Tattva-viveka
Questions on Sanga-Siddha-Bhakti
Prema-bhakti Marga - March 26, 2007 9:42 pm
Sanga siddha bhakti are activities that are not constitutionally bhakti but become like bhakti when associated with it. I have also read explanations of sanga-siddha-bhakti described as jnana-misra-bhakti. The activities of sanga-siddha-bhakti are also described as marginal characteristics or by products of svarupa-siddha-bhakti. Jiva Goswami cites these verses from Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.3.24) as examples of sanga siddha bhakti, one should cultivate compassion towards others, friendliness, offering respect to others, cleanliness, austerity, tolerance, silence, study of the Vedas, simplicity, celibacy, non-violence, and so on.
1) What does it mean when sanga siddha bhakti is described as being associated with bhakti? If one cultivates the qualities listed above in the mood of guru seva is that still considered sanga-siddha-bhakti or svarupa-siddha-bhakti?
2) Another question I have is about endeavors such as writing or other preaching activities examples of sanga-siddha-bhakti, which GM gave on yesterday’s call. If one employs the principle of yukta-vairagya is it correct that his/her bhakti can be considered in either category of sanga-siddha-bhakti or svarupa-siddha-bhakti depending on his/her level of purity. I have heard it explained that these kinds of activities when done in the pure mood of guru seva then become pada-sevanam and thus can be defined as svarupa- siddha-bhakti. This definition seems to imply that any activity when done to please guru and Krsna can be transformed into svarupa-siddha-bhakti. Is that correct?
GM also mentioned on Sunday that Bhaktivinode Thakur defined sanga-siddha-bhakti in broader terms and that there are many nuances to these terms.
I’d appreciate any help in understanding this better.
Babhru Das - March 27, 2007 12:46 am
What great questions, Prema! My off-the-cuff sense is that, for the most part, the difference between sanga-siddha bhakti and svarupa-siddha bhakti is indeed the consciousness of the performer, as you've suggested. I'll have to make some time to work on this for more comprehensive and authoritative discussion, but I'm glad you brought it up. (That goes for Bhaktivinoda Thakura's broader, more nuanced uses of terms such as sanga-siddha bhakti and aropa-siddha bhakti, much as he sometimes used kanistha-adhikari, madhyama-adhikari and uttama-adhikari in creative ways.) The devotees here have asked me to consider giving a class about The Nectar of Devotion, and I think it would be well to focus on the topics of the first chapter (or two). The subject there is pure devotional service, and when we discussed this in the study group I have here, I tried hard to make that the central point we considered, so devotees wouldn't be confused about whether they might or might not be experiencing the kinds of things discussed there.
Maybe we could check back to the discussions in our Classroom here (probably Assignment 3 and/or 4) to see if we sorted any of this out there. If not, it might not hurt to revive those discussions.
I won't have much time to work on this today, but I think I will tomorrow. Thanks again for bringing this up.
Bhrigu - March 27, 2007 5:12 pm
Great questions, Prema! I'm just now reading the Bhakti-sandarbha in Satyanarayana's generally excellent edition, and though I haven't finished yet, this is how I understand these things:
1) What does it mean when sanga siddha bhakti is described as being associated with bhakti? If one cultivates the qualities listed above in the mood of guru seva is that still considered sanga-siddha-bhakti or svarupa-siddha-bhakti?
I think the division of svarupa-siddha and sanga-siddha bhakti is more straightforward than this. Some activities (bhavarupa or cestarupa) are intrinsically (svarupa) devotional, such as sravana and kirtana, while sanga-siddha activities, as you say, become bhakti when associated (sanga) with it. In other words, they may also be done for completely other reasons. That is, without cultivating the qualities mentioned in the mood of guru- or Krishna-seva, that is not bhakti at all, of any kind.
2) Another question I have is about endeavors such as writing or other preaching activities examples of sanga-siddha-bhakti, which GM gave on yesterday’s call. If one employs the principle of yukta-vairagya is it correct that his/her bhakti can be considered in either category of sanga-siddha-bhakti or svarupa-siddha-bhakti depending on his/her level of purity. I have heard it explained that these kinds of activities when done in the pure mood of guru seva then become pada-sevanam and thus can be defined as svarupa- siddha-bhakti. This definition seems to imply that any activity when done to please guru and Krsna can be transformed into svarupa-siddha-bhakti. Is that correct?
