Siddha Pranali - and Related Practices

In regards to vayas:



Particularly the passage below, in addition to the definition of vayah-sandhi, calls for explanation.



And on to another topic, Raghunatha Dasa Gosvami:


On the other hand, I just read from your "Translator's Preface" to Manjari-svarupa-nirupana:

Would you like to shed more light on this?

Yes, I continue to hold to my opinion about Raghunath Das. I think that it is very significant that Raghunath Das writes
yad avadhi mama kAcit maJjarI rUpa-pUrvA etc.

I wonder what Narayan Maharaj would say about it.

I also never heard that there was anything in Svarupa Damodar's karcha that touched on this subject. As far as I know, the karcha dealt with Mahaprabhu's lila. But we'll never really know, because the karcha doesn't exist, except for two or three verses.

With regard to the vayaH questions, I have absolutely no idea what to say. I have never heard anything of the sort before.

Here is the rest of that chapter, which contains more about the Svarupa Damodar/Raghunath Das equation, plus a few other assertions that I found dubious.

---

Vijaya Kumar: What will be their attitude to the gopis who are Radharani’s rivals?

Goswami: Srila Raghunath Das Goswami describes them. Please hear this description (Vraja-viläsa-stava, text 41):

sApatnyoccaya-rajyad-ujjvala-rasasyoccaiH samudvRddhaye
saubhAgyodbhaTa-garva-vibhrama-bhTtaH zrI-rAdhikAyAH sphuTam |
govindaH smara-phulla-vallava-vadhU-vargeNa yena kSaNaM
krIDaty eSa tam atra vistRta-mahA-puNyaM ca vandAmahe ||

“In order to increase the splendid and nectarean jealous love of Srimati Radharani, who sometimes becomes proud of Her own good fortune, Lord Krishna briefly enjoys pastimes with other gopis, who blossom with many amorous desires. Let us offer our respectful obeisances to these gopis, who must have performed many great pious activities in order to play this role in the Lord’s pastimes.”

That is how you should think about the rival groups of gopis, even though in particular situations while serving the Lord some gopis may speak mockingly of the rival gopis.

The upshot is that one should serve in the manner described by Srila Raghunath Das Goswami in his Vilapa-kusumanjali, while one’s dealings with the other gopis should follow the manner described in his Vraja-vilasa-stava. At the same time, one should see the Divine Couple’s aSTa-kAliya pastimes as they have been described in his Sri-VisakhanandAbhidha-stotra and other prayers. Raghunath Das Goswami’s ManaH-zikSA is like a practitioner’s manual by following which one can become rapt in meditation on the Divine Couple’s pastimes. One should follow the mood found in Raghunath Das’s Sva-niyama-dasaka and firmly adopt the vows he makes there.

Srila Rupa Goswami has extensively described the theoretical principles of rasa in his books, for this is the responsibility Lord Chaitanya gave him. For this reason, Rupa Prabhu did not describe how these rasas become active in the life of worshp. Srila Raghunath Das Goswami described these things following the teachings in Srila Svarupa Damodar’s karcha. Mahaprabhu’s devotees all carried out whatever task Lord Chaitanya assigned to them.

Vijaya Kumar: Please tell us which tasks Lord Mahaprabhu assigned to which devotee.

Goswami: The Lord ordered Srila Svarupa Damodar Goswami to describe the method of worship according to the rasas. Following that order, Srila Svarupa Damodar Goswami wrote his karcha, which is divided into two parts, the internal (antaH-panthA) and external paths (bahiH-panthA) or worship according to the rasas. He taught the internal path to Raghunath Das Goswami, who memorized it and then transformed it into his own writings. Svarupa Damodar Goswami taught the external path to Srila Vakreshwara Pandit. This teaching is the great treasure of this seat. I explained this path to my disciple Dhyana Chandra, and he has described it in his book, which you have received.

Lord Mahaprabhu ordered Lord Nityananda and Lord Advaita to preach the glories of the Holy Name, and He also gave Them the power to do it. He ordered Srila Rupa Goswami to write books describing the principles of rasa and the power to do it successfully. He ordered Srila Sanatan Goswami to write about vaidhi bhakti and the relationship between vaidhi bhakti and raga bhakti. The Lord also gave Srila Sanatan Goswami the order to explain the difference between the visible and invisible manifestations of Gokula. Through Nityananda Prabhu and Sanatan Goswami, the Lord empowered Srila Jiva Goswami to write books about sambandha, abhidheya and prayojana. They did whatever they were ordered to do and only that.

Vijaya Kumar: O master, what task was gi

ven to Srila Ramananda Raya?

Goswami: Lord Mahaprabhu gave Srila Ramananda Raya the task of expanding the rasas. Srila Ramananda Raya used Srila Rupa Goswami as his instrument in fulfilling this task.

Vijaya Kumar: O master, what task was given to Srila Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya?

Goswami: To Srila Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya He gave the task of explaining philosophy. Srila Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya executed that task by having one of his disciples teach Srila Jiva Goswami.

Vijaya Kumar: What task did the Lord give to the great devotees in Bengal?

Goswami: To the great devotees in Bengal the Lord gave the task to teaching the truth about Lord Chaitanya and showing the people how to have faith in Lord Chaitanya’s descriptions of Krishna-rasa. These devotees fulfilled that order by writing many books glorifying the rasas.

Vijaya Kumar: What task was given to Srila Raghunath Bhatta Goswami?

Goswami: To him was given the task of preaching the glories of Srimad Bhagavatam.

Vijaya Kumar: What task was given to Srila Gopala Bhatta Goswami?

Goswami: To Srila Gopala Bhatta Goswami was given the task of stopping perverted misinterpretations of pure såìgära-rasa and also stopping the tendency not to have faith in vaidhi-bhakti.

Vijaya Kumar: Srila Prabodhananda Saraswati was the uncle and spiritual master of Srila Gopala Bhatta Goswami. What task was given to him?

Goswami: To Srila Prabodhananda Sarasvati was given the task of showing the world that the path of the rasas and anubhavas in Vraja is the highest of all paths.

Hearing all this, Vijaya Kumar thought himself very fortunate.

---

With all due respect, I don't think that most of these lines of influence can be effectively shown. The "internal" and "external" paths theory is interesting. I have written elsewhere that I think the entire manjari-sadhana came from Vraja, and particularly from Srila Rupa Prabhu. The prayers in Utkalika-vallari, Karpanya-panjika and other prayers can be shown to have direct influence on Raghunath's writings. Some feel that Raghunath has expressed his emotions with more vigour and depth than even Rupa, but it is hard to think that it came from Svarupa Damodar. This is why Svarupa is universally identified as a sakhi, Lalita, not a manjari.

Ramananda no doubt had a senior relation to Rupa, and there are some similarities between Jagannath-vallabha and Vidagdha-madhava, but there is not much to support that Rupa received extensive instruction from Ramananda.

Gopala Bhatta's influence on the Sampradaya is probably greater than is realized. Jiva Goswami clearly states that the Sandarbhas were written on the basis of an outline by Gopala Bhatta, which would make him one influential dude.

If we add to the mix Prabodhananda Saraswati, who was Gopala Bhatta's guru, and whose commentary on the Gopala Tapani appears to have directly influenced Jiva Goswami, and whose heartfelt poems like Radha-rasa-sudha-nidhi may have inspired Rupa (or have been inspired by him--which I think rather more likely).

Anyway...

In my opinion,`who does the choise`-question is not applicable on `inherent theory`.The guru simply has the ability to see someone`s siddha-deha.The siddha-deha is an inherent part of a person.

Regarding `assigned theory` and `who does the choise`;Kunja Bihari Dasa doesn`t provide us with the details.So...i don``t know.

But,the point is that the guru is extremely important to the transformative process,because he is the one who `reveals` the mantra and the siddha-pranali to the initiate.

jiva

P.S. As much as i understand,Jagat simply said:``If i am predestined to SOME particular form,i.e.,if it is already existing and `waiting for me` as Kunja Bihari has it,...`` . It doesn`t  necessary  mean `inherent view`.

Quote Jagat: `Some feel that Raghunath has expressed his emotions with more vigour and depth than even Rupa,
but it is hard to think that it came from Svarupa Damodar.`

I`m not so sure...In C.c.Adi,4.137 ,Krsnadasa Kaviraja write:

mahaprabhura lila yata bahira-antara
dui bhai tanra mukhe sune nirantara

``Because [Raghunatha Dasa] was assistant of Svarupa Damodara, he knows much about internal and external
characteristics of the lilas of Mahaprabhu.So,he taught it to two brothers,Rupa and Sanatana.``
[My translation .Sorry for eventual grammatical mistakes]

Raghunatha/Svarupa Damodara is also singled out by Sahajiya Vaisnava text `Vivarta-vilasa` as being important in the transmission of the true meaning of Chaitanya teaching.Caitanya taught Svarupa,and Svarupa``taught Raghunatha;from him [Krsnadasa] Kaviraja learned of the panca-guna,and...taught Mukunda.``
(`Vivarta-vilasa` of Akincana dasa,p.40.;Calcutta,:Taracand Das 1948.). The coincidence or the fact?

Quote Jagat:`This is why Svarupa is universally identified as a sakhi, Lalita, not a manjari.`

Sometimes even Radha assumes the role of sakhi ! (Cc.Madhya 8.212-13)

Radha have five kind of sakhis/friends:sakhi(the ordinary friends),nitya-sakhi(the eternal friends),prana-sakhi
(the friends close as life),priya-sakhi(the dear friends) and parama-prestha-sakhi (the best friends like Lalita).

[For disccusion of the five kinds of female friends see `Ujjvalanilamani` 4.46-55.A dual object of love is suggested by these sakhis.This will become increasingly important for the development of Manjari sadhana .]

Two among these,the friends close as life (prana-sakhis like Sasimukhi,Vasanti and Lasika) and the eternal friends (nitya-sakhis like Kasturi and Manimanjari) are characterized as having a greater love for the Radha than for Krsna.It is this type of SAKHI that is typically identified as a manjari.

Further,Kunja Bihari Dasa writes:``Among the five types of sakhis, the prana-sakhi and the nitya-sakhi,who have great love for Radha,are called by the name manjari.``(Manjari-svarupa-nirupana, p.39)

Quote Jagat:`The second comment I have on this passage is that vayaH-sandhi refers to a very specific time when a girl hits puberty. To call the entire period from 10-16 vayaH-sandhi seems odd.`

The manjari is always of an adolescent age(vayah-sandhi or nava-kaisora:twelve to fifiteen years of age) since this is considered the period when emotions are capable of reaching the greatest intensity.Our culture agrees that the adolescent female is emotionally the most intense,but being a culture that basically distrust the emotions,ours has not held the adolescent female as a religious ideal.

Quote Jagat:` I have written elsewhere that I think the entire manjari-sadhana came from Vraja,  and particularly from Srila Rupa Prabhu.`

Manjari Sadhana is not mentioned in the BRS or any other text written by Rupa Goswamin.He created a skeletal system with a wide range of possible transformative roles for practitioners striving to participate in the Vraja-lila.Manjari Sadhana was not alluded to directly by any of the six original Vrndavana Goswamins,and there
is no definite proof that Manjari Sadhana in its complete form was initiated by any of these Goswamins.
Yet,Niradprasad Nath,a Bengali scholar of Narottama Dasa Thakura,convincingly argues that this sadhana is hinted at in a very seminal form in the poetic prayers of Rupa Goswamin`s `Stavamala` and Raghunatha`s `Stavavali`,though it was not fully developed until the early to mid-seventeenth century,the time of Narottama,who wrote many texts on Manjari sadhana.

jiva

This is CC Adi 10.97, not Adi 4.137.

This speaks about the characteristics of the lilas of Mahaprabhu. It is well known how Das Gosvami used to spend several hours every day relating the pastimes of Mahaprabhu. I doubt one can draw any conclusions from this in regards to manjari-bhava sadhana coming from Das Gosvami, which is what Jagat was speaking about, to Rupa and Sanatana.


Of the asta-manjaris, Manjulali is the oldest, being 13 years, 6 months and 7 days (DhC Pad.), and even Sri Radha Herself is 14 years, 2 months and 15 days. Lalita-sakhi is 27 days older. Fifteen would be rather old for a manjari, don't you think?


Mid-seventeenth century? Narottama was born around 1531-1532. Around what time did he compile his main works, Prema-bhakti-candrika and Prarthana? It would seem unlikely that they would date to early to mid-seventeenth century.

By the way, how was it "fully developed" in the writings of Narottama? Does he have other not so widely known works which go deeper into manjari-bhava sadhana? What exactly is the definition of what consists "manjari-bhava-sadhana" in the context that it is being used here?

-Sorry for wrong reference.

-My understanding was that Jagat speak (`in the background`)about `incompetence` of Svarupa Damodara  to taught about manjari-bhava sadhana.

-Raganuga Bhakti sadhana developed into the specific form of Manjari Sadhana in that `creative` period of Gaudiya Vaisnavism in Vraja which followed the `Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu` in the mid- sixteenth century and lasted until the `careers` of Narottama Dasa and Srinivasa Acarya were over in the mid-seventeenth century.

Quote Raga:``By the way, how was it "fully developed" in the writings of Narottama?``

In Rupa`s system,Krsna is the sole visaya(religio-aesthetic object) and Radha,though supreme among the asrayas and often portrayed as an unattainable ideal,is still considered an asraya (religio-aesthtetic vessel)[ BRS 3.5.7.-8].The visaya of Manjari Sadhana is not Krsna alone,but rather Krsna and Radha.
[ Kunjabihari Dasa ,`Manjari-svarupa-nirupana`,p.57.]

In the poetic prayers of Narottama Dasa we find  numerous requests for the chance to serve not Krsna alone,not even Radha alone,but Radha-Krsna together.Thus we see an important innovation in the devotional theory,which played a great part in the development of the Manjari Sadhana.Narottama direct his devotional efforts toward both Krsna  and Radha,with a particular emphasis on Radha.What in effect emerges from his works is
a new sthayi-bhava [see Bhavollasa thread].

jiva

P.S.This shift from Krsna as the visaya to Radha-Krsna as the visaya interestingly parallels the shift from some the early notion that Caitanya was an incarnation of Krsna to the notion expressed in C.c. that Caitanya was a dual incarnation of Radha-Krsna.

The same is found in Rupa's prayers like Utkalikavallari and Karpanyapanjika. Since you have MSN, you can find examples there. Also at the end of UN 8, you can find examples.

Would you like to post us some of them?

I shall stand on my ground .

As far as explaining the ritual process in relation to the transformations that take place in the individual,particularly in relationship to love of God,the BRS and UN of Rupa Goswamin are the key texts.Rupa lays the foundation for this process in the BRS  and  then follows up with very minute analyses of the highest love in his UN.These texts are really keys for explaining how this is possible,the `mechanisms` of these transformations.And they leave it to you to figure out what has actually happened.

Narottama did not so much write systematic texts as he did poems.It is really in his poems that one gets a sense of manjari sadhana.His poems draw the reader into the world of the poem,causing the reader to assume the role of a manjari.Therefore,in my opinion,it was Narottama who finally developed the understanding of raganuga-bhakti sadhana as manjari sadhana .

jiva

jiva:  If Gopal Guru was earlier than Narottama, that does not really seem reasonable, unless I am missing something.  I thought Gopal Guru was earlier, at least.

How do you see the Govinda Lilamrta of Krishnadasa Kaviraja? Not much related with manjari sadhana?

"Govinda Lilamrta" is a long and laborious production of a subtle pedant,rather than of a sound or even sophisticated poet.The descriptions are in conformity with the dictates of Vaisnava Rasa-sastra,but the work was also meant for the conscious display of the author`s extraordinary learning and skill in grammar,rhetoric,music...For example,much of the twenty-second and twenty-third cantos is taken up with a dry display of the author`s knowledge of Samgita and Natya-sastra,in the course of which he mention 22 Srutis,59 Tanas,21 Murchanas and 15 Gamakas.A discource on music follows,in which we have a list of Ragas(xxii.85-87),of musical instruments(xxii.88-90),gestures and Mudras(xxii.91-92)and Talas(xxii.97-101),as well as of Marga and Desi class of songs. Here is a specimen of the dancing Tala versified:

dham dham drk drk cana cana ninam ninam nam
                                       ninam nam
tuk tuk tum tum gudu gudu gudu dram dram gudu dram
                                       gudu dram /
dhek dhek dho dho kiriti kiriti dho dram drimi dram
                                        drimi dram
agatyaivam muhur iha muda srimad-isa nanarta //.

After the dancing and singing,feeding follows with a list again of various delicacies(interestingly,Krsnadasa never misses an opportunity of giving,with great relish,long lists of gorgeous delicacies,as we know from CC ).

The extremely artificial and learned character of this astonishing literary atrocity is obvious.When a scholastic mind writes verse,we can expect nothing better;and further comment is needless.

The frank object is not narrative,nor poetry,but direct illustration of technical niceties and rhetorical and metrical ingenuities.The imposing magnitude,sheer erudition and profusion of elaborate skill are admitted,but the work also illustrates a curious combination of the laboured volubility of a bad poet with the clever prolixity of a subtle pedant.

jiva

Having first removed the posting above, I have reposted it after discussing with another board member. We do not endorse the posting of texts directly critical towards widely recognized and honored acaryas.

What is posted above appears to be directly from S.K. De. Is this correct, Jiva, or is it your insight?

S.K. De has a view about as high about the six Gosvamis as well as he has of Krishnadas Kaviraja in the post you have presented above.

If you quote or paraphrase texts from authors opposed to Gaudiya Vaishnavism, you'll have to let us know it is not your insight, and moreover, you'll have to let us know how it is relevant to the discussion at hand or to anything.

The posting, in addition to being very inconsiderate of the practicing Gaudiya Vaishnavas who regard Krishnadas Kaviraja as one of their revered authorities, is completely irrelevant to the thread and the question I presented earlier: Is Govinda Lilamrita relevant to Manjari-sadhana, and can we find elements of aspiration for manjari-seva there or not?

A man who has no regard for others will see virtues as faults.


We might want to examine the allegations given above to see whether they hold any substance, or whether they are the workings of a frustrated individual who is keen of finding faults.


"Govinda Lilamrta" is a long and laborious production of a subtle pedant,rather than of a sound or even sophisticated poet.

Basically this asserts that the author has compiled his work with a motive of fulfilling his inner tendencies for nit-pickery and showing off expertise. Nevertheless, if such details exist in the realm of lila, are they not fit to be described?

The motivation of the author is beyond the grasp of the mental strength of both S.K. De and Jiva the poster, whomever of the two is the actual mastermind of the insight.


The descriptions are in conformity with the dictates of Vaisnava Rasa-sastra,but the work was also meant for the conscious display of the author`s extraordinary learning and skill in grammar,rhetoric,music...

If the author is extraordinarily learned in grammar, rhetoric and music, it will naturally be evident from his writing. Should he have written like a retarded fool instead?


For example,much of the twenty-second and twenty-third cantos is taken up with a dry display of the author`s knowledge of Samgita and Natya-sastra,in the course of which he mention 22 Srutis,59 Tanas,21 Murchanas and 15 Gamakas.

A person who has no regard for the exquisite pastimes of the Divine Couple will regard such descriptions as dry, while one who has taste for the divine lila is overwhelmed by the description.


The extremely artificial and learned character of this astonishing literary atrocity is obvious.When a scholastic mind writes verse,we can expect nothing better;and further comment is needless.

The commentator has his particular taste of literary expression, to which he is entitled. It appears that he consideres his own preference to be the all-in-all and the final word in the world of literature, based on which he is free to level condescending statements towards one and all.


The frank object is not narrative,nor poetry,but direct illustration of technical niceties and rhetorical and metrical ingenuities.The imposing magnitude,sheer erudition and profusion of elaborate skill are admitted,but the work also illustrates a curious combination of the laboured volubility of a bad poet with the clever prolixity of a subtle pedant.

Going to such lengths about the faults of the eloquent, detailed descriptions found in the works of Krishnadas Kaviraja makes us suspect whether the commentator has unfulfilled desires for gaining recognition for his own intellectual prowess, causing him to project the same fault upon one and all.

To conclude with, if in the future anyone feel

s like posting something like Jiva has just posted, we ask them to carefully consider which purpose does it serve, if any. The posting concerned has not positively contributed either to the bhajan of the board members nor to the discussion of the subject matter in the texts above on the origin of manjari-sadhana. It is but an irrelevant, unfounded critique aimed at one of the most revered Gaudiya acaryas.

To bring the discussion back on the track, namely to tracking down the earliest references of manjari-sadhana, I repeat my question:

"Is Govinda Lilamrita relevant to Manjari-sadhana, and can we find elements of aspiration for manjari-seva there or not?"

I say yes. A considerable quantity of the title's contents is directly concerned with the services of the maidservants.

In addition, Vilapa Kusumanjali of Raghunatha Das is a source older than either Krishnadas Kaviraja or Narottama, and it is certainly concerned with manjari-seva.

In its very first verse, Raghunatha Das cuts jokes with his guru-sakhi Rupa Manjari, and in the third verse he reveals his own identity as Rati Manjari, remembering the words of blessing from her guru-sakhi. The entire length and breadth of the title is filled with aspirations for manjari-seva throughout the eight phases of the day.

This title is certainly a clear and intense presentation of manjari-seva, grasping the reader along into the realm of Vraja -- in the wake of the moods of a maidservant.

In addition, as stated by Ananga, Gopal Guru predates Narottama by twenty years or so. Narottama actually met Gopal Guru in Puri at Kashi Misra's house (BR 8.382).

I was not aware that you will look upon my post as approaching offense to a venerable acarya(s).

Anyway,please,all of you,accept my apology.

I was not concerned with the earliest references of manjari sadhana but finally development.

In that light ,i just wanted to compare Krsnadasa`s work with Narottama`s poetry.The Gaudiya Vaisnavas insist that poetry must be used BOTH to express the meditative experience(example of Krsnadasa) AND  EVOKE the meditative experience(like Narottama).That`s was reason for paraphrasing S.K.De.

Really,i am very sorry.

jiva

No problem. You may want to mention next time you are paraphrasing the insight of a third person to avoid confusion. Had it been, "S.K. De says like this: ...", it would have been no problem. The way it appeared without reference made it sound very different.



It is open to discussion whether Govinda Lilamrta EVOKES meditative experience. In my experience, definitely yes it does. In a different way than the works of Narottama, no doubt, but it certainly evokes deep meditative experience.

Different individuals will have different impetus for absorption; for one, Kaviraja Gosvami works better, for another it is Narottama, and for the third, all of them work great. It is close to impossible to draw objective conclusions on the potency of each work to invoke meditative experience, considering the vast scale of practitioners with individual natures within the realm of Gaudiya sadhana.

For a person who is into fine details, the Govinda Lilamrta is a matchless impetus for absorption, to which the sincere student can find no end at all, leaving him astonished, beholding the beauty of the Divine, finding ever-new expressions for her tendency to serve. According to one's nature, he will find impetus for seva from various sources. It is hard to draw a stereotype of a manjari-sadhaka.




How would you define the standard of something's being developed?

I would define it something like "appearance of the new insights" .

For example:
Rupa`s theoretical works were written in the early years of the Gaudiya movement.Therefore,his primary "models" for the Raganuga Bhakti Sadhana are the individuals from of scripture.

Visvanatha Cakravartin,yet,writing over a hundred years later ,when the Gaudiya community was firmly established,instructs the practitioner also to follow the Vrndavana Goswamins and one`s own gurus,all of whom the tradition declares to be saints.

jiva

Given the fact that the six Gosvamis, plus Krishnadas Kaviraja and Lokanath, are understood to be in the status of the asta-manjaris, or the eight so-to-say "original" manjaris, it is quite natural that a "chain of allegiance" is not all that much manifest there, compared to later works, like those of Visvanatha for instance. Nevertheless we find this element particularly in the works of Raghunatha Dasa, among which Vilapa Kusumanjali shines as the foremost example.

But I wonder, how many of the characters given in the Radha-Krishna Ganoddesa Dipika for instance are from older scriptures? To give an example:

TEXTS 96 - 101

Just as there are eight varistha (most exalted) gopis, the same way there are also eight vara (exalted) gopis.  The vara-gopis are all teenage girls.  Their names are Kalavati, Subhangada, Hiranyangi, Ratnalekha, Sikhavati, Kandarpa manjari, Phullakalika and Ananga manjari

Kalavati's parents are Sindhumati-devi and Kalankura-gopa, the maternal uncle of Arkamitra.

Her complexion is the color of yellow sandalwood and she wears garments the color of a parrot.  Her husband is Kapota, the youngest brother of Vahika.

Subhangada is the younger sister of Visakha.  She is a very fair complexion  and is married to Patatri, the younger brother of Pithara.

Hiranyangi's complexion is the color of gold and she appears to be a temple or palace in which all beauty is conserved.  She was born from the womb of Harini-devi.

In this title, we find a very developed description of the social structure of Vraja. Rupa also presents a list of eighteen main manjaris:

TEXTS 179- 181

Ananga-manjari, Rupa-manjari, Rati-manjari, Lavanga-manjari, Raga-manjari, Rasa-manjari, Vilasa-manjari, Prema-manjari, Mani-manjari, Suvarna-manjari, Kama-manjari, Ratna-manjari, Kasturi-manjari, Gandha-manjari, Netra-manjari, Sripadma-manjari, Lila-manjari and Hema-manjari are among Srimati Radharani's manjari friends. Prema-manjari and Rati-manjari are both also known by the name Bhanumati-devi.

Hence it seems clear that all the ingredients are there, only waiting to be manifest in the course of time. It is very natural that for instance Rupa Gosvami did not write extensive prayers of allegiance to manjaris, considering that she herself is Srimati Rupa Manjari, the head of all the maidservants! Nevertheless, as I already mentioned, we can find this mood of allegiance in manjari-seva from the writings of Raghunatha Das.

In regards to "appearance of new insights", I might not want to give them the status of actual "new insights", but rather "the natural fruit of original insights". To give an example: We plant an exquisite garden of flowers. Over the first few yea

rs, the garden begins to blossom and to obtain its shape, but it is only over a longer period of time that the garden obtains its natural infrastructure. In a sense it appears to be something new, but it is only the manifestation of the inherent qualities of the original.

This is the point I wanted to make. Otherwise it sounds like the Gosvamis were not actually aware of the foundational principles of manjari-sadhana, which were only later invented. I find such a proposition quite unacceptable and not true to the actual mood and precepts of manjari-sadhana.

Yes,i agree.

According to Visvanatha, different bodies require different models.
This is where his theory is "innovative".He holds up the "historical" models for the practitioner to emulate in the outer physical performance with the sadhaka-rupa.

As we have seen in "anuga" thread,this is not so for Rupa Kaviraja.

Visvanatha`s  "innovation"(or "natural fruit of original insights",as you said ) is not quite as simple as it might first seem,for it assumes a complex hagiographical development that coalesced around the figures of the Vrndavana Goswamins.His solution assumed and was constructed upon an existing theory of the manjari.

jiva

Though it is certainly Visvanatha who made it clear, I think the innovation may be traced to time beyond him. Caitanya Caritamrta, Madhya-lila, 22.156-157:

bAhya, antara, ihAra dui ta sAdhana
bAhye sAdhaka-dehe kare zravaNa-kIrtana
mane nija-siddha-deha kariyA bhAvana
rAtri-dine kare vraje kRSNera sevana
“External and internal, of this [raganuga-bhakti] these are indeed the two sadhanas. Externally, in the sadhaka-deha, one engages in hearing and chanting, and in the mind, in one’s own siddha-deha, day and night one thinks of and serves Sri Krishna in Vrindavana.”

Not surprisingly, after this Krishnadas Kaviraja quotes the sevA sAdhaka-rUpeNa - verse, having first given the proper way of understanding the same.

Of course here the emulation of the Gosvamis as the residents of Vraja-loka in sadhaka-deha is not specifically given, but nevertheless the principle of dual sadhana with sadhaka-deha and siddha-deha with their respective engagements which Visvanatha later established in his Raga Vartma Candrika is very clearly present here.

Thanks "raga"  and  "jiva".

Very good discussion.Your gurus will be proud.

Mahadeva

I am curious to hear your comments on the famous incident of Mahaprabhu's instructing Raghunatha Dasa and giving him the Giriraja Sila and the Gunja-mala. Particularly the following verse:

amAnI mAnada haJA kRSNa-nAma sadA la’be
vraje rAdhA-kRSNa-sevA mAnase karibe
“Do not expect honor, but offer all respect to others. Always chant the name of Krishna, and within your mind render service to Radha and Krishna in Vrindavana.”

If Raghunath did not perform manjari-seva at that time, what kind of manasi-seva was he performing? The instruction is particularly on performing seva, not on internal remembrance of Vraja-lila from a non-participatory status.

Caitanya first gave Raghunatha over to the charge of Svarupa Damodara,but Raghunatha again approached Caitanya to hear directly from Him.After that, Caitanya said:

gramya-katha na sunibe,gramya-varttata na kahibe
bhala na khaibe ara bhala na paribe
amani manada hanya krsna-nama sada la`be
vraje radha-krsna seva manase karibe

"Don`t indulge in wordly talk,don`t hear wordly talk.Try your best to avoid mundane matters.Don`t eat delicious dishes,but take whatever ordinary food may come of its own accord; and don`t dress luxuriously.Always try to take the name of Krsna wity the attitude of giving respect to others,without expecting respect from anyone.Be humble,but never aspire after respectful dealings from others.In this way,try to take the name of Krsna constantly.And within,
try to serve Sri Sri Radha Krsna in Vrndavana."

Caitanya told Raghunatha that this was the essence of His advice to him.Whole teaching in brief.
Then,Caitanya again gave Raghunatha to the charge of Svarupa Damodara.

jiva

In his "Lord Gauranga",Shishir Kumar Ghose write:

"These trances of the Lord were by now a usual phenomenon and followed almost a set pattern.But this time the bhaktas were horrified to find that though the body was warm he was not breathing at all,the heart had ceased to beat.All the known methods of restoration were tried but in vain....Suddenly a bhakta made a suggestion.
`Let us sing the "Kunjabhanga" ,he said,`let this be our last song`.The mournful dirge began slowly.It seemed to soothe their hearts,when lo! signs appeared on the body of the Lord to show that not only was He alive but was enjoying the music."

"Kunjabhanga" is usually sung by her maids to Radha:"Get up,dear,i t is morning.We must go home.It is time for us to return" etc.

jiva

I would like to develop further the thought of Raghunatha Das Gosvami's manjari identity in Gambhira pastimes. In Caitanya Caritamrta (Antya-lila, 6.307), we find the famous incident of Mahaprabhu's offering a Govardhan-sila and a mala of gunja-berries to him. Here are the feelings of Raghunatha Das:

zilA diyA gosAJi samarpilA govardhane
guJjA-mAlA diyA dilA rAdhikA-caraNe
“By offering me the govardhana-sila, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has offered me a place near Govardhana Hill, and by offering me the gunja-mala, He has given me the lotus feet of Srimati Radharani.”

From these thoughts it is evident that Raghunatha Das had a conception of Radha-dasyam, bestowed unto him by none other than Sriman Mahaprabhu Himself.

We also know from the Caitanya Caritamrta (Antya-lila, 6.241) how Raghunatha Das rendered "antaranga-seva" unto Sriman Mahaprabhu along with Svarupa Damodara, under whose care he was entrusted. "Antaranga-seva" in the context of Mahaprabhu's intense final pastimes in tasting Radha-bhava certainly indicates service rendered in awareness of the internal spirit of His pastimes. In fact, I find it awkward to consider that Raghunatha Das would have been deprived of the inner conception of Radha-dasyam during the years he spent in serving Mahaprabhu in His final pastimes.

Perhaps we may concede that his allegiance to Rupa Manjari was only revealed in Vraja, but I really find it hard to accept that he had no acquaintance at all with manjari-seva prior to that.

From what I have understood from reading "The Glories and Heritage of Sri Radha Kunda" by Radha Kunda Mahanta Ananta Das Pandit is that Mahaprabhu's giving His Govardhana Sila and gunja berry mala had a mysterious meaning which later Raghunatha Das realized as signifying that by Mahaprabhu's grace, Raghunatha will be placed under the shelter of Govardhana and Radha's lotus feet, i.e. shelter at Radha Kunda.

I vaguely remember reading in somewhere in Jaiva Dharma to the effect that Svarupa Damodara was instrumental in Mahaprabhu's mission in teaching the principles of raganuga bhakti which branched into two categories and which were developed by two devotees there in Puri. The technical aspect was developed by Gopal Guru Goswami and the 'esoteric' aspect by Das Goswami. At least that is how I understood it (the translation was an Indian-English translation and was quite hard to follow).

From a siddha deha perspective it can be understood that Svarupa Damodara is Lalita who was advising the manjari, Rati Manjari (Raghunath Das Goswami) in the techniques of service to Sri Radha and Krsna, since Mahaprabhu did place Das Goswami under the care of Svarupa.

lalita-visakha-adi yata sakhi vrnda
ajnaya koribo seva caranaravinda

sri krsna caitanya-prabhura dasera anudasa
seva abhilasa kare narottama das

Receiving orders from the sakhis headed by Lalita and Visakha I will serve the lotus feet of Radha and Krsna.

Narottama das, the servant of the servant of Mahaprabhu, longs for this seva.

The old edition you refer to has several mistranslations, particularly in the later chapters. It is not very accurate. Here's the reference (Jaiva Dharma, chapter 39) from the recent edition of Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti:

In his writings, Srila Rupa Gosvami has illustrated rasa-tattva extensively. Since Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu entrusted him with this particular responsibility, he has not explained how rasa acts while one renders seva. Srila Dasa Gosvami accomplished this task in his writings, which are based on the kadaca (notes) of Srila Svarupa Damodara. Sriman Mahaprabhu authorized and empowered His different associates respectively with different missionary responsibilities, and following his instructions, they discharged their services flawlessly.

Vijaya Kumara: Please tell me what those various responsibilities were, and to whom Sriman Mahaprabhu entrusted them.

Gopal Guru Gosvami: Sriman Mahaprabhu entrusted Sri Svarupa Damodara with the responsibility of teaching the process of seva endowed with transcendental rasa (rasamayi upasana). To fulfill Sriman Mahaprabhu's order, Sri Svarupa Damodara presented his treatise in two parts. One part is called the internal path (antah-patha) of rasamayi-upasana, while the second part is called the external path (bahih-pantha) of rasamayi upasana.

Sri Svarupa Damodara offered this antah-pantha around the neck of Srila Dasa Gosvami, and it is illustrated and well preserved in Dasa Gosvami's writings. He taught the bahih-pantha to Sri Vakresvara Gosvami, and this is the distinguished treasure of our line up to the present day. I gave this treasured process to Sriman Dhyanacandra, and he has written a paddhati (a systematic, step-by-step method of practice) based upon it, which you have already obtained.

The idea often presented based on this statement is that there are two different paths of raganuga sadhana. However, it appears to me from the passage above that the antah-pantha and bahih-pantha are actually two aspects of the same tradition -- the internal and the technical aspects of sadhana bhajana.

Perhaps Jagat has the original Bengali at hand, so he can check the translation?


I was also thinking of this -- Svarupera Raghu -- but does Tulasi (Rati) Manjari serve in the gana of Lalita? I recall he is in the gana of Visakha. At least the two have similar complexions, similar clothes and a similar nature. Interestingly, in Gaura Ganoddesa Dipika, Kavi Karnapura describes Svarupa Damodara as Visakha, contrary to the paddhatis of Gopal Guru and Dhyanancandra and the Caitanya Caritamrta of Krishnadas Kaviraja, who understand him to be Lalita.

More insi

ghts in this regard out there?

Mahaprabhu actually told Raghunatha Das to learn "sadhya-sadhana-tattva" from Svarupa Damodara (CC Antya 6.233-234):

hAsi mahAprabhu raghunAthere kahila
tomAra upadeSTA kari’ svarUpere dila

sAdhya-sAdhana-tattva zikha iGhAra sthAne
Ami tata nAhi jAni, iGho yata jAne
“Smiling, Mahaprabhu said to Raghunatha: ’I have appointed Svarupa as your instructor. Learn from him the truths of sadhya and sadhana. I do not know as much as he does.”

If it was not the basics of manjari-upasana which Raghunatha Das practiced as his mental service (vraje rAdhA-kRSNa-sevA mAnase karibe), I would like to know what is the sadhana he performed prior to arriving in Vrindavana after the disappearance of Mahaprabhu.

Here is an interesting reference from Nitai's Bhajankutir, Zine #5, in regards to the history of the practice of manjari-upasana in the Vrindavana school:


Radha Krishna Gosvami was in Gadadhara Pandit's line after Ananta Acarya and Haridas Pandit (the chief servitor of Govindaji Mandir at the time). Krishnadas Kaviraja relates (CC 1.8.67) how Haridas Pandit showed mercy upon him and ordered him to write about the pastimes of Mahaprabhu. Given that Govinda Lilamrta was written prior to Caitanya Caritamrta, its background with Rupa Gosvami must have been known to Haridas Pandit, who related the same to his disciple.

While Caitanya clearly advised Raghunatha Dasa that Govardhana is Krsna Himself,he has also twice expressed
something quite different in "C.c".He did this once in Puri when in ecstasy he mistook a sand dune to be Govardhana and earlier in Vrndavana when he visited Govardhana.In these incidents ,Caitanya,citing the Bhagavatam (10.21.18),speaks in prise of Govardhana,not as Krsna,but as haridasa-varyo,the best servant
of Krsna ?

jiva

These incidents are from Madhya 18.34 and Antya 14.86. In the former, Mahaprabhu circumambulates Govardhana in Vraja, and in the latter Mahaprabhu mistakes the Cataka Parvata sand dune as Govardhana in His divine madness of separation.

The Govardhana hill we see as the foremost of Hari's servants, since it serves Sri Hari in various ways, offering caves for the intimate pastimes of Yugala Kishor, serving Them water to drink from its natural springs etc. This is declared in the writings of both Raghunatha Das and Visvanatha (Govardhana-dasakam and Govardhanastakam):





However, when Govardhana is worshiped in the form of a shila, we worship Govardhana as nondifferent from Nandanandana Krishna, along with a gunja-mala, following the footsteps of Raghunatha Das and the instructions of Sri Caitanya. There is a difference in the way we see Govardhana hill and Govardhana shila.

I'll study Ananta Das Panditji's commentaries later today and post more in this regard.

Radha Kunda Mahanta Ananta Das Pandit has told me and other discples that Govardhana Hill is Giriraja, the best of devotees, while the stone from Govardhana is actually Sri Giridhari, or Sri Krsna Himself.

The gunja mala is generally used in smaranam as it is one of the items included along with four other sacred items wrapped in a cloth in the shape of mala, i.e. pancha-mala. I vaguely remember reading in C.C. (I don't know where now, but i'll look for it and post it) that Mahaprabhu would wear the gunja-mala during smaranam. I was also told by Ananta Das Baba that it is the white gunja berries that are representing Sri Radha.

This is related in the Caitanya Caritamrta, Antya-lila, chapter 6, verses 288-294:

zaGkarAnanda-sarasvatI vRndAvana haite AilA
teGha sei zilA-guJjA-mAlA laJA gelA
When Sankarananda Sarasvati came from Vrindavana, he brought a sila and a gunja-mala along with him.

pArzve gAGthA guJjA-mAlA, govardhana-zilA
dui vastu mahAprabhura Age Ani’ dilA
He presented two items –  a garland of small gunja-berries strung together and a Govardhana-sila – to Sriman Mahaprabhu.

dui apUrva-vastu pAJA prabhu tuSTa hailA
smaraNera kAle gale pare guJjA-mAlA
Prabhu was very satisfied upon receiving these two unprecedented items. At the time of smarana, he would wear this garland of gunja-mala around His neck.

govardhana-zilA prabhu hRdaye-netre dhare
kabhu nAsAya ghrANa laya, kabhu zire kare
Prabhu kept the Govardhana-sila sometimes on His heart, and sometimes at His eyes. Sometimes he would smell it with His nose, and sometime keep it on His head.

netra-jale sei zilA bhije nirantara
zilAre kahena prabhu——‘kRSNa-kalevara’
The sila was always wet due to the tears pouring from His eyes. Prabhu said that the sila is the body of Krishna.

ei-mata tina-vatsara zilA-mAlA dharilA
tuSTa haJA zilA-mAlA raghunAthe dilA
In this way, He kept the sila and the gunja-mala for three years. Then, having become pleased by Raghunatha Das, he gave the sila and the gunja-mala to him.