The Essential Nature of Sri Caitanyadeva - His identity and the causes for His appearance

QUOTE

Sri Radhaavatar Caitanya Deva Ki jayho !

Having read this, I began to reflect on the idea of "Radha-avatara Caitanya". The famous sloka from Svarupa Damodara's Kadaca describes the essential nature of the Caitanya-avatara:

rAdhA kRSNa-praNaya-vikRtir hlAdinI zaktir asmAd
ekAtmAnAv api bhuvi purA deha-bhedaM gatau tau
caitanyAkhyaM prakaTam adhunA tad-dvayaM caikyam AptaM
rAdhA-bhAva-dyuti-suvalitaM naumi kRSNa-svarUpam
"The transformations of love between Sri Radha and Sri Krishna are manifestations of the hladini-sakti. These two, although one soul, have manifested in this world in separate forms since ancient times. He, who is known as Caitanya, has now manifest as Their union. Obeisances to Him, who is Sri Krishna Himself, beautifully endowed with the bhava and lustre of Sri Radha!"

The verse describes how Sri Radha and Krishna, who are one soul, have separately manifested for the sake of enjoying blissful pastimes, but who have once again manifest as one in the form of Sri Caitanya. Svarupa Damodara then specifies their union as being "kRSNa-svarUpam" who is endowed with the bhava and lustre of Sri Radha.

In other words, Sri Krishna is the essential basis of the Caitanya-avatara. The inner reasons for the descent of Sri Caitanyadeva also yield support to this, for Kaviraja Gosvami describes the three-fold inner reasons for His appearance as being the desires of Sri Krishna. Any thoughts?

zrI-rAdhAyAH praNaya-mahimA kIdRzo vAnayaivA-
svAdyo yenAdbhuta-madhurimA kIdRso vA madIyaH
saukhyaM cAsyA mad-anubhavataH kIdRsaM veti lobhAt
tad-bhAvADhyaH samajani zaci-garbha-sindhau harInduH ||CC.A.1.6||

This is the complement to your verse, Madhava.
Not sure if I can put here an adequate translation yet, but the gist is Sri Krishna wants to taste the wonderful sweetness which Sri Radha gets from Him.

But this is many-faceted, isn't it? If Sri Radha and Sri Krishna are also one being, separated, there must be some admixture. As Sri Anantadas Baba says in his Radharasa-sudhanidhi talk, Prema brings Krishna and Bhakta together so their two hearts become one.

Could we say that Sri Chaitanya is 'Radha-vesh' avatara?

Often Sriman Mahaprabhu is proclaimed to be the Radha-Krishna Milita Tanu (joint body of Radha Krishna). However, this is not so in the physical sense. He is Krishna, accepting the feelings and glow of Radha, not that Radha has physically merged or joined with Krishna in Her entirety. Srila Raghunatha Das Goswami opens his Stavavali with the following auspicious invocation to Sri Gaursundar: "The Original Personality of Godhead Sri Krishna became very eager to taste the nectar of His own sweetness in the mood of His dearmost girlfriend Sri Radha after He saw His own incomparible reflection in a jewelled mirror in Vraja". Srila Rupa Gosvami translates Krishna's feelings at that moment as follows in his 'Lalita Madhava'-play (Act VIII):

aparikalita purvah kashcamatkarakari sphurati mama gariyan esha madhurya purah
ayam aham api hanta prekshya yam lubdha cetah sarabhasam upabhoktum kamaye radhikeva

When Krishna once saw His own extraordinary sweetness reflected in a jewelled wall He was amazed and said: "How unprecedented and astonishing is this deep and indescribable sweetness of Mine! Alas! When I see it even I become greedy to enjoy its sweetness, just like Radhika!"

sva madhurya dekhi krishna korena vicara
ananta adbhuta purna mora madhurima; trijagate ihara keho nahi paya sima
ei prema dvare nitya radhika ekali; amara madhuryamrita asvade sakali

When Krishna beheld His own sweetness, He thought to Himself: "My sweetness is endless, wonderful and complete, and no one in the three worlds can find its limit. Through Her great love only Radhika can always relish all the nectar of My sweetness."

darpanadye dekhi yadi apana madhuri; asvadite lobha hoy asvadite nari
vicara koriye yadi asvada upaya; radhika svarupa hoite tabe mone dhaya

"When I see My own sweetness in the mirror I become eager to taste it, but I can't. After due consideration I find the only way to relish this sweetness is through the constitution of Sri Radhika." (Caitanya Caritamrita šdi ch. 4) According to Sriman Mahaprabhu's intimate associate Srila Svarupa Damodara there were three unfulfilled desires that were the main causes for Sri Krishna to accept the mood and complexion of Srimati Radharani and to descend as Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. It is thus described in Sri Svarupa Gosvami's notebook:

sri radhayah pranaya mahima kidrisho vanayair va
svadyo yenadbhuta madhurima kidrisho va madiyah
saukhyam casya mad anubhavatah kidrisham veti lobhas
tad bhavarhyah samajani shaci garbha sindhau harinduh

"How glorious is Sri Radha love for Me? How does She relish My wonderful sweetness through this love? How much bliss does She experience from relishing My sweetness?" It is with these three kinds of sacred greed that Lord Hari, enriched with the feelings of Srimati Radhika, appeared like the moon from mother Shaci's ocean-like womb!” So if Mahaprabhu were a joint figure (milita vigraha) of Radha-Krishna, why would He bother or need to find out these three things, and from Whom would He be feeling separation, if Radha was already there united within Him?

Yes, I understand. Thank you, Advaitadasji.

Are Kaviraja's threefold inner reasons, referred to by Madhava above, these three kidrishaH then?
I understand saukhyam and anubhava somewhat but the following are difficult:
1/ pranaya-mahima
2/ yenadbhuta-madhurima
Could you discuss these a little?

The following passage, appearing in the end of Sri Ramananda Samvada (Caitanya Caritamrita, Madhya-lila, chapter eight), serves well to illustrate the identity of Sri Caitanya as Sri Krishna who is absorbed in Radha-bhava.

eka saMzaya mora Achaye hRdaye
kRpA kari’ kaha more tAhAra nizcaye || 267 ||

pahile dekhiluG tomAra sannyAsi-svarUpa
ebe tomA dekhi muJi zyAma-gopa-rUpa || 268 ||

tomAra sammukhe dekhi kAJcana-paJcAlikA
tAGra gaura-kAntye tomAra sarva aGga DhAkA || 269 ||

tAhAte prakaTa dekhoG sa-vaMzI vadana
nAnA bhAve caJcala tAhe kamala-nayana || 270 ||

ei-mata tomA dekhi’ haya camatkAra
akapaTe kaha, prabhu, kAraNa ihAra || 271 ||
Ramananda said: “There is one more doubt in my heart. In your kindness, please help me to ascertain it. In the beginning, I saw your sannyasi-svarupa, but now I see you in a blackish form of a cowherd. I see a golden doll standing in front of you, Her golden complexion covering all of your limbs. In that form, you are holding a flute to your lips, and your lotus eyes are restlessly moving about, provoked by various feelings. In his way, I behold you in astonishment. O master, please tell me frankly what is the cause for this.”

prabhu kahe kRSNe tomAra gADha-prema haya
premAra svabhAva ei jAniha nizcaya || 272 ||

mahA-bhAgavata dekhe sthAvara-jaGgama
tAhAG tAhAG haya tAGra zrI-kRSNa-sphuraNa || 273 ||

sthAvara-jaGgama dekhe, nA dekhe tAra mUrti
sarvatra haya nija iSTa-deva-sphUrti || 274 ||

sarva-bhUteSu yaH pazyed
bhagavad-bhAvam AtmanaH
bhUtAni bhagavaty Atmany
eSa bhAgavatottamaH || 275 ||

vana-latAs tarava Atmani viSNuM
vyaJjayantya iva puSpa-phalADhyAH
praNata-bhAra-viTapA madhu-dhArAH
prema-hRSTa-tanavo vavRSuH sma || 276 ||

rAdhA-kRSNe tomAra mahA-prema haya
yAhAG tAhAG rAdhA-kRSNa tomAre sphuraya || 277 ||
Prabhu said: “You have deep prema for Krishna. Please understand the nature of this prema. A maha-bhagavata sees in all moving and non-moving objects here and there a manifestation of his Sri Krishna. He does not see the forms of moving and non-moving beings, but he sees a manifestation of his ista-deva in them.

‘He who sees a connection with the Lord in all beings withinin his enlightened self, and also sees all beings in the Lord, is known as the foremost of devotees.’

‘The vines and trees in the forest were filled with flowers and fruits, bowing down under their load, their bodies constantly showering streams of honey due to the rapture of prema they manifested for the Lord.’

Due to your great prema or Radha and Krishna, here and there Radha and Krishna appear to you.”

rAya kahe prabhu tumi chADa bhAri-bhUri
mora Age nija-rUpa nA kariha curi || 278 ||

rAdhikAra bhAva-kAnti kari’ aGgIkAra
nija-rasa AsvAdite kariyAcha avatAra || 279 ||

nija-gUDha-kArya tomAra prema AsvAdana
AnuSaGge prema-maya kaile tribhuvana || 280 ||

Apane Aile more karite uddhAra
ebe kapaTa kara tomAra kona vyavahAra || 281 ||
Raya said: “Prabhu, stop presenting these deep considerations. Don’t steal Your own form from me! Accepting the bhava and luster of Srimati Radhika, to taste Your unique mellows you have descended to this world. The relishing of prema is your special hidden reason for appearing, while simultaneously you have filled all the three worlds with prema! You have personally come to deliver me. Now, give up your duplicity, why should you behave like this!”

tabe hAsi’ tAGre prabhu dekhAila svarUpa
‘rasa-rAja’, ‘mahAbhAva’ dui eka rUpa || 282 ||

dekhi’ rAmAnanda hailA Anande mUrcchite
dharite nA pAre deha, paDilA bhUmite || 283 ||

prabhu tAGre hasta sparzi’ karAilA cetana
sannyAsIra veSa dekhi’ vismita haila mana || 284 ||

AliGgana kari’ prabhu kaila AzvAsana
tomA vinA ei-rUpa nA dekhe anya-jana || 285 ||

mora tattva-lIlA-rasa tomAra gocare
ataeva ei-rUpa dekhAiluG tomAre || 286 ||

gaura aGga nahe mora rAdhAGga-sparzana
gopendra-suta vinA teGho nA sparze anya-jana || 287 ||

tAGra bhAve bhAvita kari’ Atma-mana
tabe nija-mAdhurya kari AsvAdana || 288 ||

tomAra ThAJi AmAra kichu gupta nAhi karma
lukAile prema-bale jAna sarva-marma || 289 ||

gupte rAkhiha, kAhAG nA kario prakAza
AmAra bAtula-ceSTA loke upahAsa || 290 ||

Ami eka bAtula, tumi dvitIya bAtula
ataeva tomAya AmAya ha-i sama-tula || 291 ||
Smiling, Prabhu showed His svarupa to him as the king of rapturous mellows (rasa-raja) and the pinnacle of emotion (maha-bhava), these two in one form. Seeing this and filled with ecstasy, unable to hold himself standing, Ramananda fainted on the ground. Prabhu touched him with His hand and brought him back to consciousness. Seeing Him in the clothes of a sannyasi, his mind was struck with wonder.

Embracing him, Prabhu pacified him, telling: “Besides you, no-one else has seen this form. You know the truth about my pastimes and rapturous mellows, therefore I have shown this form to you. My body is not golden, but it appears as such because of the touch of Radha’s limbs. She never touches anyone but the son of the king of cowherds. My body and mind are illuminated by Her bhava, and thus I taste my own sweetness. Before you nothing I do is hidden even if I try to conceal it, by the force of your prema you know it all in detail. Keep it in secret, and don’t present it anywhere. My behavior is that of a madman, and ordinary people may ridicule it. I am one madman, and you are another. Therefore you and I are equal.”

In regards to what Advaitadas posted, from this beautiful narration we may learn that the body of Sri Krishna has assumed a golden due to the touch of Sri Radha's limbs, not that the limbs themselves have merged into His form.

QUOTE

Could we say that Sri Chaitanya is 'Radha-vesh' avatara?

Do you mean Radha-vesh (Radha-dyuti) or Radha-avesh (Radha-bhava)? At any rate, both are true!

Yes, both.

Though 'My body is not golden, but it appears as such because of the touch of Radha's limbs' is an even sweeter notion!

What a divine touch-stone She is.

Having read the passage I presented again and reflected on it, I would like to hear more on the following passages.

ebe tomA dekhi muJi zyAma-gopa-rUpa || 268 ||

tomAra sammukhe dekhi kAJcana-paJcAlikA
tAGra gaura-kAntye tomAra sarva aGga DhAkA || 269 ||
"Now I see you in a blackish form of a cowherd. I see a golden doll standing in front of you, its golden complexion covering all of your limbs."

tabe hAsi’ tAGre prabhu dekhAila svarUpa
‘rasa-rAja’, ‘mahAbhAva’ dui eka rUpa || 282 ||
"Smiling, Prabhu showed His svarupa to him as the king of rapturous mellows (rasa-raja) and the pinnacle of emotion (maha-bhava), these two in one form."

Although the svarupa of Sri Caitanyadeva is not a physical fusion of Radha and Krishna, nevertheless Rama Raya beheld the forms of Radha and Krishna in the svarupa of Sri Caitanya, as is evident from the above description of his darsan (seeing Srimati in front of Krishna, covering His limbs with Her lustre, as well as seeing rasa-raja and maha-bhava in one form). Any thoughts on this, Advaitadasji?

I would also be interested in insights into why Radha is called kancana-pancalika, a golden doll. Is this a certain poetic ornament or so?

Surely the vision of Ramananda Ray must have been the vision of Svarupa Damodara – they were the left and the right hand of Mahaprabhu in the Gambhira. They did not see things differently. Svarupa Damodara said ‘caitanyakhyam prakatam adhuna tad dvayam caikyam aptam’ “Now these Two have descended in one-ness as Caitanya.” He does not say ‘eka’ or one, but ‘aikya’, one-ness. If he had said ‘eka’ then yes, there was a physical one-ness. To give a mundane example (sorry for dragging everyone down), nowadays Russia and the US are on one line politically, there is one-ness in opinion, bhava-gata aikya, but they have not merged as one nation. The tika on this verse (unfortunately I don’t know the tikakara’s name, I will try to find out as soon as possible) writes ‘idanim kaliyuge radha-krsna dvayam aikyam aptam caitanyakhyam prakatam avirbhutam krsna svarupam naumi’. The final words krishna svarupam is the crux of the whole verse, the axis. If Mahaprabhu were Radha-Krishna instead of Krishna, Svarupa Damodara would never have written Krishna Svarupam. The tikakara continues: ‘kidrik krsna svarupam? radhayah bhavas ca dyutis ca tabhyam subalitam yuktam antar krsna bahir gauram iti yavat’. How is He Krishna Svarupa? Endowed (subalitam) with Radha’s feelings and glow, inwardly Krishna, outwardly Gaura (antar krsna bahir gaura, quoted in the Caitanya Caritamrita Adi 3,80 from the Sandarbhas). Then: ‘bhava dyuti subalitatvat aikyatvenotpreksya’. The one-ness expressed here is a metaphorical one (utpreksya=alankara=metaphor), a one-ness of feeling and glow only. For example, it may be said: ‘His face is like the moon’ - Of course his face IS not the moon, it is LIKE the moon. Similarly, it is AS IF Radha-Krishna have merged in Mahaprabhu, but only feeling-wise, not physically. Whatever actually appeared before Rama Raya’s retina, only he knows, and Kaviraja, but this is the philosophical truth of it. Speaking of alankara, indeed this ‘kancana pancalika’ is one of the many classical Vedic alankaras, also often used in Bengali padavali. Brings me to a very dear memory I have of a Patha that Ananta dasji gave on this subject at Jaisinghera in Vrndavana in August 1986. He explained there that Mahaprabhu is cleverly hiding His Godhood from Ramananda Ray, maintaining His human-like image, by saying: krsne tomara gudha prema hoy; premera svabhava ei janiho niscoy. mahabhagavat dekhe sthavara jangam; taha taha hoy tara sri krsna sphuran etc. (CC Madhya 8, 271-272) “You have such deep Love for Krishna that you see Him everywhere, in all mobile and immobile beings (even in Me!).”

