Lobha or intellectual curiosity? -

I was curious to see whether Advaita was going to make a response to my challenge so I went to his blog (http://madangopal.blogspot.com/), from which I learned that he is currently in Braja. He briefly recounts a visit with Kushakratha and an encounter with Dhanurdhara Swami. In the latter encounter, Dhanurdhara "is interested to know that many 'prominent' western raganugis got into raganuga bhakti more due to academic pursuits than due to lobha, though some lobha must certainly be there."

I think this is worth discussing. Since I assume that I am one of the persons being refered to here, I will say the following:

I think I was a pretty committed Iskcon devotee for nine years--committed enough to be given sannyasa. In this time, I was rather orthodox, even obnoxiously so. The only difficulty I had was with the Fifth Canto and knocked a few heads on this issue. In the period following Prabhupada's departure, I had more association with Bengali devotees, especially in the Gaudiya Math. The issue that really tipped me into Lalita Prasad Thakur's camp was the combination of the guru-parampara and diksha controversy and the reading of Bhajana Rahasya. This was topped up with the steadily degrading guru situation in Iskcon, as well as the sentiment I had had from the moment I heard of Prabhupada's departure that I was not finished as far as gurus were concerned, i.e., that I still needed further spiritual guidance. But I would never have left Iskcon if it had not been for the fifth chapter of the Bhajana Rahasya. (Which I was going to quote, but I have to go.)

I spent six years engaging in the study of Raganuga bhajan in India with sadhus in Nabadwip and Braja, studying the literature of the sampradaya. It was only after I had a variety of experiences that I felt the need to begin my "vichara."

One has to wonder what exactly "academic pursuits" here mean. It's a bit of a buzz-word. Is it used synonymously with "intellectual", "theoretical" or "speculative" pursuits?

It must not include me. I only finished the nine grades of compulsory school before joining the ashram. With high grades, granted, but that's as far as my pursuits in the realm of formal education went, and I haven't really seen a pressing need to turn my attention to the avenue at a later time, either.

Of course, if this refers to people who are "speculating", then that's a whole other issue, and a whole lot deeper an issue, raising the age-old question, "Are we allowed to interpret?"

I regard that as a secondary concern. The foremost criteria in our assessments must be the evaluation of someone's inclination for the mode of bhajan of our sampradaya, and his self-conception with relation to the ideals of that bhajan.

Forgive me if I am out of place for contributing to this discussion, but the painfully obvious answer to this to me seems to be this:

People that have preached Gaudiya Vaisnavism in the West (such as ACBSP) have hardly emphasized raganuga bhakti, and in some respects greatly limited their follower's ability to pursue it. The Westerners that discovered raganuga bhakti are those who are serious enough students of the traditions to have read the original literature and discover it without the direct help of the IGM teachers who have preached so widely in the West.

If Prabhupada (or Bhaktisiddhanta or whoever) had been more encouraging of their students to pursue raga-marg, I'm sure more of their students would have pursued it. Not just the smart, intellectual or academic people.

I say this, by the way, in a completely respectful way and without passing judgement on anyone. To be fair, I think there may be a great deal of wisdom in the way IGM preachers have done things. It's just my humble observation.

(So so so sorry if this comment breaches the caturmasya fast! It's absolutely not meant to!)

If "academic pursuits" are here taken to mean curiosity over whether the grass might be greener on the other side of the fence and so forth, then there's hardly a single individual "out there" with an IGM background that wouldn't have gone down that alley. Some may have had their impetus in the discovery of textual evidence treating the subject matter, while others may have had their impetus in meeting sadhus of such traditions.


I really wouldn't consider this an accurate assessment. I have a good deal of Western gurubhais and gurubons who aren't all that well read in the overall Gaudiya canon. (And please note that I do not say that to belittle anyone, they have their bhajan far more together than I do. It is but an observation.) For a good many, just a few books written by their future guruji and some affectionate answers on the ways of bhajan have sufficed in bringing them about to the path of raganuga.

Of course, a good many of the "old school" people, who left IGM in late 70's or early 80's, were familiar with Sanskrit and Bengali, but I really wouldn't say this is a trend that would have carried on throughout the 90's and 2K's.

I was going to say exactly that, Madhava, that “academic pursuits” here seem to indeed mean curiosity. But not in the sense of going over to check out the forbidden side, but rather in the sense of the inherent curiosity found in the intellectual, vichar type of bhakta. D. Swami clearly makes a distinction there between intellectual pursuit and lobha, so maybe with his inquiry he was genuinely curious himself as to what lobha must feel like… on the other side…

In any case, as you say, it is a fact that in some circles “academic pursuits” is a buzz-word these days. But the buzz might produce more positive results than not, I think. Having to keep up with the times, some in these circles have come to realize that to follow also means to exercise reflection and selfreliance.
-----------
Yes, it is true that to have a chance at rag-marg one should not necessarily have to depend on the assistance of the smart, intellectual or academic people. However, if these help, thats wonderful!

Ok, but would such people exist if Western pioneers like Jagat and Advaita hadn't paved the way? Or, for that matter, if certain IGM acaryas, themselves influenced by sources outside of IGM, hadn't brought lessons about raganuga bhakti in from outside of IGM?

I think that the Maharaja's comment is really only saying, like you've said, that Westerners into raganuga bhakti started with IGM and then got curious to explore other approaches. Naturally, the most learned and articulate among them are the most prominent.

I have an issue with the model where it is proclaimed, "lobha is after x+y/z, otherwise not". Prema is the full manifestation of bhakti. Bhava is its unripe stage. Asakti and ruchi are smaller fragments of it. Lobha, in whichever tiny form it may appear, is but particles of the same essence. If there is no lobha, there is no effort or endeavor. Without effort and endeavor, the pursuit will not be there.

Devotion by nature seeks to expand itself. The curiosity to seek out deeper avenues of expression is constitutional. It therefore seems almost redundant to make a point of saying that there was curiosity in the beginning in those who came to pursue the path of raganuga.

Lobha is not a pie in the sky. Lobha is not a fixed, static stage. Lobha grows, lobha evolves. Endeavors to constrain lobha to a particular framework and deny its presence beyond is an unnecessary endeavor to stiffle the manyfold appearances of devotion.

As for the paving of the way, while they have certainly been instrumental in some respects, I do not consider them irreplaceable in the grand scheme of things. We can project a thousand alternative scenarios of what could have happened, had such and such event not occured.

Returning to the original statement that starts the thread, "Many 'prominent' Western raganugis got into raganuga bhakti more due to academic pursuits than due to lobha, though some lobha must certainly be there."

While it's openly stated that some lobha must have been there, it is presented as the secondary impetus, the academic pursuits being the primary impetus. If the "academic pursuits" are taken in the sense of "curiosity and exploration", it escapes me how they are treated as something separate from lobha, rather than as its manifestations.

I am a bit at loss over the meaning of "academic pursuit". When I used the word "buzz-word" in describing it, I meant it in the sense of its being a popular expression devoid of substantial meaning in any practical sense. Yes, it'll certainly create buzz, primarily in the vein of thoughtful people wondering whether it means anything at all in the end.

Thanks for the LINK Jagat.



"I can see clearly now that
the rain is gone. I can see
all obstacles in my way...."
"...It is gona be a bright
sunshine day!"

I don't think there is any great mystery in the comment - especially given the lineage of the individual who made it. There is a distinction between understanding intellectually what is the highest and pursuing it on that basis and pursuing the highest thing based on a purified heart.

Bhakti is definitely a heart exercise. I would interepret the Maharaja's comment like this: Reading and pursuing knowledge of our tradition and it's deepest expressions requires some lobha but the lobha or greed for following in the footsteps of the residents of Vraja arises out of deep spiritual practice - which is not necessarily synonymous with an intellectual understanding of the scriptures.

It isn't Dhanurdhar Swami's comment. It is Advaitadasa's comment, who reports that DS found his view interesting. I wouldn't imagine this would have broken the news barrier, had it been Dhanurdhar who said it.

"is interested to know that many 'prominent' western raganugis got into raganuga bhakti more due to academic pursuits than due to lobha, though some lobha must certainly be there."

