Layers of the tradition

More Subala on Jyotidhama:

"I don't like the Chotta Haridas story. I wonder what layer of the tradition it comes from. I was a friend of Vishnujana Maharaj, and from what I hear, he took this story too strictly. I would edit this story out. Sure it may support renunciates, but why do we want to encourage persons to be renunciates? I've seen the damage done. That's why I say we need revised, edited, reimagined scriptures for today. "

He doesn't like it - understandably, because it may make him feel a bit uncomfortable since he himself took a vow of lifelong abstinence once upon a time, considering what was Chota Haridāsa's fate. And 'layer of the tradition'? - well that is another novel concept. I gather it is Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's layer, what other layer is there? He will 'edit the story out' - wonder what will remain of the Absolute Reality of Nitya Līlā (yes, eternal pastimes) then in the end? And what means 're-imagined'? Are the original scriptures 'imagined' to start with?

Regrettably the link to Jyotidham is lost and so is the original text involving Subal.

Plagiarism, concurring realizations or devotional copying?

At Audarya (post 12 and beyond)* the issue of Nārāyaṇa Maharaja using Ānanda Gopāl Gosvāmī’s and Ananta Dās Bābājī’s Vilāpa Kusumāñjali-purports is being discussed. The question is, is it plagiarism, concurring divine realizations or devotional copying due to 100% agreement?

For instance, all three comments on Bhakti Rasāmṛta Sindhu 1.2.182 – by Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī, Mukunda Dās Gosvāmī and Viśvanātha Cakravartī - are verbatim the same (the famous story of the Brahmin burning his fingers on the mentally offered sweet-rice). Now certainly Mukunda and Viśvanātha were not illiterate and they had access to Jīva Gosvāmī’s ṭīkās, so the explanation that they had concurring, parallel transcendental realizations is, however devotionally it is meant, not realistic. As a matter of fact, many of Viśvanātha Cakravartī’s ṭīkās of Bhakti Rasāmṛta Sindhu are verbatim copies of Jīva Gosvāmī’s, and mostly without acknowledging him. Senior followers of Nārāyaṇa Mahārāja already conceded that he took purports from Ānanda Gopāl Gosvāmī and Ananta Dās Bābājī, so the ‘concurring realizations’ explanation does not work. There are also Mukundāṣṭakams by Rūpa Gosvāmī and Raghunātha Dās Gosvāmī that are verbatim the same, of which some say they were concurring realizations. And the Caitanya Caritāmṛta purports of Bhaktivinode and Bhaktisiddhānta were not ‘parallel realized’ by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swāmi either, but simply translated by him. Just some thoughts......

* Unfortunately Audarya Fellowship folded and the link died, so it is deleted March 13, 2010

Stealing in the name of the Lord

“Stealing from the karmīs engages them in devotional service” is an abominable apasiddhānta which isn’t supported by śāstra and logic. A gift consciously and voluntarily given with love and devotion – only that engages the ‘karmīs’ in devotional service! Stealing by a ‘devotee’ is rather a sin for which the devotee will have to suffer reactions, period. In Caitanya Caritāmṛta we find the story of Gopīnāth Paṭṭanāyaka, who was corrupt and stole royal revenue. Due to his family ties with Rāmānanda Rāya, Kāśī Miśra got him [quite literally] off the hook with the king, which could be seen as proxy protection by Mahāprabhu, but only just. Still Mahāprabhu said that he should not steal. In Caitanya Caritāmṛta, Antya 9.88-92, Kāśī Miśra quotes Mahāprabhu to Mahārāja Pratāpa-rudra:

‘Gopīnāth lost control over his senses and misappropriates the king’s revenues for that. The king’s property is more sacred even than the property of a Brahmin, and this great sinner has stolen it for his own enjoyment. He should be punished by the king – that is the verdict of the śāstra. The king is very lenient and pious that he does not punish him. He does not pay his revenue to the king and now he is being punished he is crying out to Me for help – who can tolerate this?”

Later, when Gopīnāth got amnesty, everyone was relieved, but Mahāprabhu reiterated:

“You must follow this order of Mine – Do not misappropriate the king’s wealth. If anything is left after paying dues to the king then spend it on religious affairs. If you are corrupt you will perish in this life and the next.” (CC Antya 9.142-144)

There is nothing ‘transcendental to mundane morality’ in stealing by a Vaiṣṇava, as Śrīla Raghunātha Dās Gosvāmī warns in Manaḥ Śikṣā, verse 2 – na dharmaṁ nādharmaṁ – “Do not perform mundane virtue, but also no mundane sins!” Crime in devotional service is not ‘transcendental’, rather it is an offence to the chanting of the holy name called nāmno balād yasya hi pāpa buddhiḥ: “Sinning on strength of the holy name” thinking that the sin will be obliterated by chanting the holy name after, or even during the crime.

When I returned from the 1983 Ratha-Yatra Festival in Puri, I told Sādhu Bābā that the Orissa Railway Police took boys and men that were riding without ticket off the train and beat them up. Bābā said: “Very well – and when they are finished they can send them to me and I will beat them up again!” Bābā also forbade his merchant disciples to cheat in the marketplace.

adhikāra for Rāsa-Līlā

In response to Keśavānanda’s question in the previous blog's comments box, about adhikāra for hearing of the Lord's intimate pastimes:

My Guru Sādhu Bābā, Kṛṣṇa dās Madrasi Bābā, Rohiṇīndranāth Mitra and Madan-mohan Dās Bābājī, all great souls, told me, independently from each other, it is better not to read rasa śāstra when one is too lusty. I understood that is because when one is an emotionally and physically active lover one will identify with the līlā of Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa and that is an offence called ahaṅgropāsana, meditating on oneself as the deity.

Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī says in Bhakti Sandarbha (276) that smaraṇa (even just of the holy name, let alone Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa’s intimate līlā) requires a pure heart – nāma smaranaṁ tu śuddhāntaḥ-karaṇatām āpekṣate. Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī has also written (Bhakti Sandarbha 275): atha śaraṇāpattyādibhiḥ śuddhāntaḥkaraṇas cet....nāma saṅkīrtanāparityāgena smaranaṁ kuryāt "When the mind is purified by the process of surrender, one should practise the devotional item of recollection without giving up nāma saṅkīrtana." kintu rahasya-līlā tu pauruṣa-vikāravad indriyaiḥ……nopāsya “But the intimate pastimes should not be meditated upon by (those whose) senses are affected by masculine transformations.” (Bhakti Sandarbha 338)

When one is less heated one can read these books, and the topic will work as a medicine, as has been promised by the Bhāgavata in the final verse of the Rāsa līlā-narration (10.33.39). There are subtle desires, called vāsanā, cherished by people who actually control their outer senses. That can be there, OK, and one can still read rasa śāstra, but to be grossly active in sex and read rasa śāstra, is not something approved by the mahātmās I knew. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī says in Gopāla Campū (pūrva 23.1): tad etad govinda vraja vijana kāntānuvacanaṁ dadhadbhir yogyasya śravasi paramāpyam na sadasi 'This confidential Rasa-lila topic is to be heard by qualified people who carry Govinda in their hearts, not in a public assembly."

As to your query why certain devotees fell down even after hearing and reading lots of Rāsa-līlā, that may not have been caused by that but by other factors - I do not believe, for a start, that westerners qualify for sannyāsa, and the past 40-year western Vaiṣṇava history has vindicated me in that. However, there can be other reasons as well - false show-bottle renunciation for pratiṣṭhā will not work in the long term (how long can one stand on one's toes before collapsing?), one gets proud of one's position, vaiṣṇava aparādha, who knows? Only God knows it.
Hope this helps.

svārasikī elaboration

Muralīdhara commented on my last blog:

Reverend Steve of the Marijuana Sacrament Church wrote somewhere that he recently gave up eating red meat, but that his wife was still enjoying it - which must make for some inconvience for them when it comes to planning what to cook for "honey" at meal time.

Seriously, of course svārasikī-elaboration on the existing theme of Rādhā Kṛṣṇa aṣṭakāliya parakīya līlā is just fine and very welcome, however, as Murali indicated with his description of Subal's level of ācāra, great purity is required to qualify to do so. Secondly one must be expert in kāvya, nāṭaka śāstra, alaṅkāra, rasa-siddhānta and what have you. Thirdly there are the parameters given by Śrīman Mahāprabhu - rasābhāsa hoy yadi siddhānta virodha - such compositions must be in good taste, not just aesthetically, but according to the terms of kāvya, alaṅkāra etc, and must be philosophically sound. It is unfortunately certain that Subala does not qualify in any of these categories, so it is better I don't give him an e-copy of Govinda Līlāmṛta just yet...

More Subal

Subal Das continues on jyotidham.com:

I have long wanted to read Govinda Lilamrita, which more fully describes the pastimes throughout the day. I just finished reading Advaita dasa’s translation last night. It was so disappointing. Radha is portrayed as extremely emotionally unstable. She’s always torn between loving Krishna and being angry at him and rejecting him, and there’s just far too much rejection for my taste.

Subal shows that he 1. Has no idea about prema tattva 2. Has a completely mundane view of transcendental matters. 3. Has no idea about the science of kāvya. Radha is of course mādanākhya mahābhava-vati, endowed with the highest mode of transcendental love of God. Her ‘emotional instability’ was later displayed by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu in his recent prakat līlā. It is the pinnacle of ecstatic love of God.

I might describe her as a drama queen, in need of life coaching, in need of Prozac, etc.

This is so offensive I wish I hadn’t read it but just for the sake of exposure I am posting it here.

I’m always thinking, “Come on, give the guy a break. You know that’s just the way he is and that he loves you the best. Look. He’s broken hearted. What more do you want?”

Rādhā’s transcendental rejection of Kṛṣṇa is of course a symptom of Her transcendental vāmya svabhāva, opposed nature, and this is what Kṛṣṇa relishes. So, indeed, give Him a break, let Him enjoy the way He wants to. That is what bhakti is all about – pleasing Kṛṣṇa  Perhaps Subal should first study the Ujjvala Nilamani so that he can get an idea of śṛṅgāra rasa, transcendental amorous mellows. Stressing the adjective ‘transcendental’ here…..

Then there’s the relationship between Kṛṣṇa and his mother. She’s always soaked by her tears and breast milk as she fondles him. And I thought Jewish mothers were a bit much.

This again is so offensive it beggars description. Subal in his 39 years of bhakti could not even grasp the basic principles of vātsalya bhāva, or perhaps he has no mundane vātsalya bhāva himself, since I believe he does not have any children himself.

There were certainly some good parts in the book that I would want to keep. However, what I would like is an electronic copy of the translation so that I could delete sections I don’t like and rewrite others. The book is in need of a major edit and rewrite. It would be even better if Advaitadasa did it.

No way, pal. Count me out, burn your own fingers on that.

I also have his translation of Raya Shekhara’s Astakala Lila Padavali which I can’t bring myself to read. In it Ray Shekhar mixes himself in the pastimes using his male practitioner name. It seems so inappropriate. So I’m looking for some good literature describing the erotic pastimes of Radha Kṛṣṇa that I, my wife and other Westerners can relate to. Post-modern feminine ideals are much different than 16-17th century Indian feminine ideals which I come out in the writings of that period. Some books are better than others.

This all confirms my regrets over publishing these intimate literatures at all. First Pītāmbar, then Jagat, now Subal – people with a completely mundane and thus inevitably offensive view of transcendental śṛṅgāra rasa  Let me exhaust myself by repeating this simple basic lesson – Rādhā Kṛṣṇa līlā is beyond time and space and is not a creation of some medieval Indians. To quote myself (madangopal.blogspot January 13, 2006:)

"I remember that, in 1988, when the late Rohiṇīndranāth Mitra of Keśī-ghāt found out that I had translated Govinda Līlāmṛta into English, he told me: "Very well done. And now you please put this book away." Then he went on reminding me how Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvati did not want his followers to read Ujjvala Nīlamaṇi and the like. I remember in 1983 Sadhu Baba told me not to read rasika books if/when I was in a non-celibate state (he also told me not to go out of our ashram as Navadvip is full of sahajiyas). Nevertheless I continued to read, translate and distribute rasika kathā. Now self-confessed sahajiyas like Pītāmbar Dās and Jagadānanda Dās are reading and passing out these books to wholly unqualified people. I feel some burden of responsibility here; I was too liberal in the past. Now what to do? When you fired the gun you cannot call back the bullet anymore! Of course many people also express gratitude at my translation work and some people will benefit from it, but the harmful side-effect of that past 'mission' of mine is that people who do not realise the spiritual nature of Rādhā and Madangopāl's loving pastimes are reading them and are - deliberately or otherwise - misrepresenting them. I deeply regret that....

When Kṛṣṇa accepts the offering?

PATRAṀ PUṢPAṀ PHALAṀ TOYAṀ YO ME BHAKTYĀ PRAYACCHATI

TAD AHAṀ BHAKTYUPAHṚTAM AŚNĀMI PRAYATĀTMANAḤ

(Bhagavad Gītā 9.26)

“Whoever offers Me with love a leaf, a flower, fruit or water, if it is offered with devotion by a pure soul, I will eat it.”

The services of cooking and serving prasāda are for the oldest and most mature devotees, not for the youngest and least mature devotees, because they are not yet pure enough, either physically or spiritually. The purity of the donor, the server, the cook – everything goes into the consciousness of the eater. The older devotees may be too proud or too lazy to serve or cook, or may consider it ‘menial service’, but it isn’t. Śrīdhara Svāmī comments on Bhagavad Gītā 9.26 :

prayatātmanaḥ śuddha-cittasya niṣkāma-bhaktasya tat-patra-puṣpādikaṁ bhaktyā tena upahṛtaṁ samarpitam aham aśnāmi

(Kṛṣṇa says) “The word prayatātmanaḥ means a devotee who is pure-hearted and free from desires. What is offered by him I will eat.”

Śrī Viśvanātha Cakravartī comments on this verse:

kiṁ ca mad-bhaktasyāpy apavitra-śarīratve sati nāśnāmīty āha prayatātmanaḥ śuddha-śarīrasyeti rajaḥsvalādayo vyavṛttaḥ –

(Kṛṣṇa says) “I will not eat even from My devotees if their bodies are impure. Prayatātmanaḥ means with a pure body, not polluted by menstruation and so.” Too often western devotees cook for their deities with blue jeans on, that they may have worn while riding in buses or trains or while passing stool. Before cooking and offering one should shower and put on special clean clothing. In the Caitanya Caritāmṛta (Antya 6) it is mentioned that Raghunātha dās Gosvāmī decided to stop inviting Mahāprabhu for prasāda because the money that bought the prasāda came from mixed Vaiṣṇavas (his parents). Even that was considered a pollution, let alone the servers. In India the topmost devotees serve prasāda, not the newcomers, let alone polluted guests. The word prayata in the Gītā-verse means:

- piously disposed , intent on devotion , well prepared for a solemn rite, ritually pure (also applied to a vessel and a place) , selfsubdued , dutiful , careful , prudent
- a holy or pious person
- purity , holiness

(Monier Monier Williams Sanskrit dictionary)

Retraction on Vṛṣṇis

On page 14 of my essay ‘Qualification for raganuga bhakti’ on my website www.madangopal.com , linktab 'Articles', I rejected the following notion of Sripad A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami, in his book The Nectar of Devotion:

“Spontaneous love of Kṛṣṇa as exhibited by the Vṛṣṇis and the denizens of Vṛndāvana is eternally existing in them.”

“Persons desiring to follow in the footsteps of such eternal devotees of the Lord as the Vṛṣṇis and Vṛndāvana denizens are called rāgānugā-devotees, which means that they are trying to attain to the perfection of those devotees.”

I have, however, learned from Bhakti Rasāmṛta Sindhu that Swāmiji was actually correct. BRS 1.2.275 (BRS 1.2.270-309 deal exclusively with rāgānugā bhakti) mentions the Vṛṣṇis in sambandhānuga rāgānugā bhakti, quoting SB 7.1.30:

sambandhād vṛṣṇayaḥ snehād yūyaṁ bhaktyā vayaṁ vibho

“The Yādavas attained Kṛṣṇa through their relationship with him.”

śrī-jīvaḥ: gopya iti—pūrva-rāgāvasthā jñeyaḥ evaṁ vṛṣṇādayo’pi 275

Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī’s ṭīkā: “So also with the Vṛṣṇis”

Again the same in verse 288 of the same chapter:

sambandha-rūpa govinde pitṛtvādy-abhimānita atropalakṣaṇatayā vṛṣṇīnāṁ vallava mataḥ yadaiśya-jñāna-śūnyatvād eṣāṁ rāge pradhānata

„It is not only the Vṛṣṇis but also the cowherds who have sambandha bhakti, on account of their parental self-esteem. On account of their predominance of rāga (as they consider Him his relative) they are devoid of the knowledge of Kṛṣṇa's aiśvarya."

And in verse 307

tathā hi śrūyate śāstre kaścit kurupuri-sthitaḥ
nanda-sūnor adhiṣṭhānaṁ tatra putratayā bhajan
nāradasyopadeśena siddho’bhūd vṛddha-vārdhakiḥ

"It is heard in scripture that an old man in Hastināpura attained perfection by considering Nanda’s son to be his son and being instructed in this by Nārada.”

The refutation is deleted from the essay.

Madhura Milana on the Arizona Freeway

Today this appeared on jyotidham.com, written by Subal Das:

"I am looking for some devotee scholars and poets who would like to collaborate with me to update the Radha Krishna devotional literature. The GV corpus was put together based on 16th century Indian asthetic theory. What would it look like with 21st century, Western asthetics? How can the philosophy be developed in such a way that post-modern critical thinkers and seekers can be devotees without having to compromise their intelligence? How can we take and adapt the best and leave the rest? This is a major undertaking."

Subal Das takes Jagat’s mission of ‘rationalizing’ and ‘modernizing’ the Gosvāmīs books even a step further. ‘without having to compromise their intelligence’ means what, that Rūpa, Sanātan, Jīva, Jayadeva, Viśvanātha and all the other nitya siddha ācāryas don’t have any intelligence? Or perhaps they fail to cater to people who have ‘intelligence’? Now we will see what Subal means with ‘intelligence’:

"One thing I think is needed is to make Radha Krishna and their friends older--like Radha is 20 and Krishna 21. We don't have 12 year old married women here. What's with this obcession with illicit love being higher than married love anyway? I'm talking about a major reimagining of the myth to make it more relevant today and in the future."

This is my proposal: Rādhā Kṛṣṇa meet on the Arizona Freeway, after making an appointment on MSN messenger or by cellphone. Kṛṣṇa is now called Blacky and wears blue jeans and a T shirt and Rādhā is now called Starry and wears a miniskirt. She is the cheerleader in the local high school of course, 20 years old and had a score of boyfriends before meeting up with Blacky, anxiously hiding from him that she already scored an STD from one of them. Subal (renamed Muscles)’s Manjari Svarūpa (bud-body) is now 17 years old, to adjust to modern times, and she had scores of boyfriends too, yeah from her high school of course.

BUT SERIOUSLY FOLKS –“The GV corpus was put together based on 16th century Indian asthetic theory.”

Well. for starters the GV corpus was not ‘put together’ but revealed from within the heart by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu (hṛdi yasya preraṇayā, BRS 1.1.2). But then Śrī Caitanya is just a 16th century Indian sādhu I suppose. Subal seems to forget that Rādhā-kṛṣṇa Līlā appeared in Purāṇas like the Brahma Vaivarta Purāṇa, (Rāsa līlā in Bhāgavata Purana), if not 5000 years old then at least a lot older than 16th century, and even that is material calculation, since Narottama Dās Thākur says about those unintelligent 6 Gosvamis “rādhā-kṛṣṇa nitya līlā korilen prakāśa” – “They revealed (not ‘put together’) Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa ‘s nitya līlā - that’s right, nitya means eternal – neither 500 nor 5000 years old, just nitya. Perhaps Narottama wasn’t so intelligent either….

avatāras, asuras, rādhākund-śyāmakund

'Incarnation' is not the right translation for the word avatāra. It is Latin for 'in the flesh' and is thus a māyāvādī-translation because, according to Vaiṣṇava-siddhānta, God never goes in the flesh. The word avatāra is better translated as 'descent'. Instead it is us conditioned souls who are incarnations - incarnations of the individual souls.

'Demon' is often a way-too-heavy translation of the word asura, which means ungodly (a=un sura=godly). We must remember that asuras, the ungodly, are sinning out of ignorance (ityajñāna vimohitaḥ, B.Gītā 16.15)

Iskcon's Gopīnāth Dās (kīrtanīya) explains that one first bathes in Rādhākuṇḍa otherwise Kṛṣṇa will not accept you in Śyāmakuṇḍa then you bathe in Śyāmakuṇḍa and then again in Rādhākuṇḍa because only then Rādhārāṇī will really accept you.

Special service to the Guru

Yesterday, on vilasa kunja (public section!), Krishna Das wrote:

“Otherwise why would the acharyas say that simply service to guru is sufficient, one does not have to do anything else, that one can even give up one's bhajan? (e.g. Visvanath Cakravarti writes it somewhere in his commentary on Bhagavatam, but I cannot remember where exactly.)”

Here are some references to such exclusive Guru seva:

In Bhakti Sandarbha (237) Śrīmat Jīva Gosvāmīpāda has written :

tatra yadyapi śaraṇāpattyaiva sarvaṁ siddhyati. śaraṇaṁ taṁ prapannā ye dhyāna yoga vivarjitāh. te vai mṛtyum atikramya yānti tad vaiṣṇavaṁ padam. iti gāruḍāt tathāpi vaiśiṣṭya lipsuḥ śaktaś cet tataḥ bhagavac chāstropadeṣṭṛṇāṁ bhagavan mantropadeṣṭṛṇāṁ vā śrī guru-caraṇānāṁ nityam eva viśeṣataḥ sevāṁ kuryāt. tat prasādo hi sva sva nānā pratikāra dustyājyānartha hānau parama bhāgavat prasāda siddhau ca mūlam.

"Although the sādhaka achieves all perfection by surrendering to the Lord's lotus feet, still if a person wants to attain special perfection, then he must always specially serve the Guru who instructs him in the scriptures as well as the Guru who initiates into the Lord's mantras. By his grace all one's personal anarthas, that are otherwise hard to give up through other means, are conquered. It is the greatest cause of receiving the grace of the Lord."

In Padma Purāṇa, in the Śrī Devahuti-stava, it is seen —

bhaktir yathā harau me'sti tad variṣṭhā gurau yadi;
mamāsti tena satyena sandarśayatu me hariḥ

"If I have more devotion for the Guru than for Śrī Hari Himself, then through this truth Lord Hari will surely reveal Himself to me."

Śrī Viśvanātha Cakravartīpāda’s comments on Śrīmad Bhāgavata 4.28.34 :

sutāt hitveti pativratā patyur iva guroḥ sevāyāṁ pravṛttaḥ śiṣyaḥ śravaṇa kīrtanādīnyapi bhogān tad utthāna premānandān api gṛhān tad ucita vivikta sthalam api naivāpekṣate. śrī guru sevayaiva sukhena sarva sādhya siddhyartham ityupadeśa vyañjitaḥ..........guru sevāyā eva vedena sarvādhikasyoktatvā

“A disciple deeply absorbed in the service of the Guru does not even depend on hearing and chanting, knowing that by guru-sevā he can easily attain complete perfection in devotion. Just as a devoted wife does not want any sense enjoyment and home comfort, a disciple completely absorbed in guru-sevā does not seek even premānanda arising out of hearing and chanting nor even seek secluded places suitable to his bhajana. The Vedas say that service to the Guru is the greatest.”

Hope this helps!

Encouragement

In regards to the siddha-praṇālī controversy I found this letter today from my senior Guru-brother Śrī Nirañjan Prasād Dās, dated May 20, 1999 -

Advaitadās: “On the one hand Bābā forbade me to study advanced literature on Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa’s intimate pastimes if I was too afflicted by lusty desires, and on the other hand he gave me elevated things like siddha praṇālī and Vilāpa Kusumāñjali at the very beginning of my sādhana path. How can I understand this apparent contradiction?”

Niranjan Prasād Dās: “There is no contradiction. I think it is but a loving anuśāsan (advise, command) of a loving father (well-wisher) towards his beloved son, like the words of Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa uttered to His friend Arjuna on the battlefield of Kurukṣetra –

klaibyam mā sma gama pārtha naitat tvayyupapadyate. 

kṣudraṁ hṛdaya daurbalyaṁ tyaktvottiṣṭa parantapah 

(Bhagavad Gītā 2.3) 

“O Arjuna, it’s not befitting you that you lose your prowess now. Give up this paltry weakness of heart and rise!”

In this new endeavor one must proceed, trampling all the anarthas (unwanted bad old habits) on the path of sādhana (spiritual practice). That was Bābā’s basic desire. He was doing this just for your benefit.”

Since he quoted the Gita verse 2.3, Nirañjan Bābu must have wanted to say that Bābā wanted to encourage me in this way. The text is inserted in page 13 of the file 'Satsanga with Niranjan Prasad Das' at the link-tab 'Opinions' on www.madangopal.com

Uttama adhikārī

Śrīla Raghunātha dās Gosvāmī's Prarthanasraya Caturdasakam, verse 3:

UDAÑCAT KĀRUṆYĀMṚTA VITARAṆAIR JĪVITA JAGAD

YUVADVANDVAṀ GANDHAIR GUṆA SUMANASĀṀ VĀSITA JANAM

KṚPĀṀ CEN MAYYEVAM KIRATI NA TADĀ TVAṀ KURU TATHĀ

YATHĀ ME ŚRĪ KUṆḌE SAKHI SAKALAM AṄGAṀ NIVASATI

udañcat - arisen; kāruṇya - compassion; amṛta - nectar; vitaraṇaih - by distributing; jīvita - enlivening; jagat - the world; yuva - youthful; dvandvaṁ - couple; gandhaiḥ - with fragrances; guṇa - attributes; sumanasāṁ - flowers; vāsita - scents; janam - people; kṛpāṁ - mercy; cet - if; mayi - to me; evaṁ - thus; kirati - does; na - not; tadā - then; tvaṁ - you; kuru - do; tathā - then; yathā - so that; me - my; śrī kuṇḍe - by Śrī Rādhākuṇḍa; sakhi - O friend!; sakalam - all; aṅgaṁ - body; nivasati - resides.


O sakhi (Rūpa Mañjari)! If this Youthful Couple, that enlivens the whole world by distributing the nectar of Their mercy and that scents all the people with the fragrance of Their flower-like attributes, do not bestow Their mercy on me, then please arrange for it that I can always stay at Śrī Rādhākuṇḍa!

Each verse of Śrīla Raghunātha dās Gosvāmī’s is laden with rasa and prema. He sees the Divine Pair pervading the whole universe. Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa are everywhere for the uttama adhikārī. It is said in Śrīmad Bhāgavata (11.2.45):

sarva bhūteṣu yaḥ paśyed bhagavad-bhāvam ātmanaḥ 

bhūtani bhagavatyātmāṇyeṣa bhāgavatottamaḥ 

“The uttamādhikārī sees Kṛṣṇa, the Self of all selves, in every creature and sees every creature in the Lord, who is the Self of all selves.”

So though the conditioned souls themselves can actually not experience the nectar of Their mercy or smell the flowers of Their attributes, the uttamādhikārī sees it that way. Śrīla Raghunātha dās Gosvāmī described similar visions in his Viśākhānandada-stotram (49) – āvaikuṇṭham ajāṇḍāli vataṁsīkṛta sad-yaśaḥ “Rādhā’s true fame is the flower which decorates the ear of each person in all the universes, all the way up to Vaikuṇṭha.” And one of the 108 names he gave to Rādhikā is jagadānandi sad-yaśaḥ “Her true fame delights the whole world.”

Qualification for siddha praṇālī

Qualification for siddha praṇālī does not come by just being formally or socially initiated into the renounced order, since rāgānugā bhakti is not about social orders to begin with, it is all about ruci (taste). For example, in 1983, when I lived in a courtyard in Gokulānanda Ghat, Navadvip (not in Sādhu Bābā's ashram!), Jagat and me had a bābājī-guest staying in the garden-house for a while, who slept most of the day and night, and when awake spoke mostly on mundane matters like India's independence day. On the other hand, gṛhasthas like Bosāk Bābu, the founder of Vṛndāvana's Hārā-Bāri, or Ānanda Gopāl Gosvāmī Prabhupāda, my Gurudeva's father, who had 4 children and many disciples, used to get up at 3 a.m. and not speak with anybody, including wife and children, before finishing a strong bhajan until 8 a.m. So it is really all about anurāga, not about āśram. The Guru's personal judgement is the ultimate arbiter. If the Guru finds a householder fit he will give him siddha praṇālī, despite his many worldly responsibilities.

Inborn empirical world view

Though I am not a fan or ally of Kṛṣṇa-kīrti Dās, I did find this sentence on his blog siddhanta.com very much to the point:

"There are two problems most devotees in the West face: they have difficulty accepting the extent of their fallen nature, and their inborn empirical world view--inherited from their culture--naturally guides them to solutions that have no theistic premises. Devotees in the West, or who are Western by culture, are genuinely torn between the authority of the parampara and the authority of their culture's most capable, secular minds."

