Tattva-viveka
NoD--Assignment 8
Babhru Das - December 12, 2005 6:58 pm
Exploring the Ocean of The Nectar of Devotion
Assignment 8
Read Chapter 6 of The Nectar of Devotion, “How to Discharge Devotional Service.” This chapter covers verses 72-96 of the second wave (chapter) of the Eastern Division of Bhaktirasamrita-sindhu. This chapter is simply a list of 64 particularly significant devotional practices given by Srila Sanatana Gosvami in Hari-bhakti-vilasa. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu instructed Sanatana in these same devotional practices, as we see in Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya-lila, Chapter 22, starting with verse 114. The first ten items are things we should accept (pravritti), and the second ten items are things we should avoid (nivritti). Of the remaining 44 practices, items 21-49 are important practices of sadhana, and the last five are, according to Lord Caitanya, the most powerful devotional practices.
It may be worth noting that the first five items Mahaprabhu gives to Sanatana all have to do with the spiritual master:
guru-padasraya, diksa, gurura sevana
sad-dharma-siksa-priccha, sadhu-marganugamana
“On the path of regulative devotional service, one must observe the following items: (1) One must accept a bona fide spiritual master. (2) One must accept initiation from him. (3) One must serve him. (4) One must receive instructions from the spiritual master and make inquiries in order to learn devotional service. (5) One must follow in the footsteps of the previous acaryas and follow the directions given by the spiritual master” (Cc. Madhya 22.115).
We may also find it useful to pay special attention to the last five items:
sadhu-sanga, nama-kirtana, bhagavata-sravaëa
mathura-vasa, sri-murtira sraddhaya sevana
“One should associate with devotees, chant the holy name of the Lord, hear Srimad-Bhagavatam, reside at Mathura, and worship the Deity with faith and veneration” (Cc. Madhya 22.128).
Of these last five, the Lord tells Sanatana in the next verse,
sakala-sadhana-srestha ei panca anga
krishna-prema janmaya ei pancera alpa sanga
“These five limbs of devotional service are the best of all. Even a slight performance of these five awakens love for Krishna.”
For Discussion
At the beginning of this chapter, Srila Prabhupada says that Srila Rupa Gosvami “proposes [in this section] to mention only basic principles, not details.” Then Prabhupada uses an example to show the distinction between the two:
[A] basic principle is that one has to accept a spiritual master. Exactly how one follows the instructions of his spiritual master is considered a detail. For example, if one is following the instruction of his spiritual master and that instruction is different from the instructions of another spiritual master, this is called detailed information. But the basic principle of acceptance of a spiritual master is good everywhere, although the details may be different.
In his purport to Cc. Adi 7.37, Srila Prabhupada writes,
Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu was an ideal acarya. An acarya is an ideal teacher who knows the purport of the revealed scriptures, behaves exactly according to their injunctions and teaches his students to adopt these principles also. As an ideal acarya, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu devised ways to capture all kinds of atheists and materialists. Every acarya has a specific means of propagating his spiritual movement with the aim of bringing men to Krishna consciousness. Therefore, the method of one acarya may be different from that of another, but the ultimate goal is never neglected.
With this in mind, write about your understanding of the differences between principles and details, using as many references as you can from NoD and other sastric references. How is such an understanding relevant to our own lives and in our efforts to share Krishna consciousness. Who can decide on changes in details? May we sometimes need to decide ourselves? If so, how would we do so?
For yourself and/or for discussion
Srila Prabhupada stressed following the four “regulative principles,” chanting 16 rounds of japa daily, and attending the morning and evening programs as an essential foundation for spiritual progress for his disciples. What is the importance of a strict sadhana for a practitioner? What does it mean to have a good sadhana? How might a strong sadhana differ for a temple or asrama resident or a renunciant, on the one hand, and a householder with family and professional responsibilities, on the other? How about for someone new to the practices of bhakti yoga and for someone with considerable experience?
Babhru Das - December 14, 2005 6:07 am
To sort of flesh out the "For Discussion" prompt a little more, I'd like to suggest that we may consider how devotees might deal with a religious movement's need for both continuity and change. Just what may be changed, and what must be preserved? Can we find any historical examples that may help us develop an understanding of this issue?
Gopisvara Dasa - December 14, 2005 6:13 am
It's good to see the discussion continuing.
In terms of the regulative principles,etc. I would like to share my thoughts,as I think about this a lot.When they give a class in Iskcon,they invariably say very early on something like "we have four rules" and proceed to list them.My natural response is to cringe, for despite the dogmatism,fundamentalism and bad reputation they have given themselves,someone,somehow still wandered into the temple and class,possibly for the first time,only to be confronted with a less than dynamic understanding of the regulative principles.As if they needed more reasons to be turned off.I guess Krishna is so charming that they hardly notice anything else.
Srila Prabhupada very wisely called them Regulative Principles.That is quite different than four rules.A rule is static,like:no speeding.But a good driver will regulate his speed based on traffic, weather,etc. as well as posted speed limit.To say four rules, eliminates two very key words; regulative and principle.