Again, I would disagree. The whole idea of sanga-siddha bhakti is that otherwise mundane things become bhakti by associating with bhakti. But is sanga-siddha bhakti any worse than svarupa-siddha bhakti? In my life at any rate, any kind of bhakti is a plus! :Big Grin:
Guru-nistha Das - March 28, 2007 3:47 am
Interesting discussions...
Well, I can only talk of my own experience, and that is that at this point most of the things we do daily in Audarya could be defined as sanga-siddha bhakti according to the general meaning of the term, but when we once asked clarification on these terms from Guru Maharaja, he said that in his eyes everything that we do at Audarya is actually svarupa-siddha bhakti.
I was wondering if this statement of Guru Mahraja's is based on the liberal interpretation of Bhaktivinoda Thakur, or does Jiva Goswami also give room for seeing sanga-siddha bhakti transformed into svarupa-siddha bhakti in a right association?
Prema-bhakti Marga - March 28, 2007 3:09 pm
Interesting discussions...Well, I can only talk of my own experience, and that is that at this point most of the things we do daily in Audarya could be defined as sanga-siddha bhakti according to the general meaning of the term, but when we once asked clarification on these terms from Guru Maharaja, he said that in his eyes everything that we do at Audarya is actually svarupa-siddha bhakti.
I was wondering if this statement of Guru Mahraja's is based on the liberal interpretation of Bhaktivinoda Thakur, or does Jiva Goswami also give room for seeing sanga-siddha bhakti transformed into svarupa-siddha bhakti in a right association?
This is how I tend to think of it also. I was wondering the same thing Guru Nistha in regards to BVT and Jiva Goswami.
Prema-bhakti Marga - March 28, 2007 5:19 pm
Another way to possibly look at it is if guru is pleased then Krsna is pleased and that's the whole point. This seems to supersede these other definitons of bhakti.
Vivek - March 29, 2007 5:26 am
So can we similary categorize the job bhaktivinoda thakur did as a magistrate to be svarupa-siddha bhakti and not sanga siddha bhakti as he did that to bring back dignity to gaudiya sampradaya. In an argument with a devotee, the devotee always stressed on the fact that bhaktivinodha job as a householder, magistrate can at best be niskama karma but not suddha bhakti. IS there a correct position about this issue or is it subjective and gray.
Swami - March 29, 2007 4:57 pm
Good discussion. Some comments:
Any type of bhakti, be it svarupa-siddha, sanga-siddha, or aropa siddha is of two types: motivated and unmotivated. If one’s bhakti is unmotivated, it is pure regardless of whether the act of devotion performed is inherently bhakti. If, however, the act performed is inherently bhakti (hearing, chanting, etc.), it will have a devotional effect over time regardless of one’s motive. Such is the power and glory of svarupa-siddha-bhakti.
So the important thing here is one’s motivation. If one is purely motivated with a view to please Guru and Gauranga and advance in bhakti, one’ actions performed that are not inherently bhakti yet favorable to bhakti become components of bhakti, be they from the realm of jnana, such as controlling the mind, etc., or from the realm of karma, such as making friends with one’s peers, etc. Such acts are considered the high end of sanga-siddha-bhakti.
Bhaktirasamrta-sindhu also states that whether they be scripturally enjoined (vaidiki) acts or otherwise (laukiki), if they are favorable to bhakti they should be performed. The idea being that making all effort for Bhagavan’s seva is itself a limb of bhakti. Furthermore, carrying out the order of the guru can never be anything other than svarupa siddha bhakti.
Swami - March 29, 2007 9:47 pm
So can we similary categorize the job bhaktivinoda thakur did as a magistrate to be svarupa-siddha bhakti and not sanga siddha bhakti as he did that to bring back dignity to gaudiya sampradaya. In an argument with a devotee, the devotee always stressed on the fact that bhaktivinodha job as a householder, magistrate can at best be niskama karma but not suddha bhakti. IS there a correct position about this issue or is it subjective and gray.
A magistrate's work in and of itself is not bhakti. But BVT is not engaged in niskama karma yoga any more than Ramanada Ray is when his does his govenment service. The purifying nature of any particular activity is one thing, whereas the purity of a person is another. To do government service may not be purifying, but one who is pure can do government service and be fully engaged in bhakti. Thus it is said that the activities of a devotee are difficult for even a learned person to understand, vaisnavera kriya mudra vijneha bujhaya.
Vrindaranya Dasi - March 30, 2007 6:57 pm
Interesting discussions...Well, I can only talk of my own experience, and that is that at this point most of the things we do daily in Audarya could be defined as sanga-siddha bhakti according to the general meaning of the term, but when we once asked clarification on these terms from Guru Maharaja, he said that in his eyes everything that we do at Audarya is actually svarupa-siddha bhakti.
