Hinduism - overly stressing external things? -

I was wondering why external things are so overly emphasized in Hinduism. In all other religions the main point is to be honest, loving, wise etc., so the main emphasis is on inner qualifications. In Hinduism the greatest importance seems to be how many times you bathe daily, what you eat, what you drink, what you wear during puja, how you put on tilak etc. Also, the four regs are only concerned with external regulations. Is this because in India everybody is loving, kind, honest, loving etc. by nature so they don't have to deal with these things? Perhaps not... And this mentality may result in considering mean persons as saints simply because they dress as a saint, take 10 showers a day, don't eat eggs etc. These things are nice and important, but maybe secondary to inner qualities. I remember a story, when a Western devotee went to India, and met an old lady. They started to talk, and the lady's first question was, "How many times do you bathe daily?" When he answered "3", the lady was satisfied. But what if some criminal takes bath 3 times a day? Will he be considered a pure person on the basis of that? Also, in Iskcon I heard many times that following the 4 regs makes one a human being. I immediately remembered a famous person of history, who was a vegetarian, he never smoked or drank alcohol, and obviously he was not into sex. I guess you all know who I refer to... So this makes Adolf Hitler a human being opposed to the Dalai Lama who eats meat?

Good point. It is obviously better to be a humble sinner than to be a proud saint. Yet the best should be to be a humble saint. In other words, for those who have submitted themselves to a certain faith it is obviously best to also follow the rules of that faith. Actions speak louder than words. A Jew or Muslim who eats pork is still a Jew or a Muslim, sure, but he would be a pride and asset to his community by abstaining from pork.....

This is a very good question and I think that it is worth discussing further. Here are a couple of quotes:

Love’s torments are understood as the natural form of religious discipline…. [There] is a whole field of poetry in Braj dedicated to making this point, to demonstrating how the gopis, separated from Krishna, endure mortifications by virtue of the sundering of their love that are deeper by far than any austerities or yoga can concoct. They manifest all the marks of yogic discipline naturally. A yogi must learn through years of practice the art of keeping awake for long periods of time; for the woman of Braj separated from Krishna, sleep is out of the question. The one pointed concentration for which yogis strive is also all too easily theirs: they can think of nothing but their lost love…. [As] for the internal heat (tapas) that yogis learn to fan and channel so as to make all this possible, it is theirs without even asking. Love is an unquenchable forest fire, as they often say: robbed from its object it scorches everything in sight. (J.S. Hawley 1981:234)

In the vaidhi sphere, man cannot go beyond certain limits prescribed by the shastras, for he has to select one mode or the other approved by their religious codes. He cannot venture outside of the circumscribed area for fear of denunciation. In an atmosphere like this, the culture of the human mind, which is the primary object of religion, cannot find free scope. (Manindra Mohan Bose, Post-Chaitanya Sahajiya Cult. University of Calcutta: 1930, page 2)

Raganuga means literally the pursuit of love. Now love knows no reasoning, admits of no limitation and is a purely personal concern which follows nothing else than the impulse of the mind. (p4)

There is definitely an idea that associates raganuga with a tendency to laxness in following the rules and regulations of the vidhi path. Yet, there seems to be a fear that any such laxness "disproves" the genuineness of one's attachments or qualification for raganuga. Such people are labelled sahajiya, both in the Gaudiya Math and in the traditional circles.

And it is true: The Sahajiyas, Bauls, Radha-vallabhis, Sants (I notice some people scoring high in Sikhism in their belief net questionnaire) all have a spirit of protest and criticism against the orthodox cultures of Brahmanism, Islam and Vaishnavism. This is a little odd, but many historians criticize Vaishnavism for abandoning the free, liberal, somewhat antinomian spirit of Nityananda Prabhu into a Hari-bhakti-vilasa culture of "don't eat carrots or onions or we won't drink your water."

My feeling is that most of us were attracted to KC because of the discipline rather than the freedom. And it is true: There is no character formation without discipline. Western culture ostensibly admires self-imposed discipline--doing it because you want to rather than because you have to. But all cultures impose external or social discipline that can be quite confining.

Spiritual life requires discipline, let us not deny it. But the internal discipline of the heart is greater than the forced discipline of infinitely multiplied rules and regulations.

I guess that's why he had Eva Braun and his other lovers.... coz he was obviously not into sex.

Perhaps he never smoked, but he did eat meat and enjoyed his cup of wine now and then.

Hitler as vegetarian is a long-standing urban myth.

I'm going to just come right out and say it. I haven't followed the four regulative principles for 30 years and yet the desire for love of Radha Krishna burns in my heart and gives me no relief. I didn't join ISKCON so that I could follow regulative principles, but rather to develop love of God. I accepted the regulative principles and sannyasa because I was told they were necessary to attain pure love of God. However, my guru and his organization did everything they could to stand in the way of that attainment. All they wanted from me was to raise money, start, build and administer temples, and bring in new disciples as fresh meat for their religious empire. When I realized this and the depths they stooped to to attain these goals I resigned and left.

I set about stripping away the cultural externals of Indian Hinduism to see what would be left that is real. I found attraction to Radha Krishna, engaging in pure devotional service in various forms, a desire to enter into the spiritual Goloka, etc. still remain and burn strongly. I agree that following regulative principles can be helpful for certain persons at certain times in their lives, but they are way over rated. It's what's inside that counts. Call me a Sahajiya if you will. I'll bear the title happily.

I did not come to KC for rules and regs, either. I read the Gita, and I have found an extremely deep philosophy and an extremely joyous and beautiful concept of God, opposed to the angry, revengeful and often merciless God of the Old Testament. That was what made me dive deeper into KC. So when I first met the devotees, I was a bit surprised to see that most of their preaching concerned the regs, the external features, etc. The wisdom Krsna describes in the Gita, is the wisdom of freedom. He is patiently explaining all the different paths, and leaves it up to the reader to choose one. He never ever says that "this is the only way or else you go to hell". He is kind, merciful, patient and incredibly wise. This was the Krsna I first met, and I still want to believe that Krsna is not the angry, revengeful tyrant some devotees like to see Him. I often realize in myself and othrs as well that people born and raised in a Christian environment tend to project the common concept of "fear of God" unto the vision of bhakti. Imho these two concepts are contradictory. Fear kills love. Nobody loves a cruel tyrant. At most you are afraid of him. When it comes to friendship or love, there can be no question of fear. Both way may work but to me it seems impossible to walk both simultaneously. In my opinion bhakti is supposed to be the path of happiness, joy and freedom, not the path of frustration, self-deceit and hypocrisy.

I think we should distinguish between two things here - 1. awe and fear of God, and 2. rules and regulations. Even in the most anarchic societies there are some rules and regulations, we are not animals after all. Let us see what Rupa Gosvami says about it. He defines vaidhi bhakti as follows in Bhakti Rasamrita Sindhu 1.2.6:

yatra raganavaptatvat pravrittir upajayate
shasanenaiva shastrasya sa vaidhi bhaktir ucyate

"Where there is no raga (passionate love) to propel bhakti, but only the orders of the scriptures, this is called vaidhi bhakti."

Then Rupa Gosvami quotes an example from Bhagavat 11th canto:

ya esam purusham saksat atma prabhavam ishvaram
na bhajantyavajananti sthanad bhrashtah patantyadah

"Whoever does not worship the self-created Supreme Controller, the Lord Himself, and disrespects him, will fall down from his caste." (quoted in BRS 1.2.11)

Here is the threat-mentality you encountered in that well known missionary sect we all know. It is scriptural and genuine, but it does not attract you because, as you rightly said, one cannot love under threat. The Gosvamis therefore dismiss vaidhi bhakti as 'weak'.

Later Rupa Gosvami speaks about raganuga bhakti as the practise which is based on greed after the feelings of the people of Vraja, but here he does warn that in raganuga bhakti too, rules are there to be followed.

sravanotkirtanadini vaidha bhaktyuditani tu
yanyangani ta tanyatra vijneyani manishibhih

"All the items of vaidhi bhakti like hearing and chanting are also items of raganuga bhakti, according to the wise." (BRS 1.2.296)

Raganuga bhakti does not stress the following of rules and is not based on it, but rules will be there for every civilised human being. Following rules and fear of God are two separate things.

The reason I mentioned fear and rules under the same category is because very often priests threaten people like this: "If you do not follow this and this rule you go to hell!" And immediately fear enters the scene. I will tell you frankly that I simply do not know what to do with scriptural injunctions from Hari Bhakti Vilas like these ones:

"A person who will not offer a lamp to the Lord is destined to go to hell" or "a fool who eats on the Jayanti day will not easily be delivered from hell, even if he observes the vow of dvadasi" or "a person who eats on Lord Krsna's holy day pushes into a horrible hell a hundred and one generations of his relatives past and yet to come" or "a widow especially who does not follow the vow of Karttika certainly goes to hell" or "a person who during the month of Karttika eats rajamasa beans or kidney beans becomes a resident of hell".

These are two different concepts of God, at least this is how I see. God #1 is all loving, He notices the slightest merit in you, loves you and wants you to attain His association, while God #2 is an extremely rigid autocrat, Who is willing to send you to hell even for the slightest mistake (eating beans on a specific day), like a merciless judge. Always this "hell hell hell". If you dont obey Me, you go to hell. This reminds me of the book 1984 by Orwell, where the guy was tortured in every imaginable way unless he surrendered and learned how to love the cruel, evil tyrant, Big Brother. No matter how hard I try, I cannot harmonize these two concepts of God. I am sorry, I just cannot imagine Krsna angrily shouting and kicking people into blazing hells because they ate kidney beans during a specific month of the year... I - like many of us - was fed up with hellish threats of the Catholic dogmas, this is just why we started to look for something else, something different...

There is a difference between following rules and regulations and ethical, civilized behavior. Of course one must act in a way which respects all living entities and the whole of God's creation.

I must admit to a Christian influence in this regard. When Jesus was asked what is the greatest commandment, he answered that one should love God with all of one's body, mind and soul and love one's neighbor as one's self. This is the essence of the law. Judaism and Hinduism both place a strong emphasis on purity codes. I believe both Jesus and Krishna Chaitanya came to show the way of devotion to God and to free persons from the oppressive purity codes.

Bhaktivinode Thakur said that many of the rules and regulations were interpolated into the scriptures in order to keep people in line and that one should not believe everything one reads in old books. (I believe this is in The Bhagavata) Love must be given freely and spontaneously or it is not love. If one does not have love, then one may practice being loving by following the regulative principles. Of course hearing and chanting the glories of God is appropriate at any stage of spiritual development, and when one has love this will be done spontaneously, not because someone says we should.

Caitanya Caritamrita, Madhya lila, chapter 24, elaborately describes how Mahaprabhu ordered Sanatan Gosvami to compile the Haribhakti Vilasa. When Sriman Mahaprabhu outlined the contents of Haribhakti Vilasa, he assured Sanatana Gosvamipada; yabe tumi likhiba krsna korabe sphurana, "Krsna will reveal to you what to write." [Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya 24, 340] It was not written under pressure of smartas but through the inspiration of Sri Krsna.

Haribhakti Vilas may have been partially written to make Mahaprabhu's sampradaya a credible one, with a regular and respectable smriti shastra.
Nevertheless, not a single syllable of HBV should be ridiculed or rejected. It would be a great offence to Sanatan Gosvami and to Mahaprabhu, who had ordered him to write it. On the other hand, one should not take its threats too seriously, but adopt a simple, concise version/selection of it for one's practical daily life and learn sadacara from the Guru according to his wish. shastram anantam - the shastras are endless and it is ultimately the Guru who will give a practical and concise synopsis of them.



Rupa Gosvami adds this quote to his definition of vidhi bhakti in BRS:

smartavyam satatam visnur vismartavyo na jatucit
sarva vidhi nishedha syur etayor eva kinkarah

"There is only one rule - always think of Vishnu and there is only one prohibition - never forget him. All other rules and prohibitions are but servants of these two."

Sri Roopa Goswami says -

yena tena prakAreNa
manaH kRSNe nivezayat
sarve vidhi niSedhAH syur
e tayor eva kiGkarAH

Whatever way helps the devotee to absorb his mind and heart
in spontaneous Divne Love of Lord Krishna, the devotee should follow.

All the Vedic rules and restrictions are otherwise,
only SERVANTS of Raganuga Bhakti.

The servants of 'rules and regulations' just provide trivial assistance
to the loving devotees if at all the need should arise.

This is also evident from Padma-purana, Brhad-sahasra-nama-stotram:

smartavyaH satataM viSNur vismartavyo na jAtucit
sarve vidhi-niSedhAH syur etayor eva kiGkarAH

"To always remember Vishnu, and to never forget Him --
all the injunctions and prohibitions are servants of this principle."

yadA yamanu gRhNAti
bhagavAnAtma bhAvitaH
sa jahAti matiM
loke vede ca pariniSThitAM

(Bhagavatam 4.29.46)

"When, contemplated upon with in the loving heart,
the Lord showers His Grace on some particular individual,
the dovotee so blessed gives up his faith, however deeprooted,
in all the worldly rules and Vedic prohibitions."

Narada Bhakti Sutra also says-

"nirodhastu loka veda vyApAranyAsaH" (8)

"vedAnamapi sannysya ti
kevalam avicchinnAnurAgaM labhate"(49)

"niveditAtma loka veda zIla tvAt" (61)

In Caitanya Caritamritam Madhyalila- 8.8.220

Sri Ramananda Raya has also declared -

"One who is attracted by that ecstatic Raganuga bhakti of Gopis
does NOT care about the regulative principles given in Vedas or
ritualistic worship according to the prescribed rules or popular opinion.

Rather, he or she completely surrenders unto Beloved Krishna
and loves Him through spontaneous attachment."

The Vedic rules of karma kanda are referred to in the texts you quoted. However, that is a different thing from the bhakti smriti of the Gaudiya Vaishnavas, dear Anuraag. As I said before, raganuga bhakti does not mean we become animals - see BRS 1.2.296.

Actually, he doesn't, though this is often attributed to him.

Bhagavata 7.1.31, cited as BRS 1.2.4, says: tasmAt kenApy upAyena manaH kRSNe nivezayet.

The second line of the smartavyaH satataM viSNur verse from Padma cited as BRS 1.2.8 says: sarva-vidhi-niSedhAH syur etayor eva kiGkarAH.

I do not know who is behind creating the hybrid and attributing it to Rupa.

At any rate, the point is valid.

nirodhastu loka veda vyApAra tyAgaH
tasmai ananyatA tadvirodhiSUdAsInatA

(Narada Bhkti Sutra 8, 9)

The renunciation of Prema Bhaktas is mainly
a consecration of all ritualistic activities,
and duties including the subtle knowledge
given in the Vedas and Upanishads.
It means exclusive dedication to the Lord
and indifference to all that stands in the way of Divine Love.

vedAnapi sannyasyati;
kevalam avicchannAnurAgaM labhate

He who gives up even the rules and subtle knowledge as well as ritualic worship prescribed by the Vedas and obtains the Prema Bhakti, the unintermittent hankering for God;

lokahAnau cintA na kAryA; niveditAtma loka veda (zIla)tvAt

The Prema Bhakta has no cause to worry himself
over his loss and miseries in the material world;
for he has surrendered his own Self, the world as well as
the conduct prescribed in Vedas-Upanishads to the Lord.

(Narada Bhakti Sutra 49, 61)

Please note the specific mention of the word Veda in the sutras given above.

lokadharma veda dharma dehadharmakarma
lajjA dhairya deha sukha Atmasukha marma
sarvatyAga karaye kare kRSNera bhajana
kRSNa sukha hetu kare premera sevana

(Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu-C. C.)

"te nAdhItazrutigaNA......"

"kevalena hi bhAvena gopyo gAvo nagA mRgAH....."

(Bhagavatam 11.12.7,8)

Lord Krishna confirms this to His friend Uddhava,

"They had not studied the Vedas (including Upanishads),
not served great saints, nor observed any vows,
nor performed any austerities,
yet through their association with Me, they ATTAINED Me."

"The Gopis, and even the cows, trees, beasts, serpents
and others that were dull of understanding were PERFECTED,
and easily attained Me through spontaneous Divine Love alone."

Yes. Last night, when chanting japa, I struck on a sadhana that I hadn't really applied before. I tried to tap my emotional memory, rather than my mind or intellect, to the times when I was the most deeply in love, and then tried to channel that emotion into the chanting.

It has been already stated, though, that some regulated aspects of bhakti-sAdhana are not the same as zruti-dharma.

Depends how we look at it. Sruti can stand in for all kinds of ritualistic activities. Like the Gita--

yAvAn artha udapAne
sarvataH samplutodake
tAvAn sarveSu vedeSu
brAhmaNasya vijAnataH

Whatever purposes are served by a small pond are achieved by the great reservoirs of water. Similarly, all the purposes of the Vedas are accomplished by one who knows God. [Gita 2.46]

The lesson here is that we have to establish what our own spiritual essence or goal is, and cultivate that directly. That is why Jiva says that the symptoms of the siddha are the practices of the sadhaka.

Sadhanas are not sadhanas, but anubhavas. That is, they are not means to an end, but the end itself.

A lost memory just came back to me. Once, while in India, I went through a pretty crazy period and would go around chanting "prema prayojan" like a kind of mantra. Prema prayojan has a double meaning in Bengali: On the one hand it means "Love of God is the goal of life." On the other, it means, "We all need love."

This certainly does resume for me the essence of all our bhakti speculations and actions. As devotees we will never abandon the specifics of our religious symbols, but we must keep the essence solidly planted in our minds, written on our foreheads if you will. "All you need is love": prem prayojan!

parasparAnukathanaM
pAvanaM bhagavad-yazaH
mitho ratir mithas tuSTir
nivRttir mitha AtmanaH

How does one know God?

bhaktyA mAm abhijAnAti yAvAn yaz cA 'smi tattvataH
tato mAM tattvato jnAtvA vizate tada anantaram

Bhagavad Gita 18.55

By devotion (Divine Love) he knows Me in truth,
What and Who I am; then having known Me in truth,
he forthwith enters into Me.

Prema, Love makes way to the inaccessible.
The unknown and the unknowable become known to the true lover.
What is known through love is true Knowledge and
what is done through love is the true service.

na tapobhir na vedaiz ca na jnAne nApi karmaNA
harirhi sAdhyate bhaktyA pramaNaM tatra gopikAH

Padma Purana, Uttara Khanda, Chapter. 2, verse. 18

Sri Hari can be won neither by means of austerities nor through the study of the Vedas, nor even through righteous action.
He can be won only through Divine Love. The cowherdesses of Vraja bear testimony to this.

sarvasya cA 'haM hRdi sanniviSTo mattaH smRtir jnAnam apohanaM ca
vedaizca sarvair aham eva vedyo vedAnta kRd veda vid eva ca 'ham

(B.Gita 15.15)

Bhagavan Krishna also said:

And I am seated in the hearts of all;
from Me are memory, knowledge, as well as their loss;
I am verily That Which alone has to be known by Vedas ;
I am indeed the Author of the Vedanta as well as
the sole Knower of the Vedas.
I am only familiar with the first meaning.

In Bengali, "prayojan" means "need." So if I say, "AmAr prem prayojan," it means "I need prem." So "prem prayojan" literally means "Love needed."

"The essence of love lives by distribution; not by absorbtion, but by distribution. That is love. Prema is that which exists by its tendency of distribution, and that is the highest."

"Whatever we may experience, the most central need for fulfillment remains, love. The absolute king of everything is love."

Bhakti Raksaka Srila Sridhara Maharaja.

Excellent quotes, Ananda.

There are two approaches to love: the bhajananandi and the gosthyanandi. Here is the bhajananandi version:

bAhire nayan nA deo kokhon, bhAvAkrAnta citta nAhi jad-avadhi
je bhAve abhAva, hoibek bhAva, nAile bhAvAbhAse hobe nA tad-buddhi
mahatera bhAva, bhAbite bhAbite, tad-AviSTe sarva hobe vismaraN
antar-bAhye tabe ekAkAra habe, mahad-bhAve rasa hobe AsvAdan

The gosthyanandi version was given above from the Eleventh Canto. But there is no such thing as a pure bhajanandi or a pure goshthyanandi.

Thank you Jagat. Here is more from Bhakti Raksaka Srila Sridhara Maharaja:

Attraction is the most fundamental element everywhere. All else can be eliminated and forgotten if we come in touch with attraction and love.

Love is the principle in the center which is the only fulfillment of all existence. The very gist of existence is there; it can't be ignored or challenged by any other forms or aspects of our substantial existence. It is unchangeable and absolute.

Coming in clash with the principle of love, all will have to accept defeat. This is the most substantial thing.

After liberation, beyond calculative devotion, in the highest plane of the whole creation, eternal love reigns supreme.

That we may live in the waves of the ocean of love is the highest objective of our lives.

So, give up your wild-goose-chasing habit and collect and concentrate all your might to progress in this line; try to go to the temple of love divine.

So my question is: How come so many of Sridhar Maharaj's disciples are so rigid? Tripurari Maharaj is the only one who has at least tried to philosophically accomodate these concepts. Narasingha Maharaj and Bhakti Sudhir Goswami are very "tough-love" types of guys.

I am not so big on the tough love types. I affectionately call them "son-of-a-bitch" Vaishnavas. There are bhajananandi SOB Vaishnavas, too: plenty of examples of them in Vraja. They just want to be alone, and there is nothing they hate more than fawning adulation. There are stories of siddha mahatmas chasing Morwari businessmen sadhu groupie types away from their bhajan kutirs with a flurry of foul language. But you get something like that in the character of Gaur Kishor Das and Vamsi Das Babaji also. "If you want to hang out with me, do like me--eat raw eggplant and live in an abandoned toilet."

Even Ramakrishna Pandit Baba gives the impression that he could not suffer fools gladly. No wonder he did not get along with Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati. They both had these hard line attitudes.

There is such a thing as tough love, but it can really only be exercised when there is already a relationship of trust. It would be nice if tough love were psychologically effective in the community building sense, but most of the time it is not. Even in cases where there is already a supposed guru-disciple relationship based on faith and trust, harsh and intransigeant discipline often leads to unnecessary alienation.

Perhaps it is too much to expect for every guru to be a clever psychologist, and weakness may be just as counterproductive as harsh treatment--but in the building of community, there has to be an acknowledgement of individual limitation, approbation for any progress, a spirit of welcome and easy belonging rather than easy ostracism.

I say this because I see Krishna consciousness as a matter of identity first. It is a culture of identity: I am becoming the servant of Krishna, and a servant of Krishna is like this as a person. I am becoming the maidservant of Radharani, and the maidservant of Radharani is like this.

Vaishnavism is not yoga in the sense of harsh physical disciplines.

Jagat has posted this once before on VNN. No reason not to put it on again --
-----------------------------

bAhire se AlA bholA antare hRdaya galA
mukhe sadA kRSNa bolA cokhe azru mAlA
dInatAya se mATir mAnuS niSThAte acalA
kRSNa dite kRSNa nite dhare zakti sob
alaukika lokavat gauDIya vaiSNob

He looks artless, guileless
but inside his heart is melting;
the name of Krishna is always on his tongue
a garland of tears in his eyes.
In humility though forebearing,
his faith unswerving as a mountain.

To give or take Krishna,
is the power in his hands.
He looks like anyone,
but he is beyond the world.
That is a Gaudiya Vaishnava.

sabAra nIce paRe thAke sabAike se sevya dekhe
sabAra iSTa miSTa bhAkhe kRSNa tattva jñAne
sabAi debA sabAr sevA kRSNa adhiSThAne
nikhila bheda samanvayera mUrti savaibhava
tomAra preme goRA se gauDIya vaiSNava

He humbly takes the lowest place,
sees everyone as someone to serve;
to all he speaks what is pleasing and sweet,
connected to the truth of Krishna;
he knows that Krishna dwells in every soul
and so he gives to all and serves all.

All differences are resolved in him,
this is the glory he incarnates.
Formed through and through by Your love--
that is a Gaudiya Vaishnava.

sarvottama sadainya vinaya nirahaM suzAnti nilaya
nitAi graha grasta hRdaya sadaya vizva jIve
tomAra icchAya cale bale tomAra icchAya seve
tomAra gaNa sange se pAya prema rasArNava
tomAra sRSTa hRSTa iSTa gauDIya vaiSNava

He is the best of all, yet he makes no claims.
He is without ego, the house of blissful peace.
He is under the astral influence of Nitai,
and so merciful to all souls in the universe.
He walks and talks according to Your desire,
according to Your desire, he serves.

When in the company of those who are Yours,
he finds an ocean of relish.
Your personal creation, Your own ecstatic object of worship --
that is a Gaudiya Vaishnava.

kaivalyake narka mAne svargake khapuSpa jAne
indriya kRSNa sevane vizva-pUrNa sukhe
daivatAdi nAhi gaNe tomAra kRponmukhe
tomAra-i audArya vIrya AtmA akaitava
tomAra kRpA mUrtimanta gauDIya vaiSNava

He takes nondualistic liberation to be hell
and heaven to be a flower in the sky;
his senses are all engaged in Krishna's service
and so he sees the world as a place of joy;
he pays no attention to other gods,
turned only toward the search for Your mercy;

He is filled with the heroism of Your munificence;
his heart is without deception;
the incarnation of Your blessings --
that is the Gaudiya Vaishnava.

saMsAre se anAsakta bAhya dehe sAdhaka bhakta
antare se anurakta rAgAnugA lobhe
gaurotsave vrajera bhAve sadA iSTa seve
keza-zeSa-sudurlabha gopIra anubhava
acintya prabhAvI se gauDIya vaiSNava

Though detached from the world;
externally, he carries on like a sadhaka bhakta;
yet within he seethes with rAgAnugA greed.
Festive in the mood of Gauranga
he always serves the object of his love:

the mood of the gopis,
so rare for even Brahma, Vishnu and Ananta.
Of incomprehensible divine power,
that is the Gaudiya Vaishnava.

-Sri Gopinath Basak

According to Narada Bhakti Sutra - the nature of Divine Love Itself is:

anirvacanIyaM premasvarUpam

mUkAsvAdanavat

prakAzyate kvApi pAtre

guNa rahitaM kAmanA rahitaM
prati kSaNa vardha mAnaM avicchinnaM
sUkSmataraM anubhava rUpam

-Narada Bhakti Sutra 51-54

The intrinsic nature of Prema Bhakti - Divine Love defies exact and precise analysis, definition, or description.

It is like the experience of delightful taste, and joy which a dumb man has when he tastes something sweet.

The Divine Love, neverthless, manifests itself, in one - whosoever it be -
when one has made oneself fit for such manifestation
(being blessed by His Divine Grace).

The self-less Love for Lord is unmotivated, free from all chracteristic tendencies to selfish action, it is of the nature of an integral subjective experience, subtler than the subtlest, manifesting itself spontaneously and expanding every moment effortlessly!

Not all disciples will uniformly receive the guru's mood in their hearts, I suppose. I trust that Srila Sridhara Maharaja spend many moments of his life meditating on Lord Nityananda's merciful legacy. I believe thats how he could speak as he spoke, about Love and other things. Rigid discipline in itself does not seem to agree with the idea of Sublime Love, but some say it is a means to a fair end...

My telephone line was interrupted for a month, since I am living on a Swiss mountain without road access, with cows and my Nitai, so I am coming to this thread a ong time after it was active.

Openmind started out about the rigidity of Hindu practices. India is a Saturnian country, extremely serious. In public you hardly ever see smiling people (except if you start to make photos in their face). Saturn is a rigid fellow. Rules everywhere, because they live in total chaos. You notice that unsmiling, heavy nature of Indians the strongest, when you meet Tibetans which have this lightness and that perennial smile on their face. No idea what Indians know about love in their lives. All marriages are arranged. Suppression is the rule of life there. These are all Saturnian qualities.

On the positive side there is that earnestness (also Saturnian) to push through what you once adopted, sadhana (also Saturn) to achieve a goal. Learning thru hard experience, especially through self-denial, is a strong quality there. In as far as we have need for that, we are attracted to this kind of culture. To discover what Saturn wants with us in our lives (in our horoscope) is an important step in the development of one's life. It is seen that people often get into personal crises around 28-30 years of age (Saturn return), if they had not fulfilled their Saturn needs in their lives. Many devotees who joined earlier in life had to leave their institution, to search for and pursue a more honest path around this time of their lives.

Saturn lessons are not pleasant ones, generally. India is not a pleasant place to live, generally. But: there wisdom is covered deep inside the lead that can be turned into gold, figuratively speaking, if you find the key of transformation.

This reminds me of a story: once I took part on a celebration of the Dalai Lama's birthday in a Buddhist Center in Hungary. Some Tibetan monks and guests attended, too. There was some kind of ritual for the long life of the Dalai Lama. All the Western practitioners tried to be as "serious" as they could, to show off how great sadhakas they are, while the Tibetan monks and guests were just so relaxed and happy, they laughed all the time during the ceremony. This incident just confirmed my conviction that converts to Eastern religions often make a big fuss over things unnecessarily...