of darkness. Jlva Gosvamin,.
PHILOSOPHY
75 ;
however, interprets this verse in the Bhagavat-sarhdarbha as : 'TheLord's own maya is that which would be perceived outside the substance, that is, outside the intrinsic selfhood of the Lord, and what would not be perceived irrespectively of the Lord.' The analogy of abhasa, which was explained by Sridhara as 'illusory image', is explained by JIva Gosvamin as the reflection of the solar light from outside the solar orb. The solar light cannot exist unlessit is sustained by the solar orb, yet the same light can have an independent role-to play outside the orb when it is reflected or refracted. This reflected or refracted light may dazzle our eyes andblind us to its real nature, and also manifest itself in various hues. Similarly, the analogy of darkness shows that, though darkness cannot exist where there is light, yet the darkness itself cannot be perceived without the light of the eyes. As we shall see, the phenomenal world is brought into being outside the Lord by the mayasakti; but the dynamics of the md.ya-&akti is made possible by theoperation of the essential energy (antaramga-sakti) of the Lord. A piece of iron which derives its heat from the fire in which it is put cannot in its turn burn the fire or affect it in any manner, similarly the mayd-sakti and its manifestations, which derive their essence from the essential power of the Lord, cannot in any way affect Him< or His essential power. From the verse of the Bhp quoted above, it follows that there are two kinds of maya. When it is compared to the lustre of the reality, it is called jiva-maya, and when it is compared to total darkness, it is called gurya-mdya. The jiva-maya is also called nimitta-maya, because it functions as the efficient cause, as the source of the kala, daiva, karman, and svabhava. Jiva Gosvamin describes kala as ksobhaka (excitant) and quotes a verse from the Bhp (3.5.26) which states that the Paramatman, under the influence of the kala-vjtti, impregnates gutia-maya with a portion of His own vital energy (ylrya). Thus it follows that kala is not a substance but only a function or mode (vrtti) of theParamatman as the dispenser of the maya-sakti which causes the disequlibrium of the three gunas in the prakrti, and causes the effects by bringing about the evolutes. But though kala regulates the^ process of creation, it is in its turn regulated by the Paramatman, and has, therefore, no eflect on the Bhagavat who is eternally beyond1-
76
GAUDIYA-YAIS^V^. STUDIES
.kala(- Ther Icarman. }s. the.,efficient cause or nimitfa of the process of creat/on, and, cprist^tues acts performed npt by thexeal ego {aham artfyaj but the. empirical:ego (prqkfta , ahamkara) in iph^nomerial; existence, causing rebirth^ and. .jbpridage. However, such acts as* devotional worship,; which proceed from the jealego of.fhe jiva,..are.^ not to be included in this, category. .The, daiya ,is the. pendency of thS:,karman to fructify (pfia(abhimukham âbhiyiyaktam daivam). , ,Theit svabhaya is the impression left on the,;empirical ego by ih.e: kaxman (tatsartyskarah)- The jiva is., held in Abondage, by the-, maya-MhUu
through the operation, pf, these; forces. , , . , : ,.i ,' >, .-, : The guna-maya is also called'the upadMa'may&l being the source!1' material out of which evolve^ the dravya,1 ksetra, prdita, atman, andvikara. The dravya consists of the five elbments in their subtle states"'
(bhuta-suksmani). The ksetra is the prakxti. Tht'prana^ means the 1! vital principle, which' is also called vSyu. The atman is the gross"' consciousness, or the empirical1 ego subject to the1 operation 6f thiev' senses. Lastly comes the -Vikara,'-which'Cbhdrstôf the five s'ensefe'1' (indriyani) arid the five gross elements (mahnbhutaiif),''of which tlte'1 .êAaorthe body us the collocation (samghntd), continuing in an1'1 uninterrupted stream like'tJhfe spi?o"ut of Se'edS (bija-rdhavat pravafialt).'' The jiva isolated to both thejtfva-wa^.and the "guqa-maya'. ' ' '" Thus the phenomenal world has maya-iakti both for its material cause andi the efficient causey but. its substratum is Reality. The maya is not matter itself, .but it is a particular mode in which matter, ; which,is a relative reality, is apprehended.. .The primal matter is'r: called avyakta or avyakfta (indiscrete), because it isthe equipoised " condition of the constituents of the twp mayas, and of the three gunas. " i n itself it is unintelligent ,or unconscious, an4, creation! ; proceeds only througfa.the iksana or lp.ok of the, Lord^ .,Whenv,the,, state-of equilibrium ,is . disturbed, the r three, gunas intermingle,with-,, each other and give rise to th,e yaripus evolutqs(l^nd effects,,^HimaT,,: tely producing.the'phenomenal world.asanact,of t^maya-iflkti. , 1(.We haye, stated ,above that the phenomenal world is a relative-^ reality, because JJva Gosvamin, says that the world is not false Mice ' the pp^-sna.ke; as . held .by the-Vivarta^vadins^ that^siâmkara,1 butit is destructible like a jug (tato vivartavadiriam iva rajju-sarp&vanna v mithyfity^n kiptu ghqta-vannq&vamlvam evatasya). Bat though the '' world, is. nQtffals^ it is jieithec -reaU for itsfaasnoiittittterruptefl^'
;S
' 77
f n f e - i i i pa'st,/Jp'rebftt^ ari^ futiite,' atad on'fy that can!lberrfegarded as real which is not only not false.b^t'hjas^ &'n(unin|errypêd'existence-
in time. Such reality can only be affirmed of the Paramatman or His

#8v/<iw(tath 'lkithulâbHa've dp'Fifi-kalavyUbhidaf-abfiavaj =jagato na ' saftvdift'ttvartd-pdriijam-aslddhdiv&na tdd=dosaldvdy=abha'vavatyÊva, hi'vttsiUhi SaMdm vidhiydte yhiha p'drarilcLiMdM'tdb^chak'tau v3) Ba .
'7 1 , " . v - '.J ' ' :','<.-. '. ! ' ; : i ! i ; : i / ! ' j . < rj i ;,,\\ jL"'''''I',:
Now the question arises that if the world has the ultimate sat or real as its material cause, why should it hot be as indestructible as ''t'tiejaj.'^ttle'answer'is firstly,;'ih:at jlv'a G6âmiri; construes' sat to mean1 the''mutual identity of Brahman "and it^'ptfwei' in"a subtle ! potent'jai'state,Aand that the world is a matfife'st'atioti of'the subtle power.' Secondly, it'^'is1 held that^'it"is false td'hold that because unythingis produced from sat (real); therefore ifralsoimust 'be real, f since it' cannot'fee asserted that thetdpralities of,the effect are always 1 identical with those of the cause, just^ss-the raysôf light emanating 1 from fire do nothave the"power of burning; .; : ' ' -.i J in Th^'dbfect' of s'atkaryava&d of the theofybfcausaFityis that until -"ih6'J effect is firodiiced, ribthirig can be'-re'gafded'as"ca'use, andf unless 'the tause''is de'terfriined, the effect c'ahnot be determined. In order i! ib validate'this deTect the'1 Partoamavada'tif G1audyal-VainaVtsiri!p'uts ' forward' the''theorV'tfiat, the pbWer ag'effect must be regarded as ' alread^:ex:istent inutile ckuse:I:'lri;a sense";1 therefore,' the'''World"may v'bî;said; td^b'etefhalvfdr'even'in'-distolutiotf'itfsribt'wholly^ yed but 'cbri'tiiiues its existence ih;a:JSubtleiifii:iri1't1hWp6wer bf 'the iSbrd.1 This' 'potentidl e35Ustehce''pr(3ves' its'âctiial' exMeh'dy;'iU1the 5 wofldie1ifs't!sasithBvn'afura'reriefgV of'thfe -L*W,ând'- as such<;!it is
1 ; ! ; ' . K i w i 1.
1
' t s ' v ' i f
1 hi
, i ' . \ w \ v > ^ v \ w : n \ ; ; . '\\>-\:M:v:.
\'\\~\\
.>
:vJttir:.
Jiva
;
: iiii.-.tifiji
: M i 1 . : - 1 i t j , v 1 . ;,.' j , i i v i t . ; : ; .
., < i i , \ n i n )
AMnWVv/\<
Bhp.
beett-staed< above" that'fdi? the -purpose" of the' (Tattvafva'<3V!>Svattiin!Has'maiftly teTted"6 'three vefsS;-if>nhe Of thefeJverses the third is : .:.-..K. , .-:iw
i mahute'rlartham "
' ' -
:-' >,
<
.--!',;) ^ t a - t k r t a ' m ' c ^ ' a b h l p a d y a t e ' ^ l ' T i S ) 1 * ' ''" ' ; " ; ' ; j f ' i
78
(Though the jiva is different from the three gunas, but being deluded by mayS, he identifies himself with them, and ascribes to himself their functions, namely, 'the role of agent or performer of actions.)
From this verse Jiva Gosvamin concludes (Tattvasamdarbha, para 32) that though the jiva consists of pure consciousness (cidrupa), yet it is overpowered by the maya-sakti, which is the cause of samsara, while maya being an extraneous sakti of the Lord, He is -superior to it and unsullied by its influence. The jiva is also under the influence of the tatastha-sakti, which has been explained above. The jiva can release himself from the influence of the maya-sakti by the power of bhakti, which is an aspect of the play of the Bhagavat's antaramga-or svarupa-sakti. In the Paramatma-samdarbha (Sec. 19), Jiva Gosvamin quotes from the-authority of Jamatrmuni, a pre-Ramanuja Visitadvaita teacher. According to Jamatrmuni, a jha is neither a deity, nor a man, nor a movable animal, nor an immovable plant; it is neither ;the body, nor the senses, nor the mind, nor life, nor intellect; it is .neither an unconscious material object (jada), nor liable to change, nor yet consisting of mere consciousness. Thejiva, however, has tits own distinguishing attributes. The jiva is self-luminous to itself (svasmai svayam-prakahb), uniform (eka-rupab), possessor of its own identity (svampabhak), conscious (cetanah), disposed to be pervasive (vyapti-silaff), consisting of {cit consciousness) and ananda (bliss) {Cidanandatmakali), subject of the consciousness of 'I' {ahamarthal}), different in different organism (pratiksetram-bhinnah), atomic in size (atjufy), always pure {nityanirmalal}) possessing its own peculiar attribute of knowledge, action and enjoyment (jnatftvakartuva-bhoktxtva-nijadharmakali), and always possesses the natural tendency of resolving into a part of the Paramatman (Paramatmaikasesa-svabhavali).
Thus the jiva possesses the attributes of unchangeableness and of retention of identity whatever'may be its individual existence, divine, human, or otherwise. It is distinct from the body, and is not subject to change or decay, it is only due to the delusion of the maya-sakti that the jiva identifies itself with the body. The jiva, however, is not a mere aggregate of conscious states, but a single permanent conscious principle that manifests in and unifies a system -of temporal and spatial states and activities, but is still different from
PHILOSOPHY
79
this system, and retains its identity through all these states and activities. The jha is cetanah, that is, it reveals itself to itself by its own consciousness, and also possesses the capacity of revealing others, -like the light of a lamp which by revealing itself reveals others {cetanatvam natria svasya cid-rupatve'-nyasya dehades - cetayitrtvam, dipadi-prakasasya praka&ayitrvat, Paramatma-samdarbha, Sec. 27). The jha, however, derives its power of self-luminosity from the Paramatman, therefore the jha's derived power of self-luminosity is mot absolute and is to be understood as a counter-correlative of material objects (jada-pratiyogitvena, ibid, sec. 28). But the jha is anu-cit or cit-ka%a, a particle of pure consciousness, yet it pervades the whole body. That is, it does not occupy space, but its conscious principle pervades the entire body which it occupies. This conscious principle is represented by the non-empirical ego, and is distinct from the ephemeral, diverse, and impure ego imparted by the senses (jnanam ekam, indriya-balena vividham kalpitam.) The body is liable to change and decay, but not the jha, which is the eternal witness as distinguished from thing witnessed (drastrdrsya-bheda). The jha is always pure, and in its essential nature the jha is beyond the reach of the maya-sakti. But being related to the body and the phenomenal world, the jha's gross consciousness, which is the effect of the maya-sakti, overpowers it and obscures its real nature even to itself. Though the jha consists of pure consciousness, yet it is different from and inferior to the. Bhagavat in this respect that, He is eternally superior to and unaffected by his own extraneous maya-Sakti, like the magician who is not deluded by his own magic. In its essence, however, the jha is an arhSa or part of the Bhagavat. 6. Relation between the Jiva and Bhagavat The theory of the relation of the jha and Bhagavat as ariisa and arnsin is the basis of the bhedabheda theory. The representative Gaudiya-vaisnava arguments have been well formulated by Baladeva Vidyabb.us.apa in his comments on Brahma-siitra 2.3.41 to 2.3.43."
Brahma-sutra 2.3.41 is amko nana vyapadekad-anyatha-capi-dasa-
80
GAUDW/WV5OSNAVA STUDIES
r kifavaditywi, adhlyata. e/ce-(Tire.; soul* is ia part because the Lord is described as having manifold relations with the soulâtid^&lso ,Hbecause som^rtextsrre,cord;hini 3s identical with Brahman like slaves ,a^d gamblers etc,) 7 ;, ;ij - : , ,. ,:>v,w, ,>, z; . .uwyravxi rnGomtnentiag on theiaphOrismj'Baiadeva writes7 : : ; : ;
!r Jjl
'_;"' 'JlVa is a'j&tft of the Supreme Lord like" the rays of th' .sun,'which are separatevff6Am' it, butwnich continually; 'accompany'it and which ' i n a( way'Sre^depeh'dent uponit. Why''do ypyW^so? Becjaus^the scripture describes1 tiie' manifold relations of the soylwith th<?Lord...
s b ' i n t h b G / ^ (^;i8): '-"
;
'
- ::
''-
r;'!\
^t*i/iiafe>fkibh^tekj}(^.;ii.>>i^(ti.;
T">>">' 'nivasah âra'ârii s u h r t '' ''-' 1;> y / ; ; " ' praptiava^'pâjfaVstnanadi f',I'^S, /, "--''"'' ' nidna'n'ambffam a v y a y a m " ' ' " " - "
ril
v..aii
' -',,.'*!*!.
" ( I ^ m tfie jiaft,'the siistîriefj'the Lord, the witness, the abode, the shelter, the friend, and the refuge. I am the breaking apart and the store-houseôf life's Ia9i.th^seedo.f 1 all,,creaturesi.) ; ; c . > 0 :ii '>:: 11'
;!:-:*' t.TT. c oI ;i!.:i;;;r;
: . ,/
-;i;.
2 ; ;!:!
i in:1:;
it'' J
d^Ya ( c o n t i n u e ^ : . . ;
r >-,
i r'
,'v.'M-'.'."^.V.
V(("t, JJh,e.s,cxiptures,declare.manifold. relation ;iof -therfcord. with J the ] soul,, such a;s sHe.iSvê.creatpr.v.t-hcjij'wasithe created, i Heife'the ruler, the other is the ruled. He is the support," the sothetf is1)'the supported. _ He is the.Lpjfd,.the other is |he;.sqryant< tHe jg.Jhg1 lover, "the other is tfyejjejpy^d.^ He,is,,the objec^ pf attaipmenfejjthecptjier is.the attaiher and_ so or^j^ On t)ie.pj:hei ,handr,_.ttie lAthaân /lîruti alsp" describes riim in another, wajj, namely, Hi&fuî{yirjyj|h^/?'v<9!.;iand thus thet!^7ya2 isôpk^d.pppn.a^s identical with Braîmap.. .fefttiter words, the texts declare both the difference of the Lord and the jiva, and His unity with the jiva in the sense of its peyyading sj;he jiva. J Thus the following text'f-''-11'' l r r ' < r ' '' ' ' r *' ""'
r,;
'/iv.i
y.-yyns,
i u;f.'\\
; ;. :
'i-'i-Tvis: " :
-ruin
!i
......,./...,
: ,
,B.i;ahma-d|sa Brahma-dasa
i . i r > <;,.-. . \ u u r -
, .;.m
'.:v,v\
(Brahman are the'slaves, Brahman are( these, fi^h^rr-sn.'an^ Brahman are
-rn ;>. : r ' u n r n c n
:: n . : . . ' . ' i i i ' ; . : i f f . ' . - : ( ' i ' . " i i
PHILOSOPHY
81
'These declarations of unity would not be possible', Baladeva adds, 'if there were no difference in essential nature between God and Soul. No one can himself be the creator as well as the created, himself the pervader as well as the pervaded, nor the Supreme Lord who is the highest intelligence can be the slave, the fisherman etc. If He were to be so, then all those texts would be stultified which teach indifference to all worldly objects. Nor can it be said that the Lord limited by maya is transformed into slave, fisherman etc. 'The soul is not a part of Brahman in the sense of a piece of stone cut off from a rock by the chisel. Jiva is not in that sense a cut-off portion of the Lord, for if it were so then it would contradict all those texts which declare Brahman and soul to be incapable of division, and not liable to any change. Therefore the jiva is described as a part of Brahman, in the sense of being a subordinate member of Brahman, separate from Him, but related to Him, as the created, the ruled, the supported, etc. The subordinate relation of the soul to Brahman is established by the fact that all energies (Saktis) of the soul are from the Lord. As says the Smfti (Visnu-puraita, 6.7.60-61). etad sarvam idam viSvaih jagad = etac = car = acaram Para-brahma-svarupasya Vinoh sakti-samanvitam Vinu-saktih para prokta Ketrajfiakhya tath = apara avidya karma-samjfl = anya trtiya s"aktir = isja te
(The whole of this universe consisting of movable and immovable jlvas is energized by the energy of Visnu, the Supreme Brahman. The energies are of three kinds, the divine energy which is the highest, and is called the Viftfa-Sakti, the jiva energy which is lower than this and is called the ksetrajna-Hakti, and the third, the material energy called the avidya or Ararma-energy.)
'The word athSa used in this sutra is to be understood in a sense similar to that when we say the orb of the Venus is a hundredth part of that of the moon. This definition of amia or part does not transgress the definition which says "part is the particular localisation of -a whole or a particular portion of one substance, inhering in that substance but not separate from that substance". Thus 6
82
Brahman as possessor of all energies is one entire substance, while the jiva has a portion of this Brahma energy, and in that sense it is a part of Brahman, and thus is -subordinate to Brahman. In other words the word amia or part is to be taken as in the sense of subordinate. When we say "jiva is a part of Brahman", we mean "jiva is subordinate to Brahman". 'The statements that the human soul is like a space enclosed in a jar not different from the space outside the jar, are to be reconciled by holding that when the limiting condition or upadhi is destroyed, then there is the union of the two. It does not mean absolute identity. The phrases like "thou art that" etc. also declare that "the thou" is dependent upon "the that" for all its functions. In other words, the sentence "thou art that" means "all thy functions are dependent upon Brahman". In fact all the previous texts and illustrations from the Chandogya Upanisad show this to be the real meaning of the great saying "thou art that", it has no other meaning. Consequently it follows that the jiva is different from the Lord, and this difference is manifest, for one is the ruler, the other is the ruled, one is omnipresent, the other is atomic and so on. The opposite view that the jiva and the Lord are identical cannot be fairly deduced from the scriptural texts. In support of this view, that the jiva is a part of Brahman in the sense of being subordinate to Him, the author [ of the Brahma-sutra ] now quotes a Vedic $ruti.' Mantra-vanjat (II. 3. 42)
(Because of the description given in the sacred mantra), i.e., "The jiva is a part of Brahman because the mantra also describes it to be so." On this aphorism Baladeva comments. 'Even the Rg-veda (X.90.3) declares : tavan asya mahima tato jyayams" = ca puruah pado'sya sarva bhutani tripadasy-amrtam div = Iti (Such is His greatness, yea the Lord is even greater. All souls constitute one quarter of Him. His immortal three quarters are in Heaven.)
PHILOSOPHY
83
'The mantra, which is to be found in the Chandogya Upanisad 3.12.6, declares distinctly that all jivas constitute a pada or portion of Brahman. In fact the word pada and arnka are identical. Both mean "a part", or "a portion". This mantra uses the word "sarvabhuffini" in the plural number, while in the Sutra the word arhSa is used in the singular number. The singular here is used in a generic sense to denote all souls. Incidentally it may be mentioned that the souls are many as declared in this mantra. In other places also the singular must be taken as denoting the whole class, thus as in Sutra II. 3.19 the word atman is used in the singular number, but denotes ihe whole class of jivatmans.' Api ca smaryate (II. 3.43) (The Smrti also declares the soul to be a portion of Brahman.) On this aphorism Baladeva comments : 'In the Gita (15.7), we find : mam = aiv = ams"o jlvaloke jlvabhutafe saiiatanah manah athan = Indriyani prakrtisthani karati (A part of Me verily has become the jlva in this world of jlvas and is eternal. It draws round itself the senses of which the mind is the sixth, veiled in matter.) 'The Lord has used the word "eternal" in the above showing that the jivas are eternal and not fictitious portions like space enclosed in a jar. Here also the word am&a has been used showing that the jiva is always dependent upon the Lord and that all its activities are subordinate to Him. 'In the Padma-purftna the essential nature of the jiva is more definitely stated : jnanas'rayo jnanagunas" = cetanab. prakrteh parah najato nirvikaraS = ca ekarupab, svarupabhak anur = nityo vyapta-silas1 = cid- anand-atmakas = tatha aham-artho 'vyayah saksj bhinna-rupah sanatanah
(1)
(2)
84
adahyo' chedyo' kledyo' soyo'kara eva ca evam adi-gunair = yuktah seabhutah parasya vai makaren = ocyate jivah kgetrajnah paravan sada dasabhuto -Harer = eva n = anyasy = aiva kadacana
(3) (4)
(The jlva is an intelligent receptacle having intelligence as its quality, it is theg iver of sentiency to its various vehicles and is beyond Prakrti. It is not born, it is not subject to modification, it.has one form, unchanging in its essence. It is atomic, and eternal,'-having the quality of pervasion and consisting of knowledge and bliss. It is designated by the word "I", is unchanging, is the witness and eternal. It is incombustible, uncleavable, and can neither be moistened nor dried. It is imperishable as well. Possessing these attributes it is a part of Brahman, a servant of the Lord. The letter "ma" denotes the jlva called also the knower of the field. \ It is the slave of the lord but never of anyone else.)
'The words "possessing these attributes and the rest" refer to the other qualities of the jlva not definitely mentioned in the above extract, such as, the jlva is an agent, the enjoyer, the self-luminous etc. Luminosity is of two kinds according to the difference of the substance- and the quality. The first depends for its enkindling on its own self, the second is the particular substance which is the cause of enkindling himself as well as another. Such is the self or jivatman. The flame of a candle illuminates the eye and is itself a lighted mass, and its burning-is dependent upon itself and it manifests itself by its own light and is not like the jar, etc. which manifest themselves through another's light. Therefore, the flame is selfluminous. But there is this difference between the flame and the soul that the flame being material cannot shine forth or illumine itself, in -other -words, has no self-consciousness. But the soul is self-luminous like the flame and illumines others like the flame, but has the additional attribute of self-illumination, of self-consciousness, which the light has not. Therefore, it is said that the soul illumines itself, is self-luminous, and of the form of intelligence.' It will be interesting afthis point to compare Baladeva's commentary with those of Samkara's and Madhva's. We need not quote
PHILOSOPHY
85
from their commentaries, and it is sufficient to state that there is surprisingly little difference between Samkara and Baladeva, for these aphorisms are not susceptible to pure non-dualistic interpretation. Baladeva has quoted the same Upanisadic visaya-vakyas as Samkara, and the same verse from the Gha. Samkara has also discussed whether the am&amsi relation means the relation between a roaring fire and its spark, or master-servant relation. His conclusion on api ca smaryate (2.3.45) is : yat tu uktam svamibhrtyadisu eva HitrUitavya-bhavo lake prasidhah iti yadyapi esa loke prasiddMh, tathapi sastrat tu atrams'ariisitvam is'itrl-sitavyabhavas' ca nisclyate. niratiSayopadhisampannai ca Hvarah nihinopadhi-sampannan =. jhSn prasasti iti na kihcit vipratisidhyate.
(With regard to the assertion made above, viz., that in ordinary life the relation of ruler and ruled is known to hold good in the case of master and servant etc. only, we remark that, although that may be the case in ordinary life, we ascertain from scripture that the relation of part and whole and that of ruler and ruled may go togethej. Nor is there anything contradictory in assuming that the Lord who is provided with super-abundant adjuncts rules the souls which are connected with inferior adjuncts only.)
If Samkara's upadhi could be changed into Baladeva's iakti, their views would have been identical. Samkara's use of the phrases 'nirati&ayopadhi-sampanna Hvarah, and 'nihlnopadhisampannan =jhan' indicates that he was thinking in terms of positive attributes, which were quite similar to sakti. Madhva differs from Baladeva. The visaya-vakyas cited by Madhva are intended to show that the relation between Brahman and jiva is that of upajhya (benefactor, sustainer) and upajlvaka (dependent and beneficiary). Therefore the jiva is an athsa of Brahman in the sense that while the jiva is inferior to Brahman, there is resemblance between the two. But as this resemblance is only partial, their identification has to be treated as gauQa. Hence Madhva concludes: yato bhedena tasyayam abhedena ca glyate atas = c = arhs"atvam udditam bhedabhedau na mukhyatah It has been pointed out that bhedabhedau na mukhyatah does not mean that 'separateness and non-separateness ought not to. be
86
understood literally', but that the words really mean that both difference and identity cannot hold true in their primary senses.8 Only one of them can be accepted in its primary sense, and the other must be understood in a non-primary (gauqa) sense. Therefore, according to Madhva, the difference between jiva and Brahman holds true in its primary sense, and identity is to be taken in the gauna sense of aihsa. This point is clarified in the Tattvapraka&ika (2.3.43) by Jayatirtha, who states : bhedam amgikrtya abhedasthane ariitatvam vaktavyam iti bhavah. This leads Madhva into some difficulty while explaining prakasadivan naivam parah (II. 3.46), where, in order to explain the term aMavatara, he has to introduce the concept of svampariisa for the avataras, and bhinnariisa for the jivas, and states (on Br.S., II. 3.47), that 'there is not a particle of difference (nanumat.ro'pi) between the svarupathSa and its Arh&in. But the bhlnnamsa (that is jiva) is of limited power (alpa&aktih) and its resemblance with the Amsin is very slight. Thus Madhva admits a bhedabheda relation between the avataras and the avatarin, but practically denies the existence of any such relation between the jivas and Brahman. Commenting on prakaadivan = n = aivam parah and smaranti ca Madhva explains that 'the word amsa, applied to the avatar as, means their identity with Brahman. Here Baladeva explains that both the sun and a firefly are sources of light but there is a difference between the two; similarly the avataras and the jivas, though athsas of Brahman, yet are not the same. Baladeva also quotes the verse from the Varaha-purana on which Madhva relied on his divisions of svarupamSa and bhinnamsa. Baladeva explains that 'this verse [ of the Varaha-purana ] does not mean that other avataras, like the fish and the rest, are in any respect inferior to the Lord; but that they are the Supreme Lord in His entirety, and are not athias in the same -sense as the jivas are the amsas of the Lord.' That is, while Baladeva, accepts bhedabheda relation between jiva and Brahman, between the avataras and the Supreme Lord, that is Krsna, he postulates practically a relation of non-difference in essence, though he admits the difference in their manifestations, which he attributes to their difference in sakti. Madhva's denial of bhedabheda relation between jiva and Brahman, and the acceptance of this theory by the Gaudiya-vaf^flvas, constitute their main difference, which is of a fundamental nature.
PHILOSOPHY
87
There are also other grounds for dissociating the Gaudiya-va/snavas from Madhva's sect.9 7. A'cintya-bhedabheda Writing on the 'Samkara school of Vedanta', Prof. S.N.Das Gupta states : 'The above ^discussion seems to prove convincingly that -Badarayana's philosophy was some kind of bhedabheda-vada or a theory of transcendence and immanence of God (Brahman)even in the light of Samkara's own commentary. He believed that the world was the product of a real transformation of Brahman, or rather of His power and energies (Sakti). God Himself was not exhausted by such a transformation and always remained as the master creator who by his play created the world and who could by His own powers create the world without any extraneous assistance. The world was thus a real transformation of God's powers, while He Himself, though remaining immanent, in the world through His powers, transcended it at the same time, and remained as its controller, and punished or rewarded the created mundane souls in accordance with their bad and good deeds. 'The doctrine of bhedabheda-vada is certainly prior to Samkara, as it is the dominant view of the most of the purdyas.... It is indeed difficult to say what were the exact characteristics of Badarayana's bhedabheda doctrine of Vedanta; but there is very little doubt that it was some special type of bhedabheda doctrine, and, as has already been repeatedly pointed-out, even Samkara's own commentary (if we exclude only his parenthetic remarks, which are often inconsistent with the general drift of his commentary and the context of the sutras, as well as with their purpose and meaning, so far as it can be made out from such a context) shows that it was so. If, however, it is contended that this view of real transformation is only from a relative point of view (vyavaharika), then there must at least be one siitra where the absolute {pQramarthika) point of view is given; but no such sutra has been discovered even by Samkara himself. If experience always shows the causal transformation to be real, then how is one to know that in the ultimate point of view all effects are false and unreal? If, however, it is contended that there is a real transformation (parinama) of the maya stuff, whereas Brahman remains always unchanged, and if maya is regarded as the power (Sakti) of Brahman, how then can the iakti of Brahman as
88
well as its transformation be regarded as unreal and false, while the possessor of iakti (or the iaktimat, Brahman) is regarded as real and absolute?*0 This problem was solved for the first time when Sri-Caitanya promulgated his Acintya-bhedQbheda doctrine. Acintya-bhedabheda means 'incomprehensible dualistic monism', that is, an 'inscrutable relation of difference in non-difference'. It may be stated here that the conception of acintya is as old as the MaMbharata, and Samkara has twice quoted the followipg verse in his commentary on the Brahma-sutra, (II. 1.6 and II 1.27) to sustain the authority of the scriptures i 1 1 acintyah khalu ye bhava na tarns = tarkena yojayet prakrtibhyah param yac = ca tad = acintyasya laks.anam (Do not apply reasoning to what is unthinkable, that is, logically irreducible thought. The mark of the unthinkable is that it is above all material causes.) As examples Samkara quotes Glta 2.25 and 10.2. In the Vinu-purana (1.3.1-3), Maitreya asks ParaSara : 'How can creative agency be attributed to Brahman, who is unqualified (nirgund), not an object of cognition (aprameya), pure (Suddha) and free from imperfections (amala).' ParaSara replies : 'The powers of beings, incomprehensible to thought (acintya-jnana-gocarafr) like the power of creation, belong to Brahman. All such powers (Sakti) belong to Him, even as heat belongs to fire.' Both Sridhara Svamin and JIva Gosvamin have interpreted the word acintya of this verse as bhinnabhinnatv = ddi vikalpais dntayitum aiakyafy kevalam arthapatti-jhana-gocaral}. That is, acintya is that which being undefinable can only be realized by the doctrine of implied proof (arthapatti). Sridhara Svamin has also defined acintya : acintyam tark-Ssaham yaj jhanam, that is, 'acintya is the knowledge which is not susceptible to logical proof. And Jlva Gosvamin in his Bhagavatasamdarbha (XVI) has defined acintya as durghata-ghatakatvarii hy = acintyatvam, that is, 'the power which can reconcile the impossible' or in other words 'acintya is that power which can effect the difference in identity'.
PHILOSOPHY
89
The burning power of fire is cited as an example of acintya-Sakti (unthinkable or inscrutable power). It is common experience that fire burns an object and water puts out fire. But the power which can extinguish .fire is inscrutable. Similarly, poison kills a man, but he is sustained by milk; and various other experiences of daily life are observed, and accepted as truth, without any knowledge of their essential nature. Rupa Gosvamin points out in his Sarhkiepa-Bhagavatamjtam {1.365-66, 370-71) : 'The (simultaneous) existence of ekatva (oneness) and prthakatva (manyness), amkatva (partness), arhsitva (wholeness) is not impossible in Puruottama. For example the Bhagavata {10.69.2) says: "Wonderful, indeed it is, that Sn-Krna married to sixteen thousand women, lives in their houses simultaneously." Though these qualities are contradictory, they eternally inhere in the Lord due to his acintya-iakti; still no qualities can touch Him. This has been explained in the sixth chapter of the Bhagavata (6.9.33-6).' The supra-rational category of acintya-Sakti is necessary to explain the &rutis; for example the statement of the BxhMaranyaka (3.9.28): Vljhanam Anandath Brahman. Commenting on this sentence, Rupa Gosvamin states in the Sarvasamvadim : 'Are vijnana and ananda synonymous terms? Or do they have different meanings? It cannot be the former, because that would mean repetition; if taken in the latter sense, namely, that Brahman is a combination of both vijnana and Qnanda, then the objection would be that it postulates "svagata bhedd" which conflicts with the unity or one-ness (advaya-tattva) of Brahman.' We cannot enter here into the comparative merits of the different schools of Vedanta, but it may be observed that the doctrine of acintya-iakti seems to explain adequately the Brahmasutras 111.2.11-25, which deal with the nature of the Supreme Brahman. For example Samkara has taken na sthanato'pi parasyobhaya-lirngam sarvatra hi (III.2.11) ([The essential nature] of the Supreme Lord, though [differentiated] by space, does not undergo any change of characteristics ; because [He simultaneously exists] everywhere, )' as a piirvapaksa statement. Though Brahman is stated to be ubhaya-lingam, yet Samkara declares that presence of the two-fold characteristics, namely sa-viSe$atva, and absence of qualities, nir-viSesatva, cannot belong to the Highest Brahman, for all passages which aim at setting forth the nature of Brahman
90
declare It to be devoid of all distinctive qualities. This position is,, however, difficult to maintain in view of the subsequent sutras, and while commenting on prakasavac=cavaiyarthyat (III.2.15), Samkara, while maintaining that Brahman is formless, states: 'Hence, there is no reason why certain texts should not teach, for the purpose of worship, that Brahman has different forms.' (tadalambano Brahmanah akara-viseii-opade&ah upasanarthafi na virudhyate). Otherwise,
Samkara had to declare some Vedic texts as false, as he has himself admitted. This predicament does not arise if acintya-sakti of Brahman is admitted, as by Baladeva on Brahma-sutra (III.2.11) na sthanatdpi ). Here Baladeva explains that 'there is not twofoldness of characteristics or change of nature, by the mere fact of His (Brahman's) being in two different places. Though there is difference in locality, there is, however, no difference in substance occupying these localities. Because His essential nature, through His inconceivable power (acintya-Sakti) simultaneously manifests itself in every place...' In the next sutra (na bhedad Hi chen na pratyekam atad vacanat, 111,2.12) the purva-paksa objection, that different manifestations imply a difference (bheda) in Brahman is answered by Baladeva by citing Brhadaranyaka 2.5.19 instead of 2.5.1 as is done by Samkara. The Brhadaranyaka 2.5.19 states: 'Verily Dadhyafic Atharvana proclaimed this honey [meditation] to the two Asvins, and a Ri seeing this said (Qgveda VI. 47. 18) : ' "An image of the Lord is in every one of the forms, (in which a jha, or soul is embodied for every jlva has the image of the Lord in it). That form is for the sake of His revelation (and worshipping by that particular jha). The Lord (Indra = Almighty Ruler) appears multiform through His magic powers (mayas). Yoked are his tenhundred steeds. ' "He (Brahman) is verily these steeds; He verily is ten (Avataras, that is, Avataras such as the Matsya), He (Brahman) is the Thousand (Avataras, such as Visva etc.), He is the Many (such as Para, etc.) this the Endless (such as Ajita etc.). This is the Brahman, without cause and without effect; besides whom there is nothing, and outside whom there is nothing. This Atman is Brahman, omnipresent and omniscient. This is the teaching of the Upaniads." ' Baladeva concludes his comment on this sutra by stating: 'Thus.
PHILOSOPHY
91
the above text of the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad shows that every form of the Lord abiding in different individuals is the supreme Brahman, full and entire, and not a portion of Him, for an Infinity can haveno parts.' 12 In the next Adhikarana, Sarbkara has to face even greater trouble when he comments on api ca santradhane pratyaks-dnumanabhyam.13 (But [this Paramatman] can be perceived by bhakti (devotion), dhyana [meditation] and pranidhana [profound meditation or worship etc.] according to the &ruti and Smrti>14) Sarhkara states: 'However {api ca) the yogins (yoginab) see {pa&yanti) this immutable (avyaktam) atman (atmanam) bereft of all illusory manifestation {nirasta-samasta prapahcam) at the time of samradhana (samradhana-kale) and adds that samradhanajn is bhaktidhyana-pranidhana etc. It is evident that by yogins, Samkara here means bhakti-yogins as well as raja-yogins. In support of his contentions &amkara quotes Katha 2.1.1. and Mundaka, 3.1.8. Baladeva also quotes Mundaka 3.1.8 and Katha 2.1.1. He also quotes the Giia (11.53-4) and concludes: 'Thus it is established that the Blessed Hari-is perceptible even to the senses when the soul is entirely full of love. The eyes, etc. then become saturated with His essence and become fit to see Him, and so He is seen through such purified eyes.' 8. Bhakti This leads us to a discussion of bhakti, the most important element in Gaudlya-va/swava religion, theology, and philosophy. Indeed 3ri-Caitanya preached the supremacy of bhakti over the other methods of apprehending the Ultimate Reality, such as through jnana and" yoga. And not only Bengal and Orissa, but entire India accepted with gratitude his doctrine of love. In the religious field Sri-Caitanya revolutionized the conception of dharma, when he adopted the Bhagavata as the principal text. Hitherto, the Hindus had been content to accept the definition of dharma as given in the Jaimini-sutra (1.1.2) namely, 'That which is indicated by the Vedic injunction as conducive to welfare {codanalaksano'rtho dharmah). This definition involves two imperatives, namely, (1) dharma is what is enjoined in the Vedas as conducive to welfare, and (2) the Vedas are the only source of dharma. What
92
then would be the dharma of persons who are not entitled to Vedic sacrifices? What was the dharma of the Hindus when they gradually .gave up the Vedic rites? There is no answer to the first question. As answer to the second question one may quote Manu (2.6): Vedo'khilo dharma-mulam smrti-s"ile ca tad-vidam acaras" = c = aiva sadhunam atmanas = tutir eva ca That is, dharma consists in the observance of the Vedic rites and injunctions, of the prescriptions of the Smrtis, the following of the customary practice of good people, and the performance of such actions as may produce mental satisfaction to the performer. This is a far more liberal definition than Jaimini's, but Manu's earliest and principal commentator, Medhatithi, twisted its meaning and practically reconciled Manu's view with Jaimini's. Kulluka indeed differs from Medhatithi, and explains Sila (which Medhatithi explained as 'concentration which enables the mind to remember the right purports of the scriptures or Vedic injunction') according to Harita's definition as involving qualities of non-injury to others, absence of jealousy, mildness, friendliness, gratefulness, mercy, peace tc.15 The most inspiring definition of dharma is given in the Bhagavata (1.1.2), and it was due to Sri-Caitanya and his followers that the medieval Hindus were rejuvenated and galvanized into life when this wide vista of religion was unfolded to them. dharmah projjhita-kaitavo'tra paramo nirmatsaranam satam vedyam vastavam atra vastu sivadarh tapatray = onmQlanam Îrimad-Bhagavate mahamunikrte kim va parair=!svarah sadyo hrdy = avarudhyate'tra krtibhih sus"ruubhis = tatksjanat
(Here in the Srlmad-Bhagavata composed by the Great Sage [ is promulgated] a lofty religious conception which is the delight of the spiritually minded people who are by nature free from wickedness and untainted by envy. Herein one will find the blessed knowledge of the reality of the Supreme Lord. Can the other scriptures or texts help in a quick realization of the godhead? [No 1 But the Lord enters in the heart of those who listen to the Bh&gavata from the moment the desire to hear it arises in their heart.)
PHILOSOPHY
93
Thus dharma is within the man ; indeed it is man's nature which manifests itself as soon as the dross elements are removed from it. The fundamental condition of attaining dharma is not performance of certain religious rites, but it consists of the dissociation (projjhitd) of extraneous elements (kitava). As Sridhara Svamin has explained, that the prefix pra in projjihita indicates that even the desire for moksa or liberation has to be given up (pra-Sabdena moksabhisandhir = api nirastah), that the dharma must be performed without any desire for any result. God is to be worshipped without any ulterior motive, with a perfect sincerity of heart, free from all jealousy, and with love towards all. As a consequence the devotee realizes the worshipfulness of the Lord, which awakens the knowledge of the absolute and leads to supreme bliss. As the Bhagavata (1.2.6) says : sa vai purhsam paro dharmo yato bhaktir = Adhokaje ahaituky = apratihata yay = atma samprasidati