Above all else the principle is to be understood and applied(it can hardly be applied without first understanding it).To understand the principle behind each reg one is obliged to look deeper.The principles are really Mercy,Truthfulness,Austerity and Cleanliness.
To not slit an animal's throat is hardly the full purport of Mercy.It is kindness and generosity to other devotees,people and animals etc.(jive doya)all the way up to giving the highest mercy in the form of giving bhakti.
To be artificially renounced, to the point of being of being shutdown and mean-spirited is obvioudly not useful.
I don't think I know anyone who has a problem with gambling.But the underlying principle of that reg is Truthfulness.Now when people are less than truthful about the other regs or number of rounds they chant or whatever,then the whole system begins to break down.
One must hang tight to the Principle and do their best to achieve fulfilling it over time by regulating their activities accordingly,maintaining a consistent standard that is always improving.But where you are is where you are and can't be artificially overriden.You can only start from where you stand.
In my own case I waited 15 years to get initiated feeling myself unacceptable only to find my progress accellerating when I did, due to the guidance I was now getting.
Conversely, I know many devotees who obstensibly follow to the letter but totally miss the point.
I personally chant slow.Many devotees can chant 16 rounds in the time it takes me to chant 8. Are they following while I am not? Even when they chant so fast it is a blur? Again the principle is all-important.I only want to chant as much as I can do with the proper spirit.That is my Regulation.
The idea of taking a vow and assuming a pre-ordained standard has always perplexed me and history has shown many cases where this caused more harm than good.
Probably everyone here already knows everything I've said,but in other circles very few do.
I know I'm a deviant and will stand corrected wherever it is due.
Igor - December 14, 2005 10:59 am
Well said Gopisvara!
I have similar realizations, but I am still bewildered about that topic ( that is probably because for 15 years I absorbed too much wrong ISCKON conceptions about “strict” rules and regulations). I want to say, that this forum helped me and helping me a lot to become more flexible, to accept dynamic spiritual practice, to continue with my devotional attempts.
You said it right – so many devotees miss the point. I am one such devotee. In ISKCON I was too flexible, to radical, open-minded, and that attitude brought me to Swami and to all members of TV, and here I understand that I must learn how to become more flexible, introspective, that I have heavy burden of false absorbed conceptions on my shoulder.
It took years for me to understand dynamic approach, like you said “One must hang tight to the Principle and do their best to achieve fulfilling it over time by regulating their activities accordingly, maintaining a consistent standard that is always improving”. That understanding is what ISKCON need today ( and many other things ).
Babhru Das - December 16, 2005 5:02 am
In terms of the regulative principles,etc. I would like to share my thoughts,as I think about this a lot.When they give a class in Iskcon,they invariably say very early on something like "we have four rules" and proceed to list them.My natural response is to cringe, for despite the dogmatism,fundamentalism and bad reputation they have given themselves,someone,somehow still wandered into the temple and class,possibly for the first time,only to be confronted with a less than dynamic understanding of the regulative principles.As if they needed more reasons to be turned off.I guess Krishna is so charming that they hardly notice anything else.
I'm sure we can all come up with stories about what devotees do wrong in ISKCON, or some other sanga as well. And I think it's well for us to heed the lessons we can learn from those mistakes. But I think it may be even more productive for us to consider how we might introduce others to Gaudiya vaishnavism. After all, I've heard Swami say plainly that he's not looking for disciples, but for gurus. So I hope this doesn't turn into just another ISKCON-bashing thread.
Srila Prabhupada very wisely called them Regulative Principles.That is quite different than four rules.A rule is static,like:no speeding.But a good driver will regulate his speed based on traffic, weather,etc. as well as posted speed limit.To say four rules, eliminates two very key words; regulative and principle.
I like this perspective. Swami discusses his approach to the regulative principles in one of his talks. One thing I think we should emphasize (I do whenever I get the chance) is that we agree to accept those principles voluntarily. We use them to help us set priorities in our lives, and, perhaps, to set examples for others.
Above all else the principle is to be understood and applied(it can hardly be applied without first understanding it).To understand the principle behind each reg one is obliged to look deeper.The principles are really Mercy,Truthfulness,Austerity and Cleanliness.
excited by the business of devotees not using intoxicants, being celibate, refraining from gambling. I liked that they were vegetarians, but imposing the other things on others seemed weird to me. That was until I read the purports in the First Canto discussing the need for a society based on cleanliness, austerity, mercy, and truthfulness. When I read that (after having digested the purport from which my signature comes), I knew I had found the real revotlution.
One must hang tight to the Principle and do their best to achieve fulfilling it over time by regulating their activities accordingly,maintaining a consistent standard that is always improving.But where you are is where you are and can't be artificially overriden.You can only start from where you stand.
Well said, Gopisvara! Thanks.
I understand this response, but I like the idea of a commitment. I know that it has actually helped me. And I no longer think of them as rules I follow. This is just how I live. I never tell anyone I can't eat meat, drink, or pastry with eggs. I just tell them I don't. AndI also waited a while for initiation--a year and a half--because I didn't want to make a commitment I didn't think I could keep. And I waited another year and a half for second initiation because I couldn't see myself as a "brahmana." My temple president had asked me about it soon after I took first initiation, but I said I'd rather wait a while. When I never got back to him about it, he finally went ahead and recommended me anyway. As you say, we can only start from where we stand.
Thanks for keeping this going.
Babhru Das - December 16, 2005 5:05 am
I want to say, that this forum helped me and helping me a lot to become more flexible, to accept dynamic spiritual practice, to continue with my devotional attempts.
You said it right – so many devotees miss the point. I am one such devotee. In ISKCON I was too flexible, to radical, open-minded, and that attitude brought me to Swami and to all members of TV, and here I understand that I must learn how to become more flexible, introspective, that I have heavy burden of false absorbed conceptions on my shoulder.
I think we all have a deep (and deepening) appreciation for the guidance and example we get from Swami and his associates. We know we've found the right company for us. And we owe him and Vrindaranya a great debt for making TV available to us.
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - December 16, 2005 8:35 pm
I'd like to suggest that we may consider how devotees might deal with a religious movement's need for both continuity and change.
I would like to draw a parallel to Mutation and Natural Selection principle. Evolution of religious institution is somewhat similar to evolution of living being -- to adapt to the environment change occurs (mutation) then it’s tested by the environment (natural selection) -- success and failure are self evident -- tradition continues or disintegrates. Because we are living in ever-changing environment to survive we must change as well, but keep most of the genotype intact to keep uniqueness of the species. Only passage of time will show which tradition will survive. There is an interesting article on this subject written by John D. Gottsch from The Johns Hopkins University.
The first example which comes to mind is number of round prescribed by Srila Prabhupada to his disciples. If I remember correctly, the original number was 64, then it was decreased to 32 and then to 16, which appeared to be a doable for Westerners. This illustrates that tradition was changed according to time and place, but kept the main principle intact.
I agree with Gopisvara that in the first place we have to remember Principles behind regulative principles -- Mercy, Truthfulness, Austerity and Cleanliness, but I think business of changing (mutating) tradition lays solely on the shoulders of acarya, not the practitioner himself. Practitioner, being for the most part a neophyte, lacks discrimination qualities to make a correct decision and the "baby" can be tossed out with the "bath water".
Igor - December 16, 2005 9:03 pm
Interesting point Nandaji, about mutation and natural selection. Spiritual science is dinamic, not static and therefore it envolve. Good example is, as you said, prescribed number of rounds - desa, cala patra - time, place and circumstances. Natural selection and mutation have sence
Vedic time (yajna) - Budhisam (ahimsa) - Impersonalism ( Brahman ) - Vaisnavism (bhakti)
Or
Spiritisam( animalism, totemisam etc.) - Politeisam ( Greek, Roman era) - Monoteisam ( with limited knowledge about God) - Christianity, Islam etc - Vaisnavism
Here is very interesting article by Srilla Bhaktivinoda Thakura about
Babhru Das - December 16, 2005 10:54 pm
During yesterday’s Sanga call, just hearing Swami’s voice, I suppose, I had an idea about one of the last five angas, which generated some discussion when we talked about Ch. 6 here in Hawaii. Here are the verses from Bhaktirasamrita-sindhu (the last part of 90 and all of 91 and 92):
sraddha visesatah pritihsri-murter-anghri-sevane
srimad-bhagavatarthanama-svado rasikaih saha
sajatiyasye snigdhe sadhau sangah svato vare
nama-sankirtanam sri mathura-mandale sthitih
Bon Maharaja translates these:
60) Liking with special interest for worshiping the feet of the Srimurti in the temple, 61) Tasting the nectar of the esoteric meaning of the Bhagavatam in the company of bhava and prema bhaktas, 62) Keeping the association of such superior sadhus who are of similar temperament and taste and are affectionate, 63) Singing the Name of the Lord in the company of devotees, and 64) Living in Mathura-mandala.
Haberman’s translation of these items:
60) special love for serving the feet of the divine image, 61) enjoying the message of Sri Bhagavata Purana with sensitive people, 62) associating with the highest affectionate saints who are of similar temperament as oneself, 63) singing the names of the Lord, and 64) living in the blessed circle of Mathura.
Haberman has a note explaining that Mathura-mandala means the entire region of Vraja.
Here’s how we find these five items in Ch. 22 of Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita:
sadhu-sanga, nama-kirtana, bhagavata-sravana
mathura-vasa, sri-murtira sraddhaya sevana
One should associate with devotees, chant the holy name of the Lord, hear Srimad-Bhagavatam, reside at Mathura and worship the Deity with faith and veneration.
Yesterday I had a thought about Mathura-vasa, living in Mathura, or Mathura-mandala-stithih, staying in Mathura-mandala. In his commentary on Bg. 18.65 (man-mana bhava mad-bhakto), Tripurari Maharaja writes, Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada notes elsewhere that the transcendental position from which the activities of realized souls are enacted is called ‘Mathura.’” He writes, ‘Devotion to Krishna, the son of Nanda Maharaja, is the essence of all knowledge, and wherever such knowledge is manifested [that place] is called Mathura. Also, when one establishes bhakti-yoga, excluding all other methods, one’s situation is called Mathura. Yatra nityam sannihito harih: the place where Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, lives eternally is called Mathura.’” Here’s what Swami paraphrases in beginning this passage: “When a self-realized soul acts in his transcendental position, his situation is called Mathura. In other words, when one acts in the process of bhakti-yoga, he may live anywhere, but actually he lives in Mathura, Vrindavana.”
So this means we don’t necessarily have to pick up and move to Vraja-mandala. However, it also means that we need to bring our lives to the Mathura platform, or live in a place that is so situated.
Regarding “Bhagavat-sravana,” I have for a long time taken it as “hearing Srimad-Bhagavatam,” or “hearing about Bhagavan.” I suppose it could also be read as “hearing from the [person] Bhagavat.”
Any thoughts?
Bhrigu - December 17, 2005 9:39 am
So this means we don’t necessarily have to pick up and move to Vraja-mandala. However, it also means that we need to bring our lives to the Mathura platform, or live in a place that is so situated.
That's comforting to hear for most of us, no doubt! But it is not that one necessarily has to practice all of these five (or the 64); even one of them can bring perfection, if practiced offenselessly. Jiva Goswami comments that if one physically cannot live in Vraja, one may do so in the mind.
The Mathura-area has the special benefit of being the place of Lord Krishna's pastimes and thus better reminding the sadhaka of him + that of countless siddha devotees, who still help the practitioner advance.
Regarding “Bhagavat-sravana,” I have for a long time taken it as “hearing Srimad-Bhagavatam,” or “hearing about Bhagavan.” I suppose it could also be read as “hearing from the [person] Bhagavat.”
I guess so, but that would be more or less the same as sadhu-sanga, making it redundant. All the commentators seem to agree on the verse referring specifically to the Srimad Bhagavatam. I remember reading that Swami somewhere comments that according to Jiva Goswami, hearing the Bhagavatam refers especially to hearing the 10th Canto, but I haven't been able to locate that statement.
Bhrigu - December 17, 2005 10:33 am
I though to note also the limbs of bhakti that seem to have lost in popularity:
10) Worship of holy trees such as the banyan
22) Marking the upper body with the letters of the Lord's name
29) Circumambulating the temple
I've always been rather curious about why Rupa Goswami included nr. 10 in the first place, and among the first 10 important ones! Perhaps because it is such a prominent part of "popular" devotion? There is very little about it in the HBV, which generally is mentioned as the source for this list. Nrs. 22 & 29 are widely practiced at least outside our group and ISKCON. Otherwise, the other limbs are things that we can see devotees actually practicing regularly even today.
What is the importance of a strict sadhana for a practitioner? What does it mean to have a good sadhana? How might a strong sadhana differ for a temple or asrama resident or a renunciant, on the one hand, and a householder with family and professional responsibilities, on the other?
These are excellent, important questions. For me, a strict sadhana will lead to my being more conscious of Krishna in my daily life. For example, if I read the Bhagavatam (especially), what I have read will come back to me during the next day and I will think about it. By no means all the time, but decidedly more than if I don't read.
I think that sadhana is especially important for those of us who are not ashrama residents. Ashramites will naturally follow a good sadhana, but we have to make a special endeavour. I sometimes hear people say that they have no time for sadhana, but my experience has been that I've always been able to find the time. My wife and I don't have children, so I cannot say anything about how to combine sadhana with child-rearing, but it would be interesting to hear from those with such experience. Did you have to reduce your sadhana at some point, and was it difficult to get back to normal later?
In general, I am as I'm sure you know, more for continuity than change. Doing the same things day after day (nityaseva) is comforting to me. I have seen, though, how for a friend they led in the opposite direction, so I can appreciate Gopisvara's point about the principles behind the rules. Good point about gambling and truthfulness! "White lies" are so easy to slip into in uncomfortable situations!
My own sadhana is very "morning-oriented", i.e. I do practically all of my stuff before noon. Sometimes I feel that I should leave something for the evening as well, but then again, I'm afraid that I would overburden myself so that the devotional activities would start to feel oppressive.
Bhrigu - December 17, 2005 10:51 am
One more thing: I'm reading a Swedish translation of NOD, and at the end of the chapter Srila Prabhupada mentions the five most important limbs of devotion, but differently from the BRS/ CC - version, substituting watering tulasi for murti-seva. Is that the same in the English version? In chapter 13, Srila Prabhupada follows the "standard" list.
Madangopal - December 17, 2005 3:05 pm
how to combine sadhana with child-rearing, but it would be interesting to hear from those with such experience. Did you have to reduce your sadhana at some point, and was it difficult to get back to normal later?
