|
Post by JD33 on Aug 23, 2010 15:32:15 GMT -6
"The eternally existent love of Krsna can never be acquired; In a mind purified by hearing it simply appears." I believe this is true.
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Aug 23, 2010 17:03:33 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. Because of Nitaiji's mention of Tony Steward I looked him up and found in GoogleBooks his latest book " The Final Word; The Cc and the Grammar of Religious Thought" Oxford 2010. On page 256 n.18 he writes about the Siksastakam: "S.K De has persuasively argued in the introduction to Rupa's Padyavali, which includes several of these verses, that textual evidence suggests that Caitanya was probably not the author of most of the eight shlokas, if any."
|
|
|
Post by madanmohandas on Aug 23, 2010 17:17:10 GMT -6
I have heard of S.K. De, Gerrard, but never read him. It does not seem to matter really and it could well be imagined that Gauranga spoke or composed or even quoted the Siksastak verses. There is a certain trepidation in airing such comments for fear of offending anyone. Gauranga's conduct and recorded speaches would seem not to require him to have written any poetry, and if he did write poetry it is hard to concieve how such a master poet only composed about ten verses(?). Maybe it is something to do with him being the object of poetry who is praised by poets and so does not need to write poetry himself but leaves it to his eulogists.
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Aug 23, 2010 17:26:27 GMT -6
Okay. What does Mani Babu say about the first verse of the Siksastaka? (I only quote the first line to represent the entire post)I don't think there is anything in this comm of Mani Babu on the first verse we could disagree upon. The question he poses in the introduction 'how was it that he wrote no other other books or verses' is intriguing. The answer could simply be that Caitanya didn't want to add to the 'wall of books' the Bengalis were said to hide behind. Muni Babuji 's 'if one can know that by which everything else is known' is dangerous in the sense that that might easily lead to overinterpretation of verses that can be read as simple expressions of strongly felt mystical emotions of a deeply-realized bhakta. But I have to wait and see of course...
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Aug 23, 2010 17:42:47 GMT -6
I have heard of S.K. De, Gerrard, but never read him. It does not seem to matter really and it could well be imagined that Gauranga spoke or composed or even quoted the Siksastak verses. There is a certain trepidation in airing such comments for fear of offending anyone. Gauranga's conduct and recorded speaches would seem not to require him to have written any poetry, and if he did write poetry it is hard to concieve how such a master poet only composed about ten verses(?). Maybe it is something to do with him being the object of poetry who is praised by poets and so does not need to write poetry himself but leaves it to his eulogists. I agree with you that it doesn't matter all that much, if we see that S.K. De writes in his " Studies in Bengal Vaisnavism": 'The only work that can be ascribed to him with certainty consists of the eight verses which are attributed to him in the Padyavali.' He wrote that shortly before publishing his edition of the P. He seemed to have made a 180 in a very short time. I have not read that introduction Steward mentions, but apparently it convinced him.I also agree with the idea that Caitanya's conduct and charisma was enough to kick-start his reform movement without having to write himself. His life was the inspiration.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 24, 2010 15:22:40 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. Because of Nitaiji's mention of Tony Steward I looked him up and found in GoogleBooks his latest book " The Final Word; The Cc and the Grammar of Religious Thought" Oxford 2010. On page 256 n.18 he writes about the Siksastakam: "S.K De has persuasively argued in the introduction to Rupa's Padyavali, which includes several of these verses, that textual evidence suggests that Caitanya was probably not the author of most of the eight shlokas, if any." Interesting, gerard. I had no idea his book was finally published. I assume this book is a reworked version of his dissertation. I will have to get a copy and see what he has to say. I wonder what evidence S. K. De has presented in his introduction that is so persuasive. I can't imagine that there is any. How would you argue such a thing? Rupa clearly thought that the verses were by Mahaprabhu and he is more likely to know than just about anybody. It is true he occasionally misidentifies a verse in the PadyAvalI, but that is relatively rare. Tony's use of the word "persuasively" is probably a hint that the evidence is not that strong and yet Tony likes the idea and is trying to persuade himself that it is true. Even if it is true it probably doesn't matter very much. The tradition thinks that they were written by Mahaprabhu, and so he may as well have written them. They have acted like a guiding light since the Cc put them altogether and made them into a teaching. Such things often happen with religious traditions. Look at how Paul has outshone Jesus.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 24, 2010 15:38:48 GMT -6