QUOTE

Speaking of alankara, indeed this ‘kancana pancalika’ is one of the many classical Vedic alankaras, also often used in Bengali padavali.

Would you have more insights into a special meaning this expression is meant to convey? I didn't quite understand the comparison of Radhaji to a golden doll.

I am posting here the relevant verse from Svarupa Damodara's Kadaca explaining the three-fold cause of Hari's eagerness to appear in this world.

zrI-rAdhAyAH praNaya-mahimA kIdRzo vAnayaivA-
svAdyo yenAdbhuta-madhurimA kIdRzo vA madIyaH |
saukhyaM cAsyA mad-anubhavataH kIdRzaM veti lobhAt
tad-bhAvADhyaH samajani zacI-garbha-sindhau harInduH ||
“To experience the quality of the greatness of Sri Radha’s love, which She alone possesses, to experience the quality of the relish of His own astonishing sweetness, and to understand the kind of happiness She feels in experiencing Him – these are the reasons for the greed of the moon-like Hari, which prompted him to take birth from the ocean of the womb of Mother Saci, endowed with abundant emotions.”

Thus the three inner causes for His appearance are as follows:

1. zrI-rAdhAyAH praNaya-mahimA kIdRzo vAnayaivA – “To experience the quality of the greatness of Sri Radha’s love, which She alone possesses.”

2. AsvAdyo yenAdbhuta-madhurimA vA madIyaH – “To experience the quality of the relish of His own astonishing sweetness.”

3. saukhyaM cAsyA mad-anubhavataH – “To understand the kind of happiness She feels in experiencing Him.”

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 29 2002,02:15)

QUOTE

Speaking of alankara, indeed this ‘kancana pancalika’ is one of the many classical Vedic alankaras, also often used in Bengali padavali.

Would you have more insights into a special meaning this expression is meant to convey? I didn't quite understand the comparison of Radhaji to a golden doll.

I could not find any comment in Haridas Dasji’s books, the only other comment on this verse is Radhagovinda Nath’s, which my wife has unfortunately taken to Radhakunda just now.

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 28 2002,02:29)

QUOTE

Sri Radhaavatar Caitanya Deva Ki jayho !

Any thoughts?

Jay Sri Radhe !

"Sri Radha-Kripa-Kataksa-Stava-Raja
spoken by Lord Siva in a conversation with Gauri in the Urdhvamnaya-tantra "

Makhesvari! kriyesvari svadhesvari suresvari
triveda-bharatisvari pramana-sasanesvari
ramesvari! ksamesvari pramoda kananesvari
vrajesvari vrajadhipe sri radhike namo 'stu te (12)

"You are the mistress of all kinds of sacrifices (especially of the topmost yugala milana yajna); of all actions( since You are the root of all potencies;mula sakti-tattwa); of the mantras uttered at yajnas and the sacrificial offerings presented to the demigods; of all the words of the three Vedas; of the enforcement of all scriptural principles; of Sri Rama-devi ( the goddess of fortune); of Sri Ksama-devi ( the goddess of forgiviness); and especially of the delightful kunjas in Vrindavana.When will You mercifully make me Your dasi and grant me the qualification to render service in Your amourous pastimes with the prince of Vraja? He Srimat Radhike ,owner( adhikarini, vrajesvari ) and mainteiner ( vrajadhipe ) of Vraja!
I offer pranama unto You time and again".

The Idea of Radhaavatar is undestood within the context that She is the root of all potencies ( Mula sakti-tattwa ). Being Hladini Shakti She stands as the pleasure potency ,the embodiment of love. She is the source of everthing that exist for the pleasure of Sri Krishna. In the highest sense She is actually the director of any and every particle that moves for Krishna's pleasure.
Nothing is independent of Srimat Radhika, for She is that very potency that supplies and maintaing Krishna's hapiness.
Sri Caitanya Deva is the combined form of Sri Sri Radha and Krishna.
This combination, is the Bhava of Srimat Radhika borrowed by Sri Krishna to understand and realize that Bhava.
The Vedas declares that: the name , forms and qualities of Sri Radha and krishna are no different from Themself.
In this way it can be understood that Caitanya Deva's body complexion and Bhava are Srimat Radhika, that which was taken from Srimat Radhika is actually Herself, it is not different.
Normaly it said that Sri Krishna incarnated as Radha, but if They are together as combined form and Sri Radhika is there Personally, that emotions and color are Srimat Radhika.
So, in this way, one can say Caitanya Deva is a Radhaavatar. That color and Bhava are not different in quality and quantity from Srimat Radhika, perhaps, I would say , it is increased because Sri Krishna is there... in that transcendental mixture...Radha and Krishna in just one body... in one place... Radhakrishnavatar Caitanya Deva Kijayho!

In his Radharsa-Sudhanidhi Prabodhananda Sarasvati says: " Krishna Madhusudana, Who is hardly attainable by the Yogis, feels Himself glorified if He happens to be touched by the glorious wind set in motion by the agitate skirts of Sri Radhika"

Thakur Bhakti Vinode emphassied the Idea in one of his songs:

Krishna's pleasure lies in the Bliss of Radha.
I like to maditate upon it.
To keep His company, leaving the feet of Radha,
I shall never yearn.
Thare may be some, who live apart from Her,
Let them live as they prefer.
I am always in support of Radha.
I hate to see the others. ( saranagati # 26 )

radhe ! jaya jaya madhava-dayite!
gokula-taruni mandala-mahite

O Srimat Radhike! O beloved of Madhava! O most worshipable young maiden of Gokula-mandala! All glories to You! All glories to You!

your servant

QUOTE(Sri Hari @ Aug. 29 2002,10:05)

The Vedas declares that: the name , forms and qualities of Sri Radha and krishna are no different from Themself.
In this way it can be understood that Caitanya Deva's body complexion and Bhava are Srimat Radhika, that which was taken from Srimat Radhika is actually Herself, it is not different.
Normaly it said that Sri Krishna incarnated as Radha, but if They are together as combined form and Sri Radhika is there Personally, that emotions and color are Srimat Radhika.
So, in this way, one can say Caitanya Deva is a Radhaavatar. That color and Bhava are not different in quality and quantity from Srimat Radhika, perhaps, I would say , it is increased because Sri Krishna is there... in that transcendental mixture...Radha and Krishna in just one body... in one place...

Dear Sri Hari. If Radha were nothing else but Her bhava, then Svarupa Damodara Gosvami would not have said ‘radha bhava dyuti subalitam naumi krishna svarupam’ – “Mahaprabhu is endowed with the bhava and dyuti of Radha.” If She was non-different from Her bhava and nothing more, he would have simply said: “He is Radha-Krishna in fusion.” And again, to remind you, the verse closes off with Naumi Krishna Svarupam, “Gaura is Krishna”.

Jiva Gosvamin concludes the ''Sri Krsna -sandarbha'' by interpreting the first verse of the SB as applaying to Radha ,in the same way as he has interpreted and applied to Krsna alone.

According to Jiva Gosvamin,in the phrase ''tad dhimahi'' (we adore that) of the verse,the neuter singular usage of the relative pronoun ''tat'' (that)is intended to indicate generally,without any distinction of sex,the essential identity of Radha and Krsna as the Sakti and the Saktimat.Hence the appearance of Krsna coupled with that of Radha (rAdhayA yugalitas tu krsnah) at Vrndavana is the most wonderful of all the blessed and wonderful manifestations of Krsna(paramAd-bhuta-prakAsah).

