|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 20, 2010 14:52:10 GMT -6
Thanks, gerard, for this delightful translation. It is interesting to see how an IGMer would explain this first verse. Most of the focus is on the condition of the jiva in material existence. He doesn't necessarily see this verse as a concise description of all the levels on the path of bhakti. The mainstream commentators see it in this way and even think of the later seven verses as expansions of some part of this first verse. The second, third and fourth appear to be expansions of the first verse in general, speaking to aspects of sankirtana, the power of the names, the proper state of mind for sankirtana, and a caution against doing it for some gain of some sort. The fifth and sixth verses represent expansions of the anandambudhivardhanam and seven purnamrta-svadanam and eight sarvatma-svapanam.
Anyway, it seems like we have plenty of commentary on these eight verses. I forgot that Cc represents perhaps the earliest commentary on the verses. It is the first place that they are put in that order. All of the verses are in Rupa's Padavali but they don't form a group there. They are scattered throughout the text. Moreover, they aren't really an astaka. Astakas are a form of Sanskrit composition in which the last line of each verse is the same. That is not so in this collection. So it is unlikely that they were composed at the same time and as a unified work. One wonders who put them together in this order and promoted the idea that they are a unity. Was it Krsnadasa Kaviraja? Or, was there an earlier tradition that he merely records. I doubt that KdK is recording an actual occasion on which Mahaprabhu recited all those verses together in the company of Svarupa Damodara and Ramananda Ray. He is using the general practice of Mahaprabhu's reciting and relishing verses as a convenient vehicle to present a summary of the tradition's beliefs and practices at the time as the concluding statement of his book. It is a nice summary, but I think some important siksas got left out. What about that fundamental teaching that is at the same time somewhat controversial:
nAhaM vipro na ca narapatirnApi vaizyo na zUdro no vA varNI na ca gRhapatirno vanastho yatirvA| kintu prodyannikhilaparamAnandapUrNAmRtAbdher gopIbhartuH padakamalayordAsadAsAnudAsaH|| (Padyavali, 74)
This seems like an even more fundamental teaching than any of the others. Perhaps it should come before all the others. Once one realizes or at least accepts the proposition that one is a servant (of a servant of a servant) of the "lover of the gopis," then one's engagement in Krsna-sankirtana is a natural outcome. One wonders why it was left out. It certainly fits the extraordinary humility of an author like KdK and one would think he would have promoted it. Anyway, I propose that since the astaka in not really an astaka, we make it a navaka (that is not really a navaka) and include that verse there in the beginning. It speaks to what one is in one's svarupa. Moreover, it puts to rest this whole business of varnasrama dharma, daiva or otherwise.
The other interesting thing to be gleaned from the Cc account/commentary of the Siksastaka (I will continue calling them that for convenience) is that it provides a context for the eight verses. They are themselves meant as a commentary on the Bhagavata verse:
kRSNavarNaM tviSAkRSNaM sAGgopAGgAstrapArSadam yajJaiH saMkIrtanaprAyairyajanti hi sumedhasaH
This is an important context, one that should not be forgotten. The Siksastaka in connection with that Bhagavata verse reinforces the belief in CV that Mahaprabhu was himself Sri Krsna come to deliver the yuga-dharma.
Just some preliminary thoughts. Next time I will lay out what Mani Babu says about the first verse.
Gerardji, the only part of Herr Eidlitz' elucidation that I found questionable was his contention that at some point the jiva exercised its free will and turned from Krsna. What possesed the jiva to do such a thing and how could that happen in Krsna's presence? Can it happen again?
Gerardji, Can you give us a summary of Bhaktivinode's commentary on the first verse next? I have discovered that I have several Sanskrit commentaries on the individual verses, plus Dr Radhagovinda Nath's long Bengali commentary on that section of the Cc that contains the eight verses. I will try in the course of the next few weeks to summarize those. Anyone want to do the same for Pandit Anantadas Babaji Maharaja's commentary? I still have not found the copy I saved.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 20, 2010 15:29:14 GMT -6
I guess the thing I don't like about this translation is the first line, madanji. There is no request or plea in the original and Mahaprabhu was more subtle than that. The Cc represents him as "tasting" this verse, not beating others over the head with it. And to take sankirtana as "chant together" is not necessarily a good translation of the word. What distinguishes sankirtan from kirtan is not that many people do it, but that it is loud and usually done with musical instruments. It is the loudness and musicality that make up that sam in sankirtana. At least that is the way Sanatana explains it (reference in the Nectar of the Holy Name book). And why just the names? The verse says Krsna-sankirtana which includes his qualities, forms, sports, and names. Anyway, I am probably too picky. The rhyming is nice.
|
|
|
Post by madanmohandas on Aug 20, 2010 16:24:12 GMT -6
You're quite right Nitaida, it is not really anything like the CC last chapter, but it reminded me of it, and I thought the verses good in and of themselves with some elegant qualities. Well he's the only one attempted it with a degree of succes in ryhming verse. I remember Bhaktipradipa Tirtha's version and he also did a few more astakams such as Rupa's Namastakam ans first Caitanyastakam and Upadesamrta etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2010 2:46:19 GMT -6
Yugalkishore ji probably has copies of Advaitaji's Sikshashtakam translation; otherwise it can probably be purchased at Brajananda Ghera in the bookstore/library area above the pangat hall.
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Aug 21, 2010 15:44:37 GMT -6
Madanmohandasji, I’m glad you like Hayeshvar’s translation of the S8, it is an elaboration of the text, he was an author and poet.
***
Bhaktivinode’s comm. contains some interesting remarks, aside from the standard views that personalism is better than impersonalism, that you need sadhu-sanga and so on.
Then he says, as long as the jiva takes full shelter of the Supreme Lord he remains a resident of the spiritual planets, but when he forgets the innate spiritual knowledge about the Lord he is placed outside the transcendental realm…The jiva exists to support and participate in the Supreme Lord’s transcendental pastimes but his marginal nature makes him vulnerable and brings him under maya’s spell to suffer the pangs of repeated birth and death. But as soon as the individual spark awakens to realize his original self the dark mist of ignorance, or maya, dissipates, he regains his true spiritual identity.
The living entities go through varied stages of existence, now eternally conditioned, now eternally liberated [?] When the jiva rejects the Supreme Lord he becomes forever ensnared in matter. But again aspiring for His shelter the curtain of maya is removed and he is immediately restored to his original pure self.
But when he turns away from God and contemplates enjoying material energy his pure nature becomes contaminated by nescience.
Chanting is the soul’s svadharma.
When the sadhaka is sincerely following the process of hearing and chanting Bhakti-devi eclipses the avidya potency. She destroys both the gross and subtle coverings of the soul. Simultaneously the jiva’s original spiritual form becomes manifest, to the extent that he receives the form of a gopi, for example, if his spiritual proclivity is steeped in the conjugal mood.
** Eidlitz also attributes the “fall” of the jiva to maya. He quotes Cc 2.20.118, krsna bhuli’ sei jiva anadi, the jiva has without beginning (anadi) been turned away (bahir-mukha) and has forgotten Krsna and because he turned away Maya gives him the suffering of samsara.
This is stirring up an old hornet’s nest of the meaning of anadi (Satya Narayana, “In Vaikuntha Not Even the Leaves Fall”), but I don’t understand how for instance Bhaktivinode in the above text can use words like ‘eternally’ or ‘forever’ in the meaning of ‘for a while’.
Personally I think that at some point in time, perhaps at the beginning of a new cosmos, the jiva has a very weak will power and therefore he is send out into the world to get a stronger will and learn to choose. As compensation for this bum deal there is mercy or grace to help the jiva here and there. But I don't think we were ever in Vaikuntha and once you're there you don't fall out.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 21, 2010 16:15:58 GMT -6
Thanks, gerard. It is indeed interesting to hear what Bv has to say. I mean, I could look it up since I have the book, but I am also interested in how it has been presented in English,
One wonders how one can forget Krsna if one is in his presence and serving him. And yes the use of the word anadi in the context of forgetting. "The living being forgetting Krsna is turned away from Krsna without beginning. Therefore, Maya gives him the sufferings of samsara." (Cc 2.20.118) Maya's operation seems to come after the forgetfulness of the jiva. And how does something happen that leads to something else (bahirmukhatA) that is without beginning? It does not make sense. Anyway, I don't want to stir up that old debate, though I must say I don't understand it all all. Back to the business at hand.
I promised to present some of Mani Babu's commentary today and that is what I will do. First, though I would like to ask you about Eidlitz' comments. I was looking through the commentary of Radhagovinda Nath on that section of the Cc and some of it began to sound familiar. I think maybe Eidlitz may have done a rough translation of RgN's commentary in that section. Does he say anything about that? Does he refer to RgN as a source? It is not word-for-word and there are a few things that Eidlitz says that RgN doesn't, but I was struck by the overall similitude of the passages.
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Aug 21, 2010 16:55:25 GMT -6
First, though I would like to ask you about Eidlitz' comments. I was looking through the commentary of Radhagovinda Nath on that section of the Cc and some of it began to sound familiar. I think maybe Eidlitz may have done a rough translation of RgN's commentary in that section. Does he say anything about that? Does he refer to RgN as a source? It is not word-for-word and there are a few things that Eidlitz says that RgN doesn't, but I was struck by the overall similitude of the passages. Yes he quotes R.G. Nath twice but not on the S8. In his bibliography he has by Nath: Sri Caitanya-Caritamrita Calcutta B. 1354 ( = 1948 A.D.) 4th ed. with registers and commentaries, in Bengali, Sankrit verses in Bengali script Mahaprabhu Sri Gauranga, Calcutta 1963 Gaudiya Vaisnava-Darsana, Calcutta B. 1363-1367 (= 1957 A.D. - 1961 A.D.) 5 vols Sri Sri Gaura Tattvam, Calcutta B. 1360 (= 1959 A.D.)
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 21, 2010 17:25:55 GMT -6
Mani Babu starts off his commentary on the first verse, or well, on the whole astaka with an introduction of sorts in which he places the eight verses in context. Here he is referring to the account of the Cc in chapter 20 of the Antya lila. He obviously takes it as an actual incident that occurred very near the end of Mahaprabhu's lila. Mahaprabhu was contemplating his approaching departure from the world and was saddened by the thought of the sufferings of the future living beings after he goes. That sadness was driven away when he remembered the great power of sankirtan of the holy names and thus the episode of the Cc begins with the word harSe which means "in joy or delight." The verse he cites has a result of his recollection is
kRSNavarNaM tviSAkRSNaM ...
Mani Babu then notes that he has given another lengthy analysis of this verse in another of his books (Sri Gaura-karuna-candrika-kana) and calls attention to the secret import of the second foot (?) of this verse which states that in the present age, the living being can only obtain prema by taking shelter at the feet of yuga avatara, i.e. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. And the method of gaining this prema is the practice of bhakti in which the main limb is sankirtana of the holy names. He then cites Sri Prabodhananda Sarasvati who says in his Sri Caitanya-candramrta that:
yasyaiva padAmbujabhaktilabhyaH premAbhidhAnaH --- "prema can be obtained from bhakti to whose (i.e., Mahaprabhu's) feet alone"
And then he cites Anandi the commentator of that text: zrIkRSNacaitanyopAsanaM vinA premadhanaM na labhyate, tasya kalikAlopAsyatvaat "Without the worship of Sri Krsnacaitanya the treasure of prema cannot be had since he is the object of worship during the Age of Kali."
[Why is it so important ascertain that Mahaprabhu is the ONLY way to get prema in this age? It sounds so miserly and self-congratulatory and well so Christian. Does it lead to some sort of psychological boost needed to propel one through the rigors of sadhana? I find this aspect of the tradition deeply embarrassing.]
Mani Babu this compares this verse from the Bhagavata to a sutra on Nama-yajna and the SiksASTaka he says is its commentary or bhASya. Mahaprabhu himself revealed this commentary and like himself it ceaselessly rains down the sweetness of the nectar of prema. That is why it is so beloved by his bhaktas. Moreover, it is the very life of world of living beings.
Mani Babu then states that aside from these eight verses only two other verses are attributed to him in Sri Rupa's PadyAvalI. [Here he is of course wrong. He, too, has forgot the verse nAhaM vipro ... What is up with the neglect of one of the most important instructions of Mahaprabhu we have?] He adds that whether there are other verses and works by Mahaprabhu he does not know.
Those verses are:
dadhimathananinAdaistyaktanidraH prabhAte nibhRtapadamAgAraM vallavInAM praviSTaH | mukhakamalasamIrairAzu nirvApya dIpAn kavalitanavanItaH pAtu mAM bAlakRSNaH
Awakened in the morning By sounds of yogurt's churning, With secret steps he entered The houses of the gopIs. With his lotus face's breeze He blew out the lights with ease And swallowed down the butter. May that Child Krsna protect me!
and
savye pANau niyamitaravaM kiGkiNIdAmaM dhRtvA kUbjIbhUya prapadagatibhirmandamandaM vihasya| akSNorbhaGgyA vihasitamukhI bArayan sammukhInAM mAtuH pazcAdaharata harirjAtu haiyaGgavInam||
Holding them with his left hand he stilled the bells in his band, And bent forward he slowly stole step by step, smiling all the while; And signaling with his eyes he banned the spreading smiles From the faces of those in front. And from behind his mom Hari carried off her butter scot-free.
[Interesting, huh? Both about Krsna stealing butter. Not what one would expect from Mahaprabhu.]
|
|
|
Post by madanmohandas on Aug 22, 2010 4:24:58 GMT -6
Intersesting. I agree with you on that 'only way' sectarian mood that comes over now and then, but sometimes it is expressed with a kind of inosence of emotion. In my copy of Padyavali the 'dadhimathana....etc.'142 sloka is not attributed to anyone or 'kasyacit', from somewhere or other. The other one 'savye pANau....etc.'143 is attributed to Srimat.
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Aug 22, 2010 9:16:31 GMT -6
Thanks, Nitaiji, for translating Mani Babu’s comm., not really a revelation but it has some nice points and I like your translation of those two Padyavali verses, beautiful! Mahaprabhu experienced all sorts of rasas and bhâvas so I can imagine him liking the Bal-Gopala lila. Mani Babu, you say, seems to take, the incident of the S8 to occur very near the end of his lila, but perhaps Caitanya composed the verses earlier and were placed in that time by KdK, see Cc 3.20.64, purva ashta-shloki, Caitanya had formerly (purva) composed the eight verses for instruction of the people. I agree that the dasanudasah-verse should be incorporated in the basic tenets given by Caitanya, humility is important in sadhana; you mentioned KdK being very humble but in the Rupa-siksa he says, koti jnani-madhye, out of millions of jnanis there is one liberated (mukta) and among millions of those it is hard to find a Krsna-bhakta (Cc 2.19.148), thereby seemingly placing the Krishna-bhakta at the pinnacle of creation, with what consequences? Because of the ‘Mahaprabhu as the ONLY way’ and the kRSNavarNaM tviSAkRSNaM verse as context of the Siksataskam it seems appropriate to address the issue of the divinity or the avatarahood of Caitanya which is dogma from a very early time in CV. But for instance S.K. De and Debnarayan Acharyya tried their hand at demythologizing that. The not very popular S.K. De in Studies in Bengal Vaisnavism : “Except the usual obeisance and homage to Caitanya and general passages testifying to his identity with the supreme deity, there is nowhere in the extensive works of the three early authoritative Gosvamins (Rupa, Sanatana and Jiva) any direct reference to his personal views and teachings. These theologians and philosophers are chiefly concerned with the godhead of Krsna and his Lila as revealed in the older scriptures; and Krsna in their theory is not an Avatara but the supreme deity himself. They are almost entirely silent about Caitanya-lila and its place in their devotional scheme, and it is somewhat strange that in presenting a system in Caitanya's name they rely exclusively upon older sources and do not refer at all to his direct realisation of spiritual truths. The divinity of Krsna as the exclusive object of worship is elaborately established, but the divinity of Caitanya, which is implicitly acknowledged in the Namaskriyas and miscellaneous devotional verses, is hardly ever discussed .” From A.L. Basham’s foreword to the thesis of his student Debnarayan Acharyya’s The Life and Times of Srikrsnacaitanya; “Much has been written already about Sri Caitanya, mostly by the devotees of this saintly teacher who have developed a complex body of hagiographical literature about him. Such literature, in many