I have tried to carry on with my sadhana while having children, working and going to school full time. I would not recommend it to anyone - 
- but my life worked out in this way. I spent much time without a progressive spiritual guide and I think that made my sadhana adjustments much more difficult. I was always feeling guilty and did not trust myself to make such decisions. Plus, my brahmacari conditioning made it difficult to "think outside the box".
I have great attachment for the practices of sadhana but I have had to reduce to keep my sanity. Meditating on "kirtaniya sada hari" has helped me to be at peace with what I can do. I try to develop the qualities that will allow me to constantly chant and I endeavor to bring the holy name into my consciousness throughout my busy days. With the understanding that my goal is to chant constantly, when I get to that point 16 rounds, 4 rounds, 8 regulative principles or 2 will really just be stepping stones in my past. I'm not advocating "free lovin'" do what you want, no rules bhakti... I guess my situation just causes me to step back and look at the big picture of my spiritual progression and to be satisfied with what I can do for the time being. I feel a little detachment from rigid rule following has nurtured some of my spiritual understanding.
I'm a real believer in regulation or as Bhrigu put it, nityaseva. Mostly because I find that the sattvik atmosphere regulation produces is good for the practice of sadhana. BUT, I must say that kids are the opposite of nityaseva. Having kids has reformed my belief and my whole value system in regulation and forced me to learn flexibility. I would recommend it just for the value in pushing one's boundaries, stirring up some of your conditioning; but it is not easy and one has to learn to get the nectarean results of sadhana practice in different ways.
Plus, kids who are devotional can be little raganuga bhaktas/ins. They don't do sadhana very well, but they can be spontaneously attracted to Krsna's pastimes and involve you in their lila.
In short, practice of sadhana in family life can have many rewards if you have the right mentality.
Babhru Das - December 17, 2005 4:18 pm
I guess so, but that [babhru's third version of Bhagavat-srava] would be more or less the same as sadhu-sanga, making it redundant.
You're probably right. But I'm not sure that's a fault here, as Srila Rupa Gosvami points out that the five special angas were all mentioned previously, but restated at the end for emphasis. Still, I take your point. The thought occurred to me as I was typing.
All the commentators seem to agree on the verse referring specifically to the Srimad Bhagavatam. I remember reading that Swami somewhere comments that according to Jiva Goswami, hearing the Bhagavatam refers especially to hearing the 10th Canto, but I haven't been able to locate that statement.
I've heard that one fairly recently. I'll see if I can find it. It's a good one to remember.
Oh--maybe in the talk about Mahaprabhu delivering Prakasananda, which was apparently given at Narasingha Maharaja's ashram. I'll listen later and confirm, unless someone else does so first.
Babhru Das - December 17, 2005 4:24 pm
I though to note also the limbs of bhakti that seem to have lost in popularity:
10) Worship of holy trees such as the banyan
22) Marking the upper body with the letters of the Lord's name
29) Circumambulating the temple
I've always been rather curious about why Rupa Goswami included nr. 10 in the first place, and among the first 10 important ones! Perhaps because it is such a prominent part of "popular" devotion? There is very little about it in the HBV, which generally is mentioned as the source for this list. Nrs. 22 & 29 are widely practiced at least outside our group and ISKCON.
In the early days in ISKCON Hawaii, we used to at least offer respect by calling out something like "Jaya Sri Battah!" when we saw a banyan (which was several times a day). I would like to know how to worship the banyan (Offer an arati? Dunno.), since we have one on our property. I do sometimes circumambulate our house in order to circumambulate the temple room, and especially our Girirajas.
Babhru Das - December 17, 2005 4:33 pm
One more thing: I'm reading a Swedish translation of NOD, and at the end of the chapter Srila Prabhupada mentions the five most important limbs of devotion, but differently from the BRS/ CC - version, substituting watering tulasi for murti-seva. Is that the same in the English version? In chapter 13, Srila Prabhupada follows the "standard" list.
Here's the list:
(40) One should do whatever is done with great care and devotion for the Deity. (41) One should relish the pleasure of Bhägavatam reading among devotees and not among outsiders. (42) One should associate with devotees who are considered more advanced. (43) One should chant the holy name of the Lord. (44) One should live in the jurisdiction of Mathura.
And here's what he says at the end of the next-to-last paragraph:
Out of these sixty-four items, five items -- namely worshiping the Deity, hearing Srimad-Bhagavatam, associating among the devotees, sankirtana, and living in Mathura -- are very important.
Is that different from the Swedish edition? Boy, that would point out a problem, wouldn't it?
Babhru Das - December 17, 2005 4:41 pm
I have tried to carry on with my sadhana while having children, working and going to school full time. I would not recommend it to anyone -
Raising a family can be a real challenge to the kind of regulation we learn in the brahmachari ashram. And juggling all these things can be less than fun sometimes. Guidance from devotees who are actually progressive (in at least two senses) can be a real boon.
