Tattva-viveka
brahman realisation and dependence on bhakti
Vivek - July 17, 2006 3:25 pm
Haribol,
While reading prabhupada's analysis of western philosphers he says that Socrates is Brahman realised.
Is it that people in other countries except India who get some impersonal realisation will have to perform bhakti according to vedic tradition to get liberation or maybe they will after many births surrender to Krsna by being born in land of India.
I was worried because if bhakti has to be performed only according to Vedic rituals doesnt it make it sectarian.
Secondly does Krsna only come to this earthly planet to perform his pastimes in this universe, similarly what is significance of Kailash, does Lord Siva reside in Kailash, Kasi or Kedarnath on this earthly planet only not in other heavenly planets. Is Kailash referred to in Bhagvatam, like when devas come to ask Lord Siva to drink poison the same as the one found on the earth or somewhere else.
Vivek
Swami - July 30, 2006 3:48 pm
While reading prabhupada's analysis of western philosphers he says that Socrates is Brahman realised.
Is it that people in other countries except India who get some impersonal realisation will have to perform bhakti according to vedic tradition to get liberation or maybe they will after many births surrender to Krsna by being born in land of India.
I was worried because if bhakti has to be performed only according to Vedic rituals doesnt it make it sectarian.
This question is interesting. Liberation is dependent upon bhakti, but is bhakti resticted to that which is described in our sastras, or does our sastra describe bhakti as being more universal than it might appear at a glance? This should be discussed.
Bijaya Kumara Das - July 30, 2006 4:41 pm
This question is interesting. Liberation is dependent upon bhakti, but is bhakti resticted to that which is described in our sastras, or does our sastra describe bhakti as being more universal than it might appear at a glance? This should be discussed.
I would tend to think that it is more universal than it might appear at a glance.
While reading prabhupada's purports, did he not discuss that not any one can speak Krsnas name unless he or she is a devotee, indicates that at some time they have come in contact with bhakti.
He also said that what ever we gain will never be lost but why not become 100 Krsna concious this life time instead of waiting for another chance next time or times to do it.
Vinode Vani Dasa - July 30, 2006 5:08 pm
My understanding of bhakti is that it requires a truly personal form of the Lord. Because our Lord is so personal, the avenues of service to him are both highly variegated and highly specific (i.e., we are careful to offer foods to Krishna that he actually likes). Worship of the deity is appropriate in this regard as well, because our Lord has form (another attribute of personality). As the physical embodiment of the personality of the Lord, we are able to render so many person-specific services to the deity. We are able to speak (kirtanam), hear about (sravanam), and contemplate (smaranam) the infinite qualities of our Lord, all of which are direct forms of service to him. I would surmise that as the concept of the Lord becomes more and more impersonal, the avenues of service to him become fewer and fewer. Most theistic conceptions (Christian, Judaic, Islamic) have an impersonal conception of God; Christianity may be an exception to this with the concept of Jesus as both fully God and fully human, but the concept of direct service to Jesus is still something that has not been sufficiently explored by this religion. What I think devotees of an impersonal conception of God are left with, therefore, are indirect forms of bhakti: kindness to other living entities, stewardship of the environment, upstanding moral values, prayer, contemplating the will of God, etc., all of which are pleasing to God, but do not refer to him in any personal way (I suppose that the idea of God having a will would imply God having some kind of personality to have that will, but again this idea doesn't get explored much further in other religions). These forms of indirect bhakti would be capable of providing a practitioner with attainments up to Brahman realization, but as they are devoid of personal conceptions, could go no further. As we know, Brahman realization is impossible without some bhakti--I think that we can be generous (as I believe Prabhupada was when he spoke of Socrates) and say that even those who have no conception of God, at least in the way we are used to thinking of God (and Socrates would belong in this category), would be capable of pleasing God through their actions anyway by virtue of some of the activities mentioned above. While I admit some of this is speculation on my part (I am positing a distinction between direct and indirect forms of bhakti, an idea that I can't positively attest to via scripture and the statements of guru), and thus stand to be corrected by those more knowledgable than myself, it would account for various forms of realization across the spectrum of world religions and philosophies, at the same time reserving a very high place for our conception of the Lord.
Bijaya Kumara Das - July 30, 2006 6:29 pm
I agree with Vinode Vani dasa some what here.
Socrates new he was not the body, lived after the body died as the self in some form connected to that great whole and I think this is what prabhupada saw
Swami - August 1, 2006 3:49 pm
You comments are good Vinoda. The idea of direct (mukhya vritti) and indirect bhakti (gauna vritti) is found in scripture. However, for the most part in both cases greater knowledge of Bhagavan is involved than the kinds of examples that you have suggested might be seen as indirect bhakti. For example, Brahmas' work of creation is considered indirect bhakti. Basically it involves the idea of dovetailing one's karmic propensities in the service of God, about whom there is considerable knowledge.
Then again, sincere prayer to God (vandanam), even when one does not know who or what God is, could be considered bhakti, as could contemplating the will of God. Perhaps merely believing in God may suffice.
It is also worth considering that when we say that some bhakti must be in place for one to attain liberation, it may be so little that not being against bhakti may be sufficeint. Consider the following verse that is often cited as evidence for the need of bhakti in one's pursuit of mukti.
"O lotus-eyed Lord, although nondevotees who accept severe austerities and penances to achieve the highest position may think themselves liberated, their intelligence is impure. They fall down from their position of imagined superiority because they have no regard for Your lotus feet.
Swami - August 2, 2006 2:07 pm
Of course, if there is only a little bhakti factored into the equation of one's pursuit of liberation, a lot of something else much be in place—introspection, control of the senses, etc.—if one is to be successful.
Vinode Vani Dasa - August 3, 2006 3:58 am
Of course, if there is only a little bhakti factored into the equation of one's pursuit of liberation, a lot of something else much be in place—introspection, control of the senses, etc.—if one is to be successful.
In such a case, there is a distinction between the bhakti that is performed by one desirous of liberation, and the other activities (introspection, control of the senses, etc.) that such a person performs. When a devotee practices introspection, etc., done with the intention of improving one's ability to serve Krishna, does this count as a kind of indirect bhakti, but when performed by a jnani considered to be something other than bhakti? In other words, is what separates indirect bhakti (karmic work or the attainment of knowledge) from "not bhakti at all" the intention with which it is performed?
Jason - August 3, 2006 2:05 pm
Then again, sincere prayer to God (vandanam), even when one does not know who or what God is, could be considered bhakti, as could contemplating the will of God. Perhaps merely believing in God may suffice.
As a kid, when I was questioning my Christian upbringing, I used to ask my parents, "What about people that feel God is real and do their best to serve him, but due to their remote geographical location(s), they never hear about Christ and instead, practice their particular religious beliefs with the same intent? Do they go to Hell?" My parents would respond that God knows their heart and that would be how they would be judged. it never set well with me; the idea that just because someone was practicing differently, that they may suffer in the long run. This is part of the reason that Krsna consciousness appealed to me. There was a "sliding scale" in some sense and the verse about....whatever service rendered in this life is carried over; never diminished, etc.
Vinonde Vani's question seems logical to me; that the difference between gauna vritti and "no bhakti at all" would be the person's intention; their heart; their mood and demeanor in which they are practicing their spiritual path.
I have a question....is "mercy" involved with attaining mukti, or is it really only involved in attaining bhakti?
-J
Madangopal - August 3, 2006 2:57 pm
In other words, is what separates indirect bhakti (karmic work or the attainment of knowledge) from "not bhakti at all" the intention with which it is performed?
Yes, the intent or the motive is exactly what separates it or makes it mixed bhakti. There is karma-misra and jnana-misra bhakti, where one's bhakti is influenced by karmic activity or pursuit of knowledge. If you take your examples of introspection or control of the senses devoid of an endeavor for bhakti they may simply be an endeavor for mukti or karmic fruits.
Madangopal - August 3, 2006 3:07 pm
I have a question....is "mercy" involved with attaining mukti, or is it really only involved in attaining bhakti?
It seems that mercy is involved in every pursuit, material or spiritual and including liberation. Siddhi (perfection, attainment of goal) comes through krpa (mercy) and sadhana (practice). Krsna was certainly merciful in giving Kamsa and other demons liberation. They did not take the sadhana route (though Kamsa did Krsna smaranam 24/7 
). But Vaisnava's believe in gradations of mercy... We don't want the mercy that the demons attained just by their contact with Krsna. We have the highest concept of what mercy is; devotional service, and that is the mercy we strive for.
Jason - August 4, 2006 1:36 pm
We have the highest concept of what mercy is; devotional service, and that is the mercy we strive for.
Does this mean that mercy IS, in iteself devotional service AND that mercy is what we receive when we engage in devotional service? Thanks for your responses Madan Gopal! Much appreciated.
Vivek - August 5, 2006 6:41 pm
Does this mean that mercy IS, in iteself devotional service AND that mercy is what we receive when we engage in devotional service? Thanks for your responses Madan Gopal! Much appreciated.
In the case of Gajendra, he doesnt know who the Supreme Personality of Godhead is but he cries sincerely for him so he appears, this may be some hint towards a person sincere in his pursuit being led to Krsna.
Do let me know what all of you think.
Swami - August 10, 2006 4:09 pm
In the case of Gajendra, he doesnt know who the Supreme Personality of Godhead is but he cries sincerely for him so he appears, this may be some hint towards a person sincere in his pursuit being led to Krsna.
Do let me know what all of you think.
Yes, good example. As the gita says, "sincereity is invincible,' na hi kalyana krd kascid durgatim tata gacchati.
Jason - August 20, 2006 4:30 pm
Madan Gopal....could you explain what you mean by "gradations of mercy". I would like to understand that more. Thanks.
Madangopal - August 20, 2006 5:30 pm
Madan Gopal....could you explain what you mean by "gradations of mercy".
I meant this in relation to your question about mercy for mukti. There are different conceptions of mukti. One type of liberation - sayujya (to merge with the body of the Lord) Vaisnava's don't accept. There are also four types of liberation that Vaisnava's accept - sarupya (to attain the same form as the Lord. Think of residents of Vaikunta...), salokya (liberation to the planet of the Lord), sarsti (to attain similar opulence as the Lord) and samipya (to become an associate of the Lord).