I was wondering if this statement of Guru Mahraja's is based on the liberal interpretation of Bhaktivinoda Thakur, or does Jiva Goswami also give room for seeing sanga-siddha bhakti transformed into svarupa-siddha bhakti in a right association?
According to my understanding of the definitions of both Jiva Goswami and Bhaktivinode Thakur, most of the things we do daily at Audarya are svarupa-siddha bhakti. Building a temple for Gaura-Nitai, taking care of their cows, Deity worship, growing vegetables and flowers for the Deities, etc. are all svarupa-siddha bhakti because they are activities that are directly favorable to the Lord by their very nature and are not divorced from devotion even if performed unconsciously. For example, everyone who takes part in building the temple is spiritually benefited, even if he or she doesn't know that it is a temple. In contrast, if the neighbors build a house for their family and offer the action to the Lord, this is aropa-siddha-bhakti. If someone comes and does the painting for them, he or she won't be spiritually benefited.
One may say that growing vegetables for Gaura-Nitai is sanga-siddha-bhakti according to the logic that growing vegetables isn't inherently bhakti. However, you have to take the whole activity: growing vegetables for Gaura-Nitai. This activity is inherently bhakti. Take any item of nava-laksana bhakti--without connection to the Lord, they aren't inherently bhakti either. You must hear about the Lord, chant about the Lord, remember the Lord. Jiva Goswami clarifies: "The hearing and chanting referred to in the above verse are also actions, but because they are specifically intended for Lord Visnu, they are distinct from karma and jnana, and they do not come under the category of aropa-siddha bhakti."
Someone might insist that when Jiva Goswami defined svarupa-siddha-bhakti, he said that it is described in the verse about nava-laksana-bhakti; therefore, only nava-laksana-bhakti is svarupa-siddha-bhakti. However, the examples that Jiva Goswami himself uses--fasting on the Lord's appearance day and circumambulating the temple--are not nava-laksana-bhakti in a strict sense either. If even this does not satisfy one, then consider the words of Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakur, who sheds light on this much-misunderstood concept: "All endeavors of the body, words, and mind which are related to Sri Krsna and which are performed exclusively and directly for His pleasure without any intervention are known as svarupa-siddhi-bhakti." He stresses that all activities that are anukulya krsnanusila are svarupa-siddha-bhakti. Jiva Goswami confirms that svarupa-siddha bhakti manifests in infinite varieties.
The careful reader may question, what is meant by "without any intervention"? Jiva Goswami clarifies: "This means that this devotion is direct in nature, being inherently constituted of the quality of devotion. Consequently, there is nothing that can impede such devotion, unlike aropa-siddha-bhakti." In aropa-siddha-bhakti the apparent devotion is only superimposed on an activity that isn't devotion. In other words, you want to do something and then offer it to the Lord. The nondevotional nature of the activity therefore impedes the devotion and makes the activity something other than svarupa-siddha-bhakti. Srimad Bhagavatam 3.29.11 also uses the word unimpeded (avyavahita). Srila Prabhupada elaborates on its meaning: "The devotee has no interest but to fulfill the transcendental desire of the Supreme Lord." Again, the devotee isn't trying to fulfill his or her own desire and superimposing bhakti onto the activity. On a more esoteric level, one doesn't execute the activity, but rather the devotion itself flows to the Lord, making use of the any of the senses: Be devotion.
On the other hand, sanga-siddha bhakti is when you perform bhakti, but mix the bhakti with other methods based on scriptural injunctions from karma-kanda and/or jnana-kanda. Examples given of things mixed with bhakti are sacrifice, charity, oblations into the sacrificial fire, etc. (karma) or perceiving the Lord in all beings, detaching the mind, etc. (jnana). If you separately cultivate compassion towards others, friendliness, offering respect to others, cleanliness, austerity, tolerance, silence, study of the Vedas, simplicity, celibacy, non-violence, etc. as an aid to bhakti, this is sanga-siddha bhakti. In svarupa-siddha bhakti, these qualities assist bhakti, but they are not cultivated separately. For example, cooking for Krsna on a hot day is austere.
Other examples: a monastic goes to the store to purchase something that is needed for Krsna's seva (svarupa-siddha-bhakti) and happens to eye a candy bar. Purchasing the candy bar, he offers it to the Lord in his mind before consuming it (aropa-siddha-bhakti). Thinking that friendliness is favorable to bhakti, he chats with the clerk (sanga-siddha-bhakti). On the way out, he approaches someone and tells him about Krsna with great friendliness (svarupa-siddha-bhakti).