parts of the world, may throw more light on the attitudes of early devotees than on the life of the master himself. The poems on the life of Caitanya, however, do clearly contain authentic recollections of the teacher though in transmission these recollections have become garbled and exaggerated." and from Deb’s abstract: "We have examined the various accounts put forward by our various witnesses and other biographers and tried to determine the main outline or framework of events in each case. Where a witness/biographer has appeared to distort unduly this basic outline, which is found in the majority of the versions, we have attempted to ascertain the reason for this particular distortion of his evidence. Thus to some extent, the work not only examines the life of the historical Caitanya, but also the myth-making process, as revealed in his various biographies." Deb places much value on Murari Gupta’s eye-witness reports. This book was already quoted by Jijaji in Gaudiya Discussions here: www.gaudiyadiscussions.com/topic_2112.htmlThe book is still available at Alibris: www.alibris.com/search/books/author/Acharyya,%20Deb%20Narayan (another hornet's nest, or a mine-field?)
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 22, 2010 13:38:14 GMT -6
Intersesting. I agree with you on that 'only way' sectarian mood that comes over now and then, but sometimes it is expressed with a kind of inosence of emotion. In my copy of Padyavali the 'dadhimathana....etc.'142 sloka is not attributed to anyone or 'kasyacit', from somewhere or other. The other one 'savye pANau....etc.'143 is attributed to Srimat. Good point, madanji. It did not occur to me to check, but neither of those verses is attributed to Mahaprabhu in my edition of the work either. I wonder where Mani Babu got the idea that they are by Caitanya. Anyway, thanks for pointing that out. Besides the eight and nAhaM vipro verse are there other verses attributed to Mahaprabhu that you know of in the PadyAvalI? I did a cursory search, but did not find any. There is, of course, a work attributed to him on Krsna-lila. It is called the PremAmRta-rasAyaNa-stotra. Oddly it has a commentary on it by Vitthaleza, one of the sons of Vallabhacarya, prompting many to suggest that the work is really by Vallabha. As for the ONLY, there is nothing about the verse from the Bhagavata that suggests that the yuga-avatara is the ONLY way in the Age of Kali. Nor is there any mention of prema as the goal. To extract both of those things from that verse is highly imaginative. One can argue that the tviSA akRSNaM is a subtle reference to Sri Gauranga. But that too is pushing it. How do you get from "not blackish" to golden? It is a huge leap which the desperately faithful are willing to make. More solid is the reference to sankirtana. The two together make it a little more likely that the verse refers to Mahaprabhu, but not much. A quick check of the critical edition of the Bhagavata reveals that in some mss the verse is absent and in others it starts with kRSNavarNaM kalau kRSNaM. Still, the version we know is accepted into the critical edition as the most likely original. What I find interesting is the fact that the early Caitanyite commentators on the Bhagavata do not see it as a reference to Mahaprabhu. Maybe it is Sri Jiva who was the first to do so.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 22, 2010 14:53:36 GMT -6
Thanks, Nitaiji, for translating Mani Babu’s comm., not really a revelation but it has some nice points and I like your translation of those two Padyavali verses, beautiful! Mahaprabhu experienced all sorts of rasas and bhâvas so I can imagine him liking the Bal-Gopala lila. As madanji points out, those might not be by Mahaprabhu. I am not sure why Mani Babu thought they were. Yes this is what I think has happened. The verses where probably composed at different times and in different circumstances. KdK has put them all together and formed them into the final act of Mahaprabhu before he departs. Mani Babu emphasizes this finality and gives them more weight because of that. It is unlikely, for instance, that a strict sannyasi or acolyte like Mahaprabhu would make a reference to the "wife" as he does in the first verse. That may have been done when he was still a householder. He also compares himself to a worm in stool. Plus there are many other protestations of his humble state scattered throughout his books. There is no reason to think he wasn't sincere about that. Still, there is a certainly hubris in proclaiming oneself to be low. I am reminded of a story about two rabbis who go to the synagogue to offer their midday prayers. While they are there praying the man who sweeps the place came in and saw them there praying. He immediately stopped sweeping and began his prayers too. One of the rabbis looks over at him and said to companion: "Look who thinks he is nothing!" Sometimes one's protestations of humility are really just another manifestation of pride. I think De goes a little overboard here. I don't think there is any doubt that the Goswamis thought of Mahaprabhu as an avatara. That belief may have come gradually, but it did come as De concedes. If it is true that Mahaprabhu sent the Goswamis to Vraja to write books in support of his kind of powerful emotionally charged bhakti and to rediscover the lost sites of Krsna's lila there, then they could not have done that in any other way. They could not appeal to Caitanya himself as evidence for what they were trying to establish. They had to turn to accepted and respected scriptural authority to support their position. They were appealing to learned men in other parts of India. So, they only wrote in Sanskrit, the language of learned discourse and the lingua franca at the time. They could not say we know this is so because our master Sri Caitanya has experienced it that way and he is god. But they did turn the learned discourse in the direction of Mahaprabhu's experiences. The Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu and the Ujjvala-nilamani are masterpieces that have had major influences in Hindu religious history since they were written and are clearly shaped by the experiences of Mahaprabhu as they were witnessed by the Goswamis and reported to them by Raghunath Das and others. Sanatana Goswami's Brhad-bhagavatamrta sets the gopis apart as the finest examples of love for Krsna, using numerous references, explicit and implicit to the puranas and other scriptural texts. There is no doubt that Mahaprabhu's companions experienced him as divine and in trying to understand his odd and bizarre behavior and utterances appealed to their rich scriptural traditions. "Ah! He is talking like Radha sometimes talks in the Gita-govinda." "He is drawn to that erotic form of Krsna!" etc. etc. But in presenting him to the large world, they could not use him or his experiences as their evidence. What weight does that carry with others? Instead they had to appeal to common, shared scriptural traditions or if they did not exist write them. Sanatana's book is basically a fiction. Narada never made such a trip in search of the greatest object of Krsna's grace. It is made up to make a point and in the course of telling the story, hundreds of scriptural references are made. Anyway, in brief, De as usual was so focused on the details he missed the larger picture. Mahaprabhu's companions, those who saw in him the divine, may have been wrong. But that is another matter and I don't think they were being mendacious. I am not familiar with this book. I will have a look at it. Thanks for the details. There is another book by one of my fellow students when I was doing graduate work at the U of C. Tony Stewart did work on the biographies of Mahaprabhu (The Biographical Process) and discovered some interesting things if I recall correctly. His work had to do with the gradual development of the image of Mahaprabhu from one biography to another: from simple avatar of Visnu (Murari Gupta) to joined form of Radha and Krsna (Karnapura and Kaviraja). Quite an interesting transformation. I don't know if it is published or not.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 22, 2010 15:45:34 GMT -6
Let me finish what Mani Babu says in his introduction to the Siksastaka and then I will take up his commentary on the first verse.
Mani Babu makes three points as he concludes his introduction:
1. He asks how someone so brilliant and learned as Mahaprabhu, whose writing ability used to shake the hearts of the learned in his day, who used to cause the victory documents of the conquering panditas blow away in the wind like blades of grass, and the mere sucking on whose toe caused the five-year old son of Paramananda Sen (Kavikarnapura) to be turned into a great poet, how was it that he wrote no other books or verses. The answer he says is in the Siksastaka. If one can know that by which everything else is known from one place or work what need is there to keep it in many places?
2. Mahaprabhu gave the living beings everything they needed and everything worth having in the form of the eight verses of the Siksastaka, while there in Gambhira as he prepared for his departure and shedding streams of tears of love.
3. Finally, he says that though Mahaprabhu did not leave any written books he left living books in the form of his followers the Goswamis. He gave them instruction and infused them with his grace and sent them to Vrndavana to rediscover the lost sites and establish the dharma of nama-sanskirtana on a firm philosophical foundation. He gives an example from his own work career as an engineer. Just as the chief bridge engineer leaves guidelines and instructions for the future maintenance of a bridge after it has been built to his subordinates, so all the great heaps of jewels of sweetness that were rained down during Mahaprabhu's time through the "Nama-prema," which he spread and bestowed, have been carefully kept in the works of the Goswamis for the benefit of future living beings. With the help of the search light of the grace of the Goswamis we will try to understand and relish this Siksastaka .
|
|
|
Post by madanmohandas on Aug 23, 2010 10:25:55 GMT -6
May be it would have been better if Sriman Mahaprabhu had no verses attributed to him. I suspect that there were none and that the verses were purposefully or inadvertantly attributed to him. It certainly does not appear to have been composed as an astakam which usually are composed in one meter and if not thematically conected often have a repeated foot or half a foot at the end. But I guess there is no harm in attributing it to Gauranga and there is the chance that he did compose them. Sometimes I wonder when reading Padyavali if Sri Rupa occassionally makes his own verses anonymous. Particularly that 'dadhimathan...etc.' sloka; it is one that I also posted a few weeks ago. It so resembles Rupa's own work especially some of the slokas in Stavamala ending with lines like, pahi mam balakrsna, or pahi mam nanda sunu, all in that distinctive malini meter. There is also a verse in Padyavali which is also in Kulasekhar's Mukunda Mala, but in Padyavali it is anonymous. And there are also two more satakams of the Krsna Karnamrta which I don't have, but have heard some of the verses, particularly some verses that end with, naumi gopalabalam.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 23, 2010 14:47:08 GMT -6
Okay. What does Mani Babu say about the first verse of the Siksastaka?
Mani Babu starts his commentary by saying that in the first verse of the Siksastaka one is presented with the levels or stages of bhajan. He then cites the well-known verse from Sri Rupa for show how it relates to the stages in ceto-darpana ..,
Adau zraddhA tataH sAdhusango'tha bhajana-kriyA ...
There the stages are:
1. faith
2. association with sAdhus
3. the practices of bhajan
4. the cessation of harmful habits
5. firmness
6. liking
7. attachment
8. feeling
9. love
He then cites a less known verse of Visvanatha Cakravartin's (without citation)
satAM kRpA mahatsevA zraddhA gurupAdAzrayaH bhajanesu spRhA bhaktiranarthApagamastataH| niSThA rucirathAsakti ratiH premAtha darzanam harermAdhuryAnubhava ityarthAH syuzcaturdaza||
The grace of the holy, service of the great, faith, shelter at the feet of a guru, desire for bhajan, bhakti, disappearance of harmful habits, steadiness, liking, attachment, desire for Krsna (rati), love, vision, and experience of Hari's sweetness. These are the fourteen objectives.
Briefly stated, there are three divisions in bhakti: bhakti as practice, bhakti as feeling, and bhakti as love. From the grace of the holy up to attachment is in the realm of bhakti as practice. Rati or desire for Krsna is bhakti as feeling. After that is bhakti as love. After obtaining bhakti as love one has vision of him and experiences his sweetness.
The performance of hearing and praising of the names, forms, qualities, and sports of Bhagavan by the gross senses of a living being whose mind is not purified is the bhakti of practice. Bhakti is not something that can be produced. It is not created. It is an eternally existent thing. (bhaktyA saMjAtayA bhaktyA, "by bhakti produced by bhakti" Bhag. 11.3.11)
From bhakti bhakti arises. While performing repeatedly the bhakti of practice, i.e., praising through the holy names, etc., when the mind becomes pure, the bhakti of feeling arises in that pure mind.
He cites the Cc here (2.22.103-4)
Its essential character is in acts of hearing and so forth; By its marginal character the treasure of love arises. The eternally existent love of Krsna can never be acquired; In a mind purified by hearing it simply appears.
[more tomorrow]
|
|