The Gaudiya Vaisnava's ultimate goal is even higher than this in that they do not even go for these four acceptable types of liberation. Their goal is worship in separation. Therefore Mahaprabhu prays mama janmani janmanisvare. Quite a high ideal we are aiming for; but the most perfect in bhakti.
Jason - August 21, 2006 4:33 am
so there's like full, fuller and the fullest mercy that once can get from Krsna and the mercy we receive is based on the mood of our heart?
Niscala Dasi - October 29, 2006 12:49 am
Yes, the intent or the motive is exactly what separates it or makes it mixed bhakti. There is karma-misra and jnana-misra bhakti, where one's bhakti is influenced by karmic activity or pursuit of knowledge. If you take your examples of introspection or control of the senses devoid of an endeavor for bhakti they may simply be an endeavor for mukti or karmic fruits.
It seems Madan here hit the nail on the head. Intention, or motive, is everything. I read recently in Bhajan Rahasya that pure worship of the Lord is defined by motive- that one does it solely to gain attraction for the Lord. So, Arjuna was fighting, and Duryodhana was doing the same activity, but only one was doing bhakti. Arjuna was fighting solely for Krsna's pleasure.
So, introspection, study of numerous books, and philosophical research are pure bhakti when the goal is Krsna, but jnana when the goal is something else, or jnana misra bhakti when there is mized motivation.
Similarly with making money, gaining assets, etc. To the extent that one is purely motivated to please the Lord by such actvity, it is devoid of karma.
On the other hand one can be 100% of the time engaged in temple worship, book sankirtan and so on, but if one is motivated by something other than pleasing the Lord, say by prestige or followers, it is not Bhakti, even if one is very successful and has a huge following or a very very big and powerful temple.
Bhakti is an affair of the heart and it takes careful discrimination to find and root out all the wrong motivations for service, through introspection and through prayer. One also requires such to find out who is a pure bhakta and take his association.
Niscala Dasi - October 29, 2006 2:00 am
on the topic of brahman/supersoul/bhagavan realization, isn't it a question of degree rather than conception? I mean you may have the conception that God is a person, but still relate to others in a materialistic way, and have materialistic motivations for your service. On the other hand, you may not have yet a clear understanding that God is a person, yet you may relate to him as such, confiding in Him as a personal friend, giving all to him etc. My point is, just because we got some mercy from a Bhagavan realized soul, and are convinced that God is a person, does not mean we are bhagavn realized! We may not even be brahman realized- seeing God in everything. We may be utter materialists at heart and impersonal in our dealings, which means we have not yet realized Paramatma.
I wrote an article to CHAKRA on this topic, which I hope to get feedback on, but I hope it won't exceed the word limit...
We know that realization of God in His Bhagavan feature is the highest realization, as it includes realization of His other features, Paramatma and Brahman. And we are given the logical proof- that as God is everything, He must be form and personality as well; but that since God is all-spiritual, His personality and form must necessarily be spiritual. And in the science of objects in this world, such as the study of electricity, it is the beginning student who knows it as an impersonal energy, but a master who knows the workings of the electrician behind it and how he directs it in certain ways according to his design.
This is convincing, logically, and therefore we worship God in his personal feature. But the problem is we have not actually realized even the Brahman feature of the Lord, what to speak of Paramatma or Bhagavan. The evidence is both in sastra and in personal experience. Sastra outlines the progress of the Bhagavan bhakta thus: as a neophyte he disregards the Paramatma within everyone's heart, for he worships the Lord in the temple with all awe and reverence, but is disrespectful to other living entities, causing them offence, or seeing them in terms of external designations and sectarian divisions. It is described that his worship of the Lord with various offerings is as good as pouring ghee into ashes. It is useless, as the Lord does not accept it, due to it being contaminated with various kinds of aparadha.
When, however, one progresses somewhat further, he has realization of the Lord in everyone's heart, and respects them duly. He no longer offends them. What happened, one may ask?. Paramatma realization is beneath Bhagavan realization, but here we see a Bhagavan bhakta progressing towards it, and sastra confirms the progress. Isn't even a *neophyte* Bhagavan bhakta superior to a fully Paramatma realized soul? Clearly not always, as both sastra and experience illustrate. Why?
When one takes to the worship of the Lord as a person, due to logical conviction given through the grace of parampara-which is the case with most of us- we are in a sense qualified as we have received the grace of the guru, but due to lack of spiritual insight, we are unqualified also. It is actually the mercy of guru and gauranga to elevate us, who have not yet been brahman-realized jnanis, or paramatma-realized yogis, to the platform of worshiping Bhagavan. It is to save us from so many lifetimes of endeavour in the short and trouble-ridden lives we traverse during the last of the four ages. But the danger is, we have no footing, no credit of our own.
Consider the child of a maths professor. He is only in elementary school, and is having trouble with his times tables. But sometimes he looks at his father's papers and copies his difficult equations and thus he appears to solve them. He can only imitate him of course, for were his father not a professor, he would have no independent ability to solve anything of the like. He can actually progress when he is thoroughly truthful and humble, and realizes his lack of realization in the maths field. If he has a superiority complex, however, and thinks he is above elementary school maths, he will never achieve the real thing.
It is absolutely necessary for those of us in the neophyte stage, to cultivate paramatma realization as part of our sadhana. Some say that we should just do the sadhana and the offenses will cease eventually, but the reality is that offensive service is an impediment, not a means, to spiritual enlightenment, as it pushes one further from the Lord. As the service must be favorable, so one must work on doing what is pleasing to the Lord. Consciousness of the presence of the Lord in the heart is a natural way to avoid offenses; it also ensures that one will associate as befits the sadhaka in the madhyama stage; choosing association not on the basis of external or psychological gratification, but on how much the association helps me be conscious of myself as a spiritual being, and all others also.
Thus from Paramatma realization of Bhagavan, one works upwards to Brahman realization of Bhagavan. One does not lose Bhagavan realization on the way, but instead progresses towards it; beyond the theoretic and ritualistic understanding. Eventually one realizes that God and His energy are one. Please note that this is different from brahman realization only. It is not realization that God is only energy- but that God is energy- as well as a Person. This is the uttama stage of realization of Bhagavan- realization of God not just in the heart, but in everything.
In the madhyama stage, one could feel God's presence in living things- in life. In this topmost stage, one feels God's presence even in inert matter. One sees Him everywhere through his energies, and there is no contaminated place or person that can shift one's gaze from the Lord. One sees things in this world as a mother sees the shoes or toys of her child who has gone to school. All her possessions remind the mother of her. She sees her child in the empty bed, in the plates, in the pictures she draws. Out of love, she sees her everywhere. It is in this consciousness that matter is no longer matter, but spirit. It is the essence of God, like a child's picture is her essence, but it indicates separtion, like the child has gone to school. And so the separation makes one cry out in love.
This would not be possible were it brahman realization alone. If God is energy only , then He is everywhere and where is the need for longing in separation- or service in union? There is a sense of satisfaction only, which makes one blissful- but inert. Since action, longing and love are functions of spirit as opposed to matter, our sastras present bhagavan realization as superior as it fulfills not just the soul's need for peace, but for these things as well.
Since much of sastra deals with realization of God's impersonal aspect, which we understand to be impermanent and akin to the "last snare of maya", it makes sense that such emphasis is there not so that we focus on that impersonal aspect as all in all- but rather to augment our realization of God as a person to its highest potential. After all, genuine Bhagavan realization cannot be learnt from books, but through personal experience under the tutelage of, and in service to the guru. Yet we see even in such cases, without proper cultivation of the consciousness of Paramatma and later Brahman realization, the neophyte does not progress due to his anarthas and offenses. Proper consciousness of Krsna in the heart, and gradually, Krsna in everything, must be cultivated.
Both guru and sastra are there to offer guidance in this endeavour. When guru sadhu and sastra assert that Bhagavan realization includes both Paramatma realization and Brahman realization, they refer to mature Bhagavan realization, for even brahman realization is beyond material desires, yet a neophyte devotee has many. Similarly when they assert that a devotee is beyond the modes of nature they mean a pure devotee. The confusion arises because we mistake external activity for inner realization, when all that may be there is an intellectual adjustment, or change in fashion of clothing and socio-religious ritual and language.
(Summarizing my points, which are open to criticism and deconstruction, all of which is most welcome, if strung together with good reason...)
To save time and the danger of falling into the limbo of brahmana blisshood, our parampara elevates us immediately to the level of service to Bhagavan by cultivating our faith in its efficacy. The rest of the qualification to enter that level must come from effort on our part to cultivate an ever expanding consciousness of God, beginning with the Diety, eventually to encompass all that is within our vision. . If we do not put forth this effort of continuing humility and meditation, we slip into the dangerous position of self-righteous inner lethargy, feeling we are all that we need to be, and that we know all that we need to know. Unfortunately, the truth is so very different....
Swami - October 29, 2006 2:57 pm
It seems Madan here hit the nail on the head. Intention, or motive, is everything. I read recently in Bhajan Rahasya that pure worship of the Lord is defined by motive- that one does it solely to gain attraction for the Lord. So, Arjuna was fighting, and Duryodhana was doing the same activity, but only one was doing bhakti. Arjuna was fighting solely for Krsna's pleasure.
So, introspection, study of numerous books, and philosophical research are pure bhakti when the goal is Krsna, but jnana when the goal is something else, or jnana misra bhakti when there is mized motivation.
Similarly with making money, gaining assets, etc. To the extent that one is purely motivated to please the Lord by such actvity, it is devoid of karma.
On the other hand one can be 100% of the time engaged in temple worship, book sankirtan and so on, but if one is motivated by something other than pleasing the Lord, say by prestige or followers, it is not Bhakti, even if one is very successful and has a huge following or a very very big and powerful temple.
Bhakti is an affair of the heart and it takes careful discrimination to find and root out all the wrong motivations for service, through introspection and through prayer. One also requires such to find out who is a pure bhakta and take his association.
Yes, vaisnavera kriya mudra vijneha na bhujaya, "Even a learned person will find it difficult to understand the actions of a Vaisnava (to trace out his or her motive)."
Motive is everything. In one sense this is the essence of Brhad-bhagavatamrta. However, it is also said that activities such as chanting Krsna nama are inherently bhakti (svarupa-siddha bhakti), regardles of one's motive. Valmiki chanted mara mara (death death) becasue he was preocupied with it being a murderer. As a result he realized Rama lila as mara thurned into Rama. So these two, the importance of motive and the power of nava vidha bhakti or at least nama kirtana need to be harmonized. At least in the case of Valmiki Narada's motive must be factored in. Narada engaged Valmiki in chanting mara/rama.
Swami - October 29, 2006 11:53 pm
on the topic of brahman/supersoul/bhagavan realization, isn't it a question of degree rather than conception? I mean you may have the conception that God is a person, but still relate to others in a materialistic way, and have materialistic motivations for your service. On the other hand, you may not have yet a clear understanding that God is a person, yet you may relate to him as such, confiding in Him as a personal friend, giving all to him etc. My point is, just because we got some mercy from a Bhagavan realized soul, and are convinced that God is a person, does not mean we are bhagavn realized! We may not even be brahman realized- seeing God in everything. We may be utter materialists at heart and impersonal in our dealings, which means we have not yet realized Paramatma.
God exists and is cognizant becasue he is ultimately joy. In other words, one could exist but not be cognizant, but one cannot be cognizant and not exist. Similarly, one can exist and be cognizant but not necesarily joyful, but one cannot be joyful and not exist or be cognizant. Joy is God's pupose, if you will, a no purpose purpose. Becasue he is joy, he also is cognizant and he exists.
Caitanya-caritamrta speaks of these three realizations in terms of ideals or conceptions that correspond with three different paths: jnana marg = Brhaman; yoga marg = Paramatma; bhakti marg = Bhagavan. They are faces of divinity in which sat, cit, or ananda are prominent, while all three are present in each to some extent.
Granted, one may tread the path of bhakti but may not have realized Bhagavan, Paramatma, or Brahman. Still it would seem that such a devote's position is better in terms of potential. In fact the jnana marg and yoga marg foster samskaras that are not helpful to the pursuit of bhakti and realization of Bhagavan. Thus in bhakti marg one is considered better off than the realized jnani or yogi regardless of one's stage of realization. Stomaching this no doubt requires so much faith in bhakti!
However, along with treading the path of bhakti comes the opportunity for offences to bhakti and Bhagavan, and these "sins of the soul" are more detrimental than ordinary sin. So an offender on the path of bhakti who has little or no realization may be worse of than another whose conception is less developed but nevertheless is more sincere about loving God.
One thing in your paragraph above that should be considered is that one can be less than personable in one's dealings with others and not be an impersonalist. "Impersonalism" is a term Prabhupada uses to refer to those who have an impersonal conception or realization of the Absolute, not one who is less than persoanable in one's dealings with others. After all, what are our material personalities anyway?
Just a few thoughts in response, but I would like to respond further to the balance of your post when I get a chance.
Niscala Dasi - October 31, 2006 2:18 am
God exists and is cognizant becasue he is ultimately joy. In other words, one could exist but not be cognizant, but one cannot be cognizant and not exist. Similarly, one can exist and be cognizant but not necesarily joyful, but one cannot be joyful and not exist or be cognizant. Joy is God's pupose, if you will, a no purpose purpose. Becasue he is joy, he also is cognizant and he exists.
Caitanya-caritamrta speaks of these three realizations in terms of ideals or conceptions that correspond with three different paths: jnana marg = Brhaman; yoga marg = Paramatma; bhakti marg = Bhagavan. They are faces of divinity in which sat, cit, or ananda are prominent, while all three are present in each to some extent.
Granted, one may tread the path of bhakti but may not have realized Bhagavan, Paramatma, or Brahman. Still it would seem that such a devote's position is better in terms of potential. In fact the jnana marg and yoga marg foster samskaras that are not helpful to the pursuit of bhakti and realization of Bhagavan. Thus in bhakti marg one is considered better off than the realized jnani or yogi regardless of one's stage of realization. Stomaching this no doubt requires so much faith in bhakti!
However, along with treading the path of bhakti comes the opportunity for offences to bhakti and Bhagavan, and these "sins of the soul" are more detrimental than ordinary sin. So an offender on the path of bhakti who has little or no realization may be worse of than another whose conception is less developed but nevertheless is more sincere about loving God.
One thing in your paragraph above that should be considered is that one can be less than personable in one's dealings with others and not be an impersonalist. "Impersonalism" is a term Prabhupada uses to refer to those who have an impersonal conception or realization of the Absolute, not one who is less than persoanable in one's dealings with others. After all, what are our material personalities anyway?
Thank you for this valuable insight. Without knowing of the pitfalls that one can fall into and not even realize that one has fallen, our faith in the efficacy of bhakti is under constant challenge. Under the pressure of group fanaticism one may put blinkers on and pretend that everyone is transcendental, but if one steps back and sees otherwise, sees the gunas of nature in full force, one wonders how it is that bhakti can foster the highest qualities of the human spirit when experience proves otherwise. And so in this way, so many lose faith in the efficacy of bhakti. But with knowledge of these pitfalls that precede bhakti, then one does not lose faith in the process itself, but rather, has more knowledge of it!
Interestingly, many devotees think that such loss of faith through identifying non-vaisnava behavior in supposedly "advanced soul" is the result of aparadha which they interpret to mean not seeing everyone as transcendental, as "fault-finding" It is expected that no matter what happens one should not find fault- even in serious transgressions of vaisnava behavior or misinterpretation of the philosophy. Thus, fear of aparadha strangles our discrimination, the very discrimination we need to advance in terms of finding good association, to discern the essence of the sastra from the non-essence, and separate the weed from the creeper growing in one's own heart. Yes, discrimination may challenge one's faith, but ultimately all it challenges is one's illusions. It enables us to use our knowledge of the pitfalls of bahkti to everyday life. With knowledge and discrimination, one sees proof of the phiolosophy all around. With knowledge and no discrimination, one does not know hoe to use it, and follows the popular conception. With discrimination and no knowledge, one sees fault and loses faith. Both are very powerful
Back to the toopic at hand, I must say that after 30 years in ISKCON I sat through so many classes that in essence were saying "we are so much better off/more advanced than the Chrsitians and so on, because we have the highest realization of God" I now feel that such talk only leads to self-righteousness and complacency, and a holier than thou attitude. The actual truth is "we are no better than anyone else, but we have been given a concept of God that is more complete, and a path to His service that is direct, therefore the potential for greater advancement may be there, given that all other essential factors such as sincerity are equal" If we don't work on the sincerity but think that we just have to mechanically do the motions of devotional service, we are no better off than anyone, except in terms of potential- or opportunity.
Niscala Dasi - October 31, 2006 2:55 am
Yes, vaisnavera kriya mudra vijneha na bhujaya, "Even a learned person will find it difficult to understand the actions of a Vaisnava (to trace out his or her motive)."
Motive is everything. In one sense this is the essence of Brhad-bhagavatamrta. However, it is also said that activities such as chanting Krsna nama are inherently bhakti (svarupa-siddha bhakti), regardles of one's motive. Valmiki chanted mara mara (death death) becasue he was preocupied with it being a murderer. As a result he realized Rama lila as mara thurned into Rama. So these two, the importance of motive and the power of nava vidha bhakti or at least nama kirtana need to be harmonized. At least in the case of Valmiki Narada's motive must be factored in. Narada engaged Valmiki in chanting mara/rama.
The example of Valmiki appears to be krpa siddhi, doesn't it? I mean, in our experience, chanting even Krsna's name while thinking of other things, one does not get automatic visions of Krsna Lila. But the nama is Krsna himself, so he gives perfection as he pleases. Sometimes he gives prema swiftly out of no cause, and that is called krpa siddhi, but more often it is through painstaking sadhana. I am saying this, beicause it can be a bit disheartening when one reads of so many instances in sastra of people chanting Krsna's name casually or jokingly and becoming more advanced than we who struggle daily with the mind, to focus on Krsna's name. Of course ultimately krpa must be there, but Krsna appears to test the many, and benedict immediately the few.
Swami - November 1, 2006 10:06 am
The example of Valmiki appears to be krpa siddhi, doesn't it? I mean, in our experience, chanting even Krsna's name while thinking of other things, one does not get automatic visions of Krsna Lila. But the nama is Krsna himself, so he gives perfection as he pleases. Sometimes he gives prema swiftly out of no cause, and that is called krpa siddhi, but more often it is through painstaking sadhana. I am saying this, beicause it can be a bit disheartening when one reads of so many instances in sastra of people chanting Krsna's name casually or jokingly and becoming more advanced than we who struggle daily with the mind, to focus on Krsna's name. Of course ultimately krpa must be there, but Krsna appears to test the many, and benedict immediately the few.
Sravanam, kirtanam, etc. are inherently bhakti and will effect one regardless of one's motive. They are inherently bhakti, that is, in comparison to other things that are not bhakti unless one's motive in doing them is to please Krsna. Still Krsna is better served in the long run by one perfoming any particular activity for his pleasure than he is by chanting his name, etc. without such a motive. Combining the two, chanting, etc. with a motive to please Krsna, is arguably most effective. Suddha-bhakti is primarily concerned with one's motive— anukulyena krnanusilanam—and secondarily with the particualr activity one performs.
The examples of Valmiki Muni and others who met with similar success are are cited with the desire to awaken faith in the holy name. Initial faith should be met with cultivation of sambandha-jnana (a proper conceptual orientation that includes theoretical knowledge of what the motive of pure devotion is). This motive should then be cultivated both in the context of one's spiritual practice and one's every day life.
Regarding krpa-siddhi, there are several kinds of such perfection arising from mercy. It comes either from Krsna or his devotee. In the case of Krsna bestowing it on someone, he does this in one of three ways: by speaking, by appearing personally, or from within the heart. The difference between sadhana-siddhi and krpa-siddhi is that sadhana-siddhi follows sadhana that one has developed a liking for (ruci). Whereas perfection (bhava/prema) developing out of mercy does not take this route.
I have not seen Valmiki decribed as a krpa-siddha anywhere in the literature, and again, his example is usually cited to awaken faith in the efficacy of the sadhana of nama kirtana. But his perfection may very well be such that it arises more from mercy than from sadhana making him a krpa-siddha. In any case, we are dependent upon both, sadhana and krpa. We should engage in sadhana-bhakti with the sense that our perfection depends upon its successful execution, while knowing that without mercy there is no hope.
Gauravani Dasa - November 1, 2006 12:44 pm
Still Krsna is better served in the long run by one performing any particular activity for his pleasure than he is by chanting his name, etc. without such a motive.
Does this statement mean that a beginner in bhakti should be more engaged in practical service under the guidance of a guru, since the sadhaka's chanting will be materially motivated?
Swami - November 1, 2006 2:55 pm
Does this statement mean that a beginner in bhakti should be more engaged in practical service under the guidance of a guru, since the sadhaka's chanting will be materially motivated?
Serving one who chants purely will be better than chanting impurely oneself, but such service to a sudha bhakta may involve chanting in accordance with his guidlines and such chanting is both chanting and serving a suddha Vaisnava.
However, if one's chanting is not purely motivated, neither will his or her service be purely motivated. We have to start somewhere, and that place is at the feet of a Vaisnava who is the embodiment of Sri Krsna's mercy— krpa avatara.
Niscala Dasi - November 1, 2006 10:22 pm
Sravanam, kirtanam, etc. are inherently bhakti and will effect one regardless of one's motive. They are inherently bhakti, that is, in comparison to other things that are not bhakti unless one's motive in doing them is to please Krsna. Still Krsna is better served in the long run by one perfoming any particular activity for his pleasure than he is by chanting his name, etc. without such a motive. Combining the two, chanting, etc. with a motive to please Krsna, is arguably most effective. Suddha-bhakti is primarily concerned with one's motive— anukulyena krnanusilanam—and secondarily with the particualr activity one performs.
Very nice explanation. We were on a forum recently when a devotee insisted that just chanting was sufficient, and that introspecting oneself for hidden motives and anarthas etc was jnana yoga and proof that we did not have faith that just chanting was enough. He also said that if you just keep chanting for the rest of your life Krsna will take you back to Godhead. Since only suddha bhakti can take you back to Godhead, and motive is the primary qualification for that as you say, it appears that only chanting without ulterior motive can give that goal- ultimately- though any sort of chanting is a starting point.
Trouble is, devotees confuse the starting point with the process itself. I rarely hear motive discussed in classes on devotional service. Quite often the message is "keep chanting- and all the bad things will disappear like mist before the sun" It seems they think that harinam will bestow even a good motive within one's heart. If that were the case, Krsna would be robbing us of our free will to oppose serving him purely. The comparison of chanting to the sun- and its automatic dissolution of darkness- applies to pure chanting, doesn't it? If one only manages to chant with the motive to please the Lord- pure chanting, then other anarthas, such as the propensity for sense gratification- will gradually vanish. They are compared to darkness. But the darkness of a wrong motive is the responsibility of the jiva, not God, for God never interferes with one's independence.
Swami - November 4, 2006 12:57 am
Does this statement mean that a beginner in bhakti should be more engaged in practical service under the guidance of a guru, since the sadhaka's chanting will be materially motivated?
Here is something from Pujyapda Sridhara Maharaja ont he subject.
“Preaching is the real service of Krsna, and not counting beads. But because it has been ordered by Mahaprabhu and Gurudeva, I have to chant the name, counting the beads. I must do my duty to that mallika. That mallika may not fast. That was the word of Prabhupada.
There should not be any doubt that when I engage myself in the preaching work, in the sevya kariya, then I am not really obeying the orders of Mahaprabhu. ‘Take laksa nama (100,000 Names).’ This is a are provincial sayings. We are always engaged in the service of Vaisnavas,
Seva, seva, the spiritual service is the all-important factor. We are not told that the gopis always count the nama on tulasi beads, but rather how they possess the highest position in the service of Krsna. Prabhupada wanted from us that intense engagement in the service under the guidance of Vaisnava.
Only by increasing the number of rounds we cannot achieve the goal. Sevanmukhe, by increasing the quality. Not quantity. But what is the quality? Sevanmukhata. Sevanmukhe hi jihvadau svayam eva sphuraty adah. There are so many sayings in the sastra to encourage harinama in different ways, but Srila Rupa Gosvami is giving essential thought there. He says, atah sri-krsnanamadi na bhaved grahyam indriyaih. Our indriya, physical or mental, they are not eligible to come in touch with the aprakrta. The name is aprakrta, Vaikuntha. Another plane. So, atah sri-krsna-namadi. Nama, rupa, guna, lila. Nothing about Krsna can be touched by our indriyas, the senses, physical senses or mental senses. But sevonmukhe hi jihvadau, when we are sevanmukha, we are in serving attitude, properly serving attitude, svayam eva sphuraty adah. He comes down of His own accord. Then this tongue can pronounce Krsna. Otherwise only the aksara, the letter, this physical sound, mundane sound. The tongue, this hand, all this, our mundane things cannot come in touch. But intervening, something is necessary to connect this body with the aprakrta. And that is sevonmukhata, our earnest desire to serve Him, to satisfy Him. That must come in connection. The bulb won't be lighted if the connection of the electricity is not there. So the name may come in the tongue and in the ear, in the mind, in writing. But the sevonmukhata, the connection must be there between Vaikuntha and this mundane world. What is that? That is seva.”
Gauravani Dasa - November 4, 2006 12:45 pm
Thanks for posting that insightful quote Guru Maharaja.
... something is necessary to connect this body with the aprakrta. And that is sevonmukhata, our earnest desire to serve Him, to satisfy Him.
That earnest desire is achieved by associating with those who already have it?
Swami - November 4, 2006 3:18 pm
Thanks for posting that insightful quote Guru Maharaja.
That earnest desire is achieved by associating with those who already have it?
Yes of course. No other way.
Niscala Dasi - November 4, 2006 10:28 pm
Yes of course. No other way.
What if one does not have the association of one who has this "ernest desire", can one associate through their books and writings and still get the same effect?
Swami - November 5, 2006 2:23 pm
What if one does not have the association of one who has this "ernest desire", can one associate through their books and writings and still get the same effect?
Sastra (books) emphasizes such association over and over again. It is hard to imagine not having the opportunity for such association. Indeed Sri Krsna says that he keeps it available, evam parampara praptam . . .
Books are passive, whereas sadhus are active agents of divinity. The two are similar but not the same in all respects. It is possible to misunderstand the book, and the book cannot pursue us to see if we have understood her words correctly. This active pursuit comes in the form of the sadhu. The theory found in the books is given practical expression in the form of the sadhu, and the practical application of the theory is dynamic and ongoing such that it extends the book's life, a life that came from the author to begin with.
In my case as an author I do not belive that one can simply read my books and not associate with me and get the same benefit. Thus the value of this forum for those who read my books.
Sri Caitanya Caritamrta teaches us that Gaura Nityananda make their gift of prema avaibale by bringng on in touch with two Bhagavatas, book and person.
dui bhäi hrdayera ksäli’ andhakära
dui bhägavata-sange karäna säksätkära
eka bhägavata bada—bhägavata-sästra
ära bhägavata—bhakta bhakti-rasa-pätra
dui bhägavata dvärä diyä bhakti-rasa
tänhära hrdaye tänra preme haya vasa
"These two brothers [Lord Caitanya and Lord Nityänanda] dissipate the darkness of the inner core of the heart, and thus They help one meet the two kinds of bhägavatas. One of the bhägavatas is the great scripture Srimad-Bhägavatam, and the other is the pure devotee absorbed in the mellows of loving devotion. Through the actions of these two bhägavatas the Lord instills the mellows of transcendental loving service into the heart of a living being, and thus the Lord, in the heart of His devotee, comes under the control of the devotee’s love."
Having said this, it is also true that one's ability to read without association and advance is dependent on the level of one's advancement. Some advancement will reuslt in any case, but some confusion can also come, especially among neophytes. Some will read and become confused, misquote, misrepresent, etc. This is rampant in the Gaudiya world community today. Thus the injunction against sudras reading is there. The dynamic application of this injunction is that while everyone should serve, not every one should read the books, at least not without guidance. However, when one is advanced--when one has real feeling for Gaudiya Vaisnavism--one can draw proper conclusions through reading and assoiate with the author one reads to a greater extent. Still even then such an advanced devotee will seek out sadhu sanga. So at some point the answer is a qualified "yes" and at another and for the most part it is "no."
Swami - November 5, 2006 3:04 pm
Since only suddha bhakti can take you back to Godhead, and motive is the primary qualification for that as you say, it appears that only chanting without ulterior motive can give that goal- ultimately- though any sort of chanting is a starting point.
Yes.
Trouble is, devotees confuse the starting point with the process itself. I rarely hear motive discussed in classes on devotional service. Quite often the message is "keep chanting- and all the bad things will disappear like mist before the sun" It seems they think that harinam will bestow even a good motive within one's heart. If that were the case, Krsna would be robbing us of our free will to oppose serving him purely. The comparison of chanting to the sun- and its automatic dissolution of darkness- applies to pure chanting, doesn't it? If one only manages to chant with the motive to please the Lord- pure chanting, then other anarthas, such as the propensity for sense gratification- will gradually vanish. They are compared to darkness. But the darkness of a wrong motive is the responsibility of the jiva, not God, for God never interferes with one's independence.
Well, I think that it is not incorrect to say that chanting will change one's motive, ceto darpana marjanam. It cleanses the heart. This purification descends. However, as it does one begins to see one's attachments for what they are and consciously tries to overcome them. How? By petitioning Harinam fervrently with introspection.
Effort in bhakti is quite diferent from effort in karma, jnana, or yoga. It is a backward effort, an attempt to attract the supreme positive by acknowledging one's negative position, to use a magentic example. Karma, jnana, and yoga are self asserting and unattractive to Bhagavan. Bhakti on the other hand involves asserting the glory of Bhagavan, which attracts his attention. Thus the Bhagavata's example of the sun dissapating the fog. Our effort is to get the sun to rise. How will we do that? It has its own orbit! We have to petition it, worship it, and thereby attract the Krsna sun to appear in our heart. Such effort is an admission of our lack of power, as opposed to the attmept to be powerful that is inherent in karma marg, jnana marg or yoga marg, and yet this is so much more powerful than any of these three. It has the power to attract the all powerful. Bhakti is an effortles effort.
I think your point may be better expressed by pointing out the difference between anistha bhajana kriya and nistha bhajana kriya. In the former their is little introspection/discrimination, whereas the latter is characterized by these. And it is only the latter type of bhajan kriya or chanting that begets prema. As our dearmost Sriman Mahaprabhu says,
ye-rüpe la-ile näma prema upajaya
tähära laksana suna, svarüpa-räma-räya
"Listen Ram-raya and Svarupa to the symptoms of the kind of chanting that awakens prema."
Here he is speaking of nistha bhajana kriya, trnad api sunicena . . . This verse is about introspection, discrimination, sorting out one's motive—the kind of chanting that brings about pure motive, suddha-bhakti, ruci—na dhanam na janam na sundarim . . . Such motive will not come without this kind of chanting, chanting that involves fully applying one's intellect intorspectively.
Swami - November 11, 2006 7:17 pm
It is absolutely necessary for those of us in the neophyte stage, to cultivate paramatma realization as part of our sadhana. Some say that we should just do the sadhana and the offenses will cease eventually, but the reality is that offensive service is an impediment, not a means, to spiritual enlightenment, as it pushes one further from the Lord. As the service must be favorable, so one must work on doing what is pleasing to the Lord. Consciousness of the presence of the Lord in the heart is a natural way to avoid offenses; it also ensures that one will associate as befits the sadhaka in the madhyama stage; choosing association not on the basis of external or psychological gratification, but on how much the association helps me be conscious of myself as a spiritual being, and all others also.
Thus from Paramatma realization of Bhagavan, one works upwards to Brahman realization of Bhagavan. One does not lose Bhagavan realization on the way, but instead progresses towards it; beyond the theoretic and ritualistic understanding. Eventually one realizes that God and His energy are one. Please note that this is different from brahman realization only. It is not realization that God is only energy- but that God is energy- as well as a Person. This is the uttama stage of realization of Bhagavan- realization of God not just in the heart, but in everything.
In the least this wording is questionable. Our deity is not Pramatma, rather Svayam Bhagavan. We should cultivate our relationship with him, realization of him. Our sadhana should not be aimed at realizing his partial manifestation as Paramatma becasue one's sadhana and sadhaya must correspond. Sri Narottama dasa Thakura writes
sadhane bhabiba jaha siddha-dehe paba taha
raga pathera ei se upaya (Sri Prema Bhakti-candrika 5.8)
“Whatever subject is constantly meditated upon at the time of performing sadhana, that same subject is the prominent meditation at the time of death and it engrosses the citta (heart).” In other words, one’s sadhya is determined by one’s sadhana.
Thus we are not to meditate on Paramtma, rather Bhagavan. Our sadhana involves inviting Bhagavan into our heart, displacing the Paramatma. Of course we should be aware that our Deity is partially manifest as Paramatma in everyone's heart and honor them accordingly. Without doing so we deny the universality of our Diety and our so called service to him is more of a disservice. Nama dharma goes well with jiva daya, jive daya krsna nama sarva dharma sara.
As for Brahman realization following Paramatma realization as part of a focused sadhana, again, the wording is troublesome. These realizations are included within realization of Bhagavan and they come about gradually in the course of cultivating realization of Bhagavan. We should look to see that they are being realized as a sign that one is applying oneself in bhakti, in that as one advances one will realize oneself to be consciousness instead of matter and act accordingly, as well as treat others as if they are part and parcel of God. Perhaps that is what you are saying, but, again, I find the language you have chosen confusing.
Niscala Dasi - November 12, 2006 6:59 am
In the least this wording is questionable. Our deity is not Pramatma, rather Svayam Bhagavan. We should cultivate our relationship with him, realization of him. Our sadhana should not be aimed at realizing his partial manifestation as Paramatma becasue one's sadhana and sadhaya must correspond. Sri Narottama dasa Thakura writes
sadhane bhabiba jaha siddha-dehe paba taha
raga pathera ei se upaya (Sri Prema Bhakti-candrika 5.8)
“Whatever subject is constantly meditated upon at the time of performing sadhana, that same subject is the prominent meditation at the time of death and it engrosses the citta (heart).” In other words, one’s sadhya is determined by one’s sadhana.
Thus we are not to meditate on Paramtma, rather Bhagavan. Our sadhana involves inviting Bhagavan into our heart, displacing the Paramatma. Of course we should be aware that our Deity is partially manifest as Paramatma in everyone's heart and honor them accordingly. Without doing so we deny the universality of our Diety and our so called service to him is more of a disservice. Nama dharma goes well with jiva daya, jive daya krsna nama sarva dharma sara.
As for Brahman realization following Paramatma realization as part of a focused sadhana, again, the wording is troublesome. These realizations are included within realization of Bhagavan and they come about gradually in the course of cultivating realization of Bhagavan. We should look to see that they are being realized as a sign that one is applying oneself in bhakti, in that as one advances one will realize oneself to be consciousness instead of matter and act accordingly, as well as treat others as if they are part and parcel of God. Perhaps that is what you are saying, but, again, I find the language you have chosen confusing.
The point I was trying to make is that our situation is different from the progression of the transcendentalist Krsna describes in the gita. We have not been through any phase of purification to take directly to the path of bhakti. We have not mastered realization of brahman, nor paramatma, nor to take a different analysis, we have not trained our minds in detachment, sense control, concentration and meditation. Consequently, we get lumbered with offenses and anarthas and progress is very slow. It can take lifetimes, and many lose faith on the way, as it doesn't seem to work, all this chanting!.
Wouldn't it be better to take a systematic approach, and along with bhakti and devotional service to the form of Bhagavan, deliberately cultivate an awareness of Krsna in the heart, in the trees, animals, and even in the rocks and landscape? Then one naturally respects them as being one would the Lord- and there is no offenses made. By cultivating meditation that all things inert and inert are nondifferent with the Lord and part of him, one surely overcomes anarthas arising from possessiveness such as the desire for personal honour and fame? Or to take the systemic approach of the gita, by deliberate cultivation of the detachment of karma yoga, the introspection of jnana yoga, the focus of dhyana yoga, then is it not likely that gradually as a result, one's chanting and service will progress beyond the offensive or inattentive stage, the stage where anarthas are prominent?
While it is true that bhakti alone can lead to the ultimate perfection, the other paths are necessary it seems. Many say we don't have to do them, as we are qualified by dint of the mercy of the pure devotee, but I don't buy it, because I see the pure devotee is equally distributing his mercy, giving all the opportunity to serve the Lord directly, but many lose faith and fall away, despite being engaged at least externally in devotional service. The internal qualifications- the ability to concentrate, be detached and so on- come about by one's own effort, and in this respect I don't think that karma yoga, dhyana yoga, and so on, or the realization of brahman and paramatama, are irrelevant to bhakti. Because we say that bhakti comes after these things doesn't mean that one who is externally involved with bhakti automatically has all these qualifications. It just doesn't tally with my own experience, putting myself forward as an example.
I much appreciate your guidance, and I am always grateful for your valuable time.
Guru-nistha Das - November 12, 2006 5:40 pm
Thank you Niscala for bringing up all these points.
I'd like to take a shot at commenting on some of the things you've expressed. If I go off, I'd appreciate the more senior devotees here correcting me.
Wouldn't it be better to take a systematic approach, and along with bhakti and devotional service to the form of Bhagavan, deliberately cultivate an awareness of Krsna in the heart, in the trees, animals, and even in the rocks and landscape? Then one naturally respects them as being one would the Lord- and there is no offenses made. By cultivating meditation that all things inert and inert are nondifferent with the Lord and part of him, one surely overcomes anarthas arising from possessiveness such as the desire for personal honour and fame? Or to take the systemic approach of the gita, by deliberate cultivation of the detachment of karma yoga, the introspection of jnana yoga, the focus of dhyana yoga, then is it not likely that gradually as a result, one's chanting and service will progress beyond the offensive or inattentive stage, the stage where anarthas are prominent?
Well, I agree with you that trying to see Krsna in everything and everyone is certainly helpful, but I don't think you have to make a separate effort in Brahman or Paramatma realization to see reality in that light. By cultivating sambandha-jnana, contemplating on it and trying to realize it, we should get the same result, is it not? There are a lot of statements in the bhakti-shastra that lend to the kind of vision of the world that you were describing above, whereas cultivating a brahman realization separately would create a samskara for that path, and could in time twist our understanding of our prayojana, or the goal.
Also, why would you want to do karma yoga, introspection of jnana yoga and focus of dhyana yoga separate from bhakti? You get detachment from seva, introsepction from sambandha-jnana and focus from mantra-dhyana. I can't see how it would be more effective to practice these paths as separate disciplines, or did I get you wrong?
The impersonal paths for example have the same problem in their congregations: people feel like they are not going anywhere and it's a rare thing to have an anvanced jnani in the group.
Maybe one of the problems that creates confusion and the feeling that bhakti isn't effective is that a lot of devotees don't see bhakti as a yoga process, but something external: the amount of rounds you chant, the amount of vairagya you perform, the amount of service that you do, whereas it's really about cultivation of motive, culitvation of increasing intensity in absorption in the Absolute. Just like any other yoga path. We just differ in out idea of the goal.
My personal experience is that we have to have the association of a real devotee in order for the process to be effective. Otherwise we will interpret the teachings according to our samskaras, natural likings and it's easy to become complacent in your practice when you don't have a sadhu kicking you in the butt and pushing to go forward.
Some thoughts on a cold Sunday morning...
Guru-nistha Das - November 12, 2006 6:00 pm
By cultivating meditation that all things inert and inert are nondifferent with the Lord and part of him, one surely overcomes anarthas arising from possessiveness such as the desire for personal honour and fame? Or to take the systemic approach of the gita, by deliberate cultivation of the detachment of karma yoga, the introspection of jnana yoga, the focus of dhyana yoga, then is it not likely that gradually as a result, one's chanting and service will progress beyond the offensive or inattentive stage, the stage where anarthas are prominent?
Hm, the idea that we first practice these sort of "self-asserting" disciplines to come to the stage where we don't have anarthas and offences (ie. stop being self-assertive), is hard to understand for me.
For example, a jnani can chant the maha-mantra attentively because his previous practice of dhyana, but it is nonetheless offensive chanting because of his motives and conception of the absolute. So attentive chanting and absence of offences don't necessarily go hand in hand.
Also in bhakti-yoga, the stage of attentive chanting corresponds with the stage of nistha, which is described as complete humility and absence of self-assertiveness. It's not a product of doing certain practices and getting detachment, knowledge or focus from them, but rather becoming "negative" as Guru Maharaja puts it, placing ourselves in realtion to Bhagavan in the right way, and as a result detachment, knowledge and focus will come.
The whole attitude of waiting for the fruits from our practice is actually an obsticle for our advancement, because the underlying motive in getting the fruits of our sadhana is to "aqcuire" something, become something more by adding into our identity, whereas bhakti is all about emptying ourselves of that tendency and admitting our helplessness...
Vinode Vani Dasa - November 12, 2006 6:44 pm
To the extent that we don't have the ability to sit and meditate on Krishna-lila constantly, the concept of bhakti becomes more complex, because we simply have to find some other way to fill our time. We should always be looking for ways to improve our bhakti, accepting that which is favorable and that which is unfavorable. This is truly an art, and, as I say, only complicated to the extent that it is unnatural for us at this stage. With good guidance, we can learn how to engage our present tendencies in Krishna's service, thereby purifying us and qualifying us for--more service! What falls into the category of "favorable for bhakti" is most likely variable depending the temperament of the individual and their particular needs for improvement in particular areas. Regarding the other jivas in the material world, offence to them is a kind of offence to Krishna, and therefore an impediment to bhakti, so whatever we can do to see them in relationship to Krishna will help us progress along the path.
Audarya-lila Dasa - November 12, 2006 8:33 pm
Sridhara Maharaja (I can't remember what book I read this in so if anyone knows the reference please post it) told that he was challenged along a similar line one time. The person said - you should teach your students to come gradually to the teachings of Mahaprabhu. I can't remember the progression he recommended, but it was something like you are suggesting Niscala. The idea being - first qualify yourself and then engage in the prema dharma. Sridhara Maharaja said he appreciated the analysis but he rejected the idea saying that Mahaprabhu has instructed everyone, regardless of qualification, to take up the highest practice of Nama kirtana and direct devotional service. He has not recommended coming to bhakti through gradual purifcation or by first engaging in other disciplines. He also said that as we are followers of Mahaprabhu, even though his analysis sounded reasonable, we reject it in favor of the advice given to us by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
The reality is that suddha bhakti is very rare so we should expect that most devotees will be in a lower stage while holding to the highest ideal. But progress is made by engaging in bhakti under the guidance of a suddha vaishnava. Our vaishnava faith is that our progress is dependent on mercy from above us and that our progress will be made by service and surrender. It is not that devotees aren't advancing because they have failed to qualify themselves to practice bhakti. The remedy is not to engage in other practices. The remedy for all of us is to engage ourselves more sincerely in bhakti and to place ourselves under the care and guidance of an advanced sadhaka who can help us to clear our vision.
Niscala, I agree with you that there are so many examples of people not progressing even after professing faith for many years and I will also offer myself as a good example of that, but I disagree with your suggested remedy. The remedy is to pray intensely and sincerely and to seek out association with higher vaishnavas.
You are right to think that we should look for development in ourselves and others in terms of qualities such as jiva daya, peacefulness, equanimity, generousity, seeing Krsna in everything and everyone, etc. However I think you miss the real point that all these qualities will come from faithful and sincere practice of sadhana bhakti. If they are not coming then the problem isn't with bhakti or the process, it is with the sincerity and practice of the individual involved.
Bhrigu - November 12, 2006 8:36 pm
As I remember hearing this story from Guru Maharaja, it was Swami Pranavananda Maharaja, the founder of the Bharata Sevashram Sangha who suggested this method to Srila Sridhara Maharaja.
Guru-nistha Das - November 12, 2006 9:50 pm
Another point to consider is that a lot of followers of different jnana paths and the buddhists too incorporate bhakti in their practice in order to advance faster!
And they want to use it only in their beginning stages and then retire it, whereas we are talking about incorporating jnana and vairagya in our beginning practices and then retiring it... funny.
Robertnewman - November 12, 2006 9:53 pm
My personal experience is that we have to have the association of a real devotee in order for the process to be effective. Otherwise we will interpret the teachings according to our samskaras, natural likings and it's easy to become complacent in your practice when you don't have a sadhu kicking you in the butt and pushing to go forward.
I think this is the best answer to the complaint that the practices of bhakti are seemingly ineffective. Adau gurvasrayam makes it very clear that association with the guru is of paramount importance on this path. It makes sense that the more intimate the association, the more powerful the process will be and the quicker the progress. Ideally one should live with the guru and serve under his direct guidance. If that is not possible, then other types of association (such as this forum and/or personal correspondence) can substitute to some degree. However, simply studying and applying the teachings on one's own as far as possible is very feeble by comparison (though far from worthless, I would say). Yet so many who call themselves bhaktas take this approach, and it's not surprising that many of them eventually fall away from bhakti altogether.
Niscala Dasi - November 12, 2006 10:57 pm
Hm, the idea that we first practice these sort of "self-asserting" disciplines to come to the stage where we don't have anarthas and offences (ie. stop being self-assertive), is hard to understand for me.
For example, a jnani can chant the maha-mantra attentively because his previous practice of dhyana, but it is nonetheless offensive chanting because of his motives and conception of the absolute. So attentive chanting and absence of offences don't necessarily go hand in hand.
Also in bhakti-yoga, the stage of attentive chanting corresponds with the stage of nistha, which is described as complete humility and absence of self-assertiveness. It's not a product of doing certain practices and getting detachment, knowledge or focus from them, but rather becoming "negative" as Guru Maharaja puts it, placing ourselves in realtion to Bhagavan in the right way, and as a result detachment, knowledge and focus will come.
The whole attitude of waiting for the fruits from our practice is actually an obsticle for our advancement, because the underlying motive in getting the fruits of our sadhana is to "aqcuire" something, become something more by adding into our identity, whereas bhakti is all about emptying ourselves of that tendency and admitting our helplessness...
I am not sure what you mean by self-asserting. I did not use that term, nor did I refer implicitly to it, at least only in the devotional sense of asserting oneself as a servant of the Lord and trying to cultivate a favorable attitude. So I also don't understand why you feel that being assertive necessarily means that one is not advancing. Was Srila Prabhupada not assertive? And when a devotee asked him how to become humble, his answer was "be bold for Krsna!" So forgive me for being assertive 
, but it appears you have a narrow interpretation of what assertiveness is! 
Forgive me also for straying from the topic atrociously. I hate it when people do that!
You wrote: It's not a product of doing certain practices and getting detachment, knowledge or focus from them, but rather becoming "negative" as Guru Maharaja puts it, placing ourselves in realtion to Bhagavan in the right way"
It is exactly this "right way" that I am alluding to. How does one come about to do bhakti in the right way? For decades I feel I did it in exactly the wrong way, and my progress was minimal or in retro. The right way can never come about by external ritual, but by deliberate cultivation of awareness. We are made aware of offenses, certainly, but on analysis, these offenses are all due to not being aware of God in the heart- one's own and others. Consider duplicity. Could one ever be duplicit and try to pull the wool over others eyes as to one's level of advancement if one were aware of God in the heart, reading one's innermost thoughts? Ulterior motive, ditto. Lack of respect and compassion, ditto. It is not enough to be aware of the wrong things- offenses- one has to be aware of what causes them- lack of awareness of paramatma, seeing God in the Diety only, but not in the heart, which is the Kanistha stage of advancement.
You wrote: "The whole attitude of waiting for the fruits from our practice is actually an obsticle for our advancement, because the underlying motive in getting the fruits of our sadhana is to "aqcuire" something, become something more by adding into our identity, whereas bhakti is all about emptying ourselves of that tendency and admitting our helplessness..."
That "acquiring" is only of an attitude which is favorable for the cultivation of devotion- showing respect to all living entities arising from an awareness of Krsna in the heart. Is this not worthy of deliberate effort to attain? Is effort at all necessary- an age old debate! Petitioning the Lord, as well as effort, is our understanding, please correct me if I am wrong. "Your prayer must also be accompanied by endeavour" (Srila Prabhupada) "Pray as if everything depends on God. Work as if everything depends on you" is the same attitude embodied by Srila Prabhupada's own lifes example. And "work" for a devotee means cultivation of consciousness. Is it God's responsibility to control our minds - because he is petitioned- or our own? God could grant the vision that he is in everything if pleased by our prayer alone- its heartfelt intensity, but more often it is through our effort combined with that, because isn't effort the proof of the sincerity of our prayer?
Not totally offtrack at this point, beacuse it relates to the topic at hand thus: as we struggle to avoid offenses by cultivating awareness of Krsna everywhere- outside and within-, and as we sincerely petition Him to help us in this attempt, the Lord surely will do so, just like a parent will help a child struggling- and failing to walk- but not a child who wants to make no effort.
Guru-nistha Das - November 13, 2006 3:14 am
Niscala dasi,
I reread your article that you posted on Chakra and realized that to some extent we are talking about the same thing but with different terms.
I realized that you equate bhagavan-, Paramatma-, and Brahman realization in your article with the stages of kanistha, madhyama and uttama adikari in a devotional context, did I get this right?
This is probably what has created the confusion. You equate the fact that a madhyama-devotee sees value in advanced devotees instead of rituals and tradition as a kind of Paramatma realization, and you use the term brahman realization to describe an uttama adhikari's view of the whole reality as Krsna, did I understand it correctly?
But the problem is (as far as my understanding goes), that these stages of devotional advancement can't really be equated with paramatma and brahman realizations, because in and of themselves they don't leave room for having the kind of conception of God that the Gaudiyas do. Rather, the stages of Madhyama and Uttama are mature devotion, as opposed to anistha bhajana, which you seem to equate with immature bhagavan realization, or kanistha adhikara.
About the term self-assertive, I wasn't saying that you are self-assertive or anything like that. I was refering to other paths, namely karma, jnana and yoga, which have a self-assertive approach in regards to means of reaching their goal, whereas bhakti is the opposite. In the beginning of the 3rd page in this thread Swami talks about this idea.
But I do see your point now, that you can use these "self-assertive" methods in a non-assertive way if your motivation is right...
You wrote: Is it God's responsibility to control our minds - because he is petitioned- or our own? God could grant the vision that he is in everything if pleased by our prayer alone- its heartfelt intensity, but more often it is through our effort combined with that, because isn't effort the proof of the sincerity of our prayer?
The process of bhakti is not to think of the effort as separate from sincerity for the right motive. In other words, the effort itself in not the reason for any attainment. All we can do is to pray and effort is only an outward expression of our sincerity, as you put it, but the effort itself does not have the power to grant us bhakti. Bhakti-sukriti, the "pilot" that enables us to be interested in vraja-prema as our goal and that steers us in the right direction, can not be increased by jnana or yoga. This is good to remember. Although we'd be completely self-controlled, but if we didn't have enough sukriti we couldn't take advantage of bhakti any better than if we were completely uncontrolled. All we can do is to pray for more eagerness to recieve that sukriti that comes from "above".
There's that nice example of the bird whose eggs were swept into the ocean by the waves and she started to carry the waters of that ocean on the shore in her small peck, in order to dry out the ocean and find the eggs. The effort in itself was useless, but the sincerity attracted Garuda and he came and threatened the ocean and the little bird got her eggs back.
It's not that the action itself had anything to do with the bird getting the eggs back, but her motive and sincerity that were expressed through her actions. In the same way, it's not that because of our effort in meditation or purification bhakti becomes accessible to us, but because of our eagerness for it. In other words, in the context of bhakti, effort is just another form of prayer or petition.
I'm absolutely open to correction if I'm wrong. I want to emphasize that I'm not here to "smash" people or anything stupid like that. I'm testing my own understanding and trying to understand the issue better. It has been very useful so far.
Niscala Dasi - November 13, 2006 4:40 am
Niscala dasi,
I reread your article that you posted on Chakra and realized that to some extent we are talking about the same thing but with different terms.
I realized that you equate bhagavan-, Paramatma-, and Brahman realization in your article with the stages of kanistha, madhyama and uttama adikari in a devotional context, did I get this right?
This is probably what has created the confusion. You equate the fact that a madhyama-devotee sees value in advanced devotees instead of rituals and tradition as a kind of Paramatma realization, and you use the term brahman realization to describe an uttama adhikari's view of the whole reality as Krsna, did I understand it correctly?
But the problem is (as far as my understanding goes), that these stages of devotional advancement can't really be equated with paramatma and brahman realizations, because in and of themselves they don't leave room for having the kind of conception of God that the Gaudiyas do. Rather, the stages of Madhyama and Uttama are mature devotion, as opposed to anistha bhajana, which you seem to equate with immature bhagavan realization, or kanistha adhikara.
Thank you for taking that time to understand what I was trying to get at. I agree that the conceptions of brahman and paramatma realizations cannot be equated with uttama and madhyama respectively. In fact I put specifically in my article that the uttama's vision of everything being Krsna is different from Brahman realization without the Bhagavan concept, as the latter does not foster devotion. I guess the oneness and difference philosophy is the only way to put it. Trouble is, when we only stress difference and not oneness, in an effort to avoid monism, we may fall prey to duality- seeing God in the diety, but not God there in the heart of your oh-so-familiar bhakta buddies or in that nuisance insect! I think that to advance, one needs to constantly balance oneness and difference- difference to foster the attitude of separateness and service, and oneness to avoid offenses in that service. And because there is the lure of monism, kanisthas are necessarily trained up in the philosophy of difference- the difference between oneself and God, how insignificant and limited we are compared to God, etc. Then as one advances and gets some sort of taste for that service, then one needs to cultivate more the oneness attitude- trying to be aware that God is not only in the diety you serve, but in everyone. Interesting, in the topmost devotees, difference disappears entirely from their consciousness (though not from their existence, of course!) as they treat Krsna as their equal. But that is because they have an superlative service attitude- and difference would be an impediment. I hope no one minds me going off the thread a bit. These emoticons are so so cute!
Niscala Dasi - November 13, 2006 11:49 am
Sridhara Maharaja (I can't remember what book I read this in so if anyone knows the reference please post it) told that he was challenged along a similar line one time. The person said - you should teach your students to come gradually to the teachings of Mahaprabhu. I can't remember the progression he recommended, but it was something like you are suggesting Niscala. The idea being - first qualify yourself and then engage in the prema dharma. Sridhara Maharaja said he appreciated the analysis but he rejected the idea saying that Mahaprabhu has instructed everyone, regardless of qualification, to take up the highest practice of Nama kirtana and direct devotional service. He has not recommended coming to bhakti through gradual purifcation or by first engaging in other disciplines. He also said that as we are followers of Mahaprabhu, even though his analysis sounded reasonable, we reject it in favor of the advice given to us by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
The reality is that suddha bhakti is very rare so we should expect that most devotees will be in a lower stage while holding to the highest ideal. But progress is made by engaging in bhakti under the guidance of a suddha vaishnava. Our vaishnava faith is that our progress is dependent on mercy from above us and that our progress will be made by service and surrender. It is not that devotees aren't advancing because they have failed to qualify themselves to practice bhakti. The remedy is not to engage in other practices. The remedy for all of us is to engage ourselves more sincerely in bhakti and to place ourselves under the care and guidance of an advanced sadhaka who can help us to clear our vision.
Niscala, I agree with you that there are so many examples of people not progressing even after professing faith for many years and I will also offer myself as a good example of that, but I disagree with your suggested remedy. The remedy is to pray intensely and sincerely and to seek out association with higher vaishnavas.
You are right to think that we should look for development in ourselves and others in terms of qualities such as jiva daya, peacefulness, equanimity, generousity, seeing Krsna in everything and everyone, etc. However I think you miss the real point that all these qualities will come from faithful and sincere practice of sadhana bhakti. If they are not coming then the problem isn't with bhakti or the process, it is with the sincerity and practice of the individual involved.
Could not the faith and sincerity of the individual that you mention here be manifest in his struggle to attain these qualities? Isn't "association with higher vaisnavas" necessary because by such association we can see just how these qualities you mention are manifest in practice so that as apprentices we can follow in the footsteps? They teach by example- and also precept. Does not this association you speak of give us instruction as to how to develop these qualities, and inform us what inferior states of consciousness we are presently in that are not conducive to bhakti? So my point is not made to deny the importance of advanced association, but rather how best to take advantage of it. Is just "basking in the presence " enough?
Audarya-lila Dasa - November 13, 2006 3:27 pm
So my point is not made to deny the importance of advanced association, but rather how best to take advantage of it. Is just "basking in the presence " enough?
Niscala, of course you are right - just associating without following is certainly not enough. By association with advanced sadhakas we do certainly see our own prospect in action. So what exactly is the practice and precept of the advanced sadhaka in our tradition? I mentioned the story about Sridhra Maharaja to illustrate precisely that point. Our acharyas (advanced sadhakas) do not recommend taking up a lesser path in order to qualify oneself for the bhakti marg.
Babhru Das - November 14, 2006 4:33 am
I like this thread! I printed it out so I could read it more carefully and at greater leisure. It looks as though there's no real disagreement, but a little misunderstanding of each other here and there, which the participants seem to have sorted out quite well. How fortunate I am to be among such introspective, sincere devotees. Maybe I have a future after all! Thanks to all of you.
Niscala Dasi - November 14, 2006 11:27 am
Niscala, of course you are right - just associating without following is certainly not enough. By association with advanced sadhakas we do certainly see our own prospect in action. So what exactly is the practice and precept of the advanced sadhaka in our tradition? I mentioned the story about Sridhra Maharaja to illustrate precisely that point. Our acharyas (advanced sadhakas) do not recommend taking up a lesser path in order to qualify oneself for the bhakti marg.
It seems that Sridhara Maharaja was responding to the suggestion that we first qualify ourselvers before taking to bhakti, for he responded that we follow Mahaprabhu in taking to Bhakti directly. My suggestion was different... that after taking to bhakti, we often still lack detachment, knowledge, concentration, and so on, and these problems can hound us for years and compromise our progress. But bhakti should not be replaced by these goals of detachment and so on, but rather be augmented by a deliberate effort to cultivate them.
If however one has the belief that these paths are entirely irrelevant to us, that the first six chapters of the gita have no value for devotees, despite the fact that Arjuna was a devotee, then we may think that attaining their fruits is a waiting game....like we just have to hang in there and keep doing our service, and one day detachment, focus, knowledge, the awareness of Krsna in the heart and so on will overwhelm us.
The goal is not the qualities themselves but pleasing the Lord by developing them, and pleasing the Lord is what bhakti is all about. The ladder is necessary to get to a high place- it is not that the ladder is in itself any sort of goal. It is valuable as a means, not an end.
Swami - November 14, 2006 4:51 pm
Language is important. To say that one can augment bhakti by the cultivation of knowledge and detachment is perhaps not the best use of words to make your point. These two, jnana and vairagya, are but maidservants of bhakti. They follow her. As the grantha raja Srimad Bhagavatam 1.2.7 states,
vasudeva bhagavati bhakti yoga prayojiyatah
janayaty asu vairagyam jnanam ca yad ahauitukam
"By rendering devotional service unto Vasudeva, one quickly acquires causeless knowledge and detachment from the world."
Indeed, jnana and vairagya are meaningless in the bigger picture of life if they are not augmented by bhakti. They are like mountian streams who, without connecting to bhakti, will never reach the ocean.
However, Sri Rupa also writes in Bhaktirasamrta-sindhu 1.2.248
jnana vairagyayor-bhakti-pravesayopayogita
isat prathamam eveti nangatvam ucitam tayoh
"It is only in the beginning of entering into the path of Bhakti that jnana and vairagya may be a little helpful. Therefore it is not correct to say that jnana-knowledge, and vairagya or asceticism are limbs of pure bhakti."
So knowledge and detachment may be helpful in the begininng, but when ruci develops they are fully accomplished by the power of bhakti. This is the idea. Devotees should, as you say, cultivate appropriate detachment, detachment from things that are unfavorable to bhakti. They should also cultivate appropriate knowledge or sambandha jnana. Sri Rupa writes that one will be better equipped (bhakti adhikara) to tread the bhakti marg if one's faith is informed by scriptural understanding (knowledge). Prior to the stage of ruci devotees should cultivate attentiveness in thier practice, especially in chanting Krsna nama and mantra dhyana. The stage of anartha nivriti is all about paying attention and introspection, cleansing the heart. As you say, one cannot go on mindlessly in the name of bhakti and expect prema to suddenly appear in the heart one day. We have seen too much of this, especially in the name of following Srila Prabhupada within Iskcon—as if there is a back door to Goloka that Prabhupad is keeping open for those who pledge alligence to Iskcon even though they chant and practice almost mindlessly.
Niscala Dasi - November 14, 2006 10:31 pm
Language is important. To say that one can augment bhakti by the cultivation of knowledge and detachment is perhaps not the best use of words to make your point. These two, jnana and vairagya, are but maidservants of bhakti. They follow her. As the grantha raja Srimad Bhagavatam 1.2.7 states,
vasudeva bhagavati bhakti yoga prayojiyatah
janayaty asu vairagyam jnanam ca yad ahauitukam
"By rendering devotional service unto Vasudeva, one quickly acquires causeless knowledge and detachment from the world."
Indeed, jnana and vairagya are meaningless in the bigger picture of life if they are not augmented by bhakti. They are like mountian streams who, without connecting to bhakti, will never reach the ocean.
However, Sri Rupa also writes in Bhaktirasamrta-sindhu 1.2.248
jnana vairagyayor-bhakti-pravesayopayogita
isat prathamam eveti nangatvam ucitam tayoh
"It is only in the beginning of entering into the path of Bhakti that jnana and vairagya may be a little helpful. Therefore it is not correct to say that jnana-knowledge, and vairagya or asceticism are limbs of pure bhakti."
So knowledge and detachment may be helpful in the begininng, but when ruci develops they are fully accomplished by the power of bhakti. This is the idea. Devotees should, as you say, cultivate appropriate detachment, detachment from things that are unfavorable to bhakti. They should also cultivate appropriate knowledge or sambandha jnana. Sri Rupa writes that one will be better equipped (bhakti adhikara) to tread the bhakti marg if one's faith is informed by scriptural understanding (knowledge). Prior to the stage of ruci devotees should cultivate attentiveness in thier practice, especially in chanting Krsna nama and mantra dhyana. The stage of anartha nivriti is all about paying attention and introspection, cleansing the heart. As you say, one cannot go on mindlessly in the name of bhakti and expect prema to suddenly appear in the heart one day. We have seen too much of this, especially in the name of following Srila Prabhupada within Iskcon—as if there is a back door to Goloka that Prabhupad is keeping open for those who pledge alligence to Iskcon even though they chant and practice almost mindlessly.
Thankyou Swami for making things clearer for me, with the cold light of reason and the warm light of sastra! It was with this hope that I posted my article here,the hope that it would be analyzed in this way, to see what value and faults it has.
I agree with you that choice of words is important. The word maidservant is an interesting one, as she not only follows but serves, indicating that jnana and vairagya can serve bhakti, and as you point out, up to the stage of ruci they not only serve bhakti but are necessary to help one develop the genuine thing. I guess this is the service they perform- to help the mind be steady enough to concentrate on the mantra, to engage the wandering mind in topics of the bhakti philosophy etc. So I think I will be requiring the help of this maid for a while to come!
I couldn't agree more with your point about the Iskcon-as-the-ticket-to-goloka mentality. Kundali Prabhu tried for years to correct this understanding, but it is still rife, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. I have learnt far more in six years out of the movement than in twenty years in it. The philosophy, without the shackles of an institution, shines beautifully.
Swami - November 14, 2006 11:04 pm
Thankyou Swami for making things clearer for me, with the cold light of reason and the warm light of sastra! It was with this hope that I posted my article here,the hope that it would be analyzed in this way, to see what value and faults it has.
I agree with you that choice of words is important. The word maidservant is an interesting one, as she not only follows but serves, indicating that jnana and vairagya can serve bhakti, and as you point out, up to the stage of ruci they not only serve bhakti but are necessary to help one develop the genuine thing. I guess this is the service they perform- to help the mind be steady enough to concentrate on the mantra, to engage the wandering mind in topics of the bhakti philosophy etc. So I think I will be requiring the help of this maid for a while to come!
Speaking of sastra, I meant to add this verse (Brs 1.2.254) to my post:
rucim udvahatas tatra janasya bhajane hareh
visayesu garistho ‘pi ragah prayo vilhyate
"Should a person attain ruci in the service of Hari, all his worldly attachments, however hard, shall soon melt away." As Mahaprabhu Sri Caitanyadeva says in this connection, na dhanam na janam na sundarim . . . This is where actual suddha-bhakti begins and much of what is said about this standard of bhakti applies. There is much to be said on the other thread about yukta vairagya, karma yoga, etc. along these lines. Out of time here and others should write to help themselves in their own realizations.
I couldn't agree more with your point about the Iskcon-as-the-ticket-to-goloka mentality. Kundali Prabhu tried for years to correct this understanding, but it is still rife, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. I have learnt far more in six years out of the movement than in twenty years in it. The philosophy, without the shackles of an institution, shines beautifully.
Very well said! We are on the same page here. So good to have you on tattva-viveka.You have a lot of personal integrity.
Citta Hari Dasa - November 15, 2006 6:06 pm
If however one has the belief that these paths are entirely irrelevant to us, that the first six chapters of the gita have no value for devotees, despite the fact that Arjuna was a devotee, then we may think that attaining their fruits is a waiting game....like we just have to hang in there and keep doing our service, and one day detachment, focus, knowledge, the awareness of Krsna in the heart and so on will overwhelm us.
Certainly we must make some effort in the beginning to purposefully cultivate detachment. In Gita 13.9 Krsna recommends the practice of janma-mrytu-jara-vyadhi-duhka-dosanudarsanam, "Repeated contemplation of the painful shortcomings of birth, death, old age, and disease," and in the next line, asaktih, detachment. In 15.3 we find: asvattha enam su-virudha-mulam, asanga-sastrena drdhena chittva--"Cut down this deeply rooted asvattha tree with the ax of detachment. . . " So it is clear that within the context of the practice of bhakti the sadhaka must (at least until ruci awakens, as Guru Maharaja pointed out) make some effort to change his or her perception of the world in the form of deliberate cultivation of detachment.
In my experience this has helped me greatly. But I must confess that there have been times when, through no conscious effort of my own I have come to a deeper level of detachment, and/or (usually and) had greater ability to focus on Hari nama, simply by being completely absorbed in seva. It can be a bit strange--detachment sort of sneaking up on me like that--and I only took note of it because I caught myself seeing the world differently. But I will say that such engagement is by no means mechanical or mindless--absorption obviously includes the mental and intellectual faculties to their utmost.
Niscala Dasi - November 18, 2006 6:41 am
Certainly we must make some effort in the beginning to purposefully cultivate detachment. In Gita 13.9 Krsna recommends the practice of janma-mrytu-jara-vyadhi-duhka-dosanudarsanam, "Repeated contemplation of the painful shortcomings of birth, death, old age, and disease," and in the next line, asaktih, detachment. In 15.3 we find: asvattha enam su-virudha-mulam, asanga-sastrena drdhena chittva--"Cut down this deeply rooted asvattha tree with the ax of detachment. . . " So it is clear that within the context of the practice of bhakti the sadhaka must (at least until ruci awakens, as Guru Maharaja pointed out) make some effort to change his or her perception of the world in the form of deliberate cultivation of detachment.
In my experience this has helped me greatly. But I must confess that there have been times when, through no conscious effort of my own I have come to a deeper level of detachment, and/or (usually and) had greater ability to focus on Hari nama, simply by being completely absorbed in seva. It can be a bit strange--detachment sort of sneaking up on me like that--and I only took note of it because I caught myself seeing the world differently. But I will say that such engagement is by no means mechanical or mindless--absorption obviously includes the mental and intellectual faculties to their utmost.
Being completely absorbed in seva- for the right reason- would definitiely result in detachment because one is absorbed not in pleasing oneself but the Lord. Actually, it is the process of detachment itself, as it cultivates a non-enjoying spirit, which satisfies the self nevertheless ,and so one doesn't have to hanker after sense gratification, gross or subtle. So I can see how the process would work practically, and of course your testimony is further proof. But I think the snag that devotees get caught on is when they don't see detachment creeping up as in your case, and think that therefore - after 20 or 30 years- the process doesn't work, when the most important ingredient, motive, was never there. But Swami in one post said that chanting can give one the right motive for chanting. I guess it could if one sincerely petitions the Lord for a desire to please him, to be aware of him being in the holy name, etc. I don't think that Hari Nama would give such a motive to someone not interested in purifying his motives. It would interrupt the free will.
Which reminds me of something I wanted to ask. Somewhere it is mentioned thaT Lord Chaitanya distributed love of Godhead to all. Doesn't that go against the principle of free will? What if someone doesn;t want to love God and anyway how can one love unwillingly? 