This is my understanding of these terms, anyway. This section of Bhakti Sandarbha is difficult, so I look forward to further discussion of the topic.
Madan Gopal Das - March 30, 2007 8:43 pm
Thanks for the insightful commentary Vrindaranya. A lot of good points and detail. Very clarifying...
Other examples: a monastic goes to the store to purchase something that is needed for Krsna's seva (svarupa-siddha-bhakti) and happens to eye a candy bar.
You didn't know that Audarya has spies now did you Guru Nistha?!! 
Prema-bhakti Marga - March 30, 2007 9:40 pm
Any type of bhakti, be it svarupa-siddha, sanga-siddha, or aropa siddha is of two types: motivated and unmotivated. If one’s bhakti is unmotivated, it is pure regardless of whether the act of devotion performed is inherently bhakti. If, however, the act performed is inherently bhakti (hearing, chanting, etc.), it will have a devotional effect over time regardless of one’s motive. Such is the power and glory of svarupa-siddha-bhakti.
So the important thing here is one’s motivation. If one is purely motivated with a view to please Guru and Gauranga and advance in bhakti, one’ actions performed that are not inherently bhakti yet favorable to bhakti become components of bhakti, be they from the realm of jnana, such as controlling the mind, etc., or from the realm of karma, such as making friends with one’s peers, etc. Such acts are considered the high end of sanga-siddha-bhakti.
Bhaktirasamrta-sindhu also states that whether they be scripturally enjoined (vaidiki) acts or otherwise (laukiki), if they are favorable to bhakti they should be performed. The idea being that making all effort for Bhagavan’s seva is itself a limb of bhakti. Furthermore, carrying out the order of the guru can never be anything other than svarupa siddha bhakti.
This seems to make it clearer. The explanations I have heard on this topic seem to emphasize the “worldliness” of aropa-siddha-bhakti and to some extent sanga-siddha-bhakti. Your statements shed light on the bhakti component making it more cohesive.
I am not sure if I understand how aropa siddha bhakti can be unmotivated. In aropa siddha bhakti the bhakti is superimposed, one is actually offering the results of the activity. So if one is offering the results with the goal of developing pure devotion then it can be considered unmotivated. Is this correct?
I still need to digest Vrindaranya’s comments. The dynamic application of these terms eludes me.
Swami - March 31, 2007 1:40 am
This seems to make it clearer. The explanations I have heard on this topic seem to emphasize the “worldliness” of aropa-siddha-bhakti and to some extent sanga-siddha-bhakti. Your statements shed light on the bhakti component making it more cohesive.
I am not sure if I understand how aropa siddha bhakti can be unmotivated. In aropa siddha bhakti the bhakti is superimposed, one is actually offering the results of the activity. So if one is offering the results with the goal of developing pure devotion then it can be considered unmotivated. Is this correct?
I still need to digest Vrindaranya’s comments. The dynamic application of these terms eludes me.
What I meant to say is that if one's bhakti (be it aropa siddha or sanga siddha) is materially motivated (sakaitava), it is performed for something other than the ideal of pure devotion (for material gain or liberation, etc.). On the other hand if either of these are performed with a view to attain pure bhakti, they themselves are considered unmotivated (akaitava). However, neither sanga siddha or aropa siddha bhakti are pure devotion in all respects, but at best stepping stones to pure unalloyed devotion, or unmotivated svarupa siddha bhakti. Svarupa siddha bhakti may also be materially motivated (sakaitava), in which case it is performed for some other purpose than simply pleasing Bhagavan.
Sri Jiva Goswami writes about these types of bhakti with a view to make clear to the reader that pure unalloyed devotion or akaitava svarupa siddha bhakti is what he or she should pursue, and if one is not able to do so at the moment, one should engage in akaitava sanga siddha or akaitava aropa siddha bhakti for the purpose of coming to akaitava svarupa siddha bhakti. Of course one can also engage in svarupa siddha bhakti with a view to please Krsna and eventually become fully situated in pure devotion while one is still burdened by material desire, and one should do this as much as possible. This is the position of Jiva Goswami on these terms.