The term ''yugalita'',however,must not be taken to imply absolute identity or merging but a relation of identity in non-identity.

Kavi Karnapura writes in his Gaura Ganoddesa Dipika (26): "Lord Caitanya accepted Srimati Radharani's golden complexion and ecstatic love for Lord Krsna, both of which had never before been seen in this world. Lord Caitanya was actually Lord Krsna, the son of Maharaja Nanda. He appeared like a great ocean of nectar flooding the entire world."

Sorry for not having the Sanskrit at hand.

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 29 2002,14:37)

The translation you quoted of this verse is not so great. The verse runs:
svikrtya radhika bhava kanti purva suduskare
antar bahi rasambodhih sri nandanandano’pi san
Translation: “He (Mahaprabhu) accepts the feelings and glow of Radhika, which was previously hard to attain. He is the son of Maharaja Nanda, who is an ocean of rasa inside out.”

There is an interesting theme which we might want to consider in this regard -- joint avataras. Kavi Karnapura lists several of them in his Gaura Ganoddesa Dipika. I have compiled three lists, the first listing devotees in Gaura-lila in whom many persons appeared, the second listing persons who incarnated in many devotees, the third listing devotees over whom there is disagreement according to Kavi Karnapur.

[ verse : identity in Gaura-lila -- identity in Vraja-lila ]

Many in one

37-39 : Jagannatha Misra -- Nanda, Vasudeva (Sutapa, Dasaratha)
37-39 : Saci Devi -- Yasoda, Devaki (Kausalya, Prisni)
40 : Mukunda (Nitai's father -- the same as Hadai?) -- Vasudeva, Dasaratha
40 : Padmavati (Nitai's mother) -- Rohini, Sumitra
45-46 : Laksmipriya -- Janaki-devi, Rukmini-devi, Laksmi-devi
65-66 : Vasudha -- Varuni-devi, Ananga Manjari
65-66 : Jahnava-- Revati-devi, Ananga Manjari
87-88 : Acyutananda -- Karttikeya, Acyuta-gopi
93-95 : Haridas Thakura -- Prahlada, Brahma Mahatapah (Ricika Muni’s son)
120-124 : Ramananda Raya -- Lalita-sakhi, Arjuniya-gopi, Arjuna (sakha), Arjuna (Pandava)
148-150 : Gadadhara Pandita -- Radha, Lalita
155 : Gadadhara dasa -- Candrakanti-devi, Purnananda Gopi
159 : Damodara Pandita -- Saibya-gopi, Sarasvati-devi
137, 166 : Kasisvara -- Bhrngara, Sasirekha
176 : Sivananda Sena -- Vira-devi and Duti-devi
181 : Sanatana Gosvami -- Lavanga Manjari (known also as Rati Manjari according to Karnapura), Sanatana Kumara

One in many

40, 86 : Paurnamasi -- Govinda Acarya, (Yogamaya --) Sita-devi
51: Vasistha Muni -- Gangadasa, Sudarsana
56-57 : Vrisabhanu Maharaja -- Pundarika Vidyanidhi, Madhava Misra
107-108 : Catuh-Kumara -- Kasinatha, Lokanatha, Srinatha, Ramanatha (Sanatana Kumara -- Sanatana Gosvami)
89, 115 : Jaya -- Nandini, Jagannatha (Jagai)
89, 115 : Vijaya -- Jangali, Madhava (Madhai)
152 : Lalita -- Gadadhara, Dhruvananda Brahmacari
163, 170 : Tungavidya -- Prabodhananda, Vidyavacaspati
181, 182 : Lavanga Manjari -- Sanatana Gosvami, Sivananda Cakravarti
65-66, 184 : Ananga Manjari -- Vasudha, Jahnava, Gopala Bhatta Gosvami

Disagreement

44 : Vallabha Acarya -- Maharaja Janaka / Maharaja Bhismaka
92-93 : Ramacandra Puri -- Vibhisana / Jatila
117 : Kesava Bharati -- Sandipani Muni / Akrura
172 : Saranga Thakura -- Nandimukhi / Prahlada
184 : Gopala Bhatta Gosvami -- Ananga Manjari / Guna Manjari
186 : Raghunatha Das Gosvami -- Rasa Manjari / Rati Manjari / Bhanumati-devi
191 : Suklambara Brahmacari -- one of the yajna-patnis / one of the yajnika-brahmanas

Additionally, Gopala Guru, Dhyanacandra and Siddha Krishnadas Baba have presented considerations about the identities of the asta-sakhis and the asta-manjaris, which somewhat differ from Kavi Karnapura's presentation. For instance, Svarupa Damodara (instead of Raya Ramananda) is recognized as Lalita Sakhi, Raya Ramananda (instead of Svarupa Damodara) is recognized as Visakha-sakhi, Vakresvara Pandita (instead of Prabodhananda) is recognized as Tungavidya-sakhi, and so forth.

One fellow devotee in Vraja who had analyzed the yoga-pitha maps of different parivaras told me each of the asta-sakhis had three avataras in Gaura-lila, which explains the differences between Vraja-yogapitha drawings of asta-sakhis and the corresponding petals of Navadvipa-yogapitha.

Are the joint avataras "fusions" of these personalities or rather something like avesa-avataras (qualities of someone incarnated in a particular devotee)? To begin with, I find the idea of an absolute fusion of two persons into one identity somewhat confusing. I admit, though, logic is limited in transcendence. Any thoughts on this?

In Gaura Ganoddesa Dipika (150), Kavi Karnapura refers to his Caitanya-candrodaya-nataka in explaining the oneness of Radha, Lalita and Hari in one body. It appears like he is paraphrasing 3.138. He then states (151):

"Gadadhara, the best of the brahmanas, is the incarnation of both Srimati Radharani and Lalita-gopi. These two are the transcendental potencies of the Lord, and since the Lord is in one sense not different from His potencies, it may be said that He is present wherever His potencies go. For this reason it may be said that Lord Hari is also present in the body of Gadadhara Pandita. Gadadhara is therefore the incarnation of three persons: Srimati Radharani, Lalita-gopi, and Lord Hari."

Again, my apologies for no Sanskrit. I have to fill some defects in my library during my next visit to Vraja. At any rate, this would lend support to Harisaran's idea of the nondifference of sakti and saktiman in Mahaprabhu. Yes, this is about Gadadhara, but the unity of sakti and saktiman are similarly discussed here. The text states that Hari is present in the body of Gadadhara as well. I wonder if this is in the original Sanskrit though.

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 29 2002,15:43)

Are the joint avataras "fusions" of these personalities or rather something like avesa-avataras (qualities of someone incarnated in a particular devotee)? To begin with, I find the idea of an absolute fusion of two persons into one identity somewhat confusing. I admit, though, logic is limited in transcendence. Any thoughts on this?

This is like the question, What is the relationship between Sri Vishnu and Sri Krishna? Rupa's solution in the BRS, as I understand it, is that Sri Krishna is such a personality who has six unique qualities which no other avatar has. This is satisfying in itself, in context, but leaves the whole question of individual uniqueness, human and divine, as a mystery. Is our personality fully defined by its analysable qualities? Is The Lord's? Or do we and the Lord gain our uniqueness from an ineffable fundamental being (or distinct beingnesses)?

From a broader perspective, may I say that the issue of the uniqueness of a particular personality versus non-uniqueness, or non-singularity, dogs all philosophy, East and West, and there is no logical empirical Truth yet found in such an investigation which is not ambiguous. Does this comfort you Madhavaji?

Take Sartre as an example. His philosophy consisted of an assertion of fundamental individuality of his/ our being. But he could not prove this, nor could he sustain it (After 1000s of pages of argument!). In the end he moved towards recognising that he shared his being with others, to an unknown extent ( he went from pure selfishness to socialism, both mutually contradictory ).

Western philosophy is rigorously logical, if nothing else. Really so much more Jnana than the Jnanis. But even they found ambiguity at the basis of being. If that is the case for humans, then what can we say of the Divine?

Elsewhere you described yourself as 'seeker of Truth', Madhavaji, so I thought I'd throw that in about ultimate difficulty of such a search...

Nonetheless others here may still be able to move this investigation on a few more steps with some more revelations from Gaudiya Researchers. And its all wonderful! Keep going please!

shrii shrii krishna chaitanya mahaaprabhu shrii shrii raadhaabhaavakaanti sviikrita shrii shrii raadhaakrishna milita tanu svayam shrii vrajendranandanah

"Shri Krishna Chatianya Mahaprabhu has the feeling and lustre of Shri Radha. He is the son of the king of Vraja in the combined form of Shri Shri Radha-Krishna

Can someone tell me from where does this verse come?

QUOTE(adiyen @ Aug. 30 2002,01:33)

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 29 2002,15:43)

Jay Sri Radhe !

Kalayati Nayanam
by Raya Ramananda

Kalayati nayanam disi disi valitam
pankajamiva mrdu-maruta-calitam

Radha's eyes move in all directions like a lotus in gentle breze.

keli-vipinan pravisati-radha
pratipada-samudita manasija-badha

Tortured by ever-increasing amorous desires, Radha enters the pastimes forest.

vinidadhati mrdu-manthara-padam
racayati kunjara-gatimanuvadam

She walks with gentle, slow steps as gracefully as an elephant.

janayati rudra-gajadhipa-mudhitam
ramananda-raya-kavi-gaditam

May these words spoken by the poet Ramananda Raya bring happiness to Gajapati Maharaj Prataparudra.

"in the same way, may this words bring peace and realizations to our hearts with the blessings of Gouravatar Caitanya Deva"

Your servant
harisaran das

QUOTE(karunamayidas @ Aug. 30 2002,03:39)

No idea. The following verse from Raghunatha Das Gosvami's Sva Sankalpa Prakasa Stotram (14) is interesting, on account of the words milita-tanu used in it.

samAnaM nirvAhya smara-sadasi saGgrAmam atulaM
tad-AjJAtaH sthitvA milita-tanu nidrAM gatavatoH |
tayor yugmaM yuktyA tvaritam abhisaGgamya kutukAt
kadAhaM seviSye sakhi kusuma-puJja-vyajana-bhAk ||14||
"O Sakhi Rupa Manjari! When can I quickly approach the Divine Couple and serve Them on Their order by fanning htem with a fan made of flowers as they awaken from sleep, their bodies united in a firm embrace after They completed Their amorous pastimes in Cupid's assembly?"

The words "milita-tanu" are employed here to describe the loving embrace of the Divine Couple without implying that they would be merged with each other. We remember from earlier posts how Krishnadas Kaviraja described Krishna's acquiring the bhava and complexion of Srimati on account of Her gentle, loving touch. Thus it is not out of place to use the words "milita-tanu", since Sri Caitanya is indeed the [result of the] meeting of the bodies of Sri Radha and Sri Krishna, though not a physical fusion of the two.

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 30 2002,17:57)

Heh! We are discussing siddhanta, but Hari is writing in bhAvAveza only! :biggrin:

So what ? :tongue: Superior to Siddanta are Lilas, superior to Philosophy is Poetry and superior to Law is mercy !

Did you not see...? Karuna mayi Srimat Radhike's sidelong glances... in that beautiful verses spoken by the poet Raya Ramanandaji ?

Have a great Sri krishna Janmastami !

Your servant

Just a few thoughts.
In Caitanya Caritamrita it is described that He banged His head against the walls in Gambhira. And that He was bleeding. How can God bleed? If His body is not material, not human. Or did Chaitanya have a fully human body?
Most non believers would probably say that the stories about Chaitanya are exaggerated, that He was deified by His followers, as were thousands of other "human avataras" in India. How can we KNOW that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is the Supreme Reality - God? Is it just a matter of faith? Like Christianity...

Is it possible to be a Gaudiya Vaishnava and NOT believe that Chaitanya is God?

How can God bleed? Did not Mahabharata narrate that Krishna bled to death after having been shot by the hunter Jara? Is there anything that He cannot do? He can create millions of universes and not create a little blood? And yes, perhaps He had a fully human body. He created all human bodies as well, so why not one for Himself? Non believers may think that anything is exaggarated, that is because they rely on their speculative minds and their pea-brains, not on revelation by saints and scriptures. Faith is the gateway to realisation – shraddhavallabhate jnanam (B.Gita 4.39) Human avataras are God according to the devotion of their followers, it is the attitude that counts and that is observed and appreciated by the Lord, and rewarded with divine realisations. How we can know that Caitanya Mahaprabhu is the Supreme Reality? According to Vrindavan Das Thakura and Gopinathacharya, by His own grace. Finally, how to be a Gaudiya Vaishnava (=Caitanya-Vaishnava) without believing in Caitanya? It is like being a Christian and not believing in Christ.

QUOTE

In Caitanya Caritamrita it is described that He banged His head against the walls in Gambhira. And that He was bleeding. How can God bleed? If His body is not material, not human. Or did Chaitanya have a fully human body?

We tend to think that the human-like form of the Lord, being sat-cid-ananda, is completely different from human bodies -- instead of flesh, blood, bones and so forth, it is completely made of some kind of transcendental rubber or so, a homogenic lump of divinity. No -- there is also variety -- flesh, blood, bones and so forth, but they are of a divine nature. Therefore the gopis sing (SB 10.31.19) in anxiety:

yat te sujAta-caraNAmburuhaM staneSu
bhItAH zanaiH priya dadhImahi karkazeSu
tenATavIm aTasi tad vyathate na kiM svit
kUrpAdibhir bhramati dhIr bhavad-AyuSAM naH
“O Priyaji, we desire to place your very delicate lotus feet gently on our breasts, being afraid when you roam about through the rough forests, distressed by thoughts of the small stones and so on which may hurt your delicate feet. Thus our mind is cast into a whirlpool of concern over you, who are our very life!”

QUOTE

Most non believers would probably say that the stories about Chaitanya are exaggerated, that He was deified by His followers, as were thousands of other "human avataras" in India. How can we KNOW that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is the Supreme Reality - God? Is it just a matter of faith? Like Christianity...

How can we know? A very valid question. You can choose one of the following common methods of knowing:

1. Pratyaksa -- You can know by direct sense perception;
2. Anumana -- You can know by inferring knowledge from common observations;
3. Arsa -- You can consider the sayings of various sages who draw their own conclusions;
4. Upamana -- You can compare things and get an idea;
5. Arthapatti -- You can accept something which is common knowledge;
6. Sambhava -- You can infer the nature of bigger objects from qualitatively identical smaller objects;
7. Aitihya -- You can accept traditional knowledge;
8. Cesta -- You can understand by observing others' gestures;
9. Sabda -- You can understand through a scriptural tradition descending through saints.

Think about it and let us know which of the above can help you know the nature of a person who lived in India 500 years ago, assumed to be an avatara of the Lord.

It is faith which prompts us to ultimately believe something, regardless of the object of our consideration. According to Gita, this faith evolves according to one's qualities (BG 17.2 -- tri-vidhA bhavati zraddhA dehinAM sA svabhAva-jA |). Moreover, one obtains a particular kind of faith given by the Lord within according to his desires (BG 7.21 -- yo yo yAM yAM tanuM bhaktaH zraddhayArcitum icchati | tasya tasyAcalAM zraddhAM tAm eva vidadhAmy aham ||). Desires in turn evolve depending on our association (BG 2.62 -- saGgAt saJjAyate kAmaH).

One in whose heart greed awakens towards the pastimes of Vraja, he will yearn to understand the confidential nature of the Caitanya-avatara, and to him His divinity is self-evident. To another person, whose greed has not awakened, or whose greed has began to wither in lack of association, the nature of Sri Caitanya is not self-evident, and He begins to appear like an ordinary human being.

Is it faith like in Christianity? Well, not exactly. The Christians have different natures and different kinds of desires, their faith evolves into a different direction, and consequently they have a different conception of God. The principle is the same, though. It is so with everyone.

It is indeed a matter of faith, faith is a matter of desire, and desire is a matter of association.

Thanks for the nice answer Advaitadas Ji.

Here are some more thoughts I would like somebody to comment upon.
There is an "avatara" of Kalki in South India. His followers say that he is God. If you ask for proof of his avatarahood they may reply, "by having faith you can realize this by his grace". They may also give some quotes from some scripture in support of their avatara.
They may also advertise their avatara by writing theological works describing his divinity, and send out missionaries all over the world. Then they can say, "Kalki Avatara is for real, just see how many souls are blessed by him. He must be God, no ordinary human being can save so many souls."
Does all this together make him as credible as Sri Caitanya?
There are many avataras like this one in India. Are they also genuine? Several of them may seem as genuine as Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.
Most of the hindus claim that their lineage has a divine origin and that it is through following that lineage salvation/devotion can be attained. The same thing goes for Islam and Christianity.
But isn´t faith very fragile? If I get doubts in my mind it is not possible to follow wholeheartedly. One´s spirituality seems to depend totally on the "fact" that a particular person is divine.
I don´t know if anybody else on these forums ever thought about these things. Am I the only one here to have had these doubts?
In the Sankara school direct realization seems to require little or no faith. Please correct me if I am wrong. By knowledge and meditation one realizes the eternal self and God, Brahman. To realize this one doesn´t require faith in a historical person.
Is it possible at all to be religious without having faith in an avatara?
The soul has the capacity to realize some fundamental truths without faith or a guru. Such as the eternality of the self and the existence of God and His presence in the whole creation. The soul can also understand by itself that there is a higher goal in life, that the material creation is only a small part of the totality. At least this is my experience. Many of these fundamental truths I found written down in Bhagavad Gita later on. These truths are eternal, and there is no doubt about them.
However, I am becoming a bit sceptical about many other developments in the various Hindu religions.
At the same time I want to believe in Sri Caitanya and Sri Sri Radha Krishna and Their Names, Forms, Qualities and Pastimes. It is so wonderful and joyful to meditate upon. I would like to have complete faith in the Gaudiya Sampradaya, but sometimes I get too many doubts. What to do?

y s

Premananda das

QUOTE

They may also advertise their avatara by writing theological works describing his divinity, and send out missionaries all over the world. Then they can say, "Kalki Avatara is for real, just see how many souls are blessed by him. He must be God, no ordinary human being can save so many souls."
Does all this together make him as credible as Sri Caitanya?

If one wanted to get objective about the credibility, he would have to examine the scriptural evidence provided and the "how many souls are blessed" instances, and then compare him with Caitanya. At any rate, blessing etc. is a very subjective phenomena and can hardly be used as objective evidence for others.

Let everyone follow their good faith and worship whomever they wish, and let this faith evolve. That is their choice, and that is something which is given to them in accordance with their eligibility (a fusion of sukriti and desires). They will anyway not accept another person's "real avatara", simply due to the God-given fact that it is not what is within their scope of eligibility at that time. Perhaps the time will come when their conception will evolve to a higher understanding, or perhaps they have already gone beyond it.

QUOTE

Most of the hindus claim that their lineage has a divine origin and that it is through following that lineage salvation/devotion can be attained. The same thing goes for Islam and Christianity.
But isn´t faith very fragile? If I get doubts in my mind it is not possible to follow wholeheartedly. One´s spirituality seems to depend totally on the "fact" that a particular person is divine.

Yes, the origin of Hindu, Muslim and Christian lineages is divine, just as it is for any other lineages. "In the beginning, there was only Him. He glanced, He manifested the worlds." Along with the worlds, He manifested the architypes of various systems of expressing faith towards Him, which have gradually manifested as the various religions and spiritual traditions of this world, and which will continue to manifest and evolve forever, all born out of His divine being only.

There are two divisions of sraddha. One is laukika and another is paramarthika. The first, common-place faith, is born out of either a physical, mental or intellectual inclination towards the object of faith, and is fragile since it is built on the basis of fragile and flickering elements. The second, divine faith, is born out of the soul's tangible experience (which we often call "realization"), and does not change when the gross and the subtle elements of this world fluctuate.

Faith grows and transforms into realization as one makes progress on the path of bhajana. I'm sure this is true not only in the Gaudiya tradition, but among all serious spiritualists. As they approach the Lord, so He responds unto them, making their aspirations reality, and revealing yet another aspect of His. Even a person who follows a cheater or a disqualified gradually evolves in his realization, for it is the Lord within his heart who accepts the worship done with a sincere feeling and rewards him accordingly.

Dear Premananda, Kripa can act as an invisible force. I had already given up kith and kin, was shaved up and living full-time in Iskcon (a very austere lifestyle in Amsterdam, 1978), bringing almost impossible sacrifices, one day we were going on harinam chanting party and the kirtan leader was singing the panca tattva mantra for us to follow. As I responded, I thought: "What? Who is that Chaitanya?" I had not really gotten any idea about Mahaprabhu at all yet and yet I was sacrificing all bodily comforts at every moment. In other words, I had not made the conscious choice to become a devotee and later another devotee told me he had had the same experience (in another time and another place). The divinity of Caitanya can only be realised by His grace and it is very hard if not impossible to put such an experience into words. Hence Rupa Gosvami speaks of two types of faith, 'sraddha', which is more or less blind faith and 'vishvasa', which is faith laced with realisations. Needless to say, the latter is required. The Upanishads say: 'yam evaisha vrinute tenaiva labhyam' "He is attained by he to whom He chooses to reveal Himself." About Guru and Shankaracharya, the latter has written a heart-rending ashtakam about the Guru, which is very famous and in which he unequivocally states that without meditating on the Guru one is going nowhere. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, also a jnani/yogi, has a large painting of his entire Guru Parampara which he cherishes very much. So if even the jnanis worship the Guru with such verve, then what to speak of the bhaktas? It is true that initial spiritual knowledge appears to be self-attained without the intervention of a Guru, but when one advances in Guru bhakti one may think differently in retrospect......

QUOTE

About Guru and Shankaracharya, the latter has written a heart-rending ashtakam about the Guru, which is very famous and in which he unequivocally states that without meditating on the Guru one is going nowhere.

"...but if one's mind be not attached to the lotus feet of the Guru, what thence, what thence, what thence, what thence?"

I have attached Shankara's Gurvastakam to this post.

Attachment: Gurvastaka.pdf

Thank you Madhavananda das Ji and Advaita das Ji.
Once I never doubted the divinity of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, nor that of Jesus Christ. But now I am getting older and more doubtful. Whenever I try to perform japa and meditation I become discouraged and stop it, due to my lack of faith and conviction.
It feels like I have to fit into a mold created by others, there is no freedom to evolve as a human being and soul in a natural way. All the rules and the theology feel like a big burden on my head. Too complicated and confusing. My perception of reality seems to become filtered every time I try to follow the Gaudiya Vaishnava religion. I get the impression that it is something which is imposed and unnatural to me. I don´t know...

QUOTE

Once I never doubted the divinity of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, nor that of Jesus Christ.

How would you define what makes divinity or non-divinity?

QUOTE

It feels like I have to fit into a mold created by others, there is no freedom to evolve as a human being and soul in a natural way.

Most of the time this arises on account of mis-applied theology and practice in the past, which leaves a negative samskara in the mind to haunt one later when in contact with the same things, even if properly applied. Who is there to restrict your evolution?

QUOTE

My perception of reality seems to become filtered every time I try to follow the Gaudiya Vaishnava religion. I get the impression that it is something which is imposed and unnatural to me.

In such a situation, it is a good idea to stop imposing it upon oneself and rather adopt it according to what is befitting and natural for oneself. Take that which attracts you and don't worry about the rest for the time being, I say.

