The end of desire, peanuts, the process of Vedic learning, self-promotion and Tulsī leaves.

Once the Muslim emperor Akhbar asked his Hindu minister Birbal – ‘At what age does a man become free from sex desire? “ Birbal replied: “Never.” Akhbar could not believe this, so Birbal said: “Come with me to the hospital and take your 18-year old granddaughter with you.” In the hospital a 99-year old man lay on his deathbed, his wife by his side. The herald announced:  “Rise! The Emperor has come!”, but the dying man just lay there with closed eyes saying “Pranams Maharaja!” When, however, he smelled the young girl’s perfume, he opened his eyes and when he beheld the girl’s beauty he stared at her with wide open eyes. Birbal said – “You see Maharaja, there is no end to this.” Sādhu Bābā taught us this verse from Śaṅkarācārya -

aṅgaṁ galitaṁ palitaṁ muṇḍaṁ danta vihīna jātaṁ tuṇḍaṁ

vṛddho yāti gṛhitvā daṇḍam tad api na muncatyāśā piṇḍam

“In old age the body deteriorates, the head is covered with grey hair, the mouth becomes toothless, and one clutches a staff to keep straight – yet still one cannot give up material desires.” Kṛṣṇa says in Bhagavad-Gītā (3.39) - jñānino nitya vairina – “lust is the eternal enemy of the wise”. In his commentary to Śrīmad Bhāgavata 3.31.39, Śrīla Jīva Goswāmī writes – pramadāsu svīyāsvapi, one should not only give up one’s attachment to women in general, but even to one’s own wife.”

*

Some sādhus are of the opinion that peanuts should not be eaten on Ekādaśī, as it is named mung-phali in Hindi, mung referring to pulse. I phoned my Guru-bhāi Śrī Tapan-kumār Adhikāry, who told me that peanuts can be taken as they are not a śim-viśeṣa, a type of bean. In the Padma Purāṇa narration of the pāpa puruṣa it is mentioned that sin is present only in grains.

*

When I used to study bhakti from my superiors I was often amazed how I got answers that were wholly unrelated to my questions, but they were actually upakāra [helpful and useful] – I thought it might have something to do with the abstract mind-frame of Indian people, but now that I am myself a bhakti-teacher my students also tell me they experience the same – I don’t answer their questions as they expect it. So it has nothing to do with western rationalism vs. abstract Indian thought – it is just the way Bhagavān teaches through His media and His messengers.

*

Here is a striking verse about blatant self-promoters we so often see in our Vaisnava world -

ghaṭaṁ bhittvā paṭaṁ chittvā kuryād vā gārdhabhaḥ-svanam

yena kenāpy upāyena prasiddhaḥ-puruṣo bhava

“Either by breaking pots or tearing off one’s clothes, or braying like a donkey to get attention, one way or the other, a man wants to be famous.”

A devotee quoted this on Facebook. The source reference is unknown, but it’s a great verse.

*

It is often said that it is offensive to chew on Tulsi-leaves, but that is not right. If that were so one should not chew Prasad either!

The holy dhāma, two separable paths, 6 Goswāmīs, jāta rati guru, maintaining sthāyibhāva, changing names.

Dāmodar Dās

“I remember that I wrote in a blog that living in the dhāma can be compared with strong medicine and if you are not living there without blessings and guidance, it can kill spiritual life. In the dhāma there are really advanced devotees so if you offend them, consequences can be severe. Like these widows. They could be bhāvika bhaktas.”

Advaita Dās

The dhāma has great powers. There is nāmāparādha, sevāparādha and vaiṣṇavāparādha, but not dhāmāparādha. There are many Vaiṣṇavas in the dhāma, especially in Rādhākuṇḍa, a small village where everyone knows everyone. Offending them may have caused all those spectacular dropouts by western Vaisnavas from there. You can commit vaiṣṇavāparādha on each street corner.”

*

It is said in Jaiva-dharma that Dhyānacandra taught internal worship and Raghunāth dās Goswāmi taught external worship and some preachers now say they are two separable paths, of which one group of Vaiṣṇavas (so-called ‘goṣṭhyānandīs’) only practice the external and the other (so-called ‘bhajanānandīs’) only the internal side, but this not so. Both Dhyānacandra and Raghunāth dās Goswāmī practiced and preached both side by side. sevā sādhaka rūpeṇa siddha rūpena cātra hi (Bhakti Rasāmṛta Sindhu 1.2.295) – cātra indicates that both are practiced side by side. Rejecting the internal practice for mere external practice, as some have proposed, will never lead to svarūpa siddhi. Besides, if one group of Vaisnavas (so-called ‘bhajanānandīs’) is practicing only the internal side, then what are they doing with their external bodies? Are they not hearing, chanting, going on parikramā and cooking or so?

 *

The six Goswāmīs had a heart (kṛṣṇotkīrtana gāna nartana parau) and a brain (nānā śāstra vicāranaika nipuṇau). All of this is useless without humility, but they had that too – cātyanta dīnau ca yau.

*

In his ṭīkā to Bhakti Rasāmṛta Sindhu 1.2.113 Mukunda Goswami, the disciple of Kṛṣṇadās Kaviraja, says that the qualification of a Guru must be that he is jāta rati, he has developed bhāva bhakti. Śiṣya karaṇaṁ tu jāta ratīnām eva vihitatvāc ca. I did not include this in my blog on sādhana bhakti-chapter of Bhakti Rasāmṛta Sindhu because that blog was about Bhānu Swāmi’s edition of Bhakti Rasāmṛta Sindhu which does not include the ṭīkā of Mukunda Gosvāmī. It is odd that the two main commentators on Bhakti Rasāmṛta Sindhu, Jīva Gosvāmī and Viśvanātha Cakravartīpāda, did not make this point.

*

Sādhu Bābā told me that during times of intense sexual contemplation or when one is unable to observe celibacy one should temporarily suspend meditation on and study of Radha-Kṛṣṇa's rahaḥ līlā or intimate pastimes. This does not mean one should start thinking of oneself as a monkey in Hanumān's army or a servant of Lord Nārāyan. If this is done one does not really have mañjarī bhāva as sthāyi rati. It would be a mere mental concoction. Instead one can continue the aspiration for mañjarī svarūpa and the study of aṣṭakāliya līlā, skipping the intimate pastimes only. Meditating on how Svāminī sees Kṛṣṇa coming and going with his cows, how She cooks for him and how She suffers separation from him can just go on as normal. One should not throw away the baby with the bathing water. Once purity of thought and action are restored one can resume all meditations. A popular suggestion is also to temporarily shift one’s focus to Gaura- līlā. This is also all right, because it is non-erotic, attractive, magnanimous and most importantly, very instructive. Each story has a deep morale.

*

Advaitaji, who started changing names of his disciples? Traditionally, as I understand, this is usually done when people take veśa, sannyāsa, not for mantra dīkṣā. It is only a minor point, probably not to be labeled as deviation, but still interesting. I thought mostly westerners get a name change?

Advaitadās -

"Changing names is one item of 'panca rātrika dīkṣā', along with yajna, tāpa etc. - this is mentioned in Prameya Ratnavalī (8.2). Mahāprabhu also changed the Muslim names of Rūpa and Sanātan. It is a bit hard to think of Kṛṣṇa if your Guru lets you keep the name George. Ajāmila was liberated by accidentally saying Nārāyan instead of Pappoo. If a Guru does not change a disciple’s name at time of dīkṣā he is not at fault though, especially if the disciple already has a name of the Lord, gotten from parents or a previous Guru."

Jala-keli, nostalgia, sectareanism and devatās

The point of the pastime in Caitanya Caritāmṛta Antya līlā, chapter 18, in which Mahāprabhu saw the jala-keli (Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa’s watersports) standing on the shore of Yamunā, not participating, is not whether He was in sakhī bhāva or mañjarī bhāva - the point is that it showed the difference between the three stages of consciousness – antar (internal), bāhya (external) and ardha bāhya daśā (half-external). Surely there is no harm in seeing mañjarī bhāva in it, it is not an apasiddhānta, but I personally doubt if this was Kṛṣṇadās Kavirāja's intention.

*

Devotees reminiscing the past, in which they personally associated with their now deceased Guru are not sentimental old men. To accuse them of living in the past is guror avajña, disregarding Guru, thinking the Guru is dead. All bhakti-activities and thoughts are eternal. To think otherwise is māyāvāda or materialism.

*

Śrīla Raghunāth Dās Goswāmī’s Vraja Vilāsa Stava is the ultimate index of sambandhānugā (generic, non-amorous) bhakti, while his Vilāpa Kusumāñjali is the ultimate index of kāmānugā (purely amorous) bhakti. Both are essential reading.

*

There is no condemnation of ‘sectarianism’ in bhakti śāstra – instead there is a glorification of niṣṭha, fixation. Śrīla Rūpa Goswāmī speaks of ekāntīs, or focused ones, in Bhakti Rasāmṛta Sindhu (1.2.58) –

 tatrāpyekāntināṁ śreṣṭha govinda hṛta mānasāḥ

yeṣāṁ śrīśa prasādo’pi mano hartuṁ na śaknuyāt

 “And again, of all those devotees of one-pointed loyalty, those whose minds have been stolen by Govinda are the best. Even the grace of Lord Viṣṇu cannot steal their minds.”

This focus is based on rasa, but it shows exclusivity nonetheless. Surely we must respect others’ practices but it is also not so that for a soul surrendered to Mahāprabhu and the 6 Goswāmīs that everything and everyone is right. Bhagavad Gītā makes these points:

 aśraddadhānāḥ puruṣā dharmasyāsya parantapa

aprāpya māṁ nivartante mṛtyu-saṁsāra-vartmani

 “O afflicter of enemies, those who have no faith in this dharma do not attain Me but return to the path of transmigration and death.” 9.3

and –

yaḥ śāstra-vidhim utsṛjya vartate kāma-kārataḥ

na sa siddhim avāpnoti na sukhaṁ na parāṁ gatim

“He who giving up the rules of scripture acts according to his own whim does not attain perfection, happiness, or the supreme goal.” 16.23

 These verses clearly say that deviants will not attain Krṣṇa – māyāvādī, karma niṣṭha (fruitive workers) kutārkika gana (sophists) ninduk (critics) pāṣaṇḍī (agnostics) and poruwa adham (fallen eggheads) are excluded by Mahāprabhu. C.C. Ādi 7.29

*

Objections have been raised against the use of the English word 'demigods' for 'devatās', as ‘demigods’ is an English term for persons in Greek mythology who had half god-half human descent. In the Vedic context that would make the Pāṇḍavas demigods, but devatās 'gods' with a small ‘g’. either the word ‘gods’ can be used or the original term ‘devatā’ can be kept, because most readers of English translations of śāstra will know what that means, just like the word ‘guru’ needs no English translation.

Gaura Nārāyaṇa and dharma vs bhakti

Bhakta -

“What about Gaura Nārāyaṇa, a form of Mahāprabhu which appeared in a previous Kali yuga but in which he had Nārāyan-features instead of Kṛṣṇa-features?”

Advaitadās -
“Of this I have found no evidence in śāstra at all.”

Bhakta – “It is said to be in Locandās Ṭhākur's Caitanya Maṅgala.”

 

Advaitadas – “The only thing I saw there is that Nārāyaṇa appears in different forms in previous yugas. That refers to Vāmana, Nrsimha and others. There is no mentioning there of a Mahāprabhu with Nārāyaṇa-features. These features exist within Mahāprabhu anyway - they were clearly perceived and described by Vrindāvan Dās in Caitanya Bhāgavata.”

Bhakta – “What is the relation between bhakti and dharma?”

Advaitadas – “They have common decency in common. You cannot separate bhakti, including rāga bhakti, from dharma. Dharma is like the water and bhakti like the lotus that grows from it. The lotus is aloof from the water but is still rooted in it. Dharma and bhakti are linked via the offense ‘to commit sin on strength of the holy name’. In other words, some unscrupulous so-called rāga devotees say that as rāgānugā bhakti is beyond dharma, they can sin freely and their ‘rāga bhajan’ will absolve it. This is an offence to the holy name.“

Bhakta – “What is the relationship between Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava religion and the other religions?”

Advaitadas – “Viśvanātha Cakravartīpāda, in his commentary on the Bhāgavata, explains that the paths of karma, jñāna and yoga get due attention in the Bhāgavata only to create a contrast. The light of bhakti shines more brightly in the darkness of the other paths. So it is also with Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism vis-à-vis other religions and it is shown in the words of Śrī Kṛṣṇa Himself at the end of Bhagavad Gītā (18.66) – sarva dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja “Give up all religion and surrender to Me alone.” That ‘light of bhakti shining more brightly’ is especially so due to the all-attractiveness of Kṛṣṇa and the path of rāgānugā bhakti, most particularly the practice of manjarī bhāva.” Another reason why so many things are there in śāstra is that one cannot just establish authority with a one-liner. People all over the world adore scripture – it has to have some volume, otherwise people will not take it seriously. One cannot just reveal scripture with just one sentence, like “chant Hare Kṛṣṇa and be happy”. Look at Bhagavad Gītā – already in the first verse of chapter 3 Arjuna asked Kṛṣṇa to get to the point and yet Kṛṣṇa spoke on for another 16 chapters before finally saying sarva dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja “Give up all religion and surrender to Me alone.”

 

Jaṭās in the Bhāgavata and the absence of jugupsā rati

 

JAṬĀS IN THE BHĀGAVATA

 

Bhakta - "Is it proper for a Vaiṣṇava to wear Jaṭās (dreadlocks)? I thought this was māyāvādī or Śivaite practice?"

Advaitadās – “Though Nārada is usually depicted with straight black hair, the Bhāgavata (10.70.32) says vibhrad piṅga-jaṭā-bhāram, he wears golden matted locks.

The four Kumāras were not shaved up either - SB 3.8.5 - svardhuny-udārdraiḥ sva-jaṭā-kalāpair - ‘Their matted locks were moistened by the water from the celestial Gangā’

Apart of course from Lord Śiva, the following great souls or avatāras were said to have had jaṭās, either full time or during times of tapasyā, according to Śrīmad Bhāgavata –

5.7.13 vāsasānusavanābhiṣekārdra-kapiśa-kuṭila-jaṭā-kalāpena ca  - “Jada Bharat’s brown matted locks were wet.”

5.17.3 sabahu-mānam adyāpi jaṭājūṭair udvahanti - ‘To this day the seven rishis wear the Ganga water on their matted locks.”

7.12.4 jaṭā-daṇḍa-kamaṇḍalūn - Any brahmacārī in the Vedic system had matted locks.

9.4.46 jaṭāṁ roṣa pradīpita - Durvāsā Muni

9.10.49 jaṭā nirmucya vidhivat – Lord Rāma in exile [during tapasya]

9.15.29 yutaṁ jaṭābhir dadṛśe puriṁ viśan - Bhagavān Paraśurāma

10.70.32 vibhrad piṅga-jaṭā-bhāram - Nārada Muni

12.9.15 babhrāma vikṣipya jaṭā jaḍāndhavat - Mārkaṇḍeya Rishi

I have blogged on this issue earlier too.

 ***

THE ABSENCE OF JUGUPSĀ RATI

 

In the discussion on Vilāpa Kusumānjali’s verse 18, in which Raghunātha dās Goswāmī prays that he/she can clean Rādhārāṇī’s toilet with her hair, and the Bhāgavata-verse (10.8.31) which describes Kṛṣṇa passing stool and urine (kurute mehanādīni vāstau) in His parents’ room of worship (deva-pūjārtham āmṛṣṭa lipta bhūmau) it must be remembered that there is no jugupsa rasa or vībhatsa rasa (the mellow of disgust) in relation to Kṛṣṇa. na tu kṛṣṇa-vibhāvatvam, tad-ayogyatvāt (Jīva Gosvāmī’s ṭīkā on BRS 2.5.41) In the story of Ṛṣabha-deva in Śrīmad Bhāgavata (5.5.33) is is said: tasya ha yaḥ purīṣa-surabhi-saugandhya-vāyus taṁ deśaṁ daśa-yojanaṁ samantāt surabhiṁ cakāra:  “The wind, fragrant from the smell of his stool, made the place fragrant for ten yojanas around.”

Viśvanātha Cakravartīpāda comments: tasya cinmaya-śarīrasyaitad-bībhatsitam ity āśaṅkyāha—tasyeti. purīṣasya surabhinā gandhena saugandhyaṁ yasya sa vāyuḥ - “One may think that this condition is disgusting for a spiritual body.  This verse explains. The air became fragrant with the smell of his stool.”

Added to my blog of october 24,2010

 

siddha praṇālī in śāstra

Often I am asked where siddha praṇālī, the revelation of the spiritual body of the disciple by the Guru, is mentioned in the śāstras, or at least in the Six Goswāmīs’ books. Many devotees know it is mentioned in the works of minor ācāryas like Gopālguru, Dhyānacandra and Bhaktivinode and it is also mentioned by Vṛndāvana Cakravartī, a disciple of Viśvanātha Cakravartī, in his commentary on Govinda Līlāmṛta (23.94 – manobhāvena yogya vapuṣā śrī gurvājñā tat sevā-yogya siddha vapuṣā), but, though it is not called siddha praṇālī literally by name, the principle of the Guru’s involvement with the disciple’s development of the spiritual body is also clearly mentioned in the Gosvāmīs’ books. For instance, in Śrī Jīva Goswāmī’s Bhakti Sandarbha (283):

divyaṁ jñānaṁ hy atra śrīmati mantre bhagavat-svarūpa-jñānaṁ tena bhagavata sambandha-viśeṣa-jñānaṁ ca

“This divine knowledge is in the beautiful mantra and is knowledge of the Lord’s real form. Through it one receives knowledge about one’s specific relationship with the Lord.”
And in paragraph 312 of Bhakti Sandarbha:

yathā caike tādṛśam upāsanaṁ sākṣād vraja-jana-viśeṣāyaiva mahyaṁ śrī-guru-caraṇair mad-abhīṣṭa-viśeṣa-siddhy-artham upadiṣṭaṁ bhāvayāmi

“In such a worship (with the 18-syllable Gopāl-mantra) I meditate to develop myself as a direct, specific person in Vraja as my Śrī Guru’s lotus-feet have instructed me in to attain the specific siddhi I covet.”

Śrīla Narottama Dās Ṭhākur sings in Prārthanā (30):

kanaka kaṭorā pūri, sugandhi candana būri,
doṅhākāra śrī-aṅge ḍhālibo
guru-rūpā-sakhī vāme, tribhaṅga bhaṅgima ṭhāme,
cāmarera bātāsa koribo

“With fragrant sandal paste filling a golden jug, I anoint their beautiful limbs. Standing on the left side of my guru-rūpā-sakhī (my Guru in his sakhī-form) before Kṛṣṇa with His three-fold bending form, I fan with a cāmara-whisk.”

One may argue here that this is written in a siddha-state, but the song in which this couplet appears is named svābhiṣṭa lālasā, ‘yearning for a desired condition’ - clearly it speaks about a sādhaka-condition.

Not only in the books of the Gosvāmīs, but also in the books about the Gosvāmīs the guru-given siddha deha is mentioned. At the end of the 6th chapter of Prema Vilāsa, Śrī Nityānanda Dās narrates the meeting of Śrīnivāsācārya and his Guru Gopāl Bhaṭṭa Goswāmī –

Pada-yuga dhori kore ātma samarpaṇa
Ātmasāt kori gosāi kohilo vacana
Dui hasta dhauta puna koro āro bāra
Joḍa haste koro dhyāna vrajendrakumāra
Tāra vāme śrī rādhikā ati manohara
Lalitā manjarī ādi śobhita sundara
Pūjā korāilo sab pṛthak koriyā
Tulasī manjarī mālya candanādi diyā
Yūthe milāilo sab haste haste kori
Śrīnivāsa korāilo sobāra anucarī

“Holding the feet of Gosvāmī, Śrīnivāsa surrendered himself to the feet of his guru. Gopālbhaṭṭa Gosvāmī then ordered him, "Wash your hands again and start the meditation of Śrī Vrajendra-kumāra with folded hands. Think of the extremely attractive Śrī Rādhikā on His left side, surrounded by Lalitā, the Mañjarīs and others." He helped Srinivasa to do the pūjā of all of them individually with Tulsī mañjarīs, garlands, sandal paste and other ingredients. Thus he made Śrīnivāsa the maidservant of them all.”

Śrī rādhā-ramaṇa pūjā koro punarbāra
Sab manoratha siddhi caraṇe yāhāra
Sugandhi candana dilo hṛdaya upora
Tulasī manjarī caraṇe dilo bahutara
Dakṣiṇa hasta mastake dhori kohe harināma
Tabe rādhā-kṛṣṇa panca nāmera vidhāna
Rādhā-kṛṣṇa mantra kohe kare-yuge dhori
Kāma bīja śunāilo anguli anusāri
Ei sab mantra tumi koribe smaraṇa
Yei kāle tad āśraye koribe manana
Guṇa manjarikāśraye maṇi manjarikā tumi
Tomāra yūthera vivaraṇa kohi sab āmi
rūpa guṇa rati rasa manjulāmanjula
Ei sab sange sangī ei anukūla

He ordered Śrīnivāsa, "Worship Śrī Rādhā Ramaṇa again – at His lotus-feet lies the fulfillment of all your desires." Śrīnivāsa applied fragrant sandal paste on Rādhā-ramaṇa’s chest and many Tulsī-mañjarīs on His lotus feet. Placing his right hand on his head, he chanted Harināma, after which he got the five names of Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa. He spoke the mantra with Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa-nāma while holding Śrīnivāsa’s hands. Śrīla Gopāl Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī then told him the Kāma-bīja and how to count it on the fingers. He said: "Remember all these mantras whenever you surrender to Them by meditating on Them. You are Maṇi Mañjarī in the group of mañjarīs under Śrī Guṇa mañjarī (Gopāl Bhaṭṭa Goswāmī himself). I will tell you everything about her party. It is favorable to accompany Rūpa-, Guṇa-, Rati- and Mañjulāli Mañjarī."

It is however nowhere mentioned that this is a compulsory item of dīkṣā and must be given at once to anyone or everyone who gets harināma for instance. The Guru should judge who is qualified to receive it at all, and if so, when.