The addition "or who are western by culture" is interesting. It is unfortunate that Indians, and Asians in general, tend to give up their simple beliefs and start endless scientific analyses, seminars and whatnot, after migrating to Western countries, getting influenced by their western host-cultures. And "having difficulty accepting the extent of their fallen nature" is not exactly remedied by being in a society where everyone gets 'initiated' into the highest caste.

pramāda japa

Recently I heard a humble Vaiṣṇava admitting to driving his car with one hand and doing japa with the other. Since ignorance IS an excuse, let no one take personal offense at this comment: This is a most gut-wrenching example of pramāda japa, or inattentive japa. Japa is worship and meditation, and neither of these can be or should be done while steering a car through the traffic. In this way it is simply impossible to give the holy name of the Lord the attention and the worship it deserves, adding to it that one touches one's sacred beads to the steering wheel and gear-shift. Though strictly and officially speaking pramāda japa is not an offense to the chanting of the holy name, it obviously is (The 10th offense, śrute nāma-māhātmye'pi prīto'yaṁ rahitaḥ, "to be bereft of love of the holy name, despite having heard its glory", fits the best).

Suppose Śrī Gurudeva is coming to visit us in our home and we continue to watch TV, perhaps telling him to take a seat, telling one's spouse to offer him a glass of milk and occasionally saying something to him and half-listening to him, but at the same time continuing to watch the TV - this would certainly be offensive. Some attention may have been given to Śrī Gurudeva, but it is shared with attention to material things. So it is too with combining japa with any other activity, what to speak of driving a car!!! Instead, japa must be done sitting down in a lotus position in a solitary place, keeping one's japa mālā to one's heart, either murmuring or mentally repeating the syllables of the holy name. Sanātan Gosvāmī writes in his commentary to Haribhakti Vilāsa that murmuring (upaṁśu) is actual japa, while loud japa equals kīrtan and mental japa equals meditation.

Raghunātha Dās Gosvāmī's indigestion

The Bhakti Ratnākara describes in connection with Śrīla Raghunātha Dās Gosvāmī how siddha mahātmās show physical symptoms of their transcendental mental activities -

“Aha Śrīnivāsa! One day Raghunātha Dāsa Gosvāmī mentally ate some offered sweet rice and thus got indigestion and overweight. No one could understand how he (such an austere person) could get obese like that. When Raghunātha Dāsa Gosvāmī’s friend Śrī Viṭṭhalanātha, the son of Śrī Vallabha, heard this he called for two doctors who felt his pulse and confirmed time and again: “He has become obese due to overeating on sweet rice”. In astonishment Śrī Viṭṭhalanātha said: “It is impossible for him to eat sweet rice (let alone overeat). Raghunātha Dāsa Gosvāmī, however, confirmed “They speak the truth – I ate sweet rice within my mind.” Everyone was astonished to hear this. Such are the activities of Raghunātha Dāsa Gosvāmī – what more can I say?”

This translation is added to my anthology of Bhakti Ratnākara-translations at the tab-link 'Literature' on www.madangopal.com, followed by my old translation of the story of the leaf-cup.

Rādhākuṇḍa for siddhas?

Anonymous reply:

I heard that Radhakund is for siddhas, not for sadhakas, still, many people say it is very auspicious to live there. In my experience if we are too close to any sacred place or even the Guru, we tend to take everything for granted. I myself have met devotees who came back from holy plcaes after years and gave up bhakti altogether, they were crazier than before they met KC. What is your opinion? Thanks.

My response:
I don't believe that Rādhākuṇḍa is only for the outright siddhas, but I do believe that a great number of its residents better had done some more harināma before settling there now in their current state. Yes, familiarity breeds contempt, that goes for both the Guru and the holy dhāma. And purity is the force. I also know many people, personal friends, who dropped out of KC altogether after spending years in the holy dhāma non-stop. That may be more due to aparādha than due to sins committed there out of immaturity. Here I mean Vaiṣṇava aparādha and Guru aparādha, though committing sins in the holy dhāma is certainly also an aparādha. Where there are so many Vaiṣṇavas (like in the holy dhāma) there is also much more chance of getting familiar and committing Vaiṣṇava aparādha.

Going 'crazy' in Vraja

I have received the following response to a blog from last February:

haribol dear advaita, i have been reading your blog last time and would have one question considering one remark that some devotees, who spend more time in vraj tend to go mad. could you please send me some thoughts on how you meant it? i do not know from when the log is but i hope that does not matter. i was asking some friends of mine about it but no one could give any question on it. many thanks! jay sri radhe

My response:
Dear J,
You refer to a discussion I had with one devotee who, just like me, spent a long time continuously in Vraja and has seen many people go the wrong way. The point of that remark is that Vraja is a very sacred place and many people come there and decide to stay there permanently, being sincerely attracted and sincerely wanting to live a full lifetime of bhajan there. People like that devotee and me, however, have experience - with ourselves and with others - that it is not so easy and cheap as it initially seems, that most of us are much more conditioned and fallen as we initially think ourselves to be, and then the trouble starts. For 'going mad' you can fill in 'falling in māyā' (though some did go nuts indeed) - they start running after sexual partners, start big construction projects, start a Guru-career, start gossiping about their fellow devotees, listening to rock music, smoking pot etc. I have seen this going on, and it is going on now too. This is all a change of purpose and leads to offences to the holy dhāma. For the vast majority of new devotees it is better to make short visits to the holy places and otherwise remain at home. When one is purified by harināma and the senses and the mind are purified, peaceful and strong one becomes qualified to live full-time in Vraja or Navadvīp or wherever. I hope this answers your question. Rādhe Rādhe.  Advaitadās.

Posted with permission of the correspondent.

Did Śrī Advaita Prabhu support, preach or practise Gaura-nāgarī bhāva?

In his booklet « Rasarāja Śrī Gaurāṅga » Gadādhara Prān Dās quotes the following verses from the Śrī-Śrī-Gaurāṅga-Pratyanga-Varṇanākhya-Stava-Rāja, which is ascribed to Advaita Ācārya. Here he is trying to prove that Śrī Advaita Prabhu is following the line of worship of the Gaura Nāgarīs, in which Śrīman Mahāprabhu acts like a Nāgara or a flirtatious lover of married girls in Navadvīpa. Here is what Gadādhara Prān makes of the Pratyanga Varṇana, verse 6:

ardha-candrollasad-bhāla-kasturī-tilakāṅkitam
bhaṅgura-bhrū-latā-keli-jita-kāma-śarāsanam

Gadādhara Prān’s translation: "Gaurasundara´s forehead is like a brilliant half-moon adorned with beautiful musk tilaka; yet below lurks His flirting eyebrow-bows which defeat the might of Kāma-deva´s flower arrows."

My translation: « His forehead resembles a half moon and is marked with musk tilak; it has fragile creeper-like eyebrows which defeat the playfulness of Cupid’s arrows. »

Note that the word ‘flirting’ which Gadādhar Prān mentions is not mentioned in the original Sanskrit text. We must remember that to compare a great person with Cupid is standard Vedic poetic embellishment. Even the most renounced Six Gosvāmīs have been compared to Cupid in the Bhakti Ratnākara. No girls of Nadīya in sight in this verse.

Verse 17:

koṭi-kandarpa-lāvaṇya-keli-līlā-manoramam 
sākṣāl-līlā-tanuṁ keli-tanuṁ śṛṅgāra-vigraham

Gadādhara Prān’s translation: "Śrī Gaurasundara´s prema keli is absolutely manohara!— like that of millions of Cupids; for He is the Abode of prema keli and a śṛṅgāra rasa vigraha."

Advaitadas: The kandarpa mentioned in the last line of verse 17 (the whole verse is wrongly numbered as nr. 17 by Gadādhara Prān)  affects Mahāprabhu’s lābaṇya, which means luster, and does not prove that he is a lover. The words manorama keli, enchanting pastimes, do not prove that He was a nāgara or lover either – any līlā can be manohara (enchanting). Only the word śṛṅgāra vigraha in the first line of verse 18 could apply to Him being a Nāgara, but, as was already explained, to compare a great and beautiful person with Cupid is standard Vedic poetic embellishment. Otherwise the rest of that line says that He is the embodiment of playfulness, which does not point at Him being a nagara either. Next Gadādhara Prān takes verse 26:

nija-bhāva-rasāsvāda-vivaśaikādaśendriyam
vidagdha-nāgarī-bhavya-kalā-keli-manoramam 26

Gadādhara Prān’s translation: "Although Mahāprabhu´s eleven senses are completely overwhelmed by His own bhāva, rūpa and rasa — His divine keli vilāsa with the clever and rasa-skilled Nadīya nāgarīs is simply enchanting!"

My translation: “His eleven senses are overwhelmed by the relish of His own feelings (where are the words rūpa and rasa in the text?). His playful and artful pastimes are to be conceived of (bhavya) by a clever female lover.”

This applies to the Rādhā-bhāva that Kṛṣṇa came to relish as Mahaprabhu, rather than any Nāgarī bhāva to be practiced by Him. I cannot find this sentence “His divine keli vilāsa with the clever and rasa-skilled Nadīya nāgarīs is simply enchanting!" in the verse. The word Nadīya Nāgarīs is not there, and the nāgarī which is mentioned is in the first case. If it was to be ‘with the nāgaris’ (plural, third case) the verse would have said ‘nāgarībhiḥ’.

gadādhara-prema-bhāva-kalākrānta-manorathaṁ
narahari-prema-rasāsvāda-vihvala-mānasam 27

Gadadhara Pran’s translation: "Gaurāṅga keenly desires to taste the sweetness of Gadādhara's prema bhāva and rasa keli skill. Moreover, Śrīman Narahari´s prema rasa enslaves Him."

My translation: “He wishes to be overcome (ākrānta) by Gadādhara’s loving feelings and His mind is overwhelmed by the relish of Narahari’s prema.”

Where is it mentioned here that Śrīman Mahāprabhu was practicing Nadīya Nāgarī bhāva?
Verse 28:

sarva-bhāgavatāhuta-kānta-bhāva-prakāśakam
prema-pradāna-lalita-dvi-bhujaṁ bhakta-vatsalam 28

Gadādhara Prān’s translation: "Bhakta-vatsala Śrī Gaurahari hankers to take up his splendid kānta bhāva with every bhāgavata associate. Using His graceful, two arms He embraces them to award (madhura) prema."

My translation: “Called or summoned (āhuta) by all the great devotees (sarva bhāgavata) He reveals the feelings of a lady-love.”

This verse clearly describes Mahāprabhu assuming the mood of Rādhā (rādhā-bhāva dyuti subalitaṁ naumi kṛṣṇa svarūpam). There is no mentioning of Mahāprabhu hankering to take up kānta-bhāva – where is that word ‘hankering’ in the verse? “ Gadādhara Prān Dās fails to translate the words ‘āhuta’ (called, summoned) and ‘prakāśaka’ (the revealer). There is also no one being ‘embraced’ in the second line of this verse. It simply says that Mahāprabhu is the lovely two-armed one (lalita dvi-bhujam) who bestows Prema (prema pradāna).”
And finally verse 32:

naṭa-rāja-śiro-ratnaṁ śrī-nāgara-śiromaṇim
aśeṣa-rasika-sphuryan-mauli-bhūṣaṇa-bhūṣaṇam 32

Gadādhara Prān’s translation: "Śrī Gaurāṅga is the Crown-jewel amongst all dancers, the Crown-jewel amongst all nāgaras (including Sri Krsna) — and thus the Ornament of ornaments amongst all rasika persons."

My translation: “He is the crownjewel and the king of dancers (nata) and the crownjewel of Nāgaras.”

Now this is the only hint given at Mahāprabhu being a Nāgara, but we must remember that the ācāryas, headed by Śrī Rūpa Gosvāmī (f.i. in his Caitanyāṣṭakams), often see Kṛṣṇa within Mahāprabhu, who is, after all Kṛṣṇa, so it may point at Kṛṣṇa instead. That counts for verses 17-18, quoted above, as well.

“He is the ornament of the ornament of all countless rasikas.” That can apply to relishing the mellows of any devotional sentiment and does not prove Mahaprabhu thought or acted as a Gaura Nāgarī. And all this is only in case this text was actually composed by Advaita Ācārya at all.

Updates of madangopal.com

On pages 18-19 of the biography of Sādhu Bābā a new paragraph is created, all about japa. In it are known teachings of Sādhu Bābā to which I added this famous one:

"One should not trade on the market with a bead-bag in the hand and one should not go on parikramā (when one visits a holy place) with one’s beads, because each time one sees a saint or a temple one has to bow down and touch one’s beads to the ground, and that is a great offence to the sacred chanting beads."

And this golden memory of Sādhu Bābā, also on page 18:

Krishnā Dās: "Bābā never bestowed the title Mahārāja, Bābājī or Mātājī to any of his disciples."

On page 2 an index has been added to facilitate browsing in this file too.

More golden sayings of Niranjan Prasād Dās added to his file 'Satsanga with Niranjan Prasād Dās' (link-tab 'Opinions'), page 2:

“To remember the Guru – that is human life. I have not seen Bhagavān – how will I remember Him? I have never seen Him, but I have got (seen) my Gurudeva.”

page 3: “(Considering how central Advaita Prabhu was to Bābā) See how much he loved you by giving you the name ‘Advaita’!”

This, and much more, at www.madangopal.com!

Explanation of 'Ignorance IS an excuse"

I have received the following reaction to my last blog and I am posting the essence of it here in case it is not properly understood:

“I can't seem to work out the implications of Vijay Krishna Goswami's thoughts. I can understand that varnashram would be difficult to practice in the western world in its strictest meaning. We can also do away with samskaras or ritualistics rites that are a part of the Hindu tradition....And while in the west for myself, I will wear the clothing preferences of the women in the west, which I consider decent. On the other hand, I am sure you are not advocating for Vaishnavas living in the western country to take to meat eating again nor to practice the permissive stance of many people in the west in regard to personal relationship. Therefore can you please explain a bit more of your thoughts about the quote of Vijay Krishna. I am thinking of the absolutes and relatives lines within this particular quote.”

My response:
“Hmm there is a misunderstanding here. I was not trying to make the point that WE Western Vaiṣṇavas should be assimilating with western culture (I myself live a combination of Indian and western lifestyles, wearing Indian clothes at home and western clothes outside). When in the opening text I spoke of westerners, I meant non-devotee westerners, and the point of the blog was that Western Vaiṣṇavas are trained to think that all 'karmis' they meet on the street while on 'sankirtan' are going to go to hell because they eat meat, drink alcohol, cohabit without marriage etc. (At least we were trained like that in the 1970s, I don’t know about nowadays) The point that Sādhu Bābā and his predecessor Vijay Kṛṣṇa Gosvāmī make is that people are judged by God according to their own level of realization, their own culture and their own religious principles. Note that Vijay Kṛṣṇa Gosvāmī said that they are not sinning unless and until they realized that it is wrong what they are doing.

“Whatever is thus considered decent is accepted, and unless and until it is understood and realized to be wrong and unjust it should certainly be followed.”

And we western Vaiṣṇava-converts are certainly aware of the wrongs of alcohol and meat-consumption. Ignorance is an excuse but western converts are no longer in ignorance….

Ignorance IS an excuse

Although most western devotees have been initially taught that all westerners go to hell because they don’t follow the Vedic principles and that ‘ignorance is no excuse’, when I told this to Sādhu Bābā he laughed and thought I had told him the joke of the year. Later, when studying the teachings of Vijay Kṛṣṇa Gosvāmī, I understood why –

“Although not every human being has the same duties, obligations and ethics, there is morality according to country, society and time. Whatever is thus considered decent is accepted, and unless and until it is understood and realised to be wrong and unjust it should certainly be followed. Whatever I believe to be my duties and propriety that is my religious principle. If one doesn’t follow one’s fundamental religious principles one meets with woe and commits sin according to one’s local, social and temporal customs and ethics. Whatever obligation and ethics one believes in and accepts with a simple heart, that is one’s religious virtue and should certainly be followed. In some places the eating of fish and meat is established custom and at other places it is rejected as a sin as if it is poison.” Vijay Krishna Goswami, June 1891.

ebe yaśa ghuṣuk tribhuvana

In my archives I found some more nectarean examples of my beloved and revered Guru-brother Śrī Nirañjan Prasād Dās’ Guru bhakti. On a tape I recorded of him in March 2000 he said:

“I was not a young man when I met the sat-Guru – When I was 60 years old I had this amazing vision – I saw the Guru - Guru, Guru. Whatever I had heard before that was at once erased. I erased everything. He pulled me to his lap – behold the vision of the Guru!”

When I wrote Nirañjan Bābu about my misgivings about preaching Bābā’s glories, quoting a warning by Kavi Karṇapura in this regard, Nirañjan Bābu wrote back (November 12, 2002):

“I became ecstatic by learning that you will preach Baba’s glories and are already engaged thus. Why do you consider scriptural statements such as guror nama na grhniyat (“One should not utter the Guru’s name”)? There will be no fault in this, because you are not doing this for spreading your own fame – this is for the benefit of all living beings, for the whole world. Indeed, you will benefit yourself to the utmost too by preaching the glories of a saint!”

This brings back the memory of how Narottam Dāsa Thākur Mahāśay closed off his famous exaltation of the Guru: ebe yaśa ghuṣuk tribhuvana – “Now let all the three worlds proclaim your fame!” (If the macrocosm of the larger world wont then let at least the microcosm of my own mind and heart do so!)

The anecdotes have been added to the file "Satsanga with Niranjan Prasād Dās", under the link-tab 'Opinions' on www.madangopal.com

Bengalizing

I just found this post by Chanahari in Gaudiya-repercussions (Academic, controversial, eclectic) of one year ago. Never noticed this one until now: Apr 15 2005, 12:26 PM Post #2

"Advaitadas is the Westerner who reached maybe the most far away point both in effort and in faith in Bengalizing himself. I always wondered how can one so much immerge himself in a culture he is not native in (setting aside the topic whether it is needed or not in reaching Radha-Krishna...). If he is right, of course, then only Bengali and quasi-Bengali* Vaishnavas would reach the highest goal of GV, so there is no point in practicing Vaishnavism in the West at all - most of us can simply give up with any effort and fall back to the samsara, and just wait a few million lifetimes until by happenstance get a Bengali birth (maybe firstly as a monkey or a cow, and then as a woman, and then as a man ).
.....*Quasi-Bengali is, subjectively, one who lives with the Bengali cultural customs, eats the Bengali foods, wears the Bengali clothes, reads the Bengali literature (besides technical instructons), in full or nearly full exclusion of the Western correspondants, despite being not born in a Bengali family. "

This is very funny. (One wonders, of course, how much Chanahari actually knows about Bengali culture because you won't find much of it in Iskcon, not even in Māyāpur, and only a few western devotees have gone beyond such realms into the real Bengal). So let us analyse this 'Bengalizing' : Bengali cultural customs? If sadācāra or ritual purity is referred to, this is from the Vedic smṛti-scripture, and is not culturally Bengali. If fast and late eating is referred to (this is typically Bengali culture), no I don't indulge in that because I don't want to have an ulcer (last time I ate late with Bengalis was one month ago at Rādhākuṇḍa and I had the runs for two days, causing me to shift to a Brajabāsī place). Bengali cuisine is certainly the most delicious in the world, especially if prepared and offered by a Bengali brahmin! I wouldn't scrap it for a fortune!!! Bengali clothes? What is Bengali about a dhoti and a t-shirt? A dhoti is pan-Hindu/vedic and a t-shirt can be bought anywhere in the world. Bengali literature? OK, Caitanya Caritāmṛta and Advaita Prakāśa are favorites of mine, the others are all written in Sanskrit, not Bengali. Yes, I am fluent in Bengali but I only speak it when I am in the company of Bengalis and even then not always. I mostly speak English and Dutch actually.....

On the positive side, virtually all Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, modern or ancient (that have not fallen down) are Bengalis, Mahāprabhu and nearly all His associates appeared in Bengal, would that be coincidental? Indeed, the word Gauḍīya itself means Bengali.