(The supreme religion of Man is spontaneons and uncontradicted devotion for the Lord which [alone] pleases the self or atman.)
The Bhagavata teaches what is devotion, and &ri-Caitanya preached it. It is not that the element of devotion or bhakti was absent from Hinduism before/the rise of Gaudlya-vainavism. Contrary is the truth. There can be no religion in which the devotional aspect is absent, and bhakti can be traced to certain-hymns of the Rgveda. Bhakti is not only emphatically preached in the Glta, but its last message is absolute surrender to God, which is a pre-condition as well as the ultimate stage in bhakfi-yoga. Then came the Bhagavata which in a way is an elucidation of the Glta. Commentaries were written on it by Madhvacarya and Sridhara Svamin. But just as the Glta gained its proper place only after Samkara wrote his commentary, similarly did the Bhagavata gain its rightful place after SriCaitanya proclaimed it to be as authoritative as the Vedas. As Caitanya said to Prakasananda18 : Brahmare Kvar catuhsloki ye kahila Brahma Naradere sei upades" kaila.
94
sei artha Narad Vyasere kahila suni Veda-Vyas mane vicar karila ei artha amar sutrer vyakhya-rup Sri Bhagavata kari sutrer bhasja-svarup. cari-Ved Upaniad yata kichu haya tar artha lafia Vyas karila saficaya sei sutre yei rg-viaya vacan Bhagavate sei fk slok-nibandhan ataev sutrer:bhaya-Sri-Bhagavata Bhagavata-slok Upaniad kahe ek artha ek-Slok dekhaya kaila dig-daras"ana eimata Bhagavat-slok rca-sama A discussion of bhakti as described in the Bhagavata is, however, beyond the scope of the present work. Nor is it possible to discuss the analysis of bhakti as a rasa, which was perhaps the most outstanding contribution of Gaudlya-vaitjavism to religious literature. The conception of bhakti has not progressed beyond the horizon illumined by the Gosvamins of Vrndavana. At the end we may be permitted to quote from the Bhagavata. a few of the lessons which Srl-K.rs.na imparted to Uddhava : 'In Me there exists neither [the condition of] bondage nor of liberation, liberation and bondage have empirical reality and have no absolute reality, and are due to maya. Grief, sorrow, happiness, misery, and the origin of the body are the outcome of maya ; they are the unreal dream-projections of the self. Sentience (yidya) and non-sentience (avidyS) are My primary energies created by My mayd, (11.11.1-3). 'You can worship Me as the sun, as the fire, as the bmhmaija, as the cow, as the devotee of Vinu, as the sky, as the air, as the water, as the citman, and as all created objects. Let Me be worshipped in the sun with the chanting of Vedic hymns, by clarified trotter in the fire, by hospitality in the cows, with fraternity in the vaisqavas, with meditation in the heart, by excavating wells and tanks, by uttering mantras before the altar, by satisfying your own self through enjoyment, and with the vision of equanimity by worshipping Me in every soul, as the ksetrajna : (11.11. 42-5).'
PHILOSOPHY
95
It is a religion of universal love and equality. It is also a religion with the message of hope. For the Lord says : mal = laks.anam imam kayam labdhva mad-dharma asthitah anandarh param-atmanam atmastham samupaiti mam (11.26.1)
(Having obtained this [human] body which is My image and having adopted My religion, the beings attain in the end that Supreme Soul identical with ananda that rests in the in-dwelling Soul.)
Or as He has said in the Gha. matkarma-krn = mat-paramo mad-bhaktah sarhga-varjitah nirvairah sarva-bhuteu yah sa mam eti Pandava (11.55)
(Whosoever works for Me alone, makes Me; his only goal and is devoted to Me, is free from attachment and is without hatred towards any creaturethat man O PSndava, shall enter into Me.)
This message of hope and ultimate salvation is, as Sarhkara affirms, the quintessence of the Gita, and, may we add, is the perennial spring of faith from which Vais.navism draws its sustenance and vitality.
REFERENCES 1. P.V.Kane, History ofdharmaSSstra, Vol. V, part 2, pp.972-73. 2. In this connection see the story of the sage Bharata (Bhagavata-purarta, 5.7-12). 3. Tattva-saihdarbha, para 51. 4 . Bhakti-saMarbha, R.R. Gosvami & K.G.Goswami, Calcutta, 1962,pp. 16-17. 5. It may be stated here that jiianins realize Brahman, yogins Parm5tman, while Bhagavat is for bhaktas. ' 5a. $at-ariidarbha, p. 255, quoted by S. N. Das Gupta, A History of Indian Philosophy, vol. IV; p . 405. 6. In iSaiiikara's commentary these aphorisms are numbered 2.3.43 to 2.3.45. 7. Translation by Rai-Bahadur Srfsa Chandra Vasu, The VedUntasutras of Badarayana with the Commentary of Baladeva, Panini office, Allahabad, 1912, pp. 381-84.
96
8. B.N.K.Sharma : The Brahmasntras and Their Principal Commentaries, Volume II, Bombay, 1974, p. 274. 9. For a discussion of the sampradaya problem see A.K. Majumdar : Caitanya His Life and Doctrine, Bombay, 1969, pp. 260-69. 10. S.N. Das Gupta, A History of IndianiPhilosophy, Vol. II, Cambridge, 1961. pp. 42-44. 11. Mahabharata, Cr. Ed. (Poona), 6.6.11; Bombay ed. 6.5.12. The verse quoted in the text is from Sarhkara's commentary, who refers to it as a verse from a Smrti, i.e., Mahabharata.m 11.1-6 and purana {tath=ahuh pauranikah} in II. 1.27. There are minor differences between Samkara's quotation and the Mahabharata, namely, (1) at the end of the second pada instead of yojayet, the Mahabharata has sadhayet, and in the third pada instead of yac=ca, the epic has yat tu. 12. Translation by S.C.Basu, op.cit., but the translation of the passage from the #gveda is different. 13. Baladeva omits ca of this satrS and takes api as indicative of setting aside the pUrvapaksa objections. 14. G. Thibauta has translated this sBtra (III.2.24) as : 'And in the state of perfect conciliation also (the yogins apprehend the highest Brahman), according to Sruti and Smrti' The Vedanta-SUtras with the Commentary of arhkarBcarya, translated by George Thibaut, part n , 1962, Reprint, p. 171. S.C. Basu has translated this passage as : 'In devout love (the Lord even becomes visible to the eyes, etc. of the devotee, as is taught in the) Sruti and Smrti.' 15. The Mbh 13.129.5 (Cr. Ed.) 13.141.65, Bombay ed. states : Vedoktah paramo dharmah smrti-sastra-gato'parah sista-clrno'parab proktastrayo dharmah sanatanah 'There are three sanatana dharmas : one derived from the Vedas, the second from the smrtis, while the third consists of the customs observed by virtuous people'. It should be noted that the Mahabharata omits 'self-satisfaction'. It is interesting to note that the MitaksarS on YajSivalkya 1.253-54 prescribes 'self-satisfaction' where no direction is available in the Sastras or acSra (customs)'. 16. Caitanya-caritamtta, ed. by Radha-Govinda Nath, Calcutta, Bengali era 1357, 2.25.79-84. Some editions of the text do not contain the last verse, but as Mr. Nath has pointed out t it should be included.