Rādhā dāsya, blades of grass and siddha praṇālī

Dāmodar Dās

 “One devotee said that qualified devotees do not want to become gopīs - they want to become blade of grass, like Brahmāji and Uddhava”

Advaitadas -

That is daft. These are statements of humility in sādhaka deha. Did the six Goswāmīs want to become blades of grass too? They are our role-models, not Brahmā or Uddhava, who are aiśvarya jñānīs. Look how Rūpa and Raghunātha were craving for Rādhārāṇī’s darśana and service. They who speculate like that have no sat guru. Mahāprabhu said ataev gopī-bhāv koro angīkāra – “Therefore adopt the mood of the gopīs”. But they will not obey.

Dāmodar Das -

Why mañjarī bhāv is not dāsya but mādhurya?

Advaita Das

“It is dāsya within mādhurya. Sādhu Bābā considered it dāsya. When he gave me siddha pranali he revealed that Prabhu Sītānāth is Viśākhā in mādhurya rasa and Rati Mañjarī in dāsya rasa.”

Dāmodar Dās -

So we are serving in the group of Rati Mañjarī? Rati Mañjarī is serving under guidance of Viśākhā and they are both Sītānāth?

Advaita Dās -

No we serve in the group of Viśākhā. Yes they are both Sitanatha.

Dāmodar Dās -

What is then the difference between the dāsya of Citraka Patraka etc and the dāsya of the mañjarīs?

Advaita Dās -

This is rādhā dāsya, whereas Raktaka Patraka is Kṛṣṇa-dāsya. Again, it is actually mādhurya. Look at Vilāpa Kusumānjali verse 16- dasyāya te mama raso'stu raso’stu – “Let me have taste for Your dāsya only.”

Dāmodar Dās -

One devotee does not understand. He says that if it is just dāsya, where is mādhurya?

Advaita Das -

"It is not just dāsya. Look at Vilāpa Kusumānjali verse 16 - “Let me truly have only taste for your dāsya.” Whose dāsya? Not kṛṣṇa dāsya but rādhā dāsya."

Dāmodar Dās -

dāsya for Rādhā means mādhurya for Kṛṣṇa because mañjarīs feel all that Rādhā feels?

Advaita Das

That is one aspect yes, bhāva tādātmya. The bottom line is – this is dāsya as a component of mādhurya. In mādhurya there is sambhogecchātmikā and tad bhāvecchātmikā. The first is desire to enjoy, that is mādhurya within mādhurya. The second is desire to share feelings, that is dāsya within mādhurya -

sakhyāya te mama namo'stu namo'stu nityam

dāsyāya te mama raso'stu raso'stu satyam

This is the mahāmantra for rādhā dāsya.

Dāmodar Dās -

"So dāsya which deals with mādhurya becomes mādhurya also?"

Advaita Dās -

It does not become, it IS. Dās Goswami does not speak of Kṛṣṇa-dasya in Vilāpa Kusumānjali verse 16.”

Another bhakta -

Dear friend, what is your opinion: I read on a Facebook page that the adhikāra for receiving siddha-pranālī is ĀSAKTI... I can find a reference nowhere - others say that it should be given in BHAJANA-KRIYĀ...

Advaita Dās -

“It is hard to say. If they want to do that on that level there is nothing wrong with that. My Guru did not keep a fixed standard on that. It is an individual thing. If someone makes āsakti a default value he is wrong but if they want to keep such standard as their own value [THEIR OWN] there is no fault in that.”

bhakta  3-

I regularly receive a newsletter. Below, I pasted a portion of a recent item from them. What is your opinion on this? Or have you discussed this on your blog?

Sahajiyas Cannot Relish His Sweetness

These demons were against Kṛṣṇa, so instead of experiencing His sweetness, they simply experienced their own enmity. Similarly, if we imagine that we are deeply meditating on Kṛṣṇa’s asta-kaliya-lila, His daily twenty-four hour pastimes with the gopis, but we have not reached the stage of bhava-bhakti, we will also not experience His sweetness. Rather, we will experience our own lusty and other material desires. In this connection, Kamsa and other demons represent our material desires. Kṛṣṇa and the realization of the sweetness of Kṛṣṇa is surely our goal, but do not try to jump up to the top of the tree. Begin from the root of the tree and gradually climb up from there; then you can realize your goal. The sincere devotee engages in the proper process of bhakti from the start. At first he follows the verse beginning with adau sraddha tatah sadhu- sango ‘tha bhajana-kriya. After this, he is able to follow the principles as stated in the verse beginning ksantir avyartha-kalatvam.

Advaita Dās -

The sweetness of Kṛṣṇa is of course also relished in stages before niṣṭhā and ruci, otherwise why would brand new bhaktas give up hearth and home and practise celibacy and so, if there were no higher taste? Of course there are gradations of relish, hence one of the stages of devotional development is called 'ruci'. Also the ācāryas clearly say that even in the bhāva-bhakti stage, which is mentioned here, there are anarthas or unwanted habits, be it subtle.

