Notes on Sarartha Darshini

Sripad Bhānu Swāmi's English translations of the śāstras are great and carry a higher philosophical integrity than most other English translations, and a higher quality altogether. I do have just these few small remarks about the following translations by Swāmiji of Sri Visvanatha Cakravartipad's Sarartha Darśini-commentary -

1.9.26 "they become gṛhasthas" should be grhasta eva sadeti - "He is always a gṛhastha", making the point that there is a natural subdivision in human society between rāgīs and vairāgīs.

1.17.39 – tasmād evaṁ kim api sthānam ahaṁ prāpnuyāṁ yallokair dustyajyam “This place (wealth) is the best place for me (Kali) to be because it is so hard for people to give up.” Bhanu Swamiji forgot to mention this.

4.28.34 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 sarvādhikasyoktatvāt
Sri Bhanu Swami writes- "Just as the wife serves the husband by rejecting enjoyment, the disciple engages in service to guru by hearing and chanting, giving no regard even to solitary places (gṛhān) which could give rise to the bliss of prema (bhogān), in order to attain with ease the perfection of all goals by serving guru."

Actually the meaning is the opposite -

"A devoted and chaste wife, while absorbed in the service of her husband, does not care even for her son. Similarly, 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.”

7.15.26 sākṣād bhagavati gurau bhagavad aṁśa buddhir api na kāryā.
Sri Bhanu Swami writes: "For one who thinks by faulty intelligence  that the guru, who is an amsa of the Lord (sākṣāt bhagavati),.."

But this should be - "One should  not even see the Guru as a fragment of the Lord but as God Himself."

7.15.27 Not only the Guru's relatives but also His neighbors see Him as a human being. Swamiji forgot the neighbors.

11.2.45 atra paśyed iti tathā darśana yogyataiva vivakṣitā na tu tathā darśanasya sārva kālikatā. “The fact that he sees Kṛṣṇa does not mean he sees Him all the time, but that he is qualified to see Kṛṣṇa.”
Bhanu Swamiji, however, writes: "one must gain qualification for seeing, rather than being able to see like this at all times." The imperative case is not in the sentence, however.

11.3.22 Bhānu Swamiji translates the verse as: "the Lord, who gives himself in the deity form, is satisfied."
and the commentary as: "The Lord gives his self in the form of the deity in order that one may see, touch and know him."
vigraha is in the text and usually means deity but in context with the Guru this seems to make no sense. I see it like this:
"Kṛṣṇa is giving His personal form to the disciple, that can be seen and touched directly."

11.11.41 tena darbha mañjaryādīni śāstra vihitānyapi loke iṣṭatamatvābhāvāt tathā madyādini saṅkarṣaṇa priyānyapi śāstra iṣṭatamatvābhāvān na nivedayed iti bhāvaḥ. tatrāpi yacca ātmanaḥ svasyāti priyaṁ tat tu viśeṣato nivedanīyam ityarthaḥ

Sri Bhānu Swamji says: "Scripture says that Kuśa-buds are wonderful, but because they are not esteemed by the common people they are not to be offered to the Lord."

This should be - "Articles described by scriptures like Darbha shoots are not the most palatable, but wine and other beverages may be loved by Sankarṣana (Balarama), but since they are not dear to the scriptures they should not be offered."

11.21.15 Bhānu Swāmiji writes -Suitable knowledge from the mouth of the pure guru purifies a mantra."
This should be — sad guru-mukhāt yathāvat parijñānaṁ mantra-śuddhiḥ  "Purification of the mantra is done by learning it properly from the mouth of a bonafide Guru."

Brahman merely the mode of goodness? Fall-vada in Paramatma Sandarbha?

BRAHMAN MERELY THE MODE OF GOODNESS?

Recently I wrote the following mail to Dr. Satya Nārāyan Dās about a problem I had with an 11th Canto-verse:

Dear Panditji, Rādhe Rādhe

I am studying now Śrīmad Bhāgavat 11.25.27, some problem is there. It says faith in spiritual things like adhyātma is in sattva guna, but what about Śrīmad Bhāgavat 1.2.11? This says that the Absolute Truth is Brahman, Paramātma and Bhagavān, and thus all three features of the Absolute are transcendental, not in the modes of nature. It contradicts. Kānupriya Goswāmi says bhakti is nirguna and the addition of bhakti to sattvik jñāna makes it nirguna but i find that hard to swallow, for jñāna, leading to Brahman, is nirguna too, not sāttvik. No ṭīkā gives a clue. Same for Śrīmad Bhāgavat 1.2.24, sattvam yad brahma darśanam. Śrīdhar Swāmi, Jīva Goswāmi and Viśvanāth don't mention the point in their ṭīkās. Is Śrīmad Bhāgavat 11.25.27 (or even all of ch.25 of the 11th canto) just a glorification of Kṛṣṇa?

Dr. Satya Nārāyan Das replied :

"I think the mistake here is to translate adhyātma as "spiritual things". Then the last part of the verse becomes redundant because of the words mat-sevāyām - "In My service' i.e. bhakti is also a spiritual thing and thus already included in adhyātma. The meaning of adhyātmā is knowing the self as different from the body, (It is actually adhyātma-śāstra which teaches this). In Śrīmad Bhāgavat 1.2.24 sattvam yad brahma-darśanam does not mean that sattva gives brahma-darśana by itself. Brahma-darśan is not possible without bhakti. So all it means is that sattva is a doorway to brahma-darśana. Through sattva one can get an idea of its existence but not the realization. Compare it with Bhagavad-Gītā 18.20.

Jai Rādhe

snd

TRANSLATIONS OF ABOVE REFERENCES -

Hṛdayānanda Swāmi's translation of Śrīmad Bhāgavat 11.25.27:

"Faith directed toward spiritual life is in the mode of goodness, faith rooted in fruitive work is in the mode of passion, faith residing in irreligious activities is in the mode of ignorance, but faith in My devotional service is purely transcendental."

Bhānu Swāmi's translation of the same verse -

"Faith in ātmā is in sattva, faith in prescribed karma is in rajas, faith in irreligious activities is in tamas, but faith in my devotional service is beyond the guṇas."

Gita Press translation -

"Faith in things spiritual is sattvic"

None of the major ācāryas - Śrīdhar Swāmī, Jīva Goswāmī, Viśvanātha Cakravartī - explain the word adhyātmik in their commentaries.

Bhagavad Gītā 18.20

BBT translation -

"That knowledge by which one undivided spiritual nature is seen in all living entities, though they are divided into innumerable forms, you should understand to be in the mode of goodness."

Bhānu Swāmī's translation -

"Know that the process of knowledge is sattvic in nature when the individual indestructible soul with individual form is seen to exist successively in different bodies."

Viśvanāth Cakravartī's commentary on Bhagavad Gītā 18.20, translated by Bhānu Swāmi -

This verse speaks of sāttvic process of knowing. Seeing one soul (ekaṁ bhāvam), with one form (avibhaktam) which is indestructible (avyayam) residing successively in different forms (vibhakteṣu) such as human, devatā, or animal for the purpose of enjoying various fruits, which are temporary, through knowledge related to action  (verse 18), is known as sāttvic knowledge.

FALL-VĀDA IN PARAMĀTMA SANDARBHA?

I then wrote another mail to Dr. Satya Nārāyan Dās:

Panditji Rādhe Rādhe

Kuśakrath Dās has made the following fall-vādī translation of Paramātma Sandarbha, complete with word-for-word and perverted-reflection-vāda as well. Could you give the correct translation please? The text is here below -

Anuccheda 29 [at beginning]:

tasmiṁś cānandātmake jñāne pratibimbaṁ yusmad- arthatvam na bhavati. kintv ātmatvād asmad-arthatvam eva. tac cāsmad-arthatvam aham-bhāva eva. tato 'ham ity etac chabdābhidheyakāram eva jñānaṁ śuddha ātma prakṛtyāveśo 'nyathā nopapadyate. yata evāveśāt tadīya-sanghata evāham ity aham-bhāvāntaram prāpnoti. tad etad abhipretya tasyāham-arthatvam āha

tasmin - in this; ca - and; ānandātmake - blissful self; jñāne - knowledge; pratibimbam - reflection; yusmat - of you; arthatvam - the purpose; na - not; bhavati - is; kintv - however; ātmatvāt - because of the self; asmad-arthatvam - for our sake; eva - indeed; tac - that; ca - and; asmad-arthatvam - for our sake; aham- bhāva - ego; eva - indeed; tataḥ - therefore; aham - I; iti - thus; etac - this; śabda - word; abhidheyakāram - to be said; eva - indeed; jñānam - knowledge; śuddha - pure; ātma - soul; prakṛti - matter; āveśaḥ - entrance; anyathā - otherwise; na - not; upapadyate - is attained; yata - from which; eva - indeed; āveśāt - from entrance; tadīya - like that; sanghata - combination; eva - indeed; aham - I; iti - thus; aham-bhāva - false ego; antaram - after; prāpnoti - attains; tat - this; etat - that; abhipretya - knowing; tasya - of him; aham- arthatvam - false ego; āha - says.

"When that blissful spiritual consciousness is pervertedly reflected in material consciousness, the individual soul thinks, I will not act for your benefit. I will only act for my benefit". In this way the individual soul comes under the grip of materialistic false-ego. Thus influenced by false-ego, the pure soul enters the material world. Without this false-ego it would not be possible for the soul to enter the material world. In this way the individual soul comes under the grip of false-ego. This is described in the following words of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (3.26.6):

evaṁ parābhidhyānena     kartṛtvaṁ prakṛteḥ pumān

karmasu kriyamāneṣu     guṇair ātmani manyate

evam - in this way; para - other; abhidhyānena - by identification; kartṛtvam - the performance of activities; prakṛteḥ - of the material nature; pumān - the living entity; karmasu kriyamāneṣu - while the activities are being performed; guṇaiḥ - by the three modes; ātmani - to himself; manyate - he considers.

Because of his forgetfulness, the transcendental living entity accepts the influence of material energy as his field of activities, and thus actuated, he wrongly applies the activities to himself."

(Note by the blogger:) Here in the word-for-word the word āveśa has been translated twice as 'entrance' while it means 'absorption'. It is the word praveśa instead which means entrance, but this is āveśa and not praveśa. āveśa can mean entrance too, but that is not the intention of Jīva Goswāmī here.

parābhidhyānena prakṛtyāveśena prakṛtir evāham iti mananena prakṛter guṇaiḥ kriyamāneṣu karmasu kartṛtvam ātmani manyate. atra nirahambhāvasya parābhidhyānāsambhavāt parāveśa-jātāhaṅkārasya cāvarakatvād asty eva tasminn anyo'haṁ-bhāva-viśeṣaḥ. sa ca śuddha-rūpa-mātra-niṣṭhatvān na saṁsāra-hetur iti spaṣṭam.

parābhidhyānena - arabhidhyānena;prakṛty-aveśena - by entering the material world; prakṛtiḥ - matter; eva - indeed; aham - I; iti - thus; mananena - thinking; prakṛteḥ - of matter; guṇaiḥ - by the modes; kriyamāneṣu - being done; karmasu - ac tions; kartṛtvam - the doer; ātmani - in the self; manyate - is thought; atra - here; niraham- bhāvasya - freedom from false ego; parābhidhyāna - by the false identification; asambhavāt - because of being impossible; parāveśa - entrance; jāta - born; ahaṅkārasya - of false ego; ca - also; āvarakatvāt - because of covering; asti - is; eva - indeed; tasminn - in that; anyaḥ - another; aham-bhāva-viśeṣaḥ - false ego; sa - that; ca - also; śuddha-rūpa-mātra-niṣṭhatvān - because of confidence in the spiritual form; na - not; saṁsāra - of the material world; hetuḥ - the cause; iti - thus; spaṣṭam - clear.

Here the word parābhidhyānena" means  by entering the material world and thinking `I am made of matter'." In this way the transcendental living entity accepts the influence of material energy as his field of activities, and thus actuated, he wrongly applies the activities to himself (prakṛter guṇair kriyamāneṣu karmasu kartṛtvam ātmani manyate). A person who is free of false-ego does not think in this way. Only when a person is covered by materialistic false-ego does he think in this way. A soul who is convinced of his spiritual identity has no reason to enter the material world. That is clear.

(Note by the blogger:) Note here that the word 'āveśena' which means 'by this absorption', has again been mistranslated as 'entering', which is praveśena, a similar word which is not in the text however. Later the words para-āveśa are translated again as entrance, while it means absorbed (āveśa) in something else (para)

Dr. Satya Nārāyan Dās then sent his own translation of Section 29 -

The jīva is the direct meaning of “I” (This title is given by me). The jīva is not the intended meaning of the word “You” [in the statement “You are That”] signifying an individual reflected in the consciousness that is bliss by nature, but has the meaning of “I,” since it has the characteristic of being the self. The meaning [of the word] “I” is only found in the sense of being “I.” Thus consciousness, which is the primary meaning of the word “I,” is the pure atma; otherwise absorption in matter is not possible. Because of this absorption, the jiva acquires an alternative feeling of “I” identified with the aggregate of the elements [i.e., the body]. It is with this intention that Śrī Kapiladeva speaks about the soul’s being the meaning of “I”:

evaṁ parābhidhyānena     kartṛtvaṁ prakṛteḥ pumān

karmasu kriyamāneṣu     guṇair ātmani manyate

By identifying with something that is different [the mind-body complex] from himself  (parābhidhyānena), the soul attributes to himself the doership of actions that are being performed by the guṇas of nature. (3.26.6)

Parābhidhyānena means “by identifying with the material nature (prakṛti),” i.e., thinking “I am nothing other than prakṛti,” one considers himself to be the agent of works performed by the guṇas of prakṛti. Because one who does not have a sense of “I” cannot identify with something different from himself, and because the ahaṅkāra or ego born of identifying with the other [prakṛti] is a covering [over that original sense of self], there is certainly another distinct sense of self in the soul. And because that sense of self is grounded exclusively in its pure identity, it is clearly not the cause of its material bondage. These very two kinds of ahankāra are shown in the following verse [from the Eleventh Canto]: "The Atma remains unaffected in the state of deep sleep when the senses are contracted and the ego has become dormant. Its continuity [through the stages of sleep] is proven by the fact that [on awakening] we remember [the enjoyment of a sound sleep]. (11.3.39) Because the ahaṅkāra related to the body is inactive in deep sleep, later on one deliberates only on the basis of the ahaṅkāra of the self in statements such as “we remember” and “I slept happily.” Therefore in the notion [conveyed by the statement] “I did not know myself” there is a lack of knowledge of the ahaṅkāra related to the body. But the other ahaṅkāra [in relation to ātma] is understood to be the witness of the ignorance [of the material ahaṅkāra].

Commentary:

In this section Śrī Jīva establishes that pure soul has “I” consciousness as its very nature. There is “I” consciousness in relation to the physical body because of which we make statements such as “I am weak,” “I am slim,” or “I am tall.” In these sentences “I” refers to the physical body. We also make statements such as “I am happy,” “I am angry,” etc. “I” in these sentences refers to the mind. Beyond this material “I” there is a real “I” within the soul. The Advaita-vādis do not accept “I” consciousness in the soul. According to them the “I” is manifest only when Brahman is limited by ajñāna and is called jīva. When ajñāna is removed by the practice of jñāna then the jīva is Brahman, which has no “I” consciousness. They propose that Brahman is pure, uniform consciousness and bliss and when it reflects in ajñāna it is called jīva; this jīva is the meaning of the word “You” in the famous statement, “You are That” (tat tvam asi). In this statement “That” (tat) refers to Brahman and “You” (tvam) to the jīva. By this they try to deny the meaning “I” to the pure jīva because, according to them, the pure jīva is the same as Brahman, which is devoid of I-consciousness. Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī refutes this by saying that the jīva has a real ‘I’ and is not same as Brahman being conditioned by ajñāna. Thus it cannot be the object of “You” referring to each individual jiva in the famous tat tvam asi mahā-vākya. He refers to the verse of Bhāgavata Purāṇa (11.3.39) which says that during deep sleep one is not aware of either the subtle or gross bodies. That means that the material “I” is dysfunctional, dissolved. Deep sleep is not possible without getting disconnected from the material “I.” In the wakeful state, one is aware of gross body, senses and the internal senses, which include the material “I.” In the dream state, one is not aware of the gross body and senses, but only of the internal senses. In deep sleep one is not aware of anything. Nevertheless, on awaking a person remembers the happy experience of sleep. This happy experience of sleep in which one was not aware of anything would not be possible if there were no “I” in that state. There can be no experience without a sense of ‘I’, the experiencer. Only a person who experiences can have a recollection of the experience. Since one remembers, then it logically follows that there must be an experiencer. Therefore, there must be a real “I” besides the material “I.” On awakening, the material “I” is superimposed onto the real one. In the statement, “I slept well and did not know anything,” there are two parts. One is the knowledge of sleeping well and the other is ignorance of everything else.

This is part of the commentary.

There is no talk of falling from Vaikuṇṭha. Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī is discussing the characteristics of ātma on the basis of description given in Padma Purāṇa and Jamar Muni which he quotes earlier. He is refuting the concept of Advaita-vāda."

Dying at Radhakund, chillies and carrots

ERRATUM

In November, 1992 I translated Śrīla Raghunātha Dāsa Goswāmī's Sva Niyam Daśakam, and only now, 20 years later, I saw that I forgot to translate a very important phrase in verse 9, in the line mariṣye tu preṣṭhe sarasi khalu jīvādi purataḥ

- I wrote back then:
"Certainly I will leave my body in front of Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī and others."

While it should have been:
"Certainly I will leave my body near my beloved lake in front of Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī and others."
The verse can be found in volume 3 of my translation of the Stavāvalī-collection.

CHILLIES AND CARROTS

Bhakta: “Are chillies mentioned in the śāstra?”

Advaitadas: “The red and green mirch [Hindi] or lanka [Bengali] that are eaten nowadays in India were imported by the British, but the word mirch does have a Sanskrit source in the word marica. This is also still in use in India as the small black pepper-balls.”

Bhakta: “Does it have any role in the emotions in Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa Līlā?”

Advaitadas: Yes in fact it does. In Govinda Līlāmṛta (11.86) it is said:

premājya-narmāli-sitā-rasāvalī mādhvīka-manda-smita-candra-samyutā |
asyā mṛṣerṣyā maricānvitādbhutā vāṇī rasālollasatīśa-tṛptidā ||

"Śrī Rādhā satisfies Her Lord with Her amazing words, that are like a beverage named Rasālā, flavoured with the ghee of love, the sugar of humor, the honey of Her rasika talks, the camphor of Her smile and/or the black pepper of Her false jealousy."

No commentator has said exactly what is meant with mṛṣerṣyā, or false jealousy, but I suppose that Her jealousy is not real as She can never be really angry with Kṛṣṇa.

Bhakta: “Speaking of food, I heard Vaiṣṇavas are not supposed to eat carrots?”

Advaitadas: “Carrots are not eaten in any Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava group anywhere, not even in the Gauḍīya Math. Unlike marica, carrots are not mentioned anywhere in the lengthy descriptions of preparations made for either Śrī Kṛṣṇa (see Govinda Līlāmṛta, chapter 3) or Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu (see many places in Caitanya Caritāmṛta). Haribhakti Vilāsa does not mention carrots, the edition of Bhūmipati dās mentions it as a forbidden food (17.48-49), but it is an incorrect translation of the word gṛñjana, which means turnips or onions.

Mr. Mādhavī, Preaching Strategies and Puruṣottam vows

Bhakta: "What do you think of the new custom of giving women the title 'Prabhu'?”

Advaitadās: "The word Prabhu is of masculine gender, and translated into English it would be 'master', 'lord' or 'mr.' Some lady is named Mādhavī for instance, so you would say Mr. Mādhavī? That is just too absurd for words. It is not that ladies should not receive respect, but this is just totally out of frame and linguistically totally wrong. Needless to say, this is not coming down through paramparā. Furthermore, even for men the title Prabhu is not meant for every vagabond and totally loose fellow. In shastra that title is reserved, even for men, for great acharyas like Śukadeva, Vyāsadeva, or Sanātan Goswāmī.

Returning to the ladies, the title 'mātājī' is also not meant for every 15-year old girl but is traditionally reserved for elderly female gurus, although shastra does say that all women other than one's own wife should be considered mother - mātṛvad para dāreṣu. Sādhu Bābā gave great respect and position to women, and he did address young girls as Mā, or mother, but not as mātājī, for that is for another class of ladies, the elderly female Guru. Generally in traditional Vaiṣṇavism ladies are addressed with the Hindi/Bengali word 'didi' or sister. As a westerner it is hard to imitate a great sādhu like Sādhu Bābā by addressing young women as 'Ma' and we have a totally different culture here too, but Prabhu [Mr.] Mādhavī is really totally out of frame. If you said that in India you would really make a ridiculous fool of yourself."

Bhakta: "Do you think it is good if devotees preach fall-, envy-, free will-, choice-, or fall-from-taṭastha theories just as preaching strategies?"

Advaitadās: Such preaching strategies strengthen already so strong causal or Christian logic in the western minds. When it is apasiddhānta it is apasiddhānta, and it creates the heavy task for properly educated Vaiṣṇavas of re-educating 10000s of misinformed devotees. Some philosophical issues are really hard to conceive, if not impossible to conceive, with simple logic - they require shastriya shraddha, or scriptural faith instead and must be accepted without questioning or rationalizing."

Bhakta: "Puruṣottam Month, the extra Vedic month, is approaching, and many devotees make special tapasya this month."

Advaitadās: "One should follow one's own Guru in this. If Guru has prescribed special tapasya on that month, then follow that, but don't just adopt some self-invented vow this month which Guru has never given. Haribhakti Vilāsa does not prescribe special devotional vratas for Puruṣottam Month. Just chant Hare Kṛṣṇa with love and devotion bol haribol. I took dīkṣā in Puruṣottam Month in 1982, and later, when I found that out, I asked Sādhu Bābā, if it was either very auspicious or inauspicious. Sādhu Bābā shrugged his shoulders and said it did not make any difference. Haribhakti Vilāsa (2.16, 19) actually says mala-māsaṁ parityajet, one should not take initiation in Puruṣottam, the stool-month, but this is clearly in the context of karma kāṇḍa. This also counts for the last verses in chapter 16: "During the Puruṣottama-adhika-māsa, one should donate thirty-three milk cakes cooked in ghee to householder brāhmaṇas who are well-versed in the scriptures, while remembering Lord Kṛṣṇa. By failing to do so, one will lose all the piety that he had accumulated during the previous year." There is no more on Puruṣottam Month in the Haribhakti Vilāsa."

Tribalism and Absolute Authority

Bhakta - "In Caitanya Caritāmṛta (Antya Lila, chapter 9), Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyak was saved from capital punishment by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu because he was the brother of Rāmānanda Rāya. Does this justify the favoritism among some, mostly Indian, devotees towards their families or devotees from their own region?"

Advaitadās - I am initiated in a family of acaryas so I do respect and recognize family ties, especially those of great and ancient Vaiṣṇava families, but too often really bad people are favored by major Vaiṣṇavas just  because they are from the same region or family. The story of Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyaka should not be used for justifying this. It is said in that story [CC Antya 9.37] - rāmānanda rāyer goṣṭhi sob tomār dās - "All the family of Rāmānanda Rāya are your servants." So it was not just a question of birth - they were all devotees. When Gopīnath was led to the scaffold for execution he was chanting hare kṛṣṇa hare kṛṣṇa [CC Antya 9.56]. He was not just some vagabond who happened to be someone's brother by birth. Also we are chanting before each path - panca putra sanga nāce rāy bhavānanda - "All five sons of Bhavānanda Rāya [those include Rāmānanda Rāy and Gopīnāth] dance in the kīrtan." So the redemption of Gopīnāth Paṭṭanāyak was not some type of tribal cronyism by Mahāprabhu and should also not be used to justify such tribal cronyism as happens so often in the Vaiṣṇava community."


Bhakta - "Is an ācārya always an absolute authority or can we pick and choose what to accept or reject from him?"

Advaitadās - "We must judge some acaryas intelligently, indeed. For instance, Śrīpāda Bhaktisiddhānta Saraswatī published Locan Dās Ṭhākur's Caitanya Mangal while he rejected Locan's practise of Gaur Nāgarī Bhāva. So he partly accepted and partly rejected him. Swami A.C. Bhaktivedanta loved Locan's song Parama Karuṇā but also rejected Gaura Nāgari Bhāva, and even higher up, Jīva Goswāmī's svakīya vāda is not accepted by the Gauḍīya devotees, yet his other works, like the Sandarbhas, have received the status of absolute authority in the sampradāya. We need to see what is compatible with śāstra, the sampradāya and with Guru."

Jīva Goswāmī's Nāma-tattva, Matter in the womb of spirit

JĪVA GOSVĀMĪ'S NĀMA TATTVA
(In November-December 2010) I only blogged on Viśvanātha Cakravartī's commentaries on the Ajāmila-story, but in my red notebook I also found this ṭīkā of Jīva Gosvāmī from the Krama Sandarbha, on Śrīmad Bhāgavat 6.2.20, which is worth adding -

śrī bhagavannāma grahaṇaṁ khalu dvividhā bhavati kevalatvena sneha-saṁyuktatvena ca. tatra pūrveṇāpi prāpayatvena sadyas tallokaṁ tannāma pareṇa ca tat samīpyam api prāpayati. mayi bhaktir hi bhūtānāṁ amṛtatvāya kalpate.

"There are two kinds of uttering of the holy name of the Lord - kevala and sneha-samyukta. Kevala means the mere utterance and that leads to residence in the world of the Lord (sālokya mukti), but sneha samyukta, which means 'endowed with affection', leads one close to Him (samīpya mukti). Kṛṣṇa tells the gopīs in Śrīmad Bhāgavat, canto 10, chapter 82 - "Devotion to Me leads the living entities to immortality."

MATTER IN THE WOMB OF SPIRIT
Many devotees ask me about the spiritual status of the descendents of the Lord, the Advaita Vaṁśa Goswāmīs. śāstra says that Lord Nityānanda is the manifestation of Lord Balarāma in the age of Kali, and Advaita Prabhu is Lord Śiva and Mahāviṣṇu's appearance in this age. Their spirituality is therefore beyond doubt. Also there is no doubt They had children, grandchildren and so on and so forth, down to the present day. Are they material or are they spiritual? It is also said in shastra that Advaita Prabhu rejected three of His six sons for holding on to the advaita-vāda that He had preached as a loving pastime in which He wanted to draw Śrīman Mahāprabhu's attention. Also at present not all Goswāmīs in Advaita or Nityānanda Prabhu's lineage show all the signs of divinity (though many of them, like Sādhu Bābā, his brothers and His parents, do). How does it work then?

Viśvanātha Cakravartīpāda paraphrases Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Ācārya in his commentary on Śrīmad Bhāgavata 10.2.8 -

nanu śuddha sattva rūpāyāṁ bhagavat prakāśikāyāṁ mahāśaktau devakī-devyāṁ prākṛtānāṁ ṣaḍgarbhāṇāṁ kathaṁ praveśaḥ samucitaḥ. bhavati satyaṁ śuddha-svarūpe śrī bhagavati samaṣṭi vyaṣṭīnāṁ praviṣṭatve'pi yathā na tad yogas tathaiva devakyām api ṣaḍ-garbhāṇām ityarthaḥ. yad uktaṁ mat sthāni sarva-bhūtāni na cāhaṁ teṣv avasthitaḥ. na ca mat sthāni bhūtāni paśya me yogam aiśvaram iti 

"How is it possible that six mundane pregnancies could enter the womb of Devakī Devī, who is the great internal spiritual energy of the Lord, whose form consists of viśuddha sattva (pure transcendence)? Surely the Lord, whose form is viśuddha sattva, also contains the material worlds but they do not affect (pollute) Him, so it was also with Devaki's six pregnancies (matter exists in the womb of spirit, as the material universes lie in the spiritual womb of the Lord). The example is given by Lord Kṛṣṇa in Bhagavad Gītā (9.4-5): "All living beings are in Me, but I am not in them.....and yet all which is created does not reside in Me. Behold My divine majesty!"

Matter exists in the womb of spirit.........

Right ear dīkṣā, the lamp of the ego and living mountains.

RIGHT EAR DĪKṢĀ -
There is some confusion about whether the dīkṣā-mantra is to be spoken into the right ear or the left ear. The Bhāgavat says that the right ear is for karma kāṇḍa and the left ear for jñāna kāṇḍa, but both are rejected by the ācāryas – karma kāṇḍa, jñāna kāṇḍa kevala viṣera bhaṇḍa (Narottama) – they are both pots of poison. Bhakti is beyond both of them. However, in Sanat Kumara Samhita (1.101) it is said:

ūrdhva-puṇḍraṁ tataḥ kuryād     bhālādiṣu vidhānataḥ
tato mantra-dvayaṁ tasya     dakṣa-karṇe vinirdiśet 

“Then the Guru should draw Vaiṣṇava tilaka on the forehead and other places, and then he should speak the two mantras in the disciple's right ear.”

Vedic tradition is that the junior person stands or sits on the left side of the superior person. Hence the Guru speaks in the right ear of the śiṣya. See also my blog of September 30, 2010.

THE LAMP OF THE EGO

ātmanaḥ priyatayā tanu-bhājāṁ nātmanaḥ kṛtiṣu dūṣaṇa dṛṣṭiḥ
sarvatas timiram asyati dīpo nātma mūla timiraṁ vinihanti

(Ānanda Vṛndāvana Campūḥ, Kavi Karṇapūra, 1.9)

‘All embodied souls love themselves the most. Never one finds fault with one’s own activities. A lamp illuminates all directions, destroying darkness everywhere, except for its own root.’

MOUNTAINS, CLOUDS AND RIVERS ARE NOT DEAD
Ācārya Vaṁśīdhara quotes an unknown Samhita in his commentary on Śrīmad Bhāgavat 10.36.4 –

meghā nadyo’tha girayo acetanas cetanā api

“Clouds, rivers and mountains are unconscious, though they do have consciousness.”

No doubt the ‘unconscious’ here refers to their lifeless appearance.

Murāri Gupta's grains and the Nāmāṣṭakam

MURĀRI GUPTA'S GRAIN-OFFERINGS

Bhakta: You claim Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu only ate from Brahmins, but in Caitanya Bhāgavat, Madhya 20.61, it is said joto anna dey gupta tai prabhu khāi “Whatever grains Murāri Gupta gave, the Lord ate them.” And Murāri Gupta was a vaiśya.”

Advaitadās – “In verse  53 it is said - ānande murāri gupta gharete colilā; nityānanda sange prabhu HṚDAYE ROHILA “Blissfully Murāri Gupta went home but Nityānanda and Mahāprabhu stayed in his heart.” So it is clear from this that Mahāprabhu was not physically present when Murāri offered the grains.  Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī comments on this verse - tār hṛdaye gaura nityānanda virājamān rohilen - “Gaura and Nityānanda remained in his heart.” Then, in verse 62, it is said: heno kāle prabhu āilā - this shows Mahāprabhu was not there during the 'bhojan': otherwise He would have come in verse 61. After the meal, in the 2nd half of the verse it is said: vihane āsiyā prabhu guptere jāgāy – “In the morning Prabhu came to awaken Murāri Gupta”, again confirming Mahāprabhu was not physically present during the offering.


NĀMĀṢṬAKAM
This translation of Śrī Rūpa Goswāmīpāda’s Nāmāṣṭakam is floating around on the internet. Verse 3 is not properly translated though –

yad-ābhāso’py udyan kavalita-bhava-dhvānta-vibhavo
dṛśaṁ tattvāndhanam api diśati bhakti-praṇayinīm
janas tasyodattam jagati bhagavan-nāma-tarane
kṛti te nirvaktuṁ ka iha mahimānāṁ prabhavati

"O sun of Bhagavan-nāma, what learned scholar in this world is competent to describe Your unsurpassed glories? Even ābhāsa, the dim light of Your early dawn, swallows up the darkness of ignorance which blinds the conditioned souls and enables them to envision hari-bhakti."

The flaw is that nāmābhāsa does not bestow bhakti, only śuddha nāma does. The English translator has translated the effects of two types of nāma in one sentence, saying nāmābhāsa both swallows the darkness of ignorance [which is true] and also bestows bhakti. However, the verse speaks about nāmābhāsa in the first line only [yad-ābhāso’py udyan kavalita-bhava-dhvānta-vibhavo] not in the second line. The central topic of the verse is harināma, not nāmābhāsa. Ajamila, the classical example of nāmābhāsa, did not get bhakti by uttering the name of his son Nārāyan, he was just saved from hell and received bhakti only after severe sādhana after his redemption from hell.

Śrī Ānanda Gopāl Goswāmī Sūcak kīrtan

This song in praise of Sādhu Bābā's father is written in around 1962 by Rādhā Govinda Dās, one of his disciples.

ŚRĪLA ĀNANDA GOPĀL GOSWĀMĪ`S SŪCAK KĪRTAN

jaya re jaya re jaya, prabhu sītānātha jaya,
śāntipura śānti sudhākara
jaya śrī acyuta tāta, tina putra subikhyāta,
balarāma kṛṣṇa miśra-vara

“All glory and victory to Prabhu Sītānāth, the peaceful moon of Śāntipur! Victory to His three famous sons,  Śrī Acyuta, Balarām and Kṛṣṇa Miśra!” (1)

gaura kori abatīrṇa, tribhuvana koilo dhanya
jay dāo sei doyāmoy
sei vaṁśe nīlamaṇi, nīla-kamal, nīla-kānta,
janmilen tin mahāśoy

“Give victory to the compassionate one who blessed the three worlds by causing the descent of  Śrī Gaurāṅga and in whose dynasty three great souls took birth – Nīlamaṇi, Nīlakamal and Nīlakānta.” (2)

tāder je guṇa-kothā, gāy sabe yathā tothā,
śraddhā saha braje chilo bāsa
paṇḍitera śiromaṇi, rādhā-preme cuḍāmaṇi,
rādhā-kṛṣṇa sebā abhilāṣa

“Everyone sings the details of their glorious attributes everywhere. They lived in Braja with faith. They were the crown-jewels of scholars and the crest-jewels in terms of love for  Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī, who yearned for the service of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa.” (3)

nīlakānter cār putra, prabhu tār sarva kaniṣṭha,
rūpe guṇe ati anupam,
tero śata cār sane, padmanābhaikādaśī dine,
āvirbhāvo sei guṇa-dhām

“Nīlakānta had four sons, and the youngest of them all was most unique in his form and attributes. This treasure of attributes took birth in Braja-dhāma on the day of Padmanābh-Ekādaśī in the Bengali year 1304 (October 1897).” (4)

bālya-kāle krīḍā-raṅge, sakhā bhrātā-gaṇa saṅge
khelilen jeno braja-cāṅde
sadā thāken ān-mone rohen jeno kār dhyāne,
pitā bolen poḍilo śyām phāṅde

“He was playing childrens` games with his friends and brothers, as if he were the moon of Braja (child Kṛṣṇa). His mind was always elsewhere, as if he was meditating on someone. His father said: ‘He has fallen into a Śyāma-trap` (he is captivated by Kṛṣṇa ).” (5)

caudda varṣa boyos jobe, cār bhrātā loiyā tabe,
pitā ṭhākur gelā gaura dhāme
braja chāḍibāra kāle,   bhāsen prabhu āṅkhi-jole,
kintu sukhī jābo gaura bhūme

“When he was fourteen years old his father took him and his three brothers to the abode of Gaura (Navadvīpa) to live there. Prabhu floated in tears when he left Braja but he decided to blissfully go along to the land of Gaura.” (6)

prabhu nīlakānta gosāi,   śrī nabadwīpe jāy,
nīlakānta kuñja niramilā
śrī rādhā madan gopāl, dui mūrti su-rasāla,
dui pāśe aṣṭasakhī dilā

“Prabhu Nīlakānta Goswāmī thus went to Navadwīp and established Nīlakānta Kuñja there, where he had his two luscious deities Rādhā and Madangopāl flanked by Their eight girlfriends.” (7)

madhur sebā prakaṭ kori,   putradige hāte dhori,
śikhāilā prema-sebā kāje
kulera deva sītānāth,   virājita sītā saha,
śrī mandira ālo kori rāje

“He took his sons by the hand and revealed to them the sweet service (of Rādhā-Madangopāl), teaching them loving devotional service. The temple was illuminated by the family`s arch-father Adwaita Prabhu and Sītā-devī.” (8)

pitṛ kṛpāya prabhu mora,   sadā sebā rase bhor,
pāṭha śikṣā jyeṣṭha tāta ṭhāi
śrī pāṭh varṇanā kāle, agaṇita śrotā mile
śobhā jeno śukadev gosāi

“By the grace of his father my Prabhu was always immersed in the flavours of devotional service. He learned pāṭh (devotional lecturing) from his elder uncle. When he gave pāṭh, innumerable listeners gathered and he looked as beautiful as Śukadev Goswāmī.” (9)

nirjan bās anurāgī, tāi prabhu śahar-tyāgī
gelen cole phul-bāgān mājhe
sethāy giyā śiṣya-gaṇa,   dhariyā rājīv caraṇ,
sthāpilo śyām-binodinī kuñje

Being very attached to living in solitude, Prabhu gave up the city and went to live in a flower-garden, where his disciples, holding his lotus-feet, founded Śyām-vinodinī kuñja.” (10)

tathāy-o śrī sītānāth, śrī madangopāl virājita
sebā dekhi juḍāya nayan
śrī rādhā madangopāl,   daraśane tanu vikal,
prabhu mora bāhya-hārā hon

“There too, Śrī Sītānāth and  Śrī Madangopāl resided. Seeing their service, my eyes are soothed. When my Prabhu saw Śrī Rādhā and Madan Gopāl, his body was thrilled and he lost external consciousness.” (11)

daśākṣara mantra-rāje,   labhilā māyera kāche,
dhanya mātā yār heno putra
vyavahār paramārthe,   guru holen dui arthe,
lābh mantra hoilā kṛtārtha

“He received the regal ten-syllable Gopāl-mantra from his mother. Blessed is the mother of such a son! She was his Guru both materially and spiritually, and he was blessed by receiving this mantra.” (12)

āmodinī mañjarī svarūpa, dilen mātā aparūpa,
sebā dilā pāda samvāhan,
smaraṇete tanu-man, sei kāje nimagan,
varṣā heno jhare du`nayan

“Mother gave him the wonderful siddha-swarūp of ‘Āmodini Mañjarī`, and the service of massaging the Divine Pair`s lotus-feet. With his mind and body he was immersed in that meditation while tears showered from his eyes.” (13)

smaraṇāṅga bhajanete, magna prabhu dine rate,
līlā gāne sadāi vibhor
dāsa prabhur agaṇita, tārā-o bhajane rata,
vañcito`smi hata bhāgya mor

“Day and night Prabhu was immersed in the item of worship named smaraṇa (meditation) and in singing of the Lord`s pastimes. Prabhu`s innumerable servants were also dedicated to bhajan. O I am deprived, I am so unfortunate!” (14)

śrī gaurāṅgera hārda bhajan, tāte rata anukṣaṇa,
chay gosāi-er ānugatya loye
bosiyā āpan mane, śrī mandirer kuñja-bane,
nirapekṣa smaraṇete rohe

“He was always dedicated to hearty worship of  Śrī Gaurāṅga, following in the footsteps of the six Goswāmīs. Sitting in the groves of his own temple he was totally fixed in meditation, indifferent to the world.” (15)

boliten garva-bhare, rādhā-pade buke dhare,
jete hoy narakete jābo
ār kichu cāhibo nā, ekā kṛṣṇa loibo nā,
ekā kṛṣṇe phirāiyā dibo

“He used to proudly say, holding  Smt. Rādhārāṇī`s lotus-feet to his heart – ‘if necessary (for Her service) I will go to hell.` I don`t want anything else (but Her), I will not accept  Kṛṣṇa  alone – if  Kṛṣṇa  comes to me alone, I will send Him back.” (16)

tāte sarva nāśa hole, lobo tāhā abahele,
lobo kṛṣṇa rādhā saha ele
kāraṇ rādhā-dāsī āmi, rādhā garavete bhrami,
bilāibo āsile yugale

“If such an attitude would ruin me, then allright, I will accept  Kṛṣṇa  neglectfully, and only if He comes along with Rādhā. Because I am Rādhā`s maidservant, and I will wander around being proud of Rādhā. If the Divine Pair comes I will offer myself to Them.” (17)

sadā rādhā nāma kori,  du`nayane bohe vāri,
pulakete aṅga jāy bhore
rādhā nām je kore, tāre prabhu buke dhare,
boliten kine nili more

“I always sing Rādhā`s name with tears in both eyes and My body filled with goosebumps. Prabhu embraced those who sang  Rādhā`s name; he used to say: They have purchased me.” (18)

sītānāther janmotsav, korito nā loka sab,
mora prabhu tāhā pravartilo
ki vipul āyojon, nava rātri sankīrtan,
bhulibe nā tāhā ye dekhilo.

“At that time no one held a festival to celebrate Adwaita Prabhu`s advent, but my Prabhu starting organizing such festivals. How huge were such celebrations! It involved nine nights of sankīrtan (singing and dancing). Anyone who saw this would never forget it.” (19)

ei goto botsorete, ki ānanda utsabete
kori mora prabhu lukāilā
śrīdhara kṛṣṇA caturthī din, rādhā-pade holo līn,
yāra dāsī tār kāche gelā

“Last year, during a festival of bliss, my Prabhu hid himself (he passed away). On the fourth day of the dark lunar fortnight of the month of  Śrīdhara (Śravaṇa or July-August), he attained the lotus-feet of  Śrīmatī Rādhikā, joining She whose maidservant he/she is.” (20)

kothā gele mora prabhu ānanda gopāl
āra nā heribo tava mūrati rasāl
(kothāy gele doyāmoy,   virahe prāṇ jwole jāy)
modigake diye phāṅki kothā cole gele
aparādhī bole ki go modere tyājile

“Where has my master, Ānanda Gopāl Goswāmī, gone? I will never see his luscious form again. (Where has the compassionate one gone? My life-airs scorch in the fire of separation) Where has he gone, tricking us all? Has he abandoned us because we are offenders?” (21)

ku-putra āmrā baṭi kintu tumi pitā,
pita to tyaje nā putra śāstre āche gāthā
tomār virahe prabhu prāṇ jwole jāy
akasmāt eki holo bhāviyā nā pāi

“We are bad sons, surely, but you are the father and the scripture says a father never abandons the son. O Prabhu! Out of separation from you my heart burns! I don`t understand why this happened so suddenly!” (22)

boro sādh chilo prabhu ebār braje ele
nā chāḍibo prabhu tava caraṇa kamala
(caraṇ dhore poḍe robo)
(jete cāile nā chāḍibo)
rādhārāṇīr dohāi diyā caraṇe dhoribo
sebā adhikār loiyā caraṇa sevibo

“It was always your great aspiration, Prabhu, and now you have come to Vraja. I will not give up your lotus feet. (I will stay here, holding these lotus feet) (Even if you want to leave I will not let go) I swear on Rādhārāṇī that I will hold on to your lotus-feet. Taking the adhikāra for devotional service I will serve your (or Her) lotus-feet.” (23)

se sādhe sādhilo bād nidārun vidhi
(dārun vidhi ki korilo pitṛ-hīna moder koilo)
prāṇ jwole jāy prabhu kāṇde sadā hṛdi
tumi jār tār kāche cole gele guru
śukāilo āmāder sob āśā taru

“Cruel fate has accomplished this now (what has cruel fate done, making us bereft of our father?). Prabhu, my life-airs are burning and my heart constantly weeps. O Guru, you have gone to She whom you belong to, thus withering the tree of our hopes.” (24)

(sob āśā ghuce gelo sebā korbo bhajan śikhbo)
ke ār śunābe moder rādhā guṇa gān?
ke ār milāye debe śrī rādhā caran?
ke ār koribe temon pāṭh rasa grantha?
tomā sama kebā ār āche bhāgyavanta?

