Beautiful words from great-grandfather: link
Very nice article. I especially liked The slightest tendency to find faults in others is completely absent in Srila Gurudeva. At the same time, his sole function is to kindly point out our hundreds and thousands of faults, which are the cause of our misfortune.
Obviously it is hard to know for most people whether Gurudeva is pointing faults without the tendency to find faults.
The truth of who is visaya (the lover, the devotee) and who is asraya (the beloved, Krishna) appears in the heart of one who remains engaged in service to Srila Gurudeva.
The object of love, Krsna (visaya-jatiya), is one half of the equation, and the abode of love, Sri Guru (asraya-jatiya), is the other half.
Asraya and visaya are kind of mixed up in two parts of the lecture. Which one is correct?
Generally speaking:
B.R.S 2.1.16
Tatralambana:Krsnas ca krsna bhaktas ca budhair alambana matah ratyader visayatvena tatha’dharataya’pi ca
The wise consider the alambanas to be Krsna, as the object of love experienced in rati, and his devotees, as the experiencer (subject) of rati.
Asraya and visaya being "mixed up" in this lecture is purposeful though because BSST is elaborating on guru tattva, in the sense that Sri Guru holds both positions for the disciple. Guru is both God and devotee - saksad hari. The supreme personality of servitor godhead. In this sense sri guru is the object of love, the apex of worship for the disciple, while also being the experiencer of love (of krsna). Guru is everything, and the distinction between possessor of love and object of love, between worshiper and object of worship becomes blurred in bhakti. That is where BSST is taking the audience, into the haze; hence he makes the comment that "the truth of who is visaya and who is asraya" is understood in guru bhakti.
Generally speaking:B.R.S 2.1.16
Asraya and visaya being "mixed up" in this lecture is purposeful though because BSST is elaborating on guru tattva, in the sense that Sri Guru holds both positions for the disciple. Guru is both God and devotee - saksad hari. The supreme personality of servitor godhead. In this sense sri guru is the object of love, the apex of worship for the disciple, while also being the experiencer of love (of krsna). Guru is everything, and the distinction between possessor of love and object of love, between worshiper and object of worship becomes blurred in bhakti. That is where BSST is taking the audience, into the haze; hence he makes the comment that "the truth of who is visaya and who is asraya" is understood in guru bhakti.
Nice analysis Madana!
The truth of who is visaya (the lover, the devotee) and who is asraya (the beloved, Krishna) appears in the heart of one who remains engaged in service to Srila Gurudeva.
Generally we say that Govinda is the visaya, the object of love and the devotee is the asraya, the shelter and container of the love. But we can play with the words and understand Sarasvati Thakur's implication here. Certainly the devotee is the visaya (enjoyer) of love, in the sense that bhakti is relishable by the pure devotee. And Govinda becomes the asraya, the person/container of the devotees' love.
Another really nice quote that demonstrates BSST's point about Sri Guru becoming both visaya and asraya:
In madhura-rasa Srila Gurudeva is Varsabhanavi (Sri Radha). According to a person’s eternal nature, he will see that same Sri Gurudeva as a certain absolute reality (vastu). One in the mood of a parent sees him as Nanda-Yasoda; one in the mood of a friend sees him as Sridama-Sudama and one in the mood of a servitor sees him as Citraka-Patraka.
Worship of the guru as the ragatmika. Guru posesses the ideal that we strive for. Guru is lover and beloved, visaya and asraya, anyway that you can think about it.
Oooh it's too late for me to read the article, but let's keep this thread going for a looong time. :Raised Eyebrow: