Tattva-viveka
Bhakti by proxy?
Bhrigu - October 11, 2007 10:39 am
Is it possible to perform bhakti by proxy? In the path of karma, it is very common to ask another person to perform a ritual on one's own behalf. The person who does the ritual (sometimes called ritvik) gets some daksina afterwards, but the benefit of the ritual goes to the person who sponsored it (the yajamana). Is there anything like this in the path of bhakti, as understood in Gaudiya Vaishnavism?
Rupa Goswami seems to deny it in Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu (1.2.259), when he says that to do bhakti with the help of money (i.e., to pay someone to do something) or followers (by ordering them) causes a lapse in pure devotion because of the far distance (vidûratvât), and is thus not an anga of devotion. Of course, that does not mean that a guru couldn't (or shouldn't) engage his disciples in helping out with the worship etc in a temple he has founded, it just means that what they do isn't the guru's bhakti by theirs.
But what about the other way around? I remember reading in one of Kapoor's books (I think Saints of Bengal, but I couldn't find it now) about one saint who said that the teaching of the Bhakti-ratnakara is that the disciples should just be loyal to the guru, and he will do their sadhana for them. Is that the correct siddhanta? It seems to be just as "far distant" as in the case in the BRS.
Also, can peers voluntarily give each other "bhakti-credits" such as the merit-giving in some forms of Buddhism? It is not expressly forbidden in the BRS verse (though it would seem to be "far distant" as well). I know of one instance of this in the shastra: in the Hari-bhakti-vilasa (12.82-90), the first alternative given for one who cannot fast on Ekadasi is to have someone else fast on that person's behalf. Hower, it is expressly said that no remuneration must be given. If one would pay, it would of course be using money to perform bhakti and explicitly stated to not be bhakti in BRS.
Gandiva Dasi - October 11, 2007 12:42 pm
Is it possible to perform bhakti by proxy? In the path of karma, it is very common to ask another person to perform a ritual on one's own behalf. The person who does the ritual (sometimes called ritvik) gets some daksina afterwards, but the benefit of the ritual goes to the person who sponsored it (the yajamana). Is there anything like this in the path of bhakti, as understood in Gaudiya Vaishnavism?
Rupa Goswami seems to deny it in Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu (1.2.259), when he says that to do bhakti with the help of money (i.e., to pay someone to do something) or followers (by ordering them) causes a lapse in pure devotion because of the far distance (vidûratvât), and is thus not an anga of devotion. Of course, that does not mean that a guru couldn't (or shouldn't) engage his disciples in helping out with the worship etc in a temple he has founded, it just means that what they do isn't the guru's bhakti by theirs.
But what about the other way around? I remember reading in one of Kapoor's books (I think Saints of Bengal, but I couldn't find it now) about one saint who said that the teaching of the Bhakti-ratnakara is that the disciples should just be loyal to the guru, and he will do their sadhana for them. Is that the correct siddhanta? It seems to be just as "far distant" as in the case in the BRS.
Also, can peers voluntarily give each other "bhakti-credits" such as the merit-giving in some forms of Buddhism? It is not expressly forbidden in the BRS verse (though it would seem to be "far distant" as well). I know of one instance of this in the shastra: in the Hari-bhakti-vilasa (12.82-90), the first alternative given for one who cannot fast on Ekadasi is to have someone else fast on that person's behalf. Hower, it is expressly said that no remuneration must be given. If one would pay, it would of course be using money to perform bhakti and explicitly stated to not be bhakti in BRS.
This may not be bhakti by proxy but Devahuti comes to mind in SB 3rd canto 23.8
"TRANSLATION
Kardama Muni continued: I have achieved the blessings of the Lord in discharging my own religious life of austerity, meditation and Krsna consciousness. Although you have not yet experienced these achievements, which are free from fear and lamentation, I shall offer them all to you because you are engaged in my service. Now just look at them. I am giving you the transcendental vision to see how nice they are.
PURPORT
Devahüti engaged only in the service of Kardama Muni. She was not supposed to be so advanced in austerity, ecstasy, meditation or Krsna consciousness, but, imperceptibly, she was sharing her husband's achievements, which she could neither see nor experience. Automatically she achieved these graces of the Lord..."
I think it's not so much that Kardama Muni did her sadhana for her as it is that she served him with full faith and Krsna was pleased by her devotion.
