Tattva-viveka

The Desire Tree of Devotional Service

Gaura Krsna Dasa - June 21, 2004 4:02 am

Lord Caitanya thought, "My name is Visvambhara, 'one who maintains the entire universe.' Its meaning will be actualized if I can fill the whole universe with love of Godhead." Thinking in this way, He accepted the duty of a planter and began to grow a garden in Navadvipa. Thus the Lord brought the desire tree of devotional service to this earth and became its gardener. He sowed the seed and sprinkled upon it the water of His will.

 

-Cc. Adi 9.7-9

 

Guru Maharaja has described in his introductory talks the "Caitanya Tree" visualized by Kaviraja Gosvami in chapters 9 thru 12 of Adi lila as an "introduction of the cast of players to appear in the drama of Gaura-lila," unfolding upon the stage of Vedanta established in the preceeding chapters. Personaly, I have found studying this to be an effective way to learn and remember the names of the many parisad devotees of the Panca-tattva -a kind of devotional Cliffnote guide. Although very abreviated, it's still juicy.

 

Still, the more I think about it, the less sure I am that I understand it. I meant to ask Guru Maharaja these questions this weekend, but I neglected to. Perhaps the Sanga of devotees could shed some light?

 

First, is the Caitanya Tree simply a literary device to introduce the characters of Caitanya Caritamrta as just mentioned? At first it appears as a "lineage tree," a family tree of the sampradaya, not unlike those used as meditational devices by other Hindu and Buddhist schools. It is said at the onset that the desire tree of devotional service first fructified in Madhavendra Puri and then Isvara Puri, and then Mahaprabhu became the trunk. Elsewhere it is stated several times that the disciples and grand-disciples of the many associates are like countless branches and subbranches of the tree. Although many if not most of Mahaprabhu's associates acted as gurus to the world -both formally and informally- surely not all of them were initiating people.

 

Obviously Krsnadasa Kaviraja is describing more than just a historical picture of the Sampradaya. The roots of the tree, although senior, were contemporaries of Mahaprabhu: nine Sannyasis who accompanied him, headed to Paramananda Puri. In Kaviraja's vision he descibes the tree as not-different from Mahaprabhu himself. "All parts of this tree are spiritually cognizant, and thus as they grow they spread all over the world." "Although I am acting as a gardener, I also want to be the tree, for thus I can bestow benefit upon all."

 

The second issue I need a little more insight into is why -if the branches of the tree are in fact expansions of Mahaprabhu- are some associates included and others are not? Interestingly, Jagai and Madai are each one branch of the Caitanya tree, as are Kala Krsna dasa and Chota Haridasa. Kaviraja Gosvami says: "The associates of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu were many, but none of them should be considered lower or higher. This cannot be ascertained." Similar to the stories which tell that Kamsa and Hiranyakasipu are none other than Jaya and Vijaya, the doorkeepers of the spiritual world, I take this as proof that the reality these personalities are grounded in, transcends duality. Powerful. Their roles were to bring out Mahaprabhu's teachings for our benefit. Yet why would inglorious devotees, significant as they are, be included while Jaggannath Misra is not? Sacidevi is not, yet their servant Isana is. Visvarupa, Mahaprabu's brother is, while again, Visnupriya Devi is not.

 

And this brings me to my third question. Are we to understand that devotees such as Sitadevi, the wife of Advaita Prabhu and Malinidevi, the wife of Srivasa are included within the branch of their husbands' names? A woman, Madhavidevi, the sister of Sikhi Mahiti and a very intimate associate in the Puri pasttimes, is a branch of the tree, but other prominent female devotees such as Jahnavi Devi, Laksmi and Visnupriya, what to say of Sacimata are not. Is this because Madhavidevi is unmarried?

 

This has become a ridiculously long post. My apologies.