|
Post by Nitaidas on Mar 28, 2008 15:35:56 GMT -6
I thought I might start a thread here featuring the songs of Govinda Das, one of the greatest of Caitanya Vaisnava poets. I rediscovered an edition of his songs with delightful commentaries by Biman Bihari Majumdar. BB Majumdar was a superb scholar of CV and a highly evolved member of the tradition. He is an inspiration.
Here is the first song of Govinda Das in Majumdar's edition:
eka aneka eka puNa rAjasi kanakAbharaNa AkAr| abharaNa-nAmarUpa sab herai kanaka heri baNijAr||
govinda ghaTa mAhA tuhu~ kiye chApi|
jo jagajIban jIb bahirantar puraN sindhusama vyApi|| tanu mana bacan zakati sab to sa~ne koi nA herai toi|| govindadAsa diThi sabahu~ nehArai diThi nA nehArai koi||
Though you are one, you are many. Yet again you appear in one form. You are like a gold ornament. Ordinary folks see gold ornaments separately. But a gold merchant sees only the gold. O Govinda! Are you hiding in this pot-like universe? You are the life of the universe. You pervade the insides and outsides of living beings like the full ocean. All the powers of their bodies, minds, and words come from you. The amazing thing is: no one notices you as their cause. Govindadasa's vision sees everything, but your all-seeing vision nobody sees.
Commentary [later]:
|
|
|
Post by hredwood on Mar 31, 2008 18:05:42 GMT -6
Oh god you are the cause of all fame and infamy, and so i will ritual worship you like a blind dumb lost dream state cattle beast, who doesn't have a clue about your infamy pastimes, who supposedly likes to chop of the heads of his family members, so then i go ask supposedly a guru who says "you can never understand the ways of god. Obviously not if god is going around chopping of heads, and then go kiss itself with the gopis. weird stuff in some of those Vedas it comes with the good and the bad.
|
|
|
Post by hredwood on Apr 1, 2008 1:02:33 GMT -6
All i can say it is one big weird Adams family, and were does the infamy arise from in the first place, it makes me laugh how some of you people always prech like god is all good, god is just as bad as the most baddest demon, god is the seed of everything.
from what i read most of these demons sent into this world in those storys were devotees of the lord so god could enjoy some fighting past time lilas, yee ha cowboy bring it on.
the adams family dodododo
|
|
|
Post by hredwood on Apr 1, 2008 3:27:28 GMT -6
its not what i read its what so called devotees have also told me, even though this was through isckon so maybe they confused the hell out of me about this god figure, Why all the need for the parts or fractions if god is already meant to know and everything there is to experience, why the need for me, as isnt god already suppose to be self situated. Me have only read BG and about 6 srimad bhagavanz, but found the story's not very enlightening at all, its just like the bloody bible full of anthropomorphism nonsense.
Me need therapy, everyone needs some type of therapy brother. All I'm saying is god is the biggest and baddest out of us all.
anyway i still trying to love what i cannot see, its like trying to love a rock in a way most of the time, just nothing there but rock. Its only myself talking to me. you must have this wee voice or to you think it is god talking to you like most of the religious fanatics of the past who think god was talking to them and so go on holy crusades, even Mr bush thinks he doing gods work for crying out loud.
if you can help me distinguish gods voice from my own minds clatter it will be great.
|
|
|
Post by hredwood on Apr 1, 2008 4:21:45 GMT -6
ive just come to a realisation just about as i was about to go to sleep, i was pondering over this being that is the biggest and baddest out of us all, a thought pop into my head or i came to the conclusion that seeming god is the biggest and baddest out of us all then why not pay my gratitude to this being as if this is so then it is the protector of us all.
so keep on singing brothers like the birds of morning spring times.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 6, 2008 12:38:14 GMT -6
Do you see, hredwood, how your comments support Govinda Dasa's vision of the nature of God? He says that all powers (good and bad) come from Govinda and that he pervades everything inside and out like the ocean. He is not saying that God is only good.