Prabhupada says later in the purport
"By the grace of Kardama Muni, Devahüti experienced actual realization simply by serving. We get a similar example in the life of Närada Muni. In his previous life, Närada was a maidservant's son, but his mother was engaged in the service of great devotees. He got the opportunity to serve the devotees, and simply by eating the remnants of their foodstuff and carrying out their orders he became so elevated that in his next life he became the great personality Närada. For spiritual achievement the easiest path is to take shelter of a bona fide spiritual master and to serve him with heart and soul. That is the secret of success. As stated by Viçvanätha Cakravarté Thäkura in his eight stanzas of prayer to the spiritual master, yasya prasädäd bhagavat-prasädaù: ** by serving or receiving the grace of the spiritual master, one receives the grace of the Supreme Lord. By serving her devotee husband, Kardama Muni, Devahüti shared in his achievements. Similarly, a sincere disciple, simply by serving a bona fide spiritual master, can achieve all the mercy of the Lord and the spiritual master simultaneously.
SB 3.23.8
Swami - October 11, 2007 1:08 pm
Dr. Kapoor once told me that his siksa guru told him that he would do the Dr.s bhajana for him and that Dr. Kapoor in the mean time should busy himself with writing books as he had been instrcutd to do by his diksa guru. This was when Dr, Kapoor asked his siksa guru about lila samranam with concern for taking this up, as it seemed at the time important to him to begin this kind of practice.
It is also said that Dhruva delivered his mother by his concern for her. She was one of his gurus. Bhrigu, you might want to read the commentaries of Sri Visvanatha, Sri Jiva, etc. on SB 12.32-33. That might prove interesting. Prabhupada comments, "This incident proves that the siksa or diksa-guru who has a disciple who strongly executes devotional service like Dhruva Mahäräja can be carried by the disciple even though the instructor is not as advanced."
Nitaisundara Das - October 11, 2007 3:56 pm
This post brought to mind a question I think about from time to time, a little off topic but forgive me:
I'm unable to find it in NOD right now, and I've only read it once so maybe my memory is skewed, but I beleive it says that one can attain kripa-siddhi in 2 ways: by the mercy of the Lord or by the desire of the devotee. Please correct me if I am off. My question is then, wouldn't the exemplary devotee desire everyone to attain siddhi or at least those endeavoring for it to some extent? I guess I'm building on a foundation, of what I think I remember, but basically why couldnt/wouldnt the guru/exemplary devotee do this?
Bhrigu - October 11, 2007 4:01 pm
Thank you for the replies, Gandiva and Guru Maharaja! Devahuti's example does indeed seem to prove that there is such a thing as what Dr. Kapoor was explaining in the story I was thinking of (I think what Guru Maharaja referred to must be the same instance).
Dhruva's bringing his guru with him is kind of the other way around. I checked the commentaries to SB 4.12.32-33, but unfortunately Jiva & Visvanatha are extremely brief here, merely stating that Dhruva felt obliged to take his mother with him and clarifying a few words. Perhaps Jiva Goswami deals with this more elaborately somewhere in the Satsandarbhas. Prabhupada's purports here are a good example of his "devotional ecstacies", for he brings out much more from these verses than the previous acaryas. Go Prabhupada! :Just Kidding:
Swami - October 11, 2007 8:07 pm
Dhruva's bringing his guru with him is kind of the other way around. I checked the commentaries to SB 4.12.32-33, but unfortunately Jiva & Visvanatha are extremely brief here, merely stating that Dhruva felt obliged to take his mother with him and clarifying a few words. Perhaps Jiva Goswami deals with this more elaborately somewhere in the Satsandarbhas. Prabhupada's purports here are a good example of his "devotional ecstacies", for he brings out much more from these verses than the previous acaryas. Go Prabhupada! :Just Kidding:
As you can imagine, when those purposts came out we were all humbled and of course inspired by Srila Prabhupada's concluding sentences in 4.12.33. However, I do not think what he describes therein amounts to someone doing bhakti for another, but more a devotee's compassion and love for another causing Bhagavan to be mercifully disposed toward that person.
I remember when BV Sadhu Maharaja told of how he met Prabhupada. He is the son or grandson of a king. As it turned out Prabhupada knew his father and of the king's mandir and Deity in Vrndavana. So When Sadhu Maharaja told Prabhupaa where he was from, Prabhupada deduced whose son he was. Then he asked about the Deity in his father's mandir and how he was being served. Sadhu Maharaja replied that he was engaging others in the Deity's seva. To this Prabhupada replied that this was not correct, but rather that Sadhu Maharaja should be doing the seva. Prabhupada was obviously thinking of the Brs verse Bhrigu cited above. This had a profound effect on Sadhu Maharaja and he took Prabhupada's words to heart.
Incidentally, Sadhu Maharaja's guru was a babaji who told hm that Prabhupada was Nityanandavesa and that he should get his darsana. That is why he went to see Prabhupada. Much later of course he took sanyasa from Sripada Pramadvaiti Maharaja.