I'm a real believer in regulation or as Bhrigu put it, nityaseva. Mostly because I find that the sattvik atmosphere regulation produces is good for the practice of sadhana. BUT, I must say that kids are the opposite of nityaseva. Having kids has reformed my belief and my whole value system in regulation and forced me to learn flexibility. I would recommend it just for the value in pushing one's boundaries, stirring up some of your conditioning; but it is not easy and one has to learn to get the nectarean results of sadhana practice in different ways.
One thing we can learn from raising kids (and for others, raising cows) is the importance of nitya seva. Kids must be bathed, fed, dressed, and played with every day. So we may feel a similar urgency (and concomitant pleasure) in responding to the same needs in our Deities, Tulasi-devi, and our japa beads
Plus, kids who are devotional can be little raganuga bhaktas/ins. They don't do sadhana very well, but they can be spontaneously attracted to Krsna's pastimes and involve you in their lila.
That's for sure. I'd guess all the parents here have books full of cool stories about how these things show up in their kids--some quite unexpected, even startling.
Swami - December 17, 2005 5:33 pm
That's comforting to hear for most of us, no doubt! But it is not that one necessarily has to practice all of these five (or the 64); even one of them can bring perfection, if practiced offenselessly. Jiva Goswami comments that if one physically cannot live in Vraja, one may do so in the mind.
The Mathura-area has the special benefit of being the place of Lord Krishna's pastimes and thus better reminding the sadhaka of him + that of countless siddha devotees, who still help the practitioner advance.
I am in the midst of a correspondence with Sripada Narasingha Maharaja on this subject. It came up when we learned of how one of our sannyasi Godbrothers was recently murdered in Vrindavana and another robbed at gun point by gundas in his own ashrama. I commentaed thus:
"The dhama has become almost
uninhabitable. I really have no interest in going there because of
the external environment. We have to manifest Vrindavana in our hearts."
Maharaja replied:
"I agree fully. Vrindavana is in the holy name — manifest with all opulence
and potency of the Supreme Lord. My Vrindavana is Govindaji Gardens (his ashrama in South India)!"
Swami - December 17, 2005 5:45 pm
I can't find it either. At least not at the moment. However, Brs. 1.1.240 does stress the value of hearing the 10th canto in the context of explaining the anga of sri bhagavat-arthasvado (relishing the meaning of the Bhagavata).
Srila Prabhupada's translation of sri bhagavat-arthasvado in NOD is "One should relish the pleasure of Bhagavatam, reading among devotees and not among outsiders," which also leans towards the tenth canto since other cantos should be discussed for preaching to the uninitiated. Of course Prabhupada would be the first to point out that the other cantos are important and must be gone through by the initiated, but clearly the 10th canto has special power. It was this canto that drew Sukadeva away from Brahman realization.
Swami - December 17, 2005 6:04 pm
I though to note also the limbs of bhakti that seem to have lost in popularity:
10) Worship of holy trees such as the banyan
I've always been rather curious about why Rupa Goswami included nr. 10 in the first place, and among the first 10 important ones! Perhaps because it is such a prominent part of "popular" devotion?
In his discussion of this anga Sri Rupa cites Skanada Purana, in which this tree worship is included along with the worship of Tulasi, Vaisnavas, and cows.
Babhru Das - December 18, 2005 12:26 am
And I think I know where Vrindavan is for most of us here.
I really appreciate Swami's pointing out this perspective in his Gita. (I thought I had read this before in Aesthetic Vedanta, but I haven't been able to find it there, so I may be mistaken.) I think it's clear that we are each meant to strive to establish that Mathura-Vrajamandala consciousness in our hearts and share it with whomever we meet, to the extent it's possible. Sripad Narasingha Maharaja has created a Vrindavana consciousness at Govindaji Gardens, and my friend Turiya das has created a nice, peaceful Vrindavan atmosphere at his Sri Vrindavan Gardens on Maui. I have always felt spiritually refreshed whenever I visited him there. The pictures I've seen of Karnamrita and Archanasiddhi's place show that they've made Krishna the center of their home. And I know that my wife and I have tried to make our home something of an ashram, with the quiet, peaceful atmosphere, auspicious trees and flowers, the daily worship of our Thakurajis, and the regular visits of local devotees for Nectar of Devotion study-group meetings. But from what I've seen, our clearest model is Audarya, with its focus on living simply, and living simply for the service of Sri Sri Gaura-Nitai, Krishna-Balarama, and their servants whose lives are dedicated to spreading Audarya consciousness. Because I'm so inspired by that example, we like to call our home Audarya Bhavan. And more than that, I'm working on molding my life in such a way that I can work to help spread that Audarya consciousness. But first I have to establish it in my own heart, so I need all your best wishes.
(Hmmm . . . this might be a glimpse of what Dhira-lalita was asking me for a couple of weeks ago.)
Babhru Das - December 18, 2005 12:27 am
Babhru Das - December 18, 2005 1:02 am
I can't find it either. At least not at the moment. However, Brs. 1.1.240 does stress the value of hearing the 10th canto in the context of explaining the anga of sri bhagavat-arthasvado (relishing the meaning of the Bhagavata).
Srila Prabhupada's translation of sri bhagavat-arthasvado in NOD is "One should relish the pleasure of Bhagavatam, reading among devotees and not among outsiders," which also leans towards the tenth canto since other cantos should be discussed for preaching to the uninitiated. Of course Prabhupada would be the first to point out that the other cantos are important and must be gone through by the initiated, but clearly the 10th canto has special power. It was this canto that drew Sukadeva away from Brahman realization.
Is that Brs. 1.2.240? That's coming in Ch. 13. In the meantime, I think we have some serious Audarya Audio listening to do in search of Maharaja's comment on hearing the 10th Canto.
Swami - December 19, 2005 2:16 am
Hari-priya Dasi - December 19, 2005 4:59 pm
I tend to feel certain tightness around my head and heart when I read long lists of rules and regulations. On emotional level I feel that I am demanded something I am not necessarily able to give or do. And then (due to some personal history) the feelings of guilt attack immediately. In order to pacify my mind I usually start criticizing rules and rule-oriented understanding of ethics or spiritual life…
For me personally it was relieving at one point to give up some “religious habits” and give myself a permission to apply religious recommendations in a rather creative way in my own life. Later I noticed that trying to follow the rules just for the sake of following them and because of the social pressure without having my heart involved had made me grow in a completely wrong direction. I was pushing myself to act in a way, which wasn’t natural for me and as a consequence I became quite hardhearted towards other people. The fruit of my labor was exactly the opposite that I was hoping to reach.
I think even a neophyte is able to know what is good and what is bad for oneself. (Of course you have to know yourself fairly well and have some ability to be honest with yourself.) But there’s a big difference in changing the details for you personally or trying to change the details for the movement or the whole tradition. Still I think in some cases an individual has a right or sometimes even a duty to speak up what according to their understanding would be the best possible development for the tradition. For instance there are groups in Roman-catholic church that promote the priesthood of women. They are not just quietly waiting that the pope will someday decide by himself that the priesthood will be open for everyone who is qualified.
Hari-priya Dasi - December 19, 2005 5:03 pm
Giving up the association of non-devoted persons?
The second list of the sixth chapter consists of things that should be avoided. First of all one should give up with determination the association of those people, who are not devoted. (I am reading the Finnish translation, so I don’t know how it’s exactly stated in English.) That’s something I have always been kind of wondering. I do understand that people are different and that you quite naturally feel more inclined to have association of certain type of people. People with whom you have something in common, people you can trust and with whom you can share confidentially your most personal thoughts. People with whom you just feel you are on the same wavelength.
But “with determination” seems to indicate that this what’s going on here doesn’t come that naturally. So I am a bit confused what is actually meant by giving up certain association. Who can decide who is devoted and who is not? Is that something you should even be thinking about? It just seems that sometimes this kind of “rules” call out for false sense of discrimination…
Babhru Das - December 20, 2005 6:18 pm
Haripriya, I think the question regarding avoiding the association of nondevotees is a potentially rich one. In the English NoD, Srila Prabhupada writes, "One should rigidly give up the comany of nondevotees." I've seen it translated elsewhere as "carefully giving up" the company of nondevotees.
The line in Brs. is sanga tyago vidurena bhagavad vimukhair janaih. Bon Maharaja translates it as "Shunning from a long distance the company of those who are averse to the Supreme Lord." Haberman translates it "Keeping far away from those who have turned away from the Lord." I don't have a word-for-word translation anywhere. Perhaps Bhrigu could help, or maybe Swami can shed some light on this for us.
In a couple of places Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura explains that avoiding the company of nondevotees doesn't mean shunning them in ordinary dealings. Talking with them in the course of work or business, shopping, and other everyday activities, is not considered the kind of association that's being proscribed here. I've seen somewhere in Jaiva Dharma (although I can't find it now), and in Bhaktyaloka, assertions that what the Lord is talking about here is intimate association, the six kinds of loving exchanges discussed in Upadeshamrita. Now this is complicated to some degree for us by our affectionate dealings with friends and family members. But I think we eventually learn how to conduct such affairs in a balanced way that doesn't interfere with our spiritual progress. Sometimes that may mean dealing abruptly with others so they won't bother us, as we see in the case of Advaita das babaji and his old school buddy Digambar in Jaiva Dharma. Often, though, we can just be kind to others and share our hearts only to the extent that it may increase their faith in Krishna consciousness.
Babhru Das - December 20, 2005 6:28 pm
I tend to feel certain tightness around my head and heart when I read long lists of rules and regulations. On emotional level I feel that I am demanded something I am not necessarily able to give or do. And then (due to some personal history) the feelings of guilt attack immediately. In order to pacify my mind I usually start criticizing rules and rule-oriented understanding of ethics or spiritual life…
For me personally it was relieving at one point to give up some “religious habits” and give myself a permission to apply religious recommendations in a rather creative way in my own life. Later I noticed that trying to follow the rules just for the sake of following them and because of the social pressure without having my heart involved had made me grow in a completely wrong direction. I was pushing myself to act in a way, which wasn’t natural for me and as a consequence I became quite hardhearted towards other people. The fruit of my labor was exactly the opposite that I was hoping to reach.
I really like that last sentence. Srila Prabhupada makes a similar point about austerity--that too much austerity artificially imposed can make our hearts harder, not softer. as Maharaja says, we need to learn to use our heads in a way that our hearts become softer.
I remember that when I was a brahmachari we heard that one devotee (whom I later got to know fairly well) asked confessed his struggle with sexual lust to Srila Prabhupada. Prabhupada suggested that he try eating half as much as he felt was necessary and sleeping less. My friend Tarun Kanti and I heard that and ran with it. We cut an hour or more from our six hours of sleep, and we ate half as much as we were accustomed to eat. After a few weeks we started acting a little nuts (not to mention that we became so constipated from under-eating that boxes of Swiss Kriss couldn't make things right), and Goursundar gently persuaded us to return to eating and sleeping as the rest of the devotees did, partly by pointing out that Prabhupada's suggestion was meant for that one boy, not a general instruction. We reluctantly gave up our "fast track" to enlightenment, and were much happier for it (and, I would guess, so were the other brahmacharis).
Bhrigu - December 21, 2005 4:34 pm
The line in Brs. is sanga tyago vidurena bhagavad vimukhair janaih. Bon Maharaja translates it as "Shunning from a long distance the company of those who are averse to the Supreme Lord." Haberman translates it "Keeping far away from those who have turned away from the Lord." I don't have a word-for-word translation anywhere. Perhaps Bhrigu could help, or maybe Swami can shed some light on this for us.
sanga-tyAgaH -- giving up the company; vidUreNa -- from afar; bhagavat-vimukhaiH -- of those averse to the Lord; janaiH -- of the people
So both translations are good. Haberman's is better English, of course, but the rather drastic idea comes better out in Bon Maharaja's. I think what Rupa Goswami intends is something quite radical, to leave everything and literally go over the hills and far away -- in our context, moving to Audarya! A complete break with mundane society.
As Babhru pointed out, Bhaktivinoda Thakur offers an alternative for those unable to take that step. We spoke about this during our last Jaivadharma-meeting last Saturday (a pity you couldn't come, Haripriya!). He offers a "denominational" view of religion, separating the world into a vyavaharika or conventional and a paramarthika or transcendental sphere. Vaishnavas may work and live within society, following social rules and customs, but having their own spiritual circles within it, where somewhat different rules are followed. In other words, in the world but not of the world, as Swami says.
In the Bhaktyaloka, Bhaktivinoda defines "sanga" in this context as "acts done out of love", as contrasted with acts of duty. For example, paying taxes to the state is kind of giving donations out of duty and therefore not (asat) sanga, while donating to Swami is done out of love, and therefore (sat) sanga.
Swami - December 25, 2005 6:21 pm
Perhaps another way to look at the idea of giving up the association of nondevotees can be be drawn from the Bhagavata verse describing the discrimination of intermediate devotees.
isvare tad-adhinesu balisesu dvisatsu ca
prema-maitri-krpopeksa yah karoti sa madhyamah
Devotees who are serious about making advancement (madhyama) give up or avoid the acssociation of (upeksa) those who are envious (dvisatsu). Whereas those who may not be devotees but are ignorant and innocent like children with regard to devotion to Krsna (balisesu) can and should be associated with and thereby be given the merciful (krpa) opportunity to learn about Krsna bhakti through the example of the sincere devotee.
Most people are innocent and ignorant regarding Krsna bhakti. Give them your association.
Babhru Das - January 1, 2006 2:21 am
Have we discussed all that we will in connection with this chapter, at least for now? Let me know, so I can post Assignment 9. That addresses Chapter 7 in Nectar of Devotion, which discusses the first 18 of the 64 angas described in this chapter.
Bhrigu - January 2, 2006 8:07 pm
I think we can move on -- that is, if Haripriya is satisfied with Swami's answer to her question!
Hari-priya Dasi - January 3, 2006 9:50 am
Of course I am very satisfied with the answer! It relieved a great pain of my heart. All of the answers actually opened up new horizons for thinking and understanding this particular issue!
For some reason it just happens often that as long as I agree I don’t say anything. Usually I only bring questions or opinions up when I disagree or don’t understand something. I don’t know if it is just me, a Finnish characteristic or a more universal way of behaving in internet-forums… 
Babhru Das - January 3, 2006 8:20 pm
Haripriya, don't feel compelled to post anything just to be posting. This forum is particularly meant for generating discussion intended to fill out our understanding of what Srila Prabhupada writes in NoD. I think more discussion is better than less, and more devotees participating is better than a few, but everyone will participate according to their own needs. One comment I've heard at our discussions here on Hawaii is from a Godbrother who has been practicing for 30 years or so: "I think I've read this book three or four times. But when I read it now, it's as if I had never really read it."
And, as always, we're not closing discussion of Chapter 6. Anyone can make comments or ask questions at any time.