:cool:

QUOTE(Sri Hari @ Aug. 30 2002,18:49)

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 30 2002,17:57)

Heh! We are discussing siddhanta, but Hari is writing in bhAvAveza only! :biggrin:

So what ? :tongue: Superior to Siddanta are Lilas, superior to Philosophy is Poetry and superior to Law is mercy !

Thinking about it little more, I thought that some Ideas would refresh my mind from the misconception of this inconceivable Material energy.

Since the living being has been wandering here and there in this creation, it is quite obvious that none among those beings actually can get freedom from the entanglement of Samsara.
If the nature of the Jiva is under the category of Nitya-badha the "eternal" relation with the Material enegy is a subsequently imposing condition for the poor Jivas.

In this way we have a perfect condition for the Nitya-badhas search for their own hapiness within the infinity-temporarily enjoyment. ( laughs )

In other words, with the Supreme command of Lord Shiva and His Sakti, this material creation has a foundation to be maintained and with the help of the great demigods the ordinary living being thinks it is possible to leave peacefuly within this "eternal" emprisonment.
So that is the Law for all beings in this side of the Great Creation...

The possibility for the living beings to get freedom in this circumstances is pratically zero. Why this happen for the poor Jiva that would be my question forever.
God is the Supreme controler and Jiva His part and parcel, the only thing left for the poor one is: "to try the best use of a bad business". Great! That is incredible of You my Lord, You have all the Knowledge in Your hands how to control everthing and the Jiva is just your puppet.

My Supreme Lord, it was very good of You in coming as Your Devotee and see by your own Eyes how is to live down here. Specially in the mood of Vipralamba You can actually feel how the Jiva suffers to be far from You, and with no hope to go anywhere beyond one's own Karma.

And that is some thing that You Created also, Karma, ( do some thing and get the resoult of something that the poor Jiva has no Idea how anything started).
Anyway, my Supreme Lord Sri Krishna, it was nice to meet Your most confidential representant ( Srimat Radhike ) passing by disguised in this Kali-Yuga and give Her sidelong glances to the poor ones. And to be honest with You Sri Krshna my Lord, I'm not sure if happens that You to Known about it ( since You are so busy with so many Gopis and Gopal and so on ).

My dear Sri Krishna beloved of all the Brajabasis, do not be angry with me, but next time when You think about to start any other Creation, ask Srimat Radhika, the dearest One of all devotees, to replan everthing again, and let She takes care of iT.

Please my dear Sri Krishna, forgive me, today is Your transcendental appearance day on this Bhumi-loka. But my dear Lord it is hard for me to understand Your creation.
In my insignificant position my Lord I think that the reason of Srimat Radhike came with You within Lord Caitanya Deva, is based in this thoughts: "Well, Kanai did a good job in creating the Material World, but let Me give a little fun for that poor souls so they can come to me this time".

Personaly saying; thanks God that She thinks like that, if not You would come again with that Bhagavad Gita philosophy that You estabilished so may rules... and regulations to finally reach Your lotus feet.

Anyway My dear son of Yasoda mayi, try to understand, as a living being in Kali-yuga I do really thanks many, many, time to the transcendental appearence of Sri Radhaavatar Caitanya Deva.

With His apearance we all can realize how the Mercy is superior to the Laws, that You, My dear Lord, created...

Anyway Sri Krishna, indeed that was a good try... and keep going with the blessings of Your dearest Srimat Radhike!

Happy birthday for You, my sweet Lord Sri Krishna.

And that is why I keep saying: Sri Radhaavatar Caitanya Deva Kijayho!

Your servant
harisaran das

QUOTE(Advaitadas @ Aug. 31 2002,07:24)

Finally, how to be a Gaudiya Vaishnava (=Caitanya-Vaishnava) without believing in Caitanya? It is like being a Christian and not believing in Christ.

One point, for much of the history of Christianity, the divinity or human-ness of Jesus has been a central issue of debate. The first 'heresy', Arianism, was about this, and led to differences in eastern and western forms of Christianity. The earliest Christians in India, the Syrians, partook of these differences, so much so that the Portuguese, the first Euro-Christians to arrive in India, sought to purge the Syrian 'heretics' as much as, even more than, others.

The division between Catholics and Protestants has something to do with different realisations on this issue too, with some Protestants favouring a humanistic interpretation. In the 19th century there were many Christians who even did not believe in the traditional theology, but rather adopted Idealism and Hegelianism, the latter postulating a non-absolute 'dialectical' (dynamic interactive) divine reality which changes due to the actions of humans. All of this was influential in Bengali thought at the time, and traces can still be seen there.

And one reads often of Sri Chaitanya that he was a human who exemplified the perfect Bhakta. He showed us the most wonderful example of devotion to God in a human body. I'm not saying that this is my belief, but surely this would be a legitimate form of Chaitanyaism, just as Gaura-Nagara is another legitimate form. Others also believe the same of Sri Radha, that she was the exempification of perfect human devotion. This latter belief would probably not be within the limits of Gaudiya belief, because we recognise the dual Godhead as central.

QUOTE

And one reads often of Sri Chaitanya that he was a human who exemplified the perfect Bhakta. He showed us the most wonderful example of devotion to God in a human body. I'm not saying that this is my belief, but surely this would be a legitimate form of Chaitanyaism, just as Gaura-Nagara is another legitimate form.

Let us note, though, that the doctrine of Gaura's divinity comes from Svarupa Damodara and a number of other people very close to him, and the Gaura-Nagara doctrine comes through Narahari Sarakara, Raghunandana and others, also close associates of his. A follower, at least in a strict sense of the word, indicates a person who follows a particular channel of thought. Hence I would not give a purely humanistic* interpretation of Sri Caitanya a status of equal legitimacy to the original doctrines -- unless of course someone comes up with the writings of any associate of His who presented Him as such.

[* Is that the word? "Humanistic" as opposed to "divinistic", unless you come up with a better term for it.]

I fully defer to you here Madhavaji, you have a good point.

Yes, Humanistic is the right word. This word has got a bad reputation in recent times, but people forget that Humanism originally arose as a force within Christianity and Protestantism, as also did modern science and even Darwinism.

Perhaps I meant 'Chaitanyaism' in the broader sense, perhaps as part of a reform tradition. The followers of Vivekananda, for example, some of whom hold the views I described and would still regard themselves as followers of the Lord (After all they are Bengalis). One reads such descriptions in their books and others.

QUOTE(adiyen @ Sep. 01 2002,01:44)

And one reads often of Sri Chaitanya that he was a human who exemplified the perfect Bhakta. He showed us the most wonderful example of devotion to God in a human body.

Dear Adiyen, “And one reads often of Sri Chaitanya that he was a human who exemplified the perfect Bhakta.” this will not hold, because such statements are almost certainly not made by devotees of Sri Caitanya, but by outside observers who approach Him through the mundane means of the mind, intelligence and senses. Due to their lack of devotion they are deprived of a higher understanding of Him.
If Christ were human, how could he revive Lazarus from the dead and how could he himself resurrect? If Mahaprabhu were human, how could He show 10 avataras, 6-armed forms and Radha-Krishna in Himself? How can a kirtan of Gaura-nama turn into a frenzy of transcendental ecstasy if there were no transcendental potency in His name? As I said before, Gopinatha Acarya said to Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya that only those who are blessed by Him can see Him, quoting SB 10.14.29 athapite deva padambujadvaya prasada lesanugrihita etc. Please check this one.

It is clear that Sri Caitanya was born in the same way ordinary human beings are born. He had a mother and a father. That makes him human.
The divine aspect of Sri Caitanya is another matter. He is accepted by most Bengalis as a great saint and by some as the Lord Himself.
In the rest of India, with the exception of Jagannath Puri and Vrindavan Dham, he is not very well known. The Ramanuja Sampradaya, and most Madhva Sampradaya followers do not accept Sri Caitanya as an avatara.
The Christians say that Jesus was a human being fully, but that he also was the "Son of God".
Anyway, God is great and can do whatever He wants. If He wants, He can take birth as a human and teach prema bhakti by His own example. That is not a big thing for somebody who created millions of universes.