Finally - ever more Bhāgavat-nectar (2.6.34) -

na bhāratī me’ṅga mṛṣopalakṣyate na vai kvacin me manaso mṛṣā gatiḥ

na me hṛṣīkāṇi patanty asat-pathe yan me hṛdautkaṇṭhyavatā dhṛto hariḥ

Brahmā said: "O Nārada! My words are not false, the faculty of my mind is never false and my senses do not fall onto the wrong path, because I hold Lord Hari in my enthusiastic heart!"

Uddīpana and an āśā-vāṇī

Bhakta - Reading this somehow breaks my understanding. On page 38 of Śrī Ananta dās bābājī’s book ‘Rasa-darshan’ it is said:

“A great preceptor like Śrīla Jīva Goswāmī has written in his book Sarva-samvādinī - "kāvyālaṅkāra kāma-tantra-gandharva-kalās tu tat-tat-carita mādhurya anubhava vaiduṣya siddheḥ" “The study of rhetoric, the science of love-making and performing arts helps in experiencing the sweetness of the Supreme personality of God". Here kāvyālaṅkāra refers to worldly rhetoric and kāma-tantra may refer to the Kāma-sūtra of Vātsyāyana, since any spiritual Kāma-tantra does not exist. “

Please could you tell me how to make love helps to experience the sweetness of God? After all it is said by Jīva Goswāmī and he does not make any mistake."

Advaita Das:

It does not say lovemaking, it says reading Kāma-tantra or Kāma-sūtra. Later Ananta Dāsjī quotes the verse yaḥ kaumāra hara sa eva hi vara, the mundane rasa-śloka that Rūpa Goswāmī quoted to Mahāprabhu (‘he who took my virginity is now my husband’).

Bhakta - OK, but Kāma-tantra is not spiritual and refers to the art of love-making, isn’t it? Then how is it that by read this book that refers to sexuality and it is material, one can experience the sweetness of the Lord?

Advaitadas – “There is a certain sādṛśya, (similarity) but again, the ācāryas do not say we should have sex with other mens’ wives like the sahajīyās do, and they never did such things themselves either. Reading Kāma-sūtra is one thing, practising it is another thing. Jīva Gosvāmī obviously refers to 'uddīpana' here - an incitement, like seeing a peacock feather. Not that a rāgānugā sādhaka should get deeply absorbed into mundane kāma śāstra, what to speak of committing sinful acts to imitate Kṛṣṇa. Otherwise the Goswāmīs would contradict the Bhāgavat statement -

naitat samācarej jātu manasāpi hy anīśvara

vinaśyaty ācaran mauḍ̣hyād yathārudro 'bdhi-jaṁ viṣ̣am

“A person who is not a great controller can never imitate the Rāsa līlā, not even mentally. If out of foolishness an ordinary person does imitate such behavior, he will simply destroy himself, just as a person who is not Rudra would destroy himself if he tried to drink the poison from the milk ocean.” (Ś.B 10.33.30)

In Caitanya Caritāmṛta it is mentioned that Śrīman Mahāprabhu was inspired by the abovementioned mundane śloka, yaḥ kaumāra hara, and also by Rāsa līlā performances at Kānāi Nāṭśālā; He saw Kṛṣṇa in the son of king Pratāparudra and saw the Yamunā in the Gaṅgā etc. - note too that Anantadāsjī says earlier that such a devotee is acting on prāktana saṁskāra, relishing rasa based on a cultivation in a previous life, and has a vision like the avadhūta brāhmin had in the 11^th canto of the Bhāgavata. It is not for everyone."

*

The Bhāgavata is inexhaustible both in quality and quantity. This verse is added to my blog of May 11, 2011 –

6.16.39 kāma-dhiyas tvayi racitā na parama rohanti yathā karambha-bījāni
jñānātmany aguṇamaye guṇa-gaṇato 'sya dvandva-jālāni

“Oh Lord! Desires for material pleasure, directed to you, who are composed of spiritual knowledge and are different from the material guṇas, do not produce further material bodies, just as roasted seeds do not grow.  The networks of duality causing rebirth arise from the material guṇas.”

Āśā-vāṇī – words of hope. If one conceives a Kṛṣṇa-conscious child, even with obvious lusty desires, or one takes prasāda with a desire to enjoy the tongue, still one does not take birth again in the material world.”

Śrīmad Bhāgavata, Canto 2

This is a segment of an anthology of Śrī Viśvanātha Cakravartī’s commentary on Śrīmad Bhāgavata –

Bhānu Swāmi makes an interesting footnote to the commentary on SB 2.1.29 – “A distinction is made by Viśvanātha between the sense organ and the place of the sense organ in the Lord because the real material sense organ such as the ear is subtle in nature and travels with the jīva birth after birth. This is distinct from the gross organ which perishes at death.” It would be wonderful to have śāstrik back up for this.