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - October 11, 2007 9:04 pm
I could be off topic but if person is thinking of “credits” it implies that he is planning to “cash in” one day, which is faulty idea. If guru is doing bhakti instead of disciple (or backward) than it serves to endear Krishna to devotee for doing guruseva or because disciple has attention of senior vaishnava whom Krishna has close relationship with. For example guru performing bhajana instead of disciple to free disciple time to write books is clearly understandable – disciple is still “in the fire” by meditating on the book subject (hopefully Krishna) and gets benefit from guru thinking of him as well. In either case thinking of credit puts relationship into karmic realm and takes away spontaneity and love from offering.
Syamasundara - October 12, 2007 3:59 am
Sadhu Maharaja! That's what his name is! Been trying to remember it for years. Yes, he is the son of some king in Bihar. For some reason I went to his temple with him; it's practically in front of Rama-Krsna hospital, I may have run into him while getting medicines. He has two paramparas on the altar, siksa and diksa, and the portraits of his parents are among the many devotees.
Swami - October 13, 2007 5:53 pm
I do not think that the example of Dr. Kapoor or anything similar really amounts to someone doing bhakti for another. After all, he continued to do bhakti himself, even while his siksa guru said he would do his bhajana for him. I think statements like that of his siksa guru are examples of a guru telling a disciple what is more important at the time, and it is always best to do the needfull.
Nitaisundara, I think you need to rephrase your question. At least I do not know what you are getting at in relation to this thread or otherwise. Incidentally, there is another thread or two on ths forum about krpa and sadhana siddhi. You might want to look them up.
Otherwise its refreshing to have a philsosophical discussion on this forum 
Nitaisundara Das - October 14, 2007 3:53 am
Nitaisundara, I think you need to rephrase your question. At least I do not know what you are getting at in relation to this thread or otherwise. Incidentally, there is another thread or two on ths forum about krpa and sadhana siddhi. You might want to look them up.
Otherwise its refreshing to have a philsosophical discussion on this forum
OK I'll give it a go, I tried looking this up on TV and the 1 of 2 threads(this one was started my brother, maybe its in the blood) I found which was relevant produced this qoute from GM"
"Bhava is attained by either ardent spiritual practice or grace. Bhava attained by grace is of two kinds: the grace of Bhagavan or the grace of a bhakta. Of the two, practice and grace, the former is the norm and the latter is by far the exception. When bhava is attained by grace, however, it exceeds in excellence that bhava which is attained by sadhana (at least at first), for bhava resulting from sadhana is attained gradually. This is the opinion of Srila Rupa Goswami found in his Bhaktirasamrta-sindhu."
So the relevance I saw in this current discussion was basically the concept someone making progress for you, which isn't the same as krpa siddha but my mind picked up the slack and made the connection. I guess my question could be boiled down to this: In what circumstance would the devotee, or Bhagavan for that matter "make"(for lack of a better word) a krpa siddha? And why wouldn't they? I guess Bhagavan has his Srsti lila, but why would the devotee not just grace everyone? Maybe this can't be answered because it is causeless, but my brain kind of short circuits on the "causeless" thing.
Sorry everyone about the bad placement of my question in the middle of a fresh thread....
Swami - October 14, 2007 10:36 am
OK I'll give it a go, I tried looking this up on TV and the 1 of 2 threads(this one was started my brother, maybe its in the blood) I found which was relevant produced this qoute from GM"
"Bhava is attained by either ardent spiritual practice or grace. Bhava attained by grace is of two kinds: the grace of Bhagavan or the grace of a bhakta. Of the two, practice and grace, the former is the norm and the latter is by far the exception. When bhava is attained by grace, however, it exceeds in excellence that bhava which is attained by sadhana (at least at first), for bhava resulting from sadhana is attained gradually. This is the opinion of Srila Rupa Goswami found in his Bhaktirasamrta-sindhu."
So the relevance I saw in this current discussion was basically the concept someone making progress for you, which isn't the same as krpa siddha but my mind picked up the slack and made the connection. I guess my question could be boiled down to this: In what circumstance would the devotee, or Bhagavan for that matter "make"(for lack of a better word) a krpa siddha? And why wouldn't they? I guess Bhagavan has his Srsti lila, but why would the devotee not just grace everyone? Maybe this can't be answered because it is causeless, but my brain kind of short circuits on the "causeless" thing.
Sorry everyone about the bad placement of my question in the middle of a fresh thread....
By definition mercy is an exception to the rule or standard, one that defies reason. Without the rule or standard to over ride there is no opportunity to bestow mercy.
Bhrigu - October 14, 2007 5:14 pm
Also, it is not that the Lord shows no mercy to others than kripa-siddhas. Everyone's bhakti begins only by Krishna's mercy passed down through the guru (guru-krishna-prasade pay bhakti-lata-bija). So it is not that the Lord isn't merciful to everyone.
Syamasundara - October 15, 2007 2:21 am
Very nice! It's just a matter of consciousness and point of view. Sometimes wherever you look you see mercy, but then again, if you haven't received some initial mercy, how are you going to get that kind of vision?