(All my hopes are dashed for rendering devotional service and learning bhajan.)
Who else will sing me of Rādhā`s glories?
Who else will help me attain  Śrī Rādhā`s lotus-feet?
Who else will lecture like that on rasika scriptures?
Who is so fortunate as you are? (25)

(hāy! morā ki korbo, kothā gele ābār pābo? – hāy morā ki korbo?)
bālye mora bairāgya hoilā prabhu more ākarṣilā
duḥkhe gelām nabadwīpa mājh
dekhi prabhur doyā hoilo nija kāche bolāilo
duḥkhī hoilā dekhi mora sāj

(“Alas! What can I do, where should I go to find you again? Alas, what should I do?”)
In my childhood I became renounced and Prabhu attracted me. In distress I went to Navadwīp and when Prabhu saw me he was compassionate and called me to him. He was sad to see how I dressed.” (26)

ḍāki kāche bosāilā ,  sakṛpāy āśray dilo,
sompi dilā madan-gopāla pāy
vraje dilo pāṭhāiyā, nija kṛpā sañcāriyā,
se kṛpār tulanā nāhi hoy

“He called me to Him and mercifully gave me shelter at the lotus-feet of Madan-Gopāl. He dispatched me to Vraja and empowered me with his own grace, of which there is no equal.” (27)

śrī guru karuṇā bole,    gaura sevā avahele,
peye dhanya mui dīna hīna
ei kṛpā koro sabe, yabe karma śeṣa hobe,
hoi jeno ei raje līna

“On the strength of  Śrī Guru`s mercy the service of  Śrī Gaurāṅga is easily attained and a lowly wretch like me will be blessed. May everyone be merciful to me so that when my duties in the world of action are completed, I can attain the dust of His feet.” (28)

dīna ‘rādhā-govinda dās`,  śrī guru caraṇe āśa,
gāy ei virahera gāthā
sarva bhaktera caraṇete, ei bhikṣā dine rate,
guru guṇa gāi yathā tathā

“The fallen Rādhā Govinda Dās, hoping for the lotus-feet of  Śrī Guru, sings this song of separation. I pray for this alm at the feet of all the devotees – may I sing the glories of the Guru everywhere.” (29)

Ānanda Gopāl Goswāmī upgrade, One soul per body and Samādhi Mandir

ĀNANDA GOPĀL GOSWĀMĪ UPGRADE

My friend Partha Dutta Bhowmick was so kind last month to send me Śrī Kandarpa Gopāl Goswāmī’s publication of the lectures on Vilāpa Kusumāñjali by his Grandfather (and Sādhu Bābā’s father) Śrī Ānanda Gopāl Goswāmī. I did not know this publication existed before Tapan Dā told me so. This booklet also includes a biography of Ānanda Gopāl Goswāmī and a Sūcak kīrtan, a lengthy Bengali poem to glorify a saint. This warranted an upgrade of the hagiography of Ānanda Gopāl Goswāmī on madangopal.com, as through the booklet I learned more about Ānanda Gopāl Goswāmī’s date and place of birth (not Navadwīp but Vṛndāvana), His puraścarana and other sādhanas, his charity and Nīlakānta Kuñja. 

ONE SOUL PER BODY

Bhakta – Is it true that every cell of our body contains a separate soul?

Advaitadās – In his commentary on Bhagavad Gītā (13.34 or 33 according to edition) Śrīpāda Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa says there is 1 soul in each body [kṣetram], just as there is one sun that illuminates the cosmos - yathaiko ravir imaṁ kṛtsnaṁ lokaṁ prakāśayati prabhayā tathaikaḥ kṣetrī jīvaḥ kṛtsnam āpāda-mastakam idaṁ kṣetraṁ dehaṁ prakāśayati.

GRANTHA SAMĀDHI

Bhakta: I have a question about the grantha-samādhi in the courtyard of Vṛndāvana’s Madana Mohan Temple. What kind of literature is there and why the Gosvāmīs put them there?

Advaitadas: “It is a mere monument. All Goswāmīs' books are known. It is a shrine in honor of the Goswāmīs' granthas; to my knowledge, there are no secret books there. All books of the Goswāmīs are listed in Caitanya Caritāmṛta and Bhakti Ratnākara. It is not that books are buried there because they would be too intimate for us to read. Nothing is more intimate than Stavāvalī, Ujjvala Nīlamaṇi etc. Anything more explicit than these books would be vulgar or offensive.”

Vaiṣṇava dress (2)

There was a lively debate on Facebook about my Vaiṣṇava-dress blog, so i decided to post a sequel to that blog containing some of the best parts of that debate, and more feedback on the issue.

• Anonymous bhakta - The instance of the Gosvāmī (Sanātan) dressing as a fakir, and Mahāprabhu asking him to change his clothes should be enough to silence all significant doubts that clothing is not inconsequential. Though it is not inconsequential, it is not all-important. Is that agreeable to you, Pandit Ji?

Advaita Das - The point of the fakir is well taken. In short, spirituality is absolute. There is no lower or higher issue, no external or internal. Dress is not to be played down nor to be overstressed. sevā sādhaka rūpena siddha rūpena cātra hi."

Anonymous bhakta- This is a brilliant application of sevā sādhaka rūpena siddha rūpeṇa siddha rūpena cātra hi" Thank you for that. I feel that we are in full agreement, "Not to be played down nor to be overstressed." I heard that covering of the head and perhaps the sārī itself (or the manner of wearing the top portion of it over the head) is introduced from non-indian sources during classical Indic history. If you can address this I would be grateful. Your pointing out that the gopis wear three outer cloths was also important in the post. Thank you. I love your scholarship and passionate (in a good way) presentation. i don't want to push you into a scholar's dry viewpoint - a devotees inspired viewpoint, which you already have, is certainly better. But since Vilāpa Kusmāñjali was written only a few hundred years ago it may not satisfactorily address the argument that the concept of covering the head is of non-indian or non "Vedic" (historically speaking) origin.

Advaita Das- “The lord is non-different from his śakti, so the śakti is also eternal. The Lord is non-different from his dress, so is his śakti non different from her dress. “

Anonymous bhakta - Another question: are you sure that Vilāpa Kusumāñjali describes a *saree* going over the head? Previously you established that gopīs do not tend to wear sarees, but rather wear a three-piece garment with a "top-cloth" separate from the "skirt.

Advaitadas: I found the following evidence for the veil in the Goswāmīs books -

ākṛṣya mugdham avaguṇṭhanam uttamāṅgād

The sakhīs pulled the veil from Her head to comb her hair – Kṛṣṇāhnika Kaumudi [2.54]

avaguṇṭhana bhū-lekhau tathādho mukhatādayaḥ

“Covering the head with a veil is a sign of shyness” (Bhakti Rasāmṛta Sindhu 2.4.113)

hari api parivṛtya tan nitamba

dyuti nihitekṣaṇa paṅkajo'vatasthe
vara-tanu-tatir apy atītya tad go-puram

avaguṇṭhanam īṣad asyati sma

As Śrī Rādhikā and Her girlfriends passed by through the towngate, their veils slightly slipped off their heads and Hari cast His lotuslike eyes on their effulgent buttocks. [Kṛṣṇa Bhavanamrita 5.45]

ālībhiḥ saha puropakānana

prānta vartma nihitāṅghri pallavā

hrī kṣapā kṣaya-vaśād avaguṇṭhanon-

muktam āsya kamalaṁ dadhe sphuṭam

When Śrī Rādhikā and Her friends placed their lotusfeet on the roads of the subforests of Yāvat, their lotuslike faces began to blossom. This made their night-like veils perish as they opened them, dispelling the darkness of their shame. [Kṛṣṇa Bhāvanāmṛta 8.41]

Adding a date to the Purāṇas according to composition would not be right. Regardless of the date of authorship, the contents are timeless. The fact that I translated the Goswāmī Granthas in the 1980s does not make them from the 1980s.