I myself, however, loathe the Bengali chauvinism about being born or having to be born not only in Bengal but even in certain districts of Bengal. No one has uttered more sarcasm about this tribalism than yours truly, but I leave the last word to Śrī-Śrī Sādhu Bābā (yes, a Bengali brahmin!). When I asked him, in 1984, if a westerner could attain Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa in this lifetime he enthusiastically roared 'ek śo bār!' (Bengali for 'you bet!'). I do insist it is a safe bet to take dīkṣā from a Bengali rather than an American Guru. History has vindicated me on this point. Personally I find it even astonishing that a person can still take dīkṣā from a westerner after all his predecessors have fallen down. It is like not believing you will one day die despite seeing all older people die before you. That the Guru's birth matters is of course elaborately insisted upon by Śrīla Sanātan Gosvami and Śrīla Gopāl Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī in the opening chapter of Śrī-Śrī Hari-bhakti Vilāsa..............

Lokanātha's Guru

March 22, 2006
Sītānāth's Dol-Saptamī. I shoot a pic of Giridhārī on the wooden Brajabāsī-swing in 'my' gośālā at Rādhākuṇḍa.

Lokanātha Goswāmī's Guru
Vilasakunja.com, March 18, 2006:
Q: This view seems to me to be quite problematic. Why should he (Lokanath) not accept a diksa-guru? And how could he then give diksa to Narottama?
Madhavananda Das: "He may have felt it was not relevant, given his relationship with Mahaprabhu since his very childhood, and the infusion of all divine essence this relationship effected."

This is a bizarre theory for someone who, on Gaudiya Discussions, vehemently preached the need for everyone to take dīkṣā in the proper line. This is an echo of the theory of Bhaktisiddhānta Saraswati's followers. Mahāprabhu, Lord Rāma, Lord Kṛṣṇa- everyone gave the proper example by taking dīkṣā, and then Lokanāth Goswāmi did not need it? Advaita Prakāśa (12.97-100) clearly states that he did. Why Lokanātha Goswāmi's Guru is not mentioned in the different Guru-praṇālīs is a wonder to me too, since there are scriptural claims on him by both the Adwaita Parivāra and the Gadādhar Parivāra.

Holi/Gaur pūrnimā 2006

(Tulasis in Yadunath's garden)

March 14, 2006
2006 Colour Holi/Gaurpurnima
It's cloudy and windy, so no weather to be soaked by Holi-liquids. So I stay inside and give Giridhārī His abhiṣekh with just raw milk. In the evening there's such a rainstorm that I doubt if I will make it to Rohini's house, but I do reach it.

Rohini supports Jai-kṛṣṇa Dās Bābā's suggestion that a manjari's cloud-coloured dress can be white too, like an autumn cloud. It's not like a widow's dress, because it can have embroidery and ornaments. An apt discussion on a full-moon night, when Rādhikā goes out dressed all in white.

March 15, 2006
Stool-Holi begins early, at 7.45 a.m., when Brijabasis, with bags of powder, begin coloring each other. Rohini's place isn't much safer than the gośālā though - at 11 a.m. scary bands of Brijabasis with black hands (stool or paint?) are roaming around the house. When I cook for Rohini I warn him against my bad cooking. He wisely replies that (Mahāprabhu told Raghunāth Dās Goswāmī) we shouldn't eat nicely. I'll remember that next time I have guests! I suppose that if I didn't bother too much about nice dressing (the other prohibition of Mahāprabhu) I wouldn't be so terrified of stool-Holi anymore!

Sridhara Swami says that forgetting God in the famous 'bhayam dvitīyābhiniveśatah'-verse (11.2.37): bhagavataḥ svarūpāsphūrtis tato viparyayo dehāsmīti means "Not having a vision of God's own form. Hence one thinks: I am the body."

An alternative reading says: īśa vimukhasya tan māyayā'smṛtiḥ svarūpāsphūrtiḥ, 'Forgetfulness of God means that one does not perceive ones own svarūpa..." Nothing about falling from Goloka here....

About the famous 'ye'nye'ravindākṣa' verse (10.2.32) he says tvayi asto nirasto'ta evāsan yo bhāvas tasmāt bhakter abhāvād.... "Having no devotion to You" kṛcchrena bahu janma tapasā paraṁ padaṁ mokṣa sannihitaṁ sat-kula tapaḥ śrutādi."After many births of penance he attains the supreme abode, nearness to liberation, birth in a good family, learning..." 'sannihita' means "close, near, at hand, proximate, prepared to, ready or", so he's not really merged in brahman yet. This shows that no jīva falls down from Brahman, this verse having been the only option that would allow such a theory.

Śiva Caturdaśī, prāṇa pratiṣṭha, respect and Sevā Kuñja

Due to difference of opinion most people did Śiva Pūjā and the vigil yesterday, so today it really peaceful at Gopeśvara Mahādeva Mandir. At the gate I buy a basket with a garland, roses, Bael-leaves, incense and some other items to offer. I am out within 5 minutes.

In a private darśan I ask Satya-nārāyan Dāsjī whether Kṛṣṇa will not be there in the deity because of corrupt management of its temple or organization, due to lack of prāṇa pratiṣṭha or lack of bhakti. He says prāṇa-pratiṣṭhā is just a show conducted for social acceptance of a temple. Kṛṣṇa is anyway everywhere, so why not in a non-installed deity? Kṛṣṇa is manifest in the deity according to the bhakti of the individual who comes for His darshan.

I ask him about the dilemma of having to respect older devotees who may be deeply flawed. He says it is hazardous to criticise elders in public (internet) for one will make many enemies, but in private one should certainly speak the truth about such a senior devotee, because it is one's duty to warn innocent would-be followers against him. About Upadeśāmṛta verse 6 he says that one should not dishonor a devotee because of faulty character but also not associate with him/her, just as one would die after drinking the Yamunā-water in its current polluted state, but must certainly respect her from a distance.

During the class he confirms that one cannot just get darśan of Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa by hiding oneself in Sevā-kunja. This is a myth, hearsay. All the neighbors can look in from the first floor and they don't go blind or mad. I tell him I was living in such a first-floor adjacent room and I never saw anything (and mad I was already before that anyway!)

Women and social life

My Dutch friend Vāsu Ghoṣa tells me that women cannot live without social life. Men can. I remember the līlā of the sacrifice of Dakṣa. Satī was so eager to go there and socialize that she defied the prohibition of her husband Śiva and went there anyway. It cost her her life and that of her father.... (I do know there are some women who are less socially inclined but they are exceptions)

satsanga with Satya-nārāyan Dās

Today, during his Bhāgavata-pāṭha, Satya Nārāyan Bābā discussed Viśvanātha Cakravartī's ṭīkā on Śrimad-Bhāgavata 1.9.26, where he says: kintu vairāgyaṁ cet sadaiva bhikṣavo bhaveyus tadā rāgas ced gṛhastha eva sadeti "A vairāgi should be vairāgī throughout life and a gṛhastha should be a gṛhastha throughout life if that is their true propensity." If vairāgya isn't there at age 50 one has either not properly followed gṛhastha dharma or one is simply not inclined towards vairāgya."

When I ask Satyanārāyan Bābā about the Haribhakti-vilāsa verse amārgastho sanmārgo vā gurur eva janārdanaḥ ("Whether on the path or off it, the Guru is always God"), he says that if the Guru is not on the path he cannot bestow siddhi, just as blind faith in a counterfeit medicine will not cure your disease. He reminds me of the verse I quoted earlier -

guror apy avaliptasya kāryākāryam ajānataḥ

utpatha pratipannasya parityāgo vidhīyate

"If the Guru is arrogant, does not know right from wrong and is devious he is to be fully rejected".

I ask him about the muktānām api siddhānām verse (Śrimad-Bhāgavata 6.14.5), if that means that those who merged into brahman can really proceed to bhakti. He says muktānām refers to jīvanmuktas (those liberated in this body), not to atyantika muktas, fully liberated souls. Kṛṣṇa may take a soul out of brahman, because individuality is eternal, even in brahma-līna. A drop of water remains a drop, also when it is part of an ocean.

Edited December 16, 2008

The advent of Śrī Advaita Ācārya

As Lord Sadāśiva, the transcendental deity from Vaikuṇṭha who is the fountainhead of all the forms of Śiva within the innumerable mundane universes saw the wicked age of Kali, or quarrel, destroying all godly qualities in man, He became filled with compassion. After many deliberations with goddess Yogamāyā He sat down on the shore of the Causal Ocean, where Lord Mahaviṣṇu lies in mystic slumber. That great, ever-joyful yogi sat down on a yoga-āsana and began to practice yoga there. After 700 years of penance the Universal Lord Mahāviṣṇu appeared to Him. Five-headed Śiva then offered many kinds of indescribable praises to Mahāviṣṇu, who replied: "My dear Sadāśiva! Why are You trying to please Me by performing such difficult austerities? You and I are one! We differ only in body!" Sadāśiva replied: "My dear Lord, unless You empower Me to save suffering mankind, how can I do it?" Then Mahāviṣṇu embraced Sadāśiva and thus They assumed one captivating, radiant golden form in which They would appear, roaring out 'kṛṣṇa! kṛṣṇa!'
Then a most amazing divine voice resounded in the sky, proclaiming: "Listen, O Mahāviṣṇu! First descend in the womb of Lābhā-devī in this form— later I will personally descend in Nadiya. You will then find Me in the abode of Śacī and Jagannātha. Balarāma and all the other devotees will also all take birth there to redeem the conditioned souls." Hearing this, Mahāviṣṇu became one with Siva and together they entered the womb of Lābhā-devī in Śāntipura.

2006 Sītānāth Utsava

Kṛṣṇā Di

Kīrtan in the pandal

Golok and Rākhā Dā

Thanks to Prāngovinda for the hottest photos of Sītānāth's Utsava - the annual festival to commemmorate Advaita Prabhu's birthday in Sādhu Bābā's āśram, Prāchīn Māyāpur, Navadvīp! Glory to digital photography! Sītānātha's Utsav comes (almost) live into your living-room!

