sambhogecchAmayI kAmAnUgA bhakti -

A wide variety of issues have emerged from this thread, and it seems to have largely lost focus. For me, after Vijaya's initial reply, I was viewing that thread as a means to discuss an aspect of kAmAnugA rAgAnugA bhakti that seldom finds attention, namely what is termed samghogecchAmayI kAmAnugA bhakti by zrI rUpa in BRS. It is an interesting topic to me and I felt that much could be learned by such a discussion.

I notice that the various commentators on BRS such as zrI jiva and zrI cakravartIpAda often seem to vary in how they present the meaning of some of the verses regarding kAmAnugA rAgAnugA bhakti and in particular sambhogecchAmayI bhakti. Some people thought that maybe these topics should not be discussed in the open and some wondered where they fit into gauDIya siddhAnta. These topics are addressed by zrI rUpa for our benefit and I wish we could all discuss them further with a view to gain a deeper understanding of rAgAnugA bhakti as taught by him.

The rAgAnugA-bhakti-prakaraNam topic contains good study material, for starters.

Rupa Goswami discusses many, many relationships with God. But do you think that the followers of Rupa Goswami will follow all of them? Santa, dasya, sakhya and vatsalya too?

While it's true that samghogecchAmayI kAmAnugA bhakti is described in BRS, I don't think it follows that it is a path offered to followers of Rupa Goswami, just as his followers do not pursue the other types of relationships.

I think this may also be quite relevant to this discussion. Notice Sri Ananta dasa Babