Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Yāmunācārya: A Rebuttal to Misattribution Claims
devācāryaṁ yaṁ viduḥ sat-kavitve
pārāśaryaṁ tattva-vāde mahāntaḥ |
śṛṅgārārtha-vyañjane vyāsa-sūnuṁ
sa śrī-rūpaḥ pātu no bhṛtya-vargān ||
Some modern critiques claim that We, Gauḍīyas projected our ontological beliefs on Yāmunācārya's stotra-ratna. In this article we will examine the claim.
The verse under discussion is —
yad aṇḍam aṇḍāntara-gocaraṁ ca yad
daśottarāṇy āvaraṇāni yāni ca |
guṇāḥ pradhānaṁ puruṣaḥ paraṁpadaṁ
parātparaṁ brahma ca te vibhūtayaḥ ||
Which as per us translates to —
The universe, the [entire] domain within the universe, the coverings [over the universe] each ten times greater [than the previous one], the guṇas, pradhāna, the Puruṣa, the supreme abode, and the Absolute, Brahman—these are all your splendors.
And as per them translates to —
The cosmic sphere, all that is within it, its enclosures which are more than ten, the three GuNaas, the prakriti, the individual self, the supreme abode (SrI Vaikuntam) and the Brahman (Dhivya Mangala vigraham in the present context) who is higher than the individual self - all these are manifestations of Your splendor.
First of all, we will address the misconceptions that other Sampradāyas have regarding our understanding of Brahman, Paramātmā manifestations of Bhagavān, The Advaya tattva.
Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi accepts Brahman as bhedatrayavivarjita, "Free from three kinds of differences "svagata", "sajātiya", "vijātiya", "advayatvaṃ cāsya svayaṃ-siddhatādṛśātādṛśatattvāntarābhāvaāt svaśaktyeka-sahāyatvāt | paramāśrayaṃ taṃ vinā tāsām asiddhatvāc ca |". In the Bṛhadbhāgavatāmṛta, Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmi writes — "paramātmā para-brahma sa eva parameśvaraḥ |ity evam eṣām aikyena sajātīya-bhidā hatā ||". Thus, the claim of Gauḍiyas taking Brahman as an independent different entity from Bhagavān stands refuted. In the Sātvata-tantra as well we find the same conclusion— "ekam eva paraṃ tattvam avatāri sanātanam śrīkṛṣṇabrahmapuruṣaiḥ saṃjñābhir dīyate pṛthak yathā bhānoḥ prakāśasya maṇḍalasyāpṛthaksthitiḥ tathā śrīkṛṣṇadevasya brahmaṇaḥ puruṣasya ca ataḥ kṛṣṇasya devasya brahmaṇaḥ puruṣasya ca vastuto naiva bhedo hi varṇyate tair api dvija". In the Bhāgavatam itself "vadanti tat tattvavidastattvaṃ yaj jñānam advayam, brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate."
Let us see the definition of "Brahma" by Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi — "tad ekam evākhaṇḍānanda-svarūpaṁ tattvaṁ thūtkṛta-pārameṣṭhyādikānanda-samudayānāṁ paramahaṁsānāṁ sādhana-vaśāt tādātmyam āpanne, satyām api tadīya-svarūpa-śakti-vaicitryāṁ, tad-grahaṇāsāmarthye cetasi yathā sāmānyato lakṣitaṁ, tathaiva sphurad vā, tadvad evāvivikta-śakti-śaktimattā-bhedatayā pratipadyamānaṁ vā brahmeti śabdyate | " "The Absolute Reality, which is indivisible and of the nature of pure bliss, is known as Brahman by those transcendentalists (paramahaṁsas) who have completely lost all taste for material happiness—even that attainable by Śrī Brahmā—and who, through ardent spiritual practice, have realized their identity with that Reality "tattvaṁ paraṁ yogināṁ". However, because their hearts are unable to perceive the variegated manifestations of the Absolute’s internal potencies, they experience that Reality in a non-specific, undifferentiated manner, exactly in accordance with the way they have approached it. Thus, when the Absolute Truth is apprehended without distinguishing between the conscious energetic Source and His energies, it is designated as Brahman."