Anyway, here is what BB Majumdar has to say about this song:
The poet here uses two similes for Govinda ---- gold and the ocean. The gold simile is given is the Srimad Bhagavata and in Sri Jiva's Sarvasamvadini and the ocean simile is found in Sanatana Gosvamin's Brhad-bhagavatamrta. If one analyzes these two similes one will see that Govinda Dasa is speaking poetically about the view of inconceivable difference and non-difference. In the Srimad Bhagavata is found (10.87.26):
na hi vikRtiM tyajanti kanakasya tadAtmanatayA| svakRtamanupraviSTamidamAtmatayAvasitam||
Or, people who want gold when they get gold's transformations like earrings, bracelets and so forth do not reject them, since they are made of gold. Rather, they accept them indeed. In the same way, those who have discrimination do not think the things of the world are false, because they are a "form" of the real. They know them to be real. This is right and just, because people with discrimination are certain that these material things that are created by Brahman and the consciousnesses that have entered into them are forms of the real.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 14, 2008 10:58:24 GMT -6
In the BhAgavata-sandarbha Sri Jiva has clearly given the example of the seller of gold. He says:
teSAM kanakamAtraM mRgayamANAnAM kanakavaNikAM hi kanakavikAre sundarakurUpAkAratAyAM dRSTirnAsti, zuddhakkanakamaatragrAhitvAt, tathAtmavidAmapIti bhAvaH
[As the merchants of gold who are searching simply for gold do not pay attention to the beautiful or ugly forms found in its transformations because they are interested only in the gold, so too is the case with knowers of the self.]
Govinda Das reading this has written that a gold merchant has a need only for gold and no need for the distinctions of name and form found in ornaments made of gold. Sri Jiva in his Sarva-samvAdinI has said:
tadevaM svagatabhede tvaparihArye svarNaratnAdighaTitaikakuNDalavad vastvantarapravezenaiva sa pratiSedhyate iti sthitam
This means that when gold assumes the form of an earring, the earring appears to have has taken on an internal difference from gold.[footnote: There are three kinds of difference. 1) Difference within the same species like the difference between a mango tree and a jack-fruit tree. Both are trees, but there are many difference between them. 2) Difference between species like that between trees and mountains, rivers, humans and so forth. 3) Internal difference like the difference between the trunk, leaves, flowers, branches and so forth in one tree. They all belong to one tree but there are differences between them.] But in reality there is nothing other than gold in it (the earring). It is simply gold. For this reason there is no internal difference in it. "The earring here is completely dependent on gold. The form of the earring is not independent. The perception of Brahman and ParamAtma is also never independent from BhagavAn whose essence is non-dual consciousness nor is it free of dependence on non-dual consciousness. Therefore, here too there is no internal difference." [Quoted from SundarAnanda VidyAvinoda's Acintya-bhedAbheda-vAda, page 27]
[more later]
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 21, 2008 9:14:41 GMT -6
[More from the commentary]
Using the example of the ocean, Sanatana Goswami has written in his BRhad-bhAgavatAmRta:
yathA samudrasya pradezAdekasmAdeva jAyamAnAstaraGgA ekasminneva deze lIyamAnA jalamayatvAdinA samudrAbhinnA gAmbhIryaratnAkaratvAdiguNAbhAvAdbhinnAzca, kevalaM tasminllayAt pRthaktvenAdRzyamAnA aikyaM gatAH samudrasvarUpaM prAptA ityucyate; tathA svakAraNe brahmAMze tejaAdi sthAnIye muktyA lIyamAnA jIvA brahmAikyam gatA ityucyate, na tvaparicchinnasukhaghanabrahmatAprAptisteSAM svabhAvenaiva paricchinnatvAt
The approximate meaning of this is: "In some folks' opinions the living being is produced from Brahman and dissolves into Brahman. Therefore, Brahman's relationship with the living being is that of non-difference. In the opinion and argument of those who say this, the experience of the unlimited nature of Brahman does not occur; only a small experience of joy occurs. Just as a wave is produced in one part of the ocean and merges in one part of the ocean, then because it is made of water, that wave is not understood as different from the ocean. Because, that wave has then become one with the ocean. Therefore, in this respect, all those waves are non-different from the ocean. But, because of the absence in that wave of qualities like depth and being a source of jewels, etc or, in other words, because the characteristics of the ocean do not exist in it, that wave is different from the ocean. Since it only has become merged in the ocean it is not perceived as different. In other words, where it was produced, there it has merged; therefore since it is not seen in a separate form it is said to be one, but because it [still] exists as merged in some part it is different. In that same way when merged on the stage of liberation in its own cause, a part of Brahman whose essence is effulgence, the living being is said to have attained oneness with Brahman. But the liberated living beings in Brahman which is by nature unlimited do not experience unlimited, concentrated bliss. That is because living beings are by nature limited. Therefore, because of their being seen in liberation as not separate they are non-different from Brahman; moreover because they are limited by some particular portion of Brahman they are different from Brahman though remaining in a submerged form."
[Humm. Not entirely clear. Requires some reflection and interpretation. I followed B B Majumdar's "approximate" translation (bhAvArtha). It might be better or at least helpful to do the Sanskrit passage directly. Tomorrow.]
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 24, 2008 8:59:42 GMT -6
[The final paragraph of the BB Majumdar's comm.]
Sri Jiva in his Tattvasandarbha (para 51) has written that Brahman is kevalasvazaktisahAya: only its own power is its helper. There is no other principle that is of the same class or of a different class with respect to it. Therefore, it is non-dual. It is the highest resting place of all powers. Apart from it no power is able to exist.
There is a line in Kavizekhara's Gopalavijaya:
Through the one substance, gold, come many ornaments. Like that Narayana is all gods and descents.
[End of commentary on first song. Song 2 tomorrow.]
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 25, 2008 9:06:11 GMT -6
Song 2
pahu mor "srii "sriinivaasa gu.nadhaama| diinahiina-taara.na prema rasaayana aichana madhurima naama||
kaa~ncana vara.na hara.na tanusulalita kau.sika vasana viraaje| prema naama kari kahata bhaagavate aiche vara.na tanu saaje||
nija nija bhakata paari.sad sa"ngahi praka.ta hi cara.naaravinda| niravadhi vadane naama viraajita raadhe k.r.s.na govinda||
yugalabhajanagu.na liilaa aasvaadana grantha-kalapataru haate| tu.yaa vine adhame "sara.na ko de.yaba govindadaasa anaathe||
My Master Srinivasa's a treasure of merits, a savior of the wretched and lowly, an elixir of divine love, so sweet is his name.
Stealing the color of gold, his was a body most pleasing, on which silk garments shine. Repeating with love the names, he used to recite the Bhagavata. Such were his color, figure and dress.
His own disciples, gathered in assembly 'round him, he manifested at his lotus-like feet. In his mouth without cessation the holy names shown forth: Radhe, Krsna, and Govinda!
With the merit of worshiping the Divine Couple, and relishing [the flavors] of divine sport, with wishing-tree books in your hands, without you to whom will this lowlife surrender, this Govinda Dasa the unprotected.
[It would be great if we could get Radhapada Das to sing some of these for us]
[Few changes made 4-26-2008]
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 26, 2008 9:42:28 GMT -6
BB Majumdar's commentary:
Kaa~ncana-vara.na-hara.na tanu --- the color of his body was like gold (or, according to another reading like the campaka flower; that is, yellow). Therefore it is said the color of his body was created by stealing the color of gold.
Prema naama kari kahata bhaagavate aiche vara.na tanu saaje --- his bodily color and manner of dress is like that of BhagavAn who is described as having a yellow coloring in the Bhagavata and who is the very embodiment of divine love (ie, Sri Caitanya). Satishcandra Ray Mahashaya has given the following comment on this verse:
"The meaning of this statement is that in the Srimad Bhagavata, in the Tenth Skandha, Eighth Capter, Garga Muni praising Krsna's love-filled name 'Krsna' has said:
aasan var.naastrayo hyasya g.rhnato.anuyuga.m tanuu.h| "suklo raktastathaa piita idaanii.m k.r.s.nataa.m gata.h||
[There were three colors of his as he takes bodies according to the ages: white, red, as well as yellow. Now he has become blue-black (k.r.s.na)]
Bhagavan's taking on various colors in the different ages is described in this famous verse. In that, Bhagavan's yellow color in the Age of Kali is announced. Sri Srinivasa Acarya's physical coloring was also like that. There is a belief, which has been heard from some confidential bhaktas, that Gauranga Prabhu will descend two more times. On seeing the amazing and variegated greatness of Srinivasacarya, later Vaisnava bhaktas have accepted him as one of those later descents of Sri Gauranga. The songwriter Govinda Dasa was a mantra disciple of Sri Acarya Prabhu. Therefore, he too according to that belief considered Acarya Prabhu to be non-different from Sri Gauranga and in support of that view he cites this famous verse from the Bhagavata. There is no doubt about this."
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 27, 2008 13:39:25 GMT -6
[More comm.]
But to us this explanation of Satish Babu's is a bit difficult to accept. Much before the Padakalpataru, Narahari Cakravartin wrote the Bhaktiratnakara. And in that the reading is: prema naama kari kahata bhaagavate. In the Kirtanananda, too, the reading is prema naama kari kahatahi bhaagavate sei vara.na tanu saaje.
In the Prema-vilaasa (p. 7) it is found that Sri Caitanya:
In front of Jagannatha the Master joined his hands together and weeping said loudly "Srinivasa Srinivasa!" Pleased, Jagannatha smiled and looked on and sent prema to Caitanyadasa. Seeing Jagannatha's smile, the Master also smiled. With his consent he sent prema to Caitanyadasa.
At that Srinivasa's birth occurred.
To spread the greatness of Srinivasa, the Karnananda and the Anuragavalli were written. In those two books, too. Srinivasa is not said to be a descent of Sri Caitanya. Srinivasa was born while Sri Caitanya was still manifest. Therefore, the even question of his being a descent does not arise. The Anuragavalli says:
Mahaprabhu Sri Krsnacaitanya, the source of all descents, Sporting, manifested his final sport at Nilacala. At that time Acarya Thakur was born.
In the Bhakti-ratnakara it is found that Srinivasa:
Hearing of the merits of Sri Caitanyacandra, in the absorption of love, in bliss he went by way of Srikhanda to Puri. In Nilacala with Sri Caitanyacandra's folks I will meet; this was the desire in his mind. After going some distance he heard that Sri Caitanya had disappeared. It was as if life no longer remained in his body.
In support of this statement Narahari Cakravartin cited a verse from Srinivasa's disciple, Karnapura Kaviraja, in his Narottama-vilasa and a verse from another disciple of Srinivasa, Nrsimha Kaviraja, in his Bhakti-ratnakara. In so many authoritative books there is no mention of Srinivasa' being a descent of Sri Caitanya. The meaning of the reading, prema naama kari, is: Srinivasa Acarya, taking the names Hare Krsna with love, recited the Bhagavata. The color of his complexion and the manner of dress were the same [as Sri Caitanya].
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 28, 2008 11:38:47 GMT -6
Song 3
{\bn \large
gaurii [raaga]
campaka-sona-kusuma kanakaacala jitala gaura-tanu-laava.ni re| unnata giima siima naahi anubhava jagajanamohana bha"nani (re)||
ja.ya "sacii-nandana (re)| tribhuvana-ma.n.dana kaliyuga-kaala bhujaga-bha.ya-kha.n.dana (re)|| dhru
vipula-pulaka-kula- aakula kalevara gargar antara premabhare| lahu lahu haasani gadgad bhaa.sani kata mandaakinii na.yane jhare||
nija-rase naacata na.yana.dhulaa.yata gaa.yata kata kata bhakatahi~m meli| yo rase bhaasi ava"sa mahima.n.dala govindadaasa para"sa naa bheli||
}
O, the golden flower of the campaka and the mountain of gold are defeated by the beauty of Gaura's body! There is no perception of the limit of his raised neck. His mannerisms enchant the people of the world.
Glory to the Son of Saci!
O that ornament of the three worlds! Destroyer of the fear of the black snake of Kali's Age. His body overflowing with large goosebumps. His heart overwhelmed by loads of love. His gentle, gentle smile and stuttering speech. How many Mandakini rivers flow from his eyes? He dances to his own rasa. His eyes roll back and forth. How many bhaktas gather and sing? The rasa that floods the earth and makes it lose control, that Govindadasa has not even touched!
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 28, 2008 11:46:18 GMT -6
Here is a pdf of the songs up to this point. Govinda PadavaliCommentary on Three tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 29, 2008 13:35:56 GMT -6
Commentary by BB Majumdar
[There is a short Sanskrit commentary by Radhamohan Thakur (not be be confused with Radhamohan Goswami)]
{\dn \dnccalcatta \large
tata.h "sriigovindakaviraajak.rta.m sarvaama"ngaladhva.msakaaraka.m "sriimadgauracandrasya campaka"sona ityaadi giita.m likhati| tatk.rte granthe.asya daak.si.naatya"sriiraago d.r"syate kintu puurvaapara.m gauriiraage.na gaana.m "srutamato gauriiraago likhita.h| tallak.sa.na.m yathaa kaanta.m manoj~nakucayugmanipii.ditaa"nga.m kaama.m nive"sya haricandanaliptapii.the| kalpadrupu.spamadhupaayasapi.s.takaadyai.h sa.mbhojayatyavirata.m madhumaasi gauriiti| asyaartha.h sugama.h|
}
Then a song, beginning "campakasona," is incribed about Srimad Gaura by Sri Govinda Kaviraja which destroys all inauspicious things. In a book written by him [Govinda Kaviraja] the Sri raga, a South Indian raga, was seen for this song, but by [disciplic] succession the song is heard with the Gauri raga, therefore the Gauri raga is written. The definition of that (raga) is as follows: Gauri, having caused her lover, Kama, whose body was pressed by her beautiful breasts, to sit on a seat smeared with Haricandana, feeds him ceaselessly with foods like honey from the flowers of desire-trees, milk, and nuts in the month of Madhu. The meaning of the song is clear.
|
|