P D

QUOTE(Advaitadas @ Sep. 01 2002,02:41)

If Christ were human, how could he revive Lazarus from the dead and how could he himself resurrect?

As to the divinity of Jesus/Christ, the variant philosphies actually seperate them (Jesus and Christ). I believe they say that Jesus was blessed with divinity at his baptism, just as his followers were, which is why his followers were also able to work miracles. Thus 'Jesus became the Christ'. But this is a summary of 2000 years of Church history. Do a websearch on 'Heresies' and you will see much much more. I find the Gnostics particularly interesting because they have strong resemblances to Indian thought, also they appear to have the earliest known Gospel, the Gospel of Thomas.

On Lord Chaitanya, I am not including those who strongly deny the Lord's divinity as his followers, just those who are not sure of the divinity but convinced of the special importance of the Lord for all those following Bhakti and who try to follow his example even if they have not had a higher realisation, yet! I may still be a bit out of step with the orthodox tradition in this, and I welcome your pointing it out.

QUOTE

It is clear that Sri Caitanya was born in the same way ordinary human beings are born. He had a mother and a father. That makes him human.

If you read the third chapter of the first canto of the Bhagavata and read the related chapters, you'll see many of the avataras described as having taken birth.

(1) Dattatreya was born from the womb of Anasuya, this is a famous story of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva incarnated together as her son.
(2) Yajna, son of Ruci and Akuti.
(3) Rsabha, the son of Nabhi and Meru.
(4) Vamana, the son of Aditi.
(5) Parasurama, born by the semen of Jamadagni from the womb of Renuka.
(6) Vyasa, born from the womb of Satyavati.
(7) Ramacandra, born from the womb of Kausalya.
(8) Balarama, born from the womb of Rohini.
(9) Krishna, born from the womb of Devaki (and Yasoda at the same time).

Thus the mere taking of birth does not make one into a human, that is, if one is to believe the stories of the Bhagavata and the related philosophy of avatara-hood. Like Caitanya, many avataras took birth in a human way, while others were self-manifested (Matsya, Varaha, Narasimha etc.). One may read from the Caitanya Bhagavata about Mahaprabhu's maha-prakasa-lila where He exhibited all the forms of Vishnu as being within Him. Of course this is initially a matter of faith, but I fail to see how it is any more so with histories of Sri Caitanya than it is with the Puranas. If one desires to pursue the path of endless doubt, nothingness will be his reward in the ultimate. Therefore faith is said to be the beginning.

QUOTE

The divine aspect of Sri Caitanya is another matter. He is accepted by most Bengalis as a great saint and by some as the Lord Himself.
In the rest of India, with the exception of Jagannath Puri and Vrindavan Dham, he is not very well known. The Ramanuja Sampradaya, and most Madhva Sampradaya followers do not accept Sri Caitanya as an avatara.

Each tradition has its own specific avatara(s) which others may or may not accept. To begin with, Madhva himself is understood by his followers as an avatara of Hanuman and Vayu. In fact, he declares himself to be the third avatara of Vayu in his Visnu-tattva-vinirnaya, Yamaka Bharatha and other works, the two others being Hanuman and Bhima. One of his doctrines was "Vayusarvothamattva", Vayu is the supreme among jivas (and consequently he is, too). The very name "Madhva" means Mukhya-Prana or Vayu, his real name being Ananda Tirtha.

In the tradition of Ramanuja, there are the twelve alvars, who are all revered as avataras of a kind. They are as follows:

(1) Putattar -- Vishnu's gada (club);
(2) Poygai -- Vishnu's sankha (conch);
(3) Pey -- Vishnu's nandaka (sword);
(4) Tirumalisai -- Vishnu's cakra (discus);
(5) Nammalvar -- Visvaksena (Vishnu's associate);
(6) Kulasekhar -- Vishnu's Kaustubha-gem;
(7) Periyalvar -- Vishnu's carrier Garuda;
(8) Tondaradippodi -- Vishnu's vanamala (garland);
(9) Tirumangai -- Vishnu's saranga (bow);
(10) Panalvar -- Vishnu's srivatsa;
(11) Madhurakavi -- Vishnu's associate;
(12) Andal -- Vishnu's bhu-sakti.

Thus their traditions certainly hold their own when it comes to a history of avataras. Nevertheless, for instance the Madhvites commonly hold that their thesis is the only correct one, not leaving scope for various correct thesis as we do, seeing them all as contributors to the thesis of acintya bhedabheda-tattva. Given that the theology of Madhvites and Ramanujaites does not lend support to the Gaudiya thesis of a supreme dual Godhead in the form of Sri-Sri Radha-Krishna, it is not surprising that they will not comprehend the mystery of a joint avatara of the two.

I never got into it out of a sheer lack of interest, but I doubt there are many traditions out there which agree with all the doctrines of another tradition, particularly when it comes to attributing divinity to people in their sampradaya. Consequently, I would not make much out of the fact that other traditions may or may not agree with the Gaudiya thesis of Sri Caitanya's nature. There is little in devotion to be discovered through an empiric, comparative study of avatara-hood. These are matters of faith and individual insight through realization. After all, what can be proven? Only to one who has a desire to understand can something be proven, and according to his inner (subconscious) desire he will accept and reject evidence, believing this to be his unbiased discretion.

I just read an interesting verse from the Caitanya Caritamrita which echoes the "yam evaiSa vRNute tena labhyas" stanza of the Upanisads quoted by Advaitadas. As follows (Madhya 2.82-83):

ei gupta bhAva-sindhu, brahmA nA pAya eka bindu,
hena dhana vilAila saMsAre
aiche dayAlu avatAra, aiche dAtA nAhi Ara,
guNa keha nAre varNibAre || 82 ||
“Not even Lord Brahma can attain a drop of this hidden ocean of ecstacy, but this treasure was given in this world by such a merciful avatara! No-one else is as munificent as He is! Who can describe this quality of His?”

kahibAra kathA nahe, kahile keha nA bujhaye,
aiche citra caitanyera raGga
sei se bujhite pAre, caitanyera kRpA yAGre,
haya tAGra dAsAnudAsa-saGga || 83 ||
“This is not to be openly discussed, for no-one would understand. Such are the exquisite pastimes of Sri Caitanya! Whoever is able to understand them, he is one unto whom Caitanya has bestowed His mercy, and he is one who has associated with the servants of His servants.”

That pretty much sums it up I think. The avatara-hood (or divinity) of Sri Caitanya cannot be ascertained by objective means. It is initially a matter of faith and a matter of attraction, and later on a matter of realization.

I basically find that many people of various religious paths get some pleasure and happiness in their worship of God and thus get more faith in their path of religion as a result. I even heard a Muslim man in a 'Discovery Channel' program describe his pleasure in Islamic worship as experiencing a 'taste'.

The 'taste', or flavor becomes richer though as one approaches the Godhead, Sri Krishna. That 'tasteful' experience becomes more relishable as one surrenders in bhajan. The holy scriptures point the way to the highest goal of human attainment. They satisfy the intellectual part of ourselves through the sastric evidence. I feel it is up to one to endeavour' wholeheartly to experience it through surrender and bhajan.

Sankirtan is the best and quickest means to attain realization of God.

All glories to the congregational chanting of Sri Krsna's holy names, which cleanses the mirror of the heart and mind, which extinguishes the forestfire of material existense, which spreads moonlight on the white lotus of good fortune, which is the life of the bride named transcendental knowledge, which increases the ocean of trancendental bliss, which makes us relish full nectar at every step and which thus showers the whole self. (Sri Sikstastakam 1)

If one is feeling devoid of Sri Krsna's mercy, or feeling somewhat doubtful, a good dose of congregational chanting a few hours works wonders. When the heart becomes clear then one can get some impressions on Sri Caitanya's divinity through hearing, chanting, meditating and worshiping Him.