Muni Babuji 's 'if one can know that by which everything else is known' is dangerous in the sense that that might easily lead to overinterpretation of verses that can be read as simple expressions of strongly felt mystical emotions of a deeply-realized bhakta. But I have to wait and see of course... I don't see this a much of a problem. It merely opens up the text to creative interpretation. Each generation may interact with these verses in their own creative ways that probably have nothing to do with the original intent of the verse. This is the way the religious imagination works and it is a sign of a healthy tradition. Look at all the meanings the Jewish tradition has drawn from the Torah down through the ages. It is a delight to see them interacting with their texts so creatively. They have even chartered that sort of creative hermeneutic with the story of Moses visiting the Academy of Akiba. In this kind of hermeneutic the text acts more or less like a rack or skeleton upon which each generation hangs its most beautiful ideas and aspirations. As long as we remember that underneath all these shining ornaments is an original verse with its author's original intent and as long as we can keep all these levels separate there shouldn't be a problem. I see no reason to favor the original over all of the later embellishments. Sometimes the original is a whole lot less substantial than what the collective consciousness of a whole tradition makes of it. Enough lecturing. Let's see what else Mani Babu has for us to taste.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 24, 2010 16:36:20 GMT -6
Next Mani Babu gives the following example
Though the sun is in the sky if the door of one's room is closed the light of the sun cannot enter it. In the same way in a mind that is covered by refuse in the form of the pollutions of maya, the bhakti of feeling (bhava-bhakti) which is a function of the essential power of Krsna cannot be reflected. As the impurity of the mind is driven away by the bhakti of practice, the bhakti of feeling arises. Just as the sun spreads its rays everywhere without favoring any particular direction, so Krsna casts his own pleasure energy everywhere. The bhakti of feeling is a type of pure sattva like a ray of the sun of prema. By ruci which is the wish to have Bhagavan the bhakti of feeling softens the mind. The lily in the form of the bhakti of feeling is made to blossom by the moonlight of sankirtana of the holy names and becomes prema.
He cites Cc 2.23 (kRSNa-rati gADha haile ...) and Sri Rupa;s Brs (1.3.1 and 1.4.1)
Now he associates each of the elements of the ceto-darpana verse with specific stages in the development of bhakti:
cetodarpana-marjanam = bhakti as practice starting with anartha-nivRtti (cessation of harmful habits)
bhavamahAdAvAgni-nirvApanam = the level of attachment when anartha-nivRtti is nearly complete
zreyaHkairava-candrikA-vitaraNaM = the bhakti of feeling
vidyA-vadhU-jIvanam = the bhakti of love
AnandAmbudhi-vardhanam = seeing Krsna and experiencing his sweetness
pratipadaM pUrNAmRtAsvAdanam and sarvAtmasnapanam = the state of fully developed mahAbhAva
Next he says that without faith one does not undertake any endeavor. He then discusses the meaning of faith (very firm trust, sudRDha-vizvAsa). Since living beings under the guNa are not able to develop nirguNa faith by themselves, before the appearance of this faith Sri VisvanAtha has placed the grace of some holy person and service of some holy person as stages before appearance of faith. Just as with fire: fire cannot burn in damp wood and requires contact with a burning flame. . That grace and service may be in previous births or in this birth. After one has faith then again association with holy persons is necessary so that they will place the living being on the stage of the practice of bhajan. Of the 64 types of bhakti practice the first is finding shelter at the feet of a guru.
After this Mani Babu gives a pretty standard description of the development of bhakti through all the stages. If there is anything unusual I will mention it tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Aug 26, 2010 10:01:54 GMT -6
Thanks Nitaiji. Just to see if I understand Mani Babu correctly concerning the development of faith. (I like the definition “very firm trust”.)
I suppose there first must be some trust to start serving some holy person, then you might receive some grace and you can do more service which leads to faith, then sadhu-sanga which leads to nirguna faith?
And what exactly is the difference between faith and nirguna faith? Faith that is above/without the guna’s, what is that?