I received support from my friend Ananta Govinda who quoted verses from Caitanya Bhāgavat to prove the presence of the dhoti in śāstra –

Caitanya Bhāgavat Adi 6.64

keha bole,— "āmāra na rahe sāji dhuti "

Another said, "He always takes my flower basket and fresh dhoṭi."

Caitanya Bhāgavat Madhya 2.44

niṅḍaye vastra karo koriyā yatane ;

dhuṭi-vastra tuli' karo dena ta' āpane

He carefully wrung out the water from someone's wet cloth and handed someone else his dhoti.

Caitanya Bhāgavat Madhya 2.57

sāji bohe, dhuṭi bohe, lajjā nāhi kore'; 

sambhrame vaiṣṇava-gaṇa hāta āsi' dhare

He did not feel shy as He carried their flower baskets and dhotis. The Vaiṣṇavas, however, respectfully caught hold of His hands in order to dissuade Him.

Caitanya Bhāgavat CB Madhya 2.286

nānā māyā kori' tumi āmāre vañcila!;

sāji-dhuṭi-ādi kori' sakali bohila!

"You have deceived me through various illusions. You have even carried my flower basket and dhotis."

Ananta Govinda Das: “They say that it's because of local customs Mahāprabhu wore local clothes, right? But He is Bhagavan himself, and He is Nitya. Why he chose Bengal and not California then? It is said in śāstra that the Lord is coming in His eternal form and His dress and associates are not material - kṛṣṇa varṇaṁ tviṣākṛṣṇam sangopāṅgāstra pārṣadam: He is coming in His eternal form: so, how does His eternal form looks like then? “

Advaitadas: “They argue Kṛṣṇa could wear blue jeans and mobile phone. There was a riot around Banke Bihāri about this 6 years ago. In the 12th canto of the Bhagavat all clothes and ornaments of Kṛṣṇa symbolize something; the Kaustubha gem is all the jivas, f.i. How can you call this local and temporal custom then without being a complete māyāvādī?

Ananta Govinda Das: “The conclusion is that - DHOTI IS FULLY SPIRITUAL because Bhagavan Himself wears it. rāgānugā means following rāgātmikā: all nitya siddha rāgātmikās wore dhoṭī. Why should I challenge? It's so stupid."

Vaiṣṇava dress

This is my 2 cents about the ongoing discussion about whether Vaiṣṇava dress is spiritual or cultural (and can be compromised or even totally abandoned).

This discussion took place during Kartik of 2010 -

Purva-pakṣa -

You mention in your interesting blog about Sankīrtan that "dhoti is a sacred garment". I have my doubt about this statement and would like to present a few points for discussion if you don't mind:

1. The terms "dhoti" or "sari" are not Sanskrit words and not mentioned in scripture. We don't know exactly what Kṛṣṇa was wearing (even though I tend to believe that it resembles what we call dhoti)

2. There is no evidence that Lord Caitanya asked any of his followers to change their regular dress when they went out on harinama.

3. "Vaiṣṇava dress" as mentioned in Caitanya Caritāmṛta could just mean the simple garment the followers of Lord Caitanya used to wear as opposed to royal clothes.

I certainly agree that clothing affects our consciousness and has certain connotations if we use it like a uniform. It can uplift (or degrade) us. However, in Indian villages some people wear dhoti and sari without any religious sentiments. It is just village clothing for them. In certain places in India suit is considered a Christian dress. For me the main principle, if we choose to go on Harinam, is to attract people to Kṛṣṇa through beautiful singing, dancing (and possibly also dress). If they get bewildered by weird foreign clothing (which they may at best connect to India, but not to spirituality) we may not reach our goal. Just my two cents ...

Advaita Das -

1. Probably Vaiṣṇavas always wore dhoti and shari so they did not need to change cloth.

2. Haribhakti Vilāsa speaks of wearing white garments as opposed to red/orange. That certainly applies to dhoti not to pants.

3. Mahāprabhu is described as wearing tri-kaccha in Caitanya Bhāgavata, it means ' three-folded'. That certainly applies to dhoti. f.i trikaccha vasan (Caitanya Bhāgavat Adi 8.197)

4. Indian villages have a very pious regime, even if people do not practise any sādhana. Most Hindus are devotees in the heart. In contrast one never sees Muslims wear a dhoti. If it were purely cultural and regional, why South Asian Muslims do not wear dhoti?

5. A devotee would not dare watch peepshows on the street in dhoti, whereas he would be inclined to do so wearing pants, because not only the garment influences him, he would also look absurd wearing the dress of a priest while watching a peepshow.

Pūrva-pakṣa-

Thanks for your reply. Since the words dhoti and sāri are not found in the Sanskrit dictionary, how would they appear in any Sankrit text (unless it is interpolated)? What we do find in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is dukūla-agrye, which just means cloth. Certainly Mahāprabhu and his devotees wore dhotis, as was the custom back then. We just don't know how exactly the Vrajabāsīs and Kṛṣṇa wrapped their clothes around their bodies 5000 years ago. The gopīs are described as wearing belts in the 10th canto which indicated they were not wearing sārīs, but some kind of skirts. I don't doubt that it is uplifting for one's consciousness to wear dhoti /sari in that spirit, but I still hold that there is nothing INTRINSICALLY spiritual to it.

Advaita Das – “There is nothing intrinsically spiritual about being a teetotaler either – it is just healthy to be so. Does it mean we should jeopardize our sādhana by getting loaded on drink and drugs then? It would make sādhana a lot more difficult, right? One can do sādhana in America but it is much better to do in Vraja. Similarly one can also do sādhana with baseball cap, T-shirt and Bermuda shorts but why would you make it more difficult upon yourself? dhuti and śārī are indeed not in the dictionary, but the Kṛṣṇa Bhāvanāmṛta 4.35 mentions the word śāṭikā [corrupted into 'shari' nowadays] - kanaka bindumati nava śāṭikā. Why would a belt not fit with a sharee, by the way?

Purva-paksa-

Thanks Prabhuji, interesting and a beautiful description. Of course even from that we still don't know exactly how that dress looked like. It is obvious that Rādhā doesn't wear mini-skirt, but the opinion of some devotees that saris as they appear now are "Vaikuṇṭha dress" is still not substantiated by that description.

Advaita Das – “Subhadra devī dressed in gopi dress to appease her co-wife Draupadi. It was a skirt, blouse and a top as described in Vilāpa Kusumāñjali 22. Draupadi was probably dressed in a shari at that meeting, so yes it seems like sharis were Vaikuṇṭha dress and gopi dress is a skirt. In that you are right. I am short of evidence from Mahābhārat, where the pastime is described.”

Just recently I received this support from my friend Ananta Govinda –

Ananta govinda - Some devotees insist that there is no such a thing as Vaiṣṇava dress in śāstra.”

Advaitadas: “Haribhakti Vilāsa says that if you do not wear uttarīya (cador) you are naked. Wearing a chador is as purifying as wearing dhoti - 'nuttarīyaśca nagnas cāvastra eva ca - [Haribhakti Vilāsa, 4.148] – “Not wearing uttarīya [chador] is like being naked.”

Ananta govinda: Without Haribhakti Vilāsa I found refutation of this

Advaita Das: Did Mahāprabhu wear suit and tie, in a college office?

Ananta Govinda: The word vaiṣṇava-dress is in sastra: in Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 14.5

sārvabhauma-upadeśe chādi' rāja-veśa

ekalā vaisnava-veśe karila praveśa

SYNONYMS

sārvabhauma — of Sārvabhauma Bhattācārya; upadeśe — under instructions; chādi' — giving up; rāja-veśa — the royal dress; ekalā — alone; vaisnava-veśe — in the dress of a Vaisnava; karila praveśa — entered.

TRANSLATION

“Following Sārvabhauma Bhattācārya's instructions, the King had given up his royal dress. He now entered the garden in the dress of a Vaisnava.”

Ananta Govinda: look here:  vaisnava-veśe . If they don't accept Haribhakti Vilāsa they should not accept Caitanya Caritāmṛta either: so, what is vaiṣṇava veśa, blue jeans and t-shirt? They say Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism is not about the clothes. But why then Jagadānanda Paṇḍit wanted to beat Sanātan Goswāmī because of the clothes point and nothing else? (see Caitanya Caritāmṛta Antya līlā, chapter 13)? Even without considering the color of the clothes, the point was about the clothes - and if it doesn't matter then why śāstra speaks about clothes with so many ślokas?”

Advaita Das – Clothes matter. A transvestite feels feminine when he cross-dresses, a woman with pants feels more masculine than a woman in a dress. And those postmodern devotees who preach ‘the substance vs. the form’ are invited to show me this philosophy or attitude anywhere in Vaiṣṇava-śāstra or history. There is nothing external in bhakti – sevā sādhaka rūpena.  Mahāprabhu instructs Sanātan Goswāmī in Caitanya Caritāmṛta (Madhya 22.156): bāhya antara ihār dui to sādhan - There are two types of sādhana - external and internal." “The substance vs the form” is actually sheer māyāvāda, thinking that something in bhakti sādhana is false. The bottom line is - it is very hard for western devotees to give up their western saṁskāra, even if they are in the top league and supposedly 'seniormost'."