Sādhu Bābā on Vedic Utopia

Returning to the discussion of meat-eating and other practices in the Vedic civilization, I have this entry in my Indian diary, early November, 1984 – "Shortly after the assassination of Indira Gandhi I ask Bābā how it is possible that such a person can rule a holy land like India for so long." Bābā pointedly replied: āge-o kaṁsa-ṭaṁsa chilo to? “In the ancient days there were demoniac rulers like Kaṁsa too, weren’t there?” This is significant in relation to the utopian ideas that many, especially western, devotees, have of the ancient Vedic civilization. Its principles were perfect, but human beings are not and never were.

This anecdote is added to the biography of Sādhu Bābā (linktab Nikunja Gopal Gosvami, page 43) at www.madangopal.com

On siddha praṇālī

On siddha pranali, Muralidhara das states today in Audarya-fellowship:

In fact there is a situation where, generation after generation, the successive gurus in various "traditional communities" of Gaudiya Vaishnavas are giving instruction about "siddha-deha" to new initiates, with the gurus telling the disciples about their own "siddha name" and "siddha form", as well as the disciple's form and name: "you are such-and-such manjari"; but in reality these so-called gurus have no real vision of either their own real spiritual form or the spiritual body of their so-called disciples. The so-called gurus haven't realized their own real "siddha form". Nor have they attained the realized the stage of Prema (pure love). But they are initiating new disciples and telling the disciple "you are a manjari and your name is such-and-such-manjari". The practices of these people are in fact a mere imitation of the practices of Gopal Guru Goswami, Dhyanacandra Goswami and other devotees of the past who had a real and direct understanding of the transcendental form of their innermost self (swarup siddha).

This is objectionable. How does Muralidhara das know whether or not these 'so-called' Gurus are self-realized and have prema or not? It is insinuating, which is dangerous in relation to Vaiṣṇavas. There lies the chance of Vaiṣṇava aparādha. Let Muralidhara come forward and tell us which 'so-called Guru' is not realized and has no prema, yet gives siddha pranali.

"In his commentary (on Bhakti Rasamrita 1.2.291), Srila Vishvanatha Cakravarti Prabhu points out that in this verse Sri Rupa Gosvami has clearly defined raganuga bhakti. Here, Sri Rupa Goswami states that those individuals who in their intrinsic nature feel an intense longing and firm attachment for service following in the wake of the feelings and sentiments of the residents of Vrindaban, with no thought or attraction for the majesties of the Godhead, are alone eligible for following in the way of raganuga bhakti. The person eligible for raganuga bhakti may spontaneously follow Sri Radha and other Gopis in madhura rati, Nanda-Yasoda and others in vatsalya rati, Sridama-Sudama and others in sakhya rati, or Citraka-Patraka and others in dasya rati."

Factually, however, Viśvanātha Cakravartī says nothing of the kind. He says:

prasaṅgato rāgātmikāyā lakṣaṇam uktvā prastutayā rāgānugāyā lakṣaṇam āha - rāgātmikāyā iti. rāgātmika bhaktau eka-niṣṭhaṁ yeṣāṁ teṣāṁ vrajavāsināṁ śrī kṛṣṇe yo bhāvas tat sājātīya bhāvāptaye lubdha ityarthaḥ.

"In the course of discussing rāgātmikā bhakti, rāgānugā bhakti is also defined, in this verse rāgātmikaika etc. The greed to attain the same feelings towards Śrī Kṛṣṇa that the exclusively fixed rāgātmikā vrajavāsī bhaktas have (is called rāgānugā bhakti)."

The word 'spontaneous' is not there, 'attraction for the majesties' is not there, nor is there any mentioning of Yaśodā, Sudāmā and Patraka etc.

Also, it is not that the siddha deha comes just falling out of the sky, like it's pure divine revelation and no sādhana or preliminary meditation is involved. Śrī Kṛṣṇadās Kavirāja has written in his commentary on Kṛṣṇa Karnāmṛta, verse 3, that in the unripe stage, preceding bhāva, one may meditate on one's own desired siddha deha -

rāgānugā mārge anutpanna-rati sādhaka-bhaktair api svepsita siddha dehaṁ manasi parikalpya bhagavat sevādikam kriyate. jata ratīnam tu svayam eva tad deha sphūrteḥ

"In the ripe stage of bhāva it becomes manifest by itself." This is confirmed by Narottama Dāsa Thākur in his Premabhakti Candrikā:

sādhane bhāvibo yāhā, siddha dehe pābo tāhā

 pakkāpakka mātra sei vicāra 

'What I think of in my sādhana is what I will attain in my siddhi. The only difference is ripeness or rawness." On the other hand again, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī says that one does need to be pure-hearted in order to be able to meditate on anything. So the truth lies in the middle. Nor the stern approach of Bhaktisiddhānta nor the 'anything goes'- approach of some bābājīs is balanced.

Muralīdhara then continues:

Baladeva quotes the Chandogya Upanishad, which states:
"Thus does that serene being, arising from this body, appear in its own form, as soon as it has approached the highest light, the knowledge of Self. He, in that state, is the highest person (uttama purusha). He moves about there laughing or eating, playing, and rejoicing in his mind, be it with women, carriages, or relatives, never minding that body into which he was born. - Chandogya Upanishad 8.12.3.
In his Govinda Bhasya commentary Sri Baladev Vidyabhusan then quotes the following verse from the Padma Purana:
anur nityo vyapti-silas cid-anandatmakas tatha aham artho 'vyayah saksi bhinna-rupah sanatanah
The soul is atomic, eternal, is present by consciousness everywhere in the material body, is by nature full of spiritual bliss and knowledge, has a sense of individual identity, is unchanging, is a witness within the body, and is different from the Supreme.
Srila Baladev Vidyabhusan states that the spiritual form of bliss the liberated being attains is the original form of the soul that lay dormant within when the soul was in illusion. The Vedanta Sutra tells us that the spiritual body of the liberated being is the soul's original form. This form is a form of eternity, knowledge and bliss, as is mentioned in the verse above (cid-ananda-atma). It is not that the soul attains liberation and enters into a spiritual body or a form of existence which is an external imposition, an external state of being different from the self itsef. Not at all. The liberated soul realizes the spiritual nature of one's own inner being."

This, however, does not contradict the 'superimposition of a siddha svarūpa'. The above quotes of Narottama and Kṛṣṇadās Kavirāja make it clear that one does meditate on details of the siddha svarūpa in an unripe state. The quotes from Baladeva and the Upaniṣads simply state that the soul is unchangeable, intrinsically spiritual etc, and there is neither acceptance or rejection of meditating on the details of one's siddha-svarūpa in these quotes.

By saying It is not that the soul attains liberation and enters into a spiritual body or a form of existence which is an external imposition, an external state of being different from the self itsef. Not at all. The liberated soul realizes the spiritual nature of one's own inner being." Muralidhara contradicts himself, as in the beginning of his essay he did acknowledge the validity of the siddha praṇālī-process given by "Gopal Guru Goswami, Dhyanacandra Goswami and other devotees of the past who had a real and direct understanding of the transcendental form of their innermost self (swarup siddha)."

Hindus, Vaiṣṇavas and the eating of meat.

While reading a thread on gaudiyarepercussions.com about meat-eating in the Vedic civilization I am wondering if the participants have ever been to India or they have any experience of Vedic life outside of Iskcon at all. No Vaiṣṇava ācārya has ever claimed that the Vedic civilization on the whole is one of pure vegetarianism, nor are Vedic- and Vaiṣṇava culture totally identical or even compatible. One who has lived in India will surely know that most Hindus are not vegetarians, though they will abstain from beef. Scriptures like Harivaṁśa and books about Rāmacandra (haven't seen that myself though, so I can't confirm or deny it) and Brahma Vaivarta Purāṇa (that I did read) may have described Rāma or the Brajabāsīs eating meat. One must understand here that, at least the Brahma Vaivarta Purāṇa (which I can judge) is a Purāṇa in the mode of passion (rajo-guna) and that colors its subjective depiction of Kṛṣṇa līlā as well.

However, the books quoted in that thread are not quoted in the Gosvāmīs' books. nānā śāstra vicāranaika nipuṇau saddharma saṁsthāpakau (Śrīnivāsācārya's Ṣaḍ gosvāmyaṣṭakam - 2) "The Gosvāmīs were expert in scrutinizing various (not all) scriptures to establish the sad-dharma, the true religion." The outcome of their studies is that meat, fish and eggs are not served during Vaiṣṇava feasts, not in Iskcon, but also not in the Gaudiya Maṭha, with the bābājīs, Gosvāmīs or anywhere. It is also mentioned in Bhagavad Gītā (9.26) and the Bhagavat (1.17.38. śūnaḥ prāṇī-vadhah...adharma - 'killing other living beings is adharma', Viśvanātha ṭīkā) that a Vaiṣṇava is to be a vegetarian. Nobody has ever claimed that Vedic civilization itself is or has ever been vegetarian.

Mahāprabhu about respect in general

From Caitanya Caritāmṛta (Antya 4. 135-169) we learn that junior devotees should not instruct senior devotees. In this narration we see that Jagadānanda Paṇḍit advised Sanātana Gosvāmī to go to Vṛndāvana, but when Mahāprabhu heard that he was very angry, because Jagadānanda Paṇḍita was junior to Sanātana Goswāmī not just vyavahāre, materially, by being younger in age, but also paramārthe, spiritually, because Sanātana Gosvami was like his Guru (CC Antya 4.159 vyavahāre paramārthe tumi - tāra guru tulya). Mahāprabhu thus set the standard for devotees of all time to act according to maryādā, or protocol. He will be very angry when junior devotees instruct senior ones - maryādā laṅghana āmi sohite nā pāri (C.C. Antya 4.166) "I cannot tolerate breach of the protocol."

One should note, however, that if a devotee senior in age is inferior in spiritual advancement one need not heed the instructions of such a senior devotee-by-age-only. After all, Mahaprabhu said of Sanātana Gosvāmī: kāhā tumi - prāmāṇika, śāstre pravīṇa; kāhā jagā - kālikāra batuyā navīna (CC Antya 4.167) "Where are you, expert in the scriptures and a great authority, and where is Jagadānanda in comparison, a new student?" Sanātana Gosvāmī was not just superior in age.…….