I think Edward C. Dimock can surely be counted among those good westerns.

And I was curious to see what that challenge is all about. ...So we can properly discuss?
-----------------

Jagat thinks Advaita is refering to him when he informs Iskcon fellows about how Raganuga got a hold in the West. Can somebody please brief us on the current Advaita x Jagat situation? Thanks.

Or better yet, since references to the situation are being made here in the public section, why not allow all members access the whole discussion from the restricted area? Thanks again.

Let's just say that Advaita brought up his objections to my approach to spiritual life again. These can be found here and there on these forums. I concluded the thread with the following challenge:

Would we rather like to discuss the topic at the core of this, rather than the specifics of whatever there is or was between Advaitadas and Jagadananda, please?

. . .


I believe the statement refered to those, who came to take up the practice of raganuga-bhakti. I don't think Dimock got around to that, nor would I therefore classify him as a "prominent Western raganugi".

Well, specifics sometimes can help us better understand the core of things. Information on the character, profile, activities and moods of personalities in our line ( such as Mahaprabhu's associates) and how they related to each other and to the environment around them, is invaluable to our understanding of the core of our faith.

Was it Kamala who posted a link to that Buddhist site where they had a thread on common putdowns/argument stoppers? It seems this is one of our own leading examples: call someone a jnani or academic if they know more than you (or sentimental, sheep-like or simple if they know less). In any case, it seems historically inaccurate to say that the Old Skool western raganugiyas got into it due to 'academic pursuits"--Gadadhar Pran was looking for a supervisor for his thesis when he knocked on the door of Sri Lalita Prasad Thakur? Nitai and others sought instruction from Professor Tinkudi Gosvami?

After their introduction, some of them did take up academia but there are other factors in common there besides their interest in raganuga, e.g. immersion in the languages, an understanding of the vastness of the religious experience, etc. Not that academic pursuits need to be defended, in my view.

Another thought that I've been contemplating recently, especially with regard to Jagat's explanation of ruchi-pradhana or so on: I wonder about the possibility of a different categorization or model of dealing with doubt, intellectualism and so on. Both Bhaktivinode Thakur and M Scott Peck seem to propose such. For example, Bhaktivinode talks about komala sraddha--the soft-faithed--who seem to need external stricture and who are willing to believe everything literally. Beyond them are the madhayamas, who challenge and question, who need more satisfactory explanations, reason. Is a komala sraddha necessarily ruchi-pradhana just due to a lack of taste for cerebral workouts and soul searching? I think not. To me, ruchi pradhana is the mystic, the person who has passed beyond formulaic religion. No doubt that possibility is there for anyone but in general the inquisitive person is closer to it.

I don't have access to the books any longer but this is a view that I recall from M Scott Peck. He suggests that the faith which is not challenged is not real, not deep. It is only by dealing with doubt that it can become deep. And at the stage of deepness, there is no need to reject the stage of ritualized, shallow religion. He presents it in a dialectic model, with the synthesis representing mysticism.

Sorry about the confusion regarding Jagat's original post.

I think Braja's post adds quite a bit to the discussion. The idea that Ruchi pradhana isn't equivalent to komala shraddha should be obvious, but it is a point that still needs reflecting on. Afterall, Ruchi comes at a fairly advanced stage in a sadhakas development of faith. Komala shraddha is the beginning.

This idea is really another way of saying the same thing that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta stressed so much in his preaching campaign - be honest and know where you stand by deep introspection and with the help of good guidance. If we think we are further along than we actually are then we will fool ourselves and advancement will be very difficult.

If you look at the religious landscape around the globe it is fairly obvious that fundamentalism isn't receding, but it is actually growing. There will always be a need for this type of religious expression and I see no reason to believe that GV will be be any different.

One of the biggest problems, as I see it anyway, with fundamentalism isn't that it's intellectually ungratifiying (although it certainly is)- it is really that it shows it's face to the world as intolerance and anger and thereby reveals itself to be far from ideal in terms of development of a compassionate heart. Fundamentalism is like nationalism or any other ism that is exclusionary.

Because most people experience the world through the mind and intellect and are trained to find meaning through these mediums there will always be a need to explore the tradition in terms of the questions of the day. In order for the tradition to remain vital it will have to interface with the contempary world and this can only be done by sadhakas living in this particular time.

"Ruchi" in "ruchi pradhana" isn't used synonymously with "ruchi" as in "the step preceding asakti". Can someone find the link to where this was mentioned earlier on?

This is the link.

O.K., I read the linked posts but I still don't have a clear picture of how this ruchi is different. Madhava, you stated that engaging in raganuga sadhana requires some elements be in place first - exactly what your suggesting are the pre-requisites isn't clear from such a statement - but it is clear that your suggesting some form of adhikaran for such practice. While Jagat says that the ruchi referred to by Jiva Goswami when describing the two types of raganuga sadhakas isn't synonymous with the technical term denoting the stage of faith development from shraddha to prema - he does not define the term so it leaves one wondering exactly what this ruchi is then.

At any rate, ruchi does mean 'taste' or flavor and certainly denotes some tangible experience.

I was also trying to follow up on the stream of thought introduced by Braja that the ruchi pradhana isn't something that one with komala shraddha would be engaged in. If we think this through a bit it would mean that such a practitioner would have to be at a stage of advancement further along than say the first couple of stages...

Definitly this is not an attemp to super-estimate or either canonize his qualities/persona, but I still think that he deserves to be considered a Raganuga and I do have few reasons for that. First, what is Raganuga? Spontaneous love... So, in my humble opinion, someone who had the passion (lobha) to study, teach and write about Radha-Krishna/Lord Caitanya/ Bengali Poesy, surely is a lover (=Raganuga).

In his way, Prof. Ed. Dimock, gave up all other academic pursues for the eagerness to disclose to the academic western world, all about Radha, Krishna, Gopis, Vaishnavas, Sacred Rivers, and all that even before A C..B.S.’s arrival in America. As you may know:

“The late Edward C. Dimock, Distinguished Service Professor emeritus of the University of Chicago, who has been involved since his Ph.D. dissertation at Harvard in 1959 with the study of the Vaisnavas of Bengal, has translated the book and written a substantial portion of the commentary.”

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/HOS-56.htm


Or how he is graciouslly remaked:

“In addition to his numerous awards and honors, in 1992, the Indian government awarded Dimock its highest honorary degree title, Desikottama, for his work on Bengali literature. “It’s important for people to remember that Edward Dimock almost single-handedly introduced the study of Bengali to the American academy,” said Clinton Seely, Associate Professor in South Asian Languages & Civilizations. “He also was one of the founders of the South Asian department at Chicago and was much admired by his colleagues here and in India.”
http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/010301/obit-dimock.shtml

Moreover, Sanjaya said: “Wherever there is Krishna the master of all mystics, and wherever there is Arjuna the supreme archer, there will also be opulence, victory, extraordinary power and morality. That is my opinion."

Ed. Dimock’s foreword to the Bhagavad Gita As it Is, original edition, 1972:

“It has mystery, as Krsna demonstrates to Arjuna His cosmic form. It has a properly complicated view of the ways of the religious life and treats of the paths of knowledge, works, discipline and faith and their inter-relationships, problems that have bothered adherents of other religions in other times and places. The devotion spoken of is a deliberate means of religious satisfaction, not a mere outpouring of poetic emotion.”
http://www.asitis.com/foreword.html

Therefore, Ed. Dimock can surely be counted among those good westerns; those good lovers raganugis.


However, I will invite Mina to speak for it:

Posted by: Mina May 11 2004, 01:02 AM:

”As far as the late Professor Dimock and Tony K. Stewart - I studied with the former and knew the latter as a fellow graduate student at University of Chicago. Ed was a perfect gentleman and always respectful of others. Those are admirable traits in anyone, Vaishnava or non-Vaishnava. If Nitai were not currently haunting the halls of the London Library, I would drag him into the conversation, since he had a closer and longer lasting relationship with Ed than anyone else here.

Even when Ed could barely speak after being treated for throat cancer, he still went out of his way to be friendly and supportive when I spoke with him on the phone back in 1986. I was saddened to hear of his recent demise. Although he may not have been an initiated Vaishnava himself, he was a friend to many Vaishnavas, initiated and non-initiated. He was also a good father to his children.

Some of my fondest memories of University of Chicago are of the classes in which Ed, Nitai, David Haberman and I read through Kunjabihari Das Baba's Manjari Svarupa Nirupana.”

Here are some Q&A on Professor Ed. Dimock:
http://www.gaudiyadiscussions.com/index.ph...ter&f=38&t=1587

Lobha is supposed to mean greed.
When one is greedy for something, he doesn't think about anything else. He only has one thing on this mind. He cannot be diverted to other pursuits or interests. In other words, he is obsessed. He is embroiled in pursuing one thing with extreme passion.


One who has time for other pursuits and other interests cannot be truly described as being greedy or obsessed with something. A part time obsession is not greed in the true sense.

I think lobha should be understood as a one-pointed obsession. Greed, in the true sense, is all-consuming and absorbing. It is not a part-time pursuit. It is the all-in-all, the sum-total of his life's ambitions.

I don't see how anyone who has wordly pursuits and distractions can truly be said to have lobha for Radha dasyam.

Ebenezer Scrooge, in the Charles Dickens novel A Christmas Carol is a good example of greed. He is callous to everything and everyone. He only has one ambition; to acquire as much wealth as possible.

I think that sometimes the concept of lobha gets taken a little lightly. Greed is not a part time job. It is all-consuming to the exclusion of all other interests.

It was a hot summer day. Sam was out for a walk downtown with his family when he saw the icecream man. And alas, greed awakened. He dropped his two-month old kid to the ground and left his wife standing dumbfounded, running towards the icecream man. 'How much does it cost, I'll pay you anything!' While at it, he shoved aside the old grandma who was checking out the icecream selection. 'Anything? All right, that'll be five hundred bucks for you.' 'Anything for icecream,' he shouted with a maniac's glare in his eyes and coughed up the cash. It should have been spent on the upcoming family trip on the next weekend, but little did he care. He was greedy for ice-cream.

That's a bit extreme, yes indeed. Meant to illustrate that there are grades of greed, and as much is said in Visvanatha's Raga-vartma-chandrika, where he portrays lobha as something that gradually increases.

Radhe Radhe!

Good example by Madhava. Below is an excerpt from Srila Ananta dasa Babaji's commentaries in Raga Vartma Candrika (Text 8)



Throughout this verse and the accompanied commentaries Srila Visvanatha Cakravartipada and Baba continually reference lobha and its development in gradations. How quickly and to what degree lobha increases and blooms is a matter of both the aspirants’ sincerity which leads to the grace of Sri Guru and the Vaisnavas.

Rasaraja dasa

That said, I think it would be profitable to look at examples of great devotees who have shown examples of lobha as documented in the Gaudiya Vaishnava canon.

Raghunatha das Goswami and the six goswamis in general, as well as all the great mahatmas of the Gaudiya history, show what is lobha in the context of examples.

The concept of rupanuga should command a similar level and degree of lobha for all those who seek to traverse the path of raga marga.

What we seem to have today is one school of thought that demands the highest degree of qualifications for raga marga and another school of thought (or parivar) that has a very liberal an generous standard for what is lobha.

I think both shcools of thought have their merits and are worthy of appreciation.
It's just a matter of which school one is initiated into and what the standards are.

It appears that the Braja school is a lot more generous and accomodating than is the the school of the great international preaching missions.

It is possible that both schools have their merits and glories, depending upon the vision and thinking of the respective acharyas.

Don't get lobh confused with prem.
Lobh is just the ticket,
Divine love is the game.

But, wasn't it lobha that got das goswami out of householder life, and then prema came later?
did he sidestep the lobha stage and go straight to prema without passing go?

In other words, Lobha is the Lobby; the entrance hall for Prema. Some chose to research about the Truth and contemplate that beauty and others chose to serve that beauty, but in order to progress, they both must have that passion/ardor/greed. So they must be there at atrium to further procedure intellectually or emotionally about the Absolute Sweet. Therefore, in his own way, Mr. Dimock had his comfortable chair at the foyer, somewhere.