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 26, 2010 16:48:26 GMT -6
Thanks Nitaiji. Just to see if I understand Mani Babu correctly concerning the development of faith. (I like the definition “very firm trust”.) I suppose there first must be some trust to start serving some holy person, then you might receive some grace and you can do more service which leads to faith, then sadhu-sanga which leads to nirguna faith? And what exactly is the difference between faith and nirguna faith? Faith that is above/without the guna’s, what is that? Have a look at chapter 1 in the newest version of Mahat-sanga Prasanga that I just uploaded. Sri Kanupriya Goswami discusses nirguna-zraddhA there.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 26, 2010 18:04:22 GMT -6
Mani Babu continues:
If you think deeply about it, sankirtana of the holy names is the stage before all stages, because before there is faith there is association with the holy. And among holy ones (sadhus) three things are seen: the sadhu himself, the holy names on his tongue and Sri Hari personally in his heart. Therefore on the first stage of all, the seed of the tree of dharma, the holy name itself is received from association with the sadhu. Therefore, if one points to the holy name as the source of the universe of bhajan in the form of the first cause of all, it would be completely justifiable. From the seed, the holy name, gradually all forms of practice and bhajan arise. So says the Cc: "the full nine-fold bhakti comes from the holy name". (Cc 2.15,107). And again: "from sankirtana comes the destruction of sins and samsara, purification of the mind, and the appearance of all forms of bhakti and practice (Cc 3.20.13).
With the appearance of Sri Gaurahari in the very very fortunate present Age of Kali, a great opportunity has appeared in the fortune of the living beings on the first stage of bhajan. One need not wait for the association of some great person at this time. Sri Bhagavan himself has come as the greatest of great ones and given to the living beings of this Kali the holy name, the seed of all forms of bhajan, and in addition he has given the capability of accepting that. Whoever will accept the holy name given by him will pass through all the stages and in time arrive at the stage of prema. There is one other special trait of this age; in this age there is no longer any Vidhi-bhakti. By the power of the sankirtana of the holy name everyone will enter on the path of raga-bhakti. And, after obtaining the love of Vraja they will become servants in the bowers of Vraja. [He cites 10.70 of the Caitanya-candrodaya Nataka here. Actually it is 10.72-73 (in my edition). These are the words of Sri Caitanya:
vRndAraNyAntarasthaH sarasavilasitenAtmanAtmAnamuccair AnandasyandavandIkRtamanasamurIkRtya nityapramodaH| vRndAraNyaikaniSThAn svarucisamatanUn kArayiSyAmi yuSmAn ityevAte'vaziSTaM kimapi mama mahat karma taccAniSye|| 72||
dAsye kecana kecana praNayinaH sakhye ta evobhaye rAdhAmAdhavaniSThayA katipaye zrIdvArakAdhIzituH| sakhyAdAvubhayatra kecana pare ye vAvatArAntare mayyAbaddhahRdo'khilAn vitanavai vRndAvavAsaGginaH|| 73||
I have this one remaining great desire that I will manifest myself in Vrndavana through my rasa-thrilled mind in a form that has a heart wrapt in flowing bliss and that, constantly pleased, I will make you all take forms only appropriate for Vrndavana and according to your own particular tastes. (72)
Among my bhaktas some are in service, some in friendship, some have faith in Radha and Madhava and some in the Lord of Dvaraka, still some others feel friendship and the rest for the other descents (Rama and Nrsimha). I will bind all their hearts to me and make them my companions in Vrndavana. (73)]
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Aug 27, 2010 7:47:24 GMT -6
Thanks Nitaiji. Just to see if I understand Mani Babu correctly concerning the development of faith. (I like the definition “very firm trust”.) I suppose there first must be some trust to start serving some holy person, then you might receive some grace and you can do more service which leads to faith, then sadhu-sanga which leads to nirguna faith? And what exactly is the difference between faith and nirguna faith? Faith that is above/without the guna’s, what is that? Have a look at chapter 1 in the newest version of Mahat-sanga Prasanga that I just uploaded. Sri Kanupriya Goswami discusses nirguna-zraddhA there. Thanks, Nitaiji, for making that text of Kanupriya Gosvami available, but I have some problems with his explanation. I'll sum it up in a few points: * natural faith is of three kinds (viz the 3 gunas) * natural faith will not produce nirguna faith * at the root of cultivating bhakti one must have nirguna faith * it is not possible to strive to cultivate nirguna bhakti * by tremendous good luck one obtains nirguna bhakti or * the best and easiest way is to surrender to the Lord * but to respond to that call to surrender however * one needs nirguna bhakti And after this what seems to me to be a circular reasoning he says we have to go look for saints: * the root of nirguna faith is association with and service of the great bhaktas of the Lord (+ Bhag 3.25.24) So finding saints is probably what he meant with having a stroke of tremendously good luck (which is uncaused, ahaituki). So getting nirguna faith seems to boil down to: having good luck. I must confess that this does not make faith itself nor its development much clearer to me.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 27, 2010 13:27:26 GMT -6
Thanks, Nitaiji, for making that text of Kanupriya Gosvami available, but I have some problems with his explanation. I'll sum it up in a few points: * natural faith is of three kinds (viz the 3 gunas) * natural faith will not produce nirguna faith * at the root of cultivating bhakti one must have nirguna faith * it is not possible to strive to cultivate nirguna bhakti * by tremendous good luck one obtains nirguna bhakti or * the best and easiest way is to surrender to the Lord * but to respond to that call to surrender however * one needs nirguna bhakti And after this what seems to me to be a circular reasoning he says we have to go look for saints: * the root of nirguna faith is association with and service of the great bhaktas of the Lord (+ Bhag 3.25.24) So finding saints is probably what he meant with having a stroke of tremendously good luck (which is uncaused, ahaituki). So getting nirguna faith seems to boil down to: having good luck. I must confess that this does not make faith itself nor its development much clearer to me. Good summary, gerardji. That is pretty much what it boils down to, "luck".or to put it another way "grace." Grace is by definition not earned. In the eyes of Sri Kanupriya Goswami and many other mainstreamers, grace is the only way to get started. Once one has been graced, work or action or bhajana-kriya helps out. But to get started one needs grace and that is mysterious. Even the Bhagavata says yadRcchayA, "somehow" in yadRcchayA matkathAdau jAtazraddhastu yaH pumAn, "a person who has somehow developed faith in discussions about me and other such things ..." (11.20.8) So I don't think it is really circular, though it may sound that way from the way Goswamiji has framed his discussion. Nirguna-zraddhA basically depends on sanga with sadhus. And one cannot even harken to the call of Krsna to simply surrender to him with that nirguNa-zraddhA. This discussion is reminiscent of some of those theological debates between Catholics and Protestants that took place in Europe after the Reformation. The Catholics believed one needed both grace or faith and good works and Protestants claimed grace alone. Chapter Five in Nectar of the Holy Name has a nice discussion of faith similar to this one that is based on Sri Jiva's commentary on that verse of the Bhagavata (11.20.3). After describing the importance of faith for keeping unmixed bhakti alive, Sri Jiva says that one can even do without faith if there is no offense ( bhaktimAtraM tu tAM vinA sidhyati) So now what is the status of this conversation? Is it sadhu-sanga? We are considering the words of Sri Kanupriya Goswami and his disciple Mani Babu, arguably two fine sadhus.. Are we then being injected with nirguNa-zraddhA which will cause us to pursue more sanga and then undertake bhajana-kriyA? Are we among those lucky few?
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Aug 27, 2010 16:32:59 GMT -6
So now what is the status of this conversation? Is it sadhu-sanga? We are considering the words of Sri Kanupriya Goswami and his disciple Mani Babu, arguably two fine sadhus.. Are we then being injected with nirguNa-zraddhA which will cause us to pursue more sanga and then undertake bhajana-kriyA? Are we among those lucky few? Thanks for the additional explanation but to be brutally honest, I don't know. I don't think I feel lucky today. Faith has always been a mystery to me. In the same category with love and hope. And reading Kanupriya Gosvami-ji has not reduced anything of the mystery, so I can't say I am injected with nirguna faith. I hope you are. I can only wait and see.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Aug 28, 2010 12:42:56 GMT -6
So now what is the status of this conversation? Is it sadhu-sanga? We are considering the words of Sri Kanupriya Goswami and his disciple Mani Babu, arguably two fine sadhus.. Are we then being injected with nirguNa-zraddhA which will cause us to pursue more sanga and then undertake bhajana-kriyA? Are we among those lucky few? Thanks for the additional explanation but to be brutally honest, I don't know. I don't think I feel lucky today. Faith has always been a mystery to me. In the same category with love and hope. And reading Kanupriya Gosvami-ji has not reduced anything of the mystery, so I can't say I am injected with nirguna faith. I hope you are. I can only wait and see. That wasn't too brutal. It is probably not a good idea to depend on how one feels. Feelings are fleeting and temporary and have little bearing one our true metaphysical conditions. The Gita tells us not to be distracted by them. You are no doubt a lot luckier than you feel. At least you know about nirguNa-zraddhA now, and that one catches it almost the way one catches a cold, from rubbing elbows with sadhus. That is something. I think sometimes we require that some things are shrouded in mystery. It makes them more attractive. If we saw them in the light, it would make them much less desirable. Anyway, Sri Kanupriya Goswami has his strengths and weaknesses, but we can all learn a lot from him. To many of us, his is a fresh voice.
|
|