Majumdar - Gau Īyavai Ava Studies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Majumdar - Gau Īyavai Ava Studies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Majumdar - Gau Īyavai Ava Studies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GAUDlYA-VAISNAVA STUDIES

First Published : January, 1978

Distributor : BEST BOOKS IA College Row Calcutta 700009

-Caitanya readily agreed to this request, and Vrndavana-dasa says :

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KMSHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KR1SHNA AND SRI-CHA1TANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHAITANYA

RADHA-KRISHNA AND SRI-CHATTANYA

i. ,-v-vul . ,v,,mar#aa-ka!e,pajra^ i nyvj ;rparjtyajya,4ar^rarii'yah ; gacch3tisa.y : ai^r;av3in i

,,., >v ,,,,

,abh.yast9 yena^Mad-bhaya bh^vitah san,. .. ,

" " " " ':

" - " = ' ' ( i - " ^ ' "

igurantee the' idolater against the enlightening and liberating knowti.

IKtaBHILOSOPHV ' / ' 10 . .

in time. Such reality can only be affirmed of the Paramatman or His

' t s ' v ' i f

, i ' . \ w \ v > ^ v \ w : n \ ; ; . '\\>-\:M:v:.

(Brahman are the'slaves, Brahman are( these, fi^h^rr-sn.'an^ Brahman are

-rn ;>. : r ' u n r n c n

:: n . : . . ' . ' i i i ' ; . : i f f . ' . - : ( ' i ' . " i i

You might also like