BVT also writes that engaging in sanga siddha bhakti or aropa siddha bhakti does not guarantee that one will attain svarupa siddha bhakti. Only fortunate persons develop an interest in svarupa siddha bhakti. Those who do should directly pursue it as much as possible and supplement it with unmotivated sanga siddha and aropa siddha bhakti as needed. Obviously those who engage in sanga siddha and aropa siddha bhakti for the purpose of becoming situated in unmotivated svarupa siddha bhakti are such fortunate people.
Other nuanced explanations of sanga siddha and aropa siddha bhakti also exist. More on that later.
Babhru Das - March 31, 2007 4:26 am
From what I've read here and elsewhere, it seems that saranagati may be the essential element for svarupa-siddha bhakti.
Swami - March 31, 2007 4:45 am
From what I've read here and elsewhere, it seems that saranagati may be the essential element for svarupa-siddha bhakti.
But those who are not saranagata's can also engage in svarupa siddha bhakti. Jiva Goswami gives the example of a bird caught in the mouth of a dog who circumabmulated a Visnu temple! The bird participated in the svarupa siddha bhakti of cirumabulating of the temple. So saranagati is not necessarily present in sakaitava svarupa siddha bhakti.
Prema-bhakti Marga - April 5, 2007 11:51 pm
What I meant to say is that if one's bhakti (be it aropa siddha or sanga siddha) is materially motivated (sakaitava), it is performed for something other than the ideal of pure devotion (for material gain or liberation, etc.). On the other hand if either of these are performed with a view to attain pure bhakti, they themselves are considered unmotivated (akaitava). However, neither sanga siddha or aropa siddha bhakti are pure devotion in all respects, but at best stepping stones to pure unalloyed devotion, or unmotivated svarupa siddha bhakti. Svarupa siddha bhakti may also be materially motivated (sakaitava), in which case it is performed for some other purpose than simply pleasing Bhagavan.
Oh, it seems I misunderstood your previous comments. 
Jason - April 6, 2007 11:23 pm
The careful reader may question, what is meant by "without any intervention"? Jiva Goswami clarifies: "This means that this devotion is direct in nature, being inherently constituted of the quality of devotion. Consequently, there is nothing that can impede such devotion, unlike aropa-siddha-bhakti." In aropa-siddha-bhakti the apparent devotion is only superimposed on an activity that isn't devotion. In other words, you want to do something and then offer it to the Lord. The nondevotional nature of the activity therefore impedes the devotion and makes the activity something other than svarupa-siddha-bhakti. Srimad Bhagavatam 3.29.11 also uses the word unimpeded (avyavahita). Srila Prabhupada elaborates on its meaning: "The devotee has no interest but to fulfill the transcendental desire of the Supreme Lord." Again, the devotee isn't trying to fulfill his or her own desire and superimposing bhakti onto the activity. On a more esoteric level, one doesn't execute the activity, but rather the devotion itself flows to the Lord, making use of the any of the senses: Be devotion.
Other examples: a monastic goes to the store to purchase something that is needed for Krsna's seva (svarupa-siddha-bhakti) and happens to eye a candy bar. Purchasing the candy bar, he offers it to the Lord in his mind before consuming it (aropa-siddha-bhakti). Thinking that friendliness is favorable to bhakti, he chats with the clerk (sanga-siddha-bhakti). On the way out, he approaches someone and tells him about Krsna with great friendliness (svarupa-siddha-bhakti).
I'm still trying to uderstand these terms, but just before I got to Vrindaranyas post, I was thinking about how it opens the doors for people to do anything and fall back on, "well...it's all service prabhu", sort of argument. Thanks for posting this part. I'm sure that so many things have been done and were passed off as something other than aropa-siddha-bhakti.
Jason - April 6, 2007 11:49 pm
Other examples: a monastic goes to the store to purchase something that is needed for Krsna's seva (svarupa-siddha-bhakti) and happens to eye a candy bar. Purchasing the candy bar, he offers it to the Lord in his mind before consuming it (aropa-siddha-bhakti). Thinking that friendliness is favorable to bhakti, he chats with the clerk (sanga-siddha-bhakti). On the way out, he approaches someone and tells him about Krsna with great friendliness (svarupa-siddha-bhakti).
Hypothetically, not that this has ever happened to me at any point , if one is running errands for the Deity and gets hungry and eyes that slice of pizza to have on the run and then offers it in one's mind to Krsna, is this motivated (by ones desire to satisfy their hunger) aropa-siddha-bhakti? It would seem that the context in which you decide to grab something quick and eat it, even though you may have decided when the pizza is half in your mouth to offer it, sort of tarnishes any hope that there could be any spiritual benefit or bhakti involved at all. You just ate a piece of pizza, that's all.