The Definition of Paramātmā— "atha tathā-vidha-bhagavad-rūpa-pūrṇāvirbhāvaṁ tat tattvaṁ pūrvavaj jīvādi-niyantṛtvena sphurad vā pratipādyamānaṁ vā paramātmeti śabdyata iti | " "When this tattva in the form of Bhagavan, which has all the above- stated qualities and is the complete manifestation of Absolute Reality, is described or realized as the controller / regulator of living beings by the process described before, He is called Param atma, or God as the Supreme Immanent."
Now the definition of Bhagavān— "atha tad ekaṁ tattvaṁ svarūpa-bhūtayaiva śaktyā kam api viśeṣaṁ dhartuṁ parāsām api śaktīnāṁ mūlāśraya-rūpaṁ tad-anubhāvānanda-sandohāntar-bhāvita-tādṛśa-brahmānandānāṁ bhāgavata-paramahaṁsānāṁ tathānubhavaika-sādhakatama-tadīya-svarūpānanda-śakti-viśeṣātmaka-bhakti-bhāviteṣv antar-bahir apīndriyeṣu parisphurad vā tadvad vivikta-tādṛśa-śakti-śaktimattā-bhedena pratipadyamānaṁ vā bhagavān iti śabdyate |" "That very same Absolute Reality is named Bhagavan when, as the reservoir of all other transcendental energies, it manifests unique characteristics by the power of its internal potency and becomes revealed to the senses, both internal and external, of the devotional transcendentalists (bhagavata-paramahamsas)"tattvaṁ paraṁ yogināṁ". For such devotees the bliss of encountering the Absolute replete with its innate attributes subsumes the bliss of Brahman realization. The senses of such devotees are transmuted through devotion, which itself is a specific aspect of the conscious bliss-potency and the sole efficient cause making possible this realization. So, when the Absolute Truth is defined precisely in this manner, taking into consideration the distinction between the conscious energetic Source and its energies, it is known as Bhagavan."
It is not that in the śāstras strict nomenclature is always maintained "yadyapy ete brahmādi-śabdāḥ prāyo mitho’rtheṣu vartante, tathāpi tatra tatra saṅketa-prādhānya-vivakṣayedam uktam". Yet that is to be understood as per the context.
Further "ānanda-mātraṁ viśeṣyaṁ, samastāḥ śaktayo viśeṣaṇāni [śakti, not viśeṣaṇa in convention], viśiṣṭo bhagavān ity āyātam | tathā caivaṁ vaiśiṣṭye prāpte pūrṇāvirbhāvatvenākhaṇḍa-tattva-rūpo’sau bhagavān | brahma tu sphuṭam aprakaṭita-vaiśiṣṭyākāratvena tasyaivāsamyag āvirbhāva ity āgatam |" as corroborated in the Bhāgavatam— "jñānaṃ viśuddhaṃ paramārtham ekam anantaraṃ tv abahir brahma satyam pratyak praśāntaṃ bhagavac-chabda-saṃjñaṃ
In a commentary to the quoted "yad aṇḍam aṇḍāntara-gocaraṁ" an ācārya of our line writes "brahma tu bhagavata eva kvacid adhikāriṇi nirviśeṣatvenāvirbhāva-viśeṣaḥ" "“Brahman” refers to the particular non-differentited appearance of Bhagavān suited to those of certain eligibility", "The Gauḍīyas were naive of the siddhānta of Śrīvaiṣṇavites"can't be said as we find in the "Durgama-saṅgamanī-ṭīkā" of Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi "yadyapy etair brahma-śabdenāpi bhagavān vācyate, nirviśeṣaṁ brahma tu pṛthak nāṅgīkriyate, tathāpi matāntaram aṅgīkṛtya tad idaṁ proktam iti jñeyam" "Though the Śrī-vaiṣṇavas say that word brahman denotes bhagavān and do not accept the existence of a separate impersonal brahman, it should be understood here that another opinion has been accepted and is stated here." In the commentary of Śrībhagavadgītā 14.27 Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi— "yasmāt brahma-pucchaṃ pratiṣṭheti parama-pratiṣṭhatvena śrutau yat prasiddhaṃ tac ca tasyām eva śrutau ānanda-mayāṅgatvena darśitaṃ tasya pucchatva-rūpita-brahmaṇaḥ | ānanda- mayo'bhyāsād iti sūtrakāra-sammata-para-brahma-bhāva ānandamayākhyaḥ pracura-prakāśo ravir itivat pracuraś cānanda-rūpaḥ śrī-bhagavān ahaṃ pratiṣṭhā te | yadyapi brahmaṇo mama ca na bhinna-vastutvaṃ tathāpi śrī-bhagavad- rūpeṇaivod iva mayi pratiṣṭhātvasya parā kāṣṭhety arthaḥ | svarūpa-śakti- prakāśenaiva svarūpa-prakāśasyāpy ādhikyārhatvāt | nirviśeṣa-brahma- prakāśasyāpy upari śrī-bhagavat-prakāśa-śravaṇāt | ata ekasyāpi vastunas tathā tathā prakāśa-bhedo rajanī-khaṇḍino jyotiṣo mārtaṇḍa-maṇḍala-gata- gabhasti-bhedavad utprekṣyaḥ |ato brahma-prakāśasyāpi mad-adhīnatvāt kaivalya-kāmanayā kṛtena mad- bhajanena brahmaṇi nīyamāno brahma-dharmam api prāpnotīty arthaḥ | atra śrī-viṣṇu-purāṇam api sampravadate - śubhāśrayaḥ sa cittasya savargasya tathātmanaḥ iti [ViP 6.7.76] | vyākhyātaṃ ca tatrāpi svāmibhiḥ | savargasyātmanaḥ para-brahmaṇo'py āśrayaḥ pratiṣṭhā | tad uktaṃ bhagavatā brahmaṇo hi pratiṣṭhāham iti | atra ca tair vyākhyātam | brahmaṇo'haṃ pratiṣṭhā ghanībhūtaṃ brahmaivāham | yathā ghanībhūta- prakāśa eva sūrya-maṇḍalaṃ tadvad ity arthaḥ | iti |" "Because the Śruti proclaims “brahma-pucchaṃ pratiṣṭhā”—that Brahman is the supreme support—yet in that very same Śruti it is shown to be a limb of the Blissful One (ānandamaya-aṅga), the Brahman metaphorically designated as a “tail” is thus subordinate [also in the śrutigītā "puruṣa-vidho 'nvayo 'tra caramo 'nna-mayādiṣu yaḥ"]. That ānandamaya, recognized by the sūtrakāra through the principle “ānandamayo ’bhyāsāt”, is accepted as Parabrahman. I, Śrī Bhagavān, am the support (pratiṣṭhā) of that Brahman—being myself the form of abundant bliss—just as the sun is a mass of condensed light. Although Brahman and I are not different in substance, still, only in Me—as I appear specifically in the form of Śrī Bhagavān—does the function of being the ultimate support attain its highest limit (parā kāṣṭhā). This is because the manifestation of the essential nature (svarūpa) itself reaches superior fullness only through the manifestation of the essential potency (svarūpa-śakti). Hence scripture speaks of the manifestation of Śrī Bhagavān as superior even to the manifestation of unqualified Brahman. Therefore, even a single reality admits of distinctions in manifestation, figuratively speaking (utprekṣā), just as the night-dispelling luminary is spoken of as differentiated into the solar orb and the rays that proceed from it. Consequently, since even the Brahman-manifestation depends upon Me, one who worships Me with the desire for kaivalya is led into Brahman and attains even the characteristics of Brahman. This is the intended meaning. In this connection, the Śrī Viṣṇu Purāṇa also declares: śubhāśrayaḥ sa cittasya savargasya tathātmanaḥ “He is the auspicious refuge and support of the all-pervading Self.” This has been explained there by the Śrīdharasvāmi as well: even Parabrahman, the all-pervading Self (savargasya ātmanaḥ), has Him as its refuge and foundation. Therefore Bhagavān Himself states, “brahmaṇo hi pratiṣṭhā aham”—“I am the support of Brahman.” They further explain this as follows: “I am the support of Brahman,” meaning, “I myself am Brahman in its condensed form”—just as the solar orb is condensed light itself. Such is the intended sense."