2.3.17 āyur harati vai pumsam - when one branch of the tree bears fruit, the whole tree becomes successful, what to speak of all the branches bearing fruit. If one spent one’s whole life absorbed in Kṛṣṇa’s topics, how wonderful it would be! “If that is so, and life is not taken away by hearing about Kṛṣṇa, from the moment of hearing about Kṛṣṇa, a person should not die.” Viśvanātha retorts that after death a bhakta will become an eternal associate of the Lord – tat pārṣadatva prāptyā.

2.3.18 The person whose life is not stolen away does not receive rebirth in this world. Do not the trees live? They live much longer than the humans. But they do not breathe. Does not the bellows breathe? The bellows breathe more strongly than the humans. But the bellows do not eat. Do not the animals eat and mate? They can eat more than the humans. Apare indicates animals in human form. 

2.3.19 ‘hogs, dogs, camels and asses…’ - Their animalistic life is to be condemned. They are glorified profusely by dogs, pigs, camels and donkeys. He as one person accepts the qualities of us four (animals), whereas we are all incapable of taking up another animal’s qualities. He, being a human, can take up so many qualities of animals, and we being animals, cannot take up even one quality of another animal. Overstepping his scripture ordained by dharma, he accepts our qualities with passion. We however are fixed in our qualities by destiny. He is aware of the hell into which he will be born by following our qualities, whereas we are dull-witted and cannot understand anything of the future. In this way the animals praise him in four ways. The dog’s quality is to become angry without reason. The pigs quality is to eat filthy things. The quality of the camel is carrying heavy burdens. The quality of the donkey is to get kicked by his mate. Kṛṣṇa has never gone in that person’s ears. Gadāgraja means “he who appears in front of sickness (gada) as its enemy.” Thus he will appear and destroy the sickness of anger and other bad qualities of the animalistic man.

In his ṭīkā to the anti-sahajiya verse 2.3.24, Viśvanātha quotes Ś.B. 3.28.34 –

“The unfortunate yogī who has developed love for the Lord, full of all sweet qualities, whose heart is somewhat soft because of devotion, whose body hairs stand on end in ecstasy, who is constantly overcome with intense tears of joy, gradually withdraws his hook-like mind from the Lord's form.”

Then he adds: “Dravad-dhṛdaya means his heart has melted. However baḍiśa (fish hook) means it is still iron since the fish hook is made of iron. The bhāva that he attains and the melting of the heart are ābhāsas or semblances only, since he gradually withdraws the mind from the Lord. Why give up the Lord who is the real goal of life? By the bhakti in this meditation, he cannot be called a devotee but a yogī since he gives pain to the limbs of the Lord, the object of his meditation, by his fish hook heart, which is hard and bent.”

2.9.34 In order to show how prema is restricted by realization of power, Arjuna realized the universal form and the form of Paramātmā when it was revealed by yoga-māyā. Because of the covering of yogamāyā, he did not experience the svarūpa of Kṛṣṇa which was still present. At other times he did not experience either the universal form or Paramātmā, which was covered by yogamāyā, but experienced Kṛṣṇa’s two-armed form. At one time one form of the Lord was revealed, while another was covered….

The material māyā actually arises from yoga-māyā and is its vibhūti or expansion. It is said in Nārada-pañcarātra, in the speech of Śruti-vidyā:

asyā āvaraṇikā śaktir mahā-māyākhileśvarī

yayā mugdhaṁ jagat sarvaṁ sarva-dehābhimāninaḥ

“Material māyā, the controller of all beings in the material world is the covering energy of yoga-māyā. By her the whole universe becomes bewildered and everyone thinks they are their bodies.” When the snake gives up his skin which arises from him, that skin becomes material and inactive, as if arising from a non-living source.

2.9.36 yathā yathā harer nāma kīrtayanti ca nārakāḥ

tathā tathā harau bhaktim udvahanto divaṁ yayuḥ

When those in hell chant the name of the Lord they develop bhakti to the Lord and go to the spiritual world.  Nṛsiṁha Purāṇa (I must note here that the word diva means heaven)

2.10.9 - Without the gross organ on the body, the subtle sense which is known to function by performing perception cannot function.  Without the subtle sense organ, the presiding deity of the sense, whose presence is inferred from action of that sense, cannot function. Without the presiding deity of the sense, the subtle sense organ cannot operate, and without the subtle sense organ, the gross organ cannot operate.