This paragraph is added to the end of my essay 'Who or what is a brahmin or a Guru?' on the 'Articles'- page of www.madangopal.com

More cautions by Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī

Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī said in Gopāl Campū (1.23.1) that the Rāsa-līlā is for private discussion, not public hearing: tad etad govinda vraja vijana kāntānuvacanam dadhadbhir yogyasya śravasi param arpyam na sadasi - 'This confidential Rāsa-līlā topic is to be heard by qualified people who carry Govinda in their hearts, not in a public assembly."

This cautionary note is added to the footnote on page 6 of my essay "Qualification for Raganuga Bhakti" under the linktab 'Articles' of www.madangopal.com.

Regrets

I remember that, in 1988, when the late Rohiṇīndranāth Mitra of Keśī-ghāṭ found out that I had translated Govinda Līlāmṛta into English, he told me: "Very well done. And now you please put this book away." Then he went on reminding me how Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvati did not want his followers to read Ujjvala Nīlamaṇi and the like. I remember in 1983 Sādhu Bābā told me not to read rasika books if/when I was in a non-celibate state (he also told me not to go out of our āśram as Navadvīp is full of sahajīyas). Nevertheless I continued to read, translate and distribute rasika kathā. Now self-confessed sahajīyas like Pītāmbar Dās and Jagadānanda Dās are reading and passing out these books to wholly unqualified people. I feel some burden of responsibility here; I was too liberal in the past. Now what to do? When you fired the gun you cannot call back the bullet anymore!

Of course many people also express gratitude at my translation work and some people will benefit from it, but the harmful side-effect of that past 'mission' of mine is that people who do not realise the spiritual nature of Rādhā and Madangopāl's loving pastimes are reading them and are - deliberately or otherwise - misrepresenting them. I deeply regret that....

Orthodox

Trying to place the modern western term 'orthodox' into Vedic/Indian/Vaiṣṇava perspective has proven interesting and flattering indeed. The English-Bengali dictionary translates it into naiṣṭika, which is also a Sanskrit word. bhaktir bhavati naiṣṭhikī (S.B. 1.2.18) naiṣṭhikī niṣṭhā cittaikāgryaṁ tāṁ prāptā - "naiṣṭhikī means attaining niṣṭhā or a fixed mind." (Viśvanātha Cakravartī's ṭīkā) The V.S. Apte Sanskrit dictionary translates naiṣṭhika back into English as follows - "Final, last, concluding, decided, definitive, conclusive, fixed, firm, constant, highest, perfect, completely familiar with or versed in." Next time folks call me orthodox, I will blush of shyness at the flattery....

Advaitācārya, the greatest Guru of madhura rasa

Today, as I browsed through Murāri Gupta's 'Caitanya Carita Mahākāvya', I found a beautiful verse in the introduction (1.20) which ends with this line:

śrī-yuktādvaita-varyaḥ parama-rasa-kalācāraya īśo vireje

(Syntax: śrī-yuktaḥ = resplendent; advaita-varyaḥ = the superexcellent advaita prabhu; parama = the supreme; rasa = relation with God; kalā = the arts; ācārya = teacher; īśaḥ = God; vireje = shines.

"The most glorious Advaita Ācārya is the Supreme Lord and the greatest teacher of the supreme rasa  (the divine amorous flavour in relation to Śrī Kṛṣṇa)."

This adds to the existing evidence that Advaita Ācārya is indeed the bestower of madhura rasa, despite claims to the contrary. This line has been added to page 1 of my essay 'In defense of the Advaita Vaṁśa' at the linktab 'Articles' on http://www.madangopal.com/.

Sītā Caritra and Nandinī-Jangalī

Thanks to Yadupati for sending me an essay by Rebecca J. Manring, called Sita Devi, an Early Vaishnava Guru, about Sri Sita Devi, the spouse of Advaita Prabhu. Here are some interesting paragraphs from it, explaining the origin of Nandini and Jangali, the ‘cross-dressing’ disciples of Sītā-devī, which were mentioned in Prema-vilāsa and Advaita Mangala, stories that were quoted in my book ‘The Glories of Sri Advaitacarya’:

“The author of the Advaita Mangala even describes the first feast Advaita Acharya held after his marriage, to introduce his disciples to his new wife. The texts in fact state that Sita treated these boys and young men as if they were her own sons. And so it would not have been much of a stretch for these students to take the next leap of faith, once their guru had departed, to align themselves with the person who was closest to that guru in some clearly visible ways — his widow. That is apparently exactly what happened: Her husband’s students, her foster sons, in a sense, shifted her into the position of authority recently vacated by her husband.”
……………….
“According to Lokanatha Dasa’s Sita Charitra, her problems begin when two male seekers—Yajneshvara and Nandarama—approach her for instruction, and she is obligated to refuse them on gender grounds. Their story is rich in clues to Sita’s theological identity and the ways her movement chose to accommodate and contain that identity. Nandarama is a brahman, and his friend Yajneshvara is a shudra (the fourth major caste group) from a farming family. Both are great devotees of Krishna, and have decided to seek out a suitable guru. Nandarama remembers having been given a mantra some time previously by Sita, in Shantipur, so the pair set out in search of her. Sita greets them warmly, but tells them that she can only teach other women. Nevertheless she gives them the Radha mantra and some rudimentary advice: to worship Radha and Krishna, visualizing themselves as attendants in the divine couple’s trysting place.”

(Commentary by Advaitadas: This is odd, because the Advaita Vaṁśa does not bestow initiation in Rādhā mantra. It could be Sītā-devī’s personal gift to these two devotees, a special case to accomplish the following līlā:)
……………..
“The two disappear, only to reappear a short time later dressed as gopis, the young cowherd women of Vraja who were Krishna’s close friends and lovers, complete with braided hair, anklets, bangles, skirts and bodices. They announce that the practice of repeating Radha’s mantra has effected a sex change in them. This is an amazing claim!”
……………..
“Not satisfied simply to take their word that the two men are now women, Sita examines the evidence, Lokanatha writes, and then agrees that she can now instruct them. And from this time on Nandarama and Yajneshvara are known as Nandini and Jangali, and live out the remainders of their lives as women. So great was their devotion and their desire to learn from Sita rather than from any other guru that these two were willing to relinquish their very maleness to do so.”
…………………
“The author of the Sita Charitra, writing at a time when the sakhi bhavas were coming under sectarian assault, used Sita’s hagiographical image to define the sakhi bhavas as women and then to connect their sect to a venerable branch of the greater Gaudiya Vaishnava community.”

(Commentary by Advaitadas: With sakhī bhāvas the author means sakhī bhekhīs, men who dress like gopīs. Nandinī and Jangalī are not sakhī bhekhīs, because they actually had a gender change. Sakhī-bhekhīs are physically men, though some go as far as castration, but they never mystically change gender. The author mentioned in the previous paragraph: “Sītā-devī examines the evidence”, which means that an actual gender change took place, and this must have been a mystical sex change caused by their practice of the Rādhā-mantra, because in those days no surgeon would have had the know-how or the instruments to perform such an operation on them. Concluding statement: The members of the Advaita Parivāra are not cross-dressers - the above pastime is a special Līlā performed by Sītā-devī and her disciples, it does not stand as a general rule. I just posted this story because it was new to me and sheds more light on the origins of Nandinī and Jangalī)

The author informed me that unfortunately she has no copy of Sītā Caritra herself, otherwise I would have asked her to send me a copy and much more may have been learned about Sītā Devī.

Remembering the perfect gentleman

My friend Madanmohan quoted this brilliant verse from Śrīmad Bhāgavata 4.17.20 -

praharanti na vai strīṣu kṛtāgaḥsvapi jantavah

kim uta tvad vidhā rājan karuṇā dīna vatsalaḥ

“People do not beat women, even if they have done wrong. What to speak of persons like you, O king, who are so compassionate and kind to the poor?"

(Goddess Earth to King Pṛthu)

This reminded me of an incident in Sādhu Bābā's līlā, so I added this text as a footnote to his biography, page 52. See link tab Nikunja Gopal Gosvami on www.madangopal.com

Intellect led by śraddhā

From a recent lecture by Swami Tripurāri in the USA:

“On symbolism and Kṛṣṇa līlā, Swami said this morning that it is unavoidable that we will project symbolic meanings into a world beyond intellectuality. Acaryas such as Sanatana Goswami too questioned the līlā in the same way or even more intently - these were highly intellectually inclined personalities.”

While the whole lecture of Swamiji was marvellous, I beg to place a question mark here – in what way did Sanātan Gosvāmī "question the līlā" at any point? Am I not reading the Swāmī here properly?

Swamiji continues: “But they were primarily bhaktas, and they worked their intelligence into the essence of these narrations and brought their refined understanding back to us. So intelligence is necessary but, intellect is a razor’s edge that can greatly help just as it can greatly harm……some devotees have difficulties in their spiritual lives precisely due to too great intellectual activity. He explained that intelligence is a part of ego that has to be left behind just as any other part.”

Yes, I believe that the problem with many Indian Vaiṣṇavas is under-education, which leads to racism, tribalism and blind acceptance of hearsay, and the problem with many western Vaiṣṇavas is over-education, which leads to shoreless blabla, speculation and arrogant challenging of the śāstras.

Swamiji: “From this presence of Kṛṣṇa a different kind of intelligence comes into play. Intelligence is then spiritualized, functioning under the jurisdiction of the heart, of śraddhā. “

This is corroborated in the Gita (10.10) bhajatam prīti pūrvakaṁ dadāmi buddhi yogaṁ tam.

Swamiji: “From such position one will understand śāstra progressively. In such a position one will be nipuna, brilliant in understanding, creative in presentation, a scriptural genius. Understanding of śāstra then will not be limited but expansive and comprehensible, not intellectual and reasonable only, but mystical in nature, capable of transformation and revolution. This has been shown by our acaryas. Intelligence rooted in faith may appear to some as arrogance and pride. Such misunderstanding of the devotee’s words and actions can come from intellectual activity taking precedent over faith. “

Right on. The Gosvāmīs have shown through their books that an intellectual can also have simple faith and need not be an arrogant challenger of authority.