Anuga - The meaning of the term

Some scholars interpreting Gaudiya Vaisnavism for English readers present Raganuga as a process of 'imitation' (S.C.Cakravarti,O.B.L.Kapoor,N.C.Ghose...) But,others have objected to the use of the word imitation and would rather speak of anuga or anusara as ''putting oneself in the service of '' or ''becoming subordinate to'' one of Vrajaloka.This is particularly true of modern Bengali writers (for example-Radhagovinda Nath),who point out that some important commentaries on Rupa's works make much of the fact that Rupa used the term anusara as a synonym for anuga,not anukara.

One is to ''follow'' (anuga or anusara) the Vrajaloka, not ''merely imitate''(anukara) them. Anuga, they insist, is not anukara.

jiva

 I think you might have seen some English translations where the Indian writer whose native tongue is Hindi or Bengali did not get the meaning across in translation.  For example Dr. Kapoor in one place translates from the Hindi "they all ran to see the snake", when he meant to say "they all ran away upon seeing the snake".  The opposite meaning came out in translation.  I noticed that he makes more of these types of mistranslations in the biographies than in his "Philosophy and Religion of Sri Caitanya".

So it could be the 'imitation' was there just as a poor choice of words.  I do not know for sure, without looking more closely at the originals and the translations.

Thanks Ananga.

In my understanding,Jiva Goswamin(in his Bhakti Sandarbha) illustrates that anuga includes anukara.

In the context of a discusion of Raganuga,Jiva says that because the demoness Putana merely imitate (anukara) a wet nurse for Krsna (by suckling him at her breast,though her intention was to kill him) she attained salvation.Jiva does not claim that Raganuga is altogether different from imitation (anukara) but that is something MORE than 'merely imitation'. That is,anuga is ''imitation''plus something more. That 'something more' is the right intention,the intention of gaining the emotional state (bhava) of the model one is imitating.

Without this spiritual intention,imitation would be but more impersonation. Isn't?

jiva

Now I understand the distinction more clearly after your second post.  I agree with your assessment.  The raganuga tradition has never condoned concocted practices or imitation of the Lord or His eternal associates.  I have heard of gurus falsely claiming to teach the bhakti tradition that role play as kRSNa and surround themselves with young women in imitation of the rAsa dance.  That type of imitation is an example of what you are talking about.  One would have to liken such persons more to rock stars than genuine spiritual preceptors.  Someone told me once that most of them stand out on account of wearing dark orange robes (like followers of Shankaracarya).

Yes,you speak about Sahajiya-Vaisnavas.

But ,questions concerning the proper method of `imitating` the Vrajaloka with the sadhaka-rupa,the physical body, were not firmly settled by either Rupa or Jiva,and over the course of time a variety of interpretations arose and came into conflict.In particular,two strategies developed to deal with the incongruity of the female models and the male practicioners.The two strategies eventually came into conflict,with the result that the first strategy was soundly condemned by the orthodox tradition.

This first strategy followed the seemingly logical development of the Raganuga Bhakti Sadhana and encouraged its male adherents to actually transform the physical body to be congruent with the female models,whereas the second strategy developed an interpretation which involved two different sets of models for the two different bodies.

The practicioners following the first strategy literally and physically imitate the gopis by taking on the dress and behavior of a woman.They believe that since their true and essential identity is a gopi,they should dress and act the part.Many of the early followers of this path must certainly have had their own strong rationale for  so doing,but they have left no writen records.Rupa Kaviraja (NOT  Rupa Goswamin!),is usually blamed for giving written rationalization for such literal imitative action with the physical body and his works were condemned by a council held in Jaipur in 1727.

jiva

A short note on the classical meaning of the word "sahajiya" -- I believe originally it was attributed to a class of men who imitated the roles of Radha-Krishna and the gopis, and in their material bodies tried to act the erotic pastimes of Vraja. This appears to be quite different from the class of men (or ladies) who try to attain a particular bhava by adopting his/her (the role model's) clothes and nature in one's external body. The difference being that in the "classical sahajiyaism" there are also people who enact the role Krishna, and hence both ashraya and visaya are present in the "sadhana". Though I am not familiar with the philosophy of Ativadi Rupa Kaviraja, I believe this was not his doctrine.

By the way, is there a standard definition of "sahajiya" found anywhere? It is often loosely attributed to one and all.

Rupa Kaviraja does not accept the interpretation which insists that the practicioner imitate Vrajaloka only in the mind and follow the injunctions of the Vaidhi Bhakti with the body.Instead,he urges the practicioner to imitate the residents of Vrajaloka with the mind ,body,and voice of BOTH bodies.

There is no direct evidence that suggests whether Rupa Kaviraja did or did not participate in such acts as dressing as a gopi,but his theories did lend themselves to the rationale,an even impetus,for such acts.However,we can conclude that if he were important enough that a council convened especially to condemn his works,
he must have offered a significantly influential interpretation of the sadhana.But,Rupa Kaviuraja's interpretation of what Rupa Goswamin meant by "imitating the Vrajaloka with the sadhaka- rupa" was not accepted as authoritative by orthodox Gaudiya Vaisnavas;the honor was to go to Visvanatha Cakravartin.

The term 'sahaja' litarally means "easy" or "natural",and in this meaning the term is applied to a system of worship and belief in which the natural qualities of the senses should be used,not denied or suppressed.

The roots of Sahajiya sects/schools lie well within the ancient tradition of the Tantras.Both Tantrics and Sahajiyas believe that man is a microcosm,a miniature universe;both believe in unity as the guiding principle of this universe,that all duality,even that of the sexes,is falsehood and delusion and that cosmic unity is regained, or represented,by man and woman in sexual union;both are humanistic,and begin with the analysis of the nature of man,and see as the end of man the gaining of the "natural state",the sahaja,the state of ultimate and blissful unity.

Caitanya,who was considered even by the orthodox to contain Radha and Krsna within his own body,was a perfect illustration of the Sahajiya principle of unity in seeming duality.It must be remembered,however,that as the Sahajiyas gave doctrinal value to what the Vaisnavas meant symbolically,so in the area of theology the Sahajiyas to a certain extent took symbolically what the Vaisnavas meant doctrinally.

jiva

What I read on a sahajiya website a few years ago talked about doing japa of  kama gayatri while engaged in the tantric sexual sadhana in order to raise the kundalini from the root chakra to the crown chakra.  That clearly indicates a fusion of the Vaishnava sadhana with tantric yoga.  I am not aware of any orthodox Gaudiya practitioners that employ such techniques, although there were rumors about one small group in Braj started by a former sannyasi of Gaudiya Math that left that organization and was re-initiated.

Jiva, would you clarify this sentence for me?

According to some sahajiya texts,man and woman have in them both the divine Krsna and Radha: a woman is female because she has in her a preponderance of Radha;a man is man because he is mostly Krsna.Love between man and woman thus reduplicates in microcosm the love of Radha and Krsna, a love that had both phases,separation and union. Thus,when one realizes himself as divine,one experiences in union not the insignificant joys of human love,but the perpetual divine joys of the love of Radha and Krsna.

For even while Caitanya lived,people considered him divine. Some thought he was an avatara, an incarnation, of Krsna; some thought he was Krsna himself (C.c.,Adi 2:19). And some saw him as Radha and Krsna,the divine lovers, in the most intimate possible union-in one body. "Radha and Krsna were one soul in two bodies...then even the two bodies become one, in Caitanya." (C.c.,Adi 4:49-50)

The concept of the dual incarnation of Caitanya-that he was Radha and Krsna in one body-is central to the doctrine of the Sahajiya Vaisnavas, to the concept of the essential unity of things.

jiva

Exactly how and when the Vaisnavas-Sahajiyas blending took place is a matter of considerable puzzlement to me. Some would trace it to the Tantras and to the Buddhist Sahajiya, ignoring to a large extent such doctrinal requisites as the notion of the necessity of prema for transformation, which is present in the Vaisnava- sahajiya because of its Vaisnava inheritance and not in the mechanistic Tantras. Others attempt to find its roots in post-Caitanya Bengal, evidently choosing to ignore its obvious debt to the very old Tantric tradition. The question is more than an academic one.

Sahajiya worshiper is taught a mantra by his diksa-guru, and thus the sadhana is initiated. At each stage of the sexual discipline, mantras are to be repeated, from a few to several hundreds, thus causing increasing realization of the presence of the divine svarupa within. The most frequent mantras are called the kama-bija and kama-gayatri. These pure Tantric or Sahajiya mantras are, interestingly, mentioned in the writings of the Goswamins. For example, Gopala Bhatta, in his Haribhaktivilasa, says that they are appropriate mantras for a Vaisnava guru, using as his authority the Gautamiya-tantra. Krsnadasa says, in a statement that must have delighted the Sahajiyas, that the kama-gayatri is svarupa of Krsna (Cc Madhya, 8:109).

jiva

If I am not wrong, it is raaga + anu + ga ; where raaga= anuraaga, prema, bhakti, bhaavana... etc; anu = in tow, in step with with, behave in accordance or in agreement with; ga = gamana - from dhaatu gaml = to go, to pursue, to tread in that pathway etc. as in anubandha, anugaamitva, anusaraNiiya, anugaami dharma - etc.

Jayadeva uses it many times for eg - aSTapadi 13-2. yat= for which [Krishna]; anu gama naaya= to go in tow... etc. Here in raganuga - one 'a' after 'ra' is short syllabled - rather than aa - am I correct - dhrao

Thank you for the valuable points above. However, I think the issue is more with how the traditon has come to define the term, what they consider it to include and what not.

Where is Jivaji these days anyway? Long time no see?

Here I am back.Thanks for query.

with respect,

This is what I am looking for. Whether there is a def. or is this a misplet Itrans lingo - because our elders or poets were not in the habit of giving captions, or headings, or names to their ideas. They are given by laterers. Madhava - u see gg 7th sarga where I had to touch this topic. Instead of evolving something out of what I have read - I am asking you all. - dhrao

Why this topic has an+anugaamitva dharma - why not continue - a lot can be detailed to the unfamiliar - dhr

As I said, the issue is more with how the traditon has come to define the term, what they consider it to include and what not -- not all that much in the infinite possibilites of interpretation. It appears in a certain context in the Gaudiya canon, and that is what we have been exploring.