Fundamentalism?

I wrote this blog some years ago, but never posted it yet, and since there is at present not much to say I post it now, after editing it somewhat -

Some ultra-intellectual devotee-bloggers take the political correctness wrought by conditioned souls in 20th-21st Century America as the standard of comparison and the timeless truths of shastra as the object of comparison, while it should, of course, be the other way around. To establish the source of truth, Śrī Jīva Gosvāmīpāda writes in his Tattva sandarbha (9):

tatra puruṣasya bhramādi-doṣa-catuṣṭaya-duṣṭatvāt sutarām alaukikācintya-svabhāva-vastu-sparśāyogyatvac ca tat-pratyakṣādiny api sa-doṣāni

"Human beings are bound to have four types of defects: They are subject to delusion, make mistakes, have a cheating propensity, and imperfect senses. Thus they are unable to understand the inconceivable spiritual reality, for their means of acquiring knowledge by direct perception, inference, and so forth prove inadequate."

tatas tāni na pramāṇanīty anādi-siddha-sarva-puruṣa-paramparāsu sarva-laukikālaukika-jñāna-nidānatvād aprākṛta-vacana-lakṣaṇo veda evāsmākam sarvatita-sarvāśraya-sarvācintyāścarya-svabhāvaṁ vastu vividiṣatam pramāṇam ||10||

"For us who are inquisitive, therefore, about that which is beyond all, yet the support of everything, which is most inconceivable and wondrous in nature, direct perception, inference and so on are not suitable means. For this purpose we accept the Vedas, whose words are transcendental, which is the source of all mundane and transcendental knowledge, and which have been passed down in humanity through beginningless chains of succession."

And in Śrīmad Bhāgavat 4.18.4-5 it is said -

tān ātiṣṭhati yaḥ samyag upāyān pūrva-darśitān
avaraḥ śraddhayopeta upeyān vindate'ñjasā
tān anādṛtya yo'vidvān arthān ārabhate svayam
tasya vyabhicaranty arthā ārabdhāś ca punaḥ punaḥ

"One who follows the principles and instructions enjoined by the great sages of the past can utilize these instructions for practical purposes. Such a person can very easily enjoy life and pleasures. A foolish person who manufactures his own ways and means and does not recognize the authority of the sages who lay down unimpeachable directions is simply unsuccessful again and again in his attempts."

And in the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 3.2.3 -

nāyam ātma pravacanena labhyo
na medhayā na bahunā śrutena
yam evaiṣa vṛṇute tena labhyas
tasyaisa ātma vivṛṇute tanuṁ svam

"The Supreme Lord is not obtained by expert explanations, by vast intelligence, or even by much hearing. He is obtained only by one whom He Himself chooses To such a person He manifests His own form."

The abovementioned intellectuals reject śāstra’s authority by calling the above principles ‚fundamentalism‘, but fundamentalism is a concept that neither exists in Vedic philosophy nor in Vaiṣṇava philosophy or scripture. It is a concept made up by western intellectuals and newsagencies in 1979, when the clerics in Iran established a theocracy there. Of course, sense perception, inference etc. can contain truths but they should be rejected if they contradict the verdict of śāstra.

Seeking Guru, by Sādhu Bābā

A friend made a video recording of this year's Sītānāth Utsav in Sādhu Bābā's āśram, last January 30, and I noted this nice narration there about Sādhu Bābā's teachings. Tapan Kumar Adhikary speaks:

"One day in 1985 during Bäbä’s last visit to Çré Våndävana, Rebati Mukherjee, a disciple of Bäbä, asked him: "বাবা, সৎগুরু কি করে পাব?" Bäbä, how does one find a genuine Guru? Bäbä replied: “প্রাণপণে হরিনামের আশ্রয গ্রহণ কর - হরিনাম তোমাকে ঠিক জাযগায পৌঞ্ছিযে দেবে –হরিনাম তোমাকে একদিন সৎগুরু পাইযা দিবে, সৎগুরু পৌঞ্ছিযে দিবে” “Wholeheartedly take shelter of harinäm, and harinäm will show you the right place. harinäm will bring you to the genuine Guru. Çré Guru will enter through the open door. I just need to open the door to the Guru once I receive sat guru. Bābā rhymed:

গুরু করবে চেকে

জল খাবে ছেকে

পাপ হেলিবে দেখে”

‘guru korbe checke,

jol khäbe cheìkhe,

papa helibe dekhe’

"Test him before you accept him as Guru, filter the water before you drink it (test the Guru's siddhānta) and see how the sin dissolves".

This text was added to Sadhu Baba's biography on madangopal.com, page 30

Śrīmad Bhāgavat, Canto 11, part 4

This is the 4th and last blog on the 11th canto. More may be added in the comments page or in an appendix blog, later. First again we hark back to some earlier chapters again:

11.11.3 In connection with vidyā, avidyā and pradhāna, Bhānu Swāmi translates the word vṛtti here as ‘modes’ of nature, in the last paragraph of the commentary, which is not so good. ‘Functions‘ would be better, as the word ‘modes’ creates confusion with that other famous subdivision of māyā, sattva raja and tama.

11.11.6 in the last paragraph of the commentary, Bhānu Swāmi translates the famous Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad verse about the two birds in the tree as “Two birds who are friends embrace each other in the same tree.” But actually the text says they are both embracing the tree (of the body, vṛkṣaṁ pariṣasvajāte), not each other.

The final verses:

11.31.10 deals with Kṛṣṇa’s pastime of departure. Śrī Viśvanātha Cakravartī comments: “Just as the destination of lightning cannot be seen by humans, the destination of Kṛṣṇa as He left the earth could not be perceived by the devatās. But his associates could see. This is Śrīdhara Svāmī’s explanation. Having come from Vaikuṇṭha, from the Kāraṇa Ocean and the Milk Ocean, when Kṛṣṇa had appeared, the associates each now thought “I am bringing my Lord to my abode!” But each could not see the other, by the Lord’s yoga-māya. Thus the Lord went to those abodes with those associates who were delighted. It should be understood that when the Lord appeared on earth, the associates of these Viṣṇu-forms also appeared amongst the Yadus along with their masters, the Viṣṇu forms. These associates returned to their places along with the Viṣṇu forms when Kṛṣṇa departed from this world.

11.31.11 Śrī Viśvanātha Cakravarti quotes Brahmānḍa Purāṇa in his ṭīkā: anādeyam aheyaṁ ca rūpaṁ bhagavato hareḥ. āvirbhāva-tirobhāvāv asyokte graha-mocane - Nothing can be added to or subtracted from the Lord’s form. His appearance and disappearance are said to be simply coming into this world and leaving it."

Plus he adds :

"Though sometimes the Lord appears and disappears like a jīva, this is only an appearance produced by maya. It is like the actions of a magician. Though it is false, the magician can show his or someone else’s birth and death. Someone exhibits death as follows. In front of a king, a magician approaches a stack of valuable garments, jewels, coins and so forth, given by the king. Taking a jeweled necklace, the magician tells the king, “Now I am taking this necklace, and you can’t have it. Now I’m taking this gold coin, and you can’t have it. I am taking seven thousand horses, and you cannot have them.” Then the magician creates the illusion that the king’s children, grandchildren, brothers and other family members have attacked each other with weapons and that nearly all are dead from the violent quarrel. The king observes these things taking place before him as he sits in the great assembly hall. The magician says, “O King! I no longer wish to live. Just as I have studied magic, so also, by the mercy of the lotus feet of my Guru, I have learned the mystic meditation of yoga. One is supposed to give up one’s body while meditating in a holy place, I will die in front of you, who are a holy place yourself.” Thus speaking, the magician sits down in svastika āsana, fixes himself in prāṇāyāma, pratyāhāra, dhāraṇā, dhyāna and samādhi in silence. A moment later, a strong fire generated by his trance blazes forth out of his body and burns it to ashes. Then all the wives of the magician, distraught with lamentation, enter into that fire. Three or four days later, after the magician has returned to his own province, he sends a letter to the king. “O King, invisibly taking all your sons, grandsons and brothers who are in good health—along with all the jewels and other items given by you, I have come to my house in good health. Please, therefore, give me whatever you consider fitting remuneration for the wisdom of the magic that has been exhibited before you.” In this way, even by ordinary magic one can simulate death.

This example is explained in the verse. I alone have created this confusion of quarrel and fighting with weapons arising from the sages’ curse, and following that, I have entered into that scene and played with mortals for a moment by taking up the reeds. Then I withdrew from that show by my own powers and now remain separate.”