In the Viṣṇupurāṇa we find "dve rūpe brahmaṇas tasya mūrtaṃ cāmūrtam eva ca" Śrī Yamunācārya in his Catuḥśloki writes "śānta-anantam-ahāvibhūti paraṃ yad-brahma rūpaṃ harer-mūrtaṃ brahma tato ʼpi tatpriyataraṃ rūpaṃ yadatyadbhutam" here rūpaṁ doesn't mean form [body] but the aspects as found in the Viṣṇupurāṇa quotation, accepting a distinction between Viṣṇu's body and his svarūpa in the vein of Śrī Vaiṣṇavites, we must accept that Viṣṇu has been called "mūrtaṁ-brahma" thus it is Viṣṇu in the form who is being addressed not his body otherwise the term would have been "brahmaṇo-mūrti", if mūrtaṁ-brahma referred to his body which is distinct from himself then we would have to accept two Brahmans. In the Varadarāja Pañcaśata writes śrī Veṅkaṭanātha "viśvātiśāyi sukharūpa yadātmakastvaṃ vyaktiṃ karīśa kathayanti tadātmakāṃ te . yenādhirohati matistvadupāsakānāṃ sā kiṃ tvameva tava veti vitarkaḍolām". When the Ekāyanaśruti "yadātmako bhagavān tadātmikā vyaktiḥ kimātmako bhagavān jñānātmaka aiśvaryātmaka" is taken in mukhyavṛtti we do not require Bhagavān to be different from his form, how so ? it is seen that the word "bhagavān" this means that He is manifesting his śaktis and thus it can't mean to be something divested of forms, as found in a smṛti "eka eva paro viṣṇur bhuṣā-heti-dhvajeṣv ajaḥ tat-tac-chakti-svarūpeṇa svayam eva vyavasthitaḥ". When in the śāstras the form of the Lord is mentioned different to Him, it is to be understood in the same manner as someone says "The Coils of the Snake" or "The Head of Rāhu" etc. "sac-cid-ānanda-sāndratvāt dvayor evāviśeṣataḥ | aupacārika evātra bhedo'yaṃ deha-dehinoḥ ||", in the Kurma Purana "deha-dehi-bhidā cātra neśvare vidyate kvacit", In the śruti "tasya yathā kapyāsaṃ puṇḍarīkamevamakṣiṇī", "neha nānā'sti kiṃcana . mṛtyoḥ sa mṛtyuṃ gacchati ya iha nāneva paśyati", "yathodakaṃ durge vṛṣṭaṃ parvateṣu vidhāvati evaṃ dharmān pṛthak paśyaṃstānevānuvidhāvati" the Ekāyanaśruti "yadātmako bhagavān tadātmikā vyaktiḥ kimātmako bhagavān jñānātmaka aiśvaryātmaka" says the same. If we maintain the Śrī Vaiṣṇavite reading of the śruti we would have to accept two Brahmans, "Brahman" and "Brahman's Body" as the Śruti directly says "yadātmako bhagavān tadātmikā vyaktiḥ" of what is constituted Bhagavān so is the constitution of his manifestation [form] violating "gatisāmānyāt", "ubhayavyapadeśāttvahikuṇḍalavat" etc. Brahman and his body being one in essence can't be said to be vibhuti of one or the other, what is the separating constraint in here? We say "Brahma" is a vibhuti of Bhagavān because in that form Bhagavān does not manifest his variegated śaktis "bhavadbhāvātmakaṃ divyamadhvanaḥ pāramuttamam| śaktimacchaktibhāvena tad dvidhā vyavatiṣṭhate ||" even "aniruddha" is called śakti in the Lakṣmitantra "nilīnacitrarūpā yā sarvatra samavasthitā| avyāhatāsīcchaktirme so'niruddhaḥ prakīrtitaḥ ||", The point we want to convey is the cause hierarchy in Advaya Tattva is the degree of manifesation of it's śaktis "śaktir aiśvarya-mādhurya-kṛpā-tejo-mukhā guṇāḥ śakter vyaktis tathāvyaktis tāratamyasya kāraṇam". In Harivaṁśa, Śrī Kṛṣṇa says "brahma-tejo-mayaṁ divyaṁ mahad yad dṛṣṭavān asi | ahaṁ sa bharata-śreṣṭha mat-tejas tat sanātanam || prakṛtiḥ sā mama parā vyaktāvyaktā sanātanī | tāṁ praviśya bhavantīha muktā yoga-vid-uttamāḥ || sā sāṅkhyānāṁ gatiḥ pārtha yogināṁ ca tapasvinām | tat paraṁ paramaṁ brahma sarvaṁ vibhajate jagat || mām eva tad ghanaṁ tejo jñātum arhasi bhārata ||". Thus, the Gauḍīya understanding remains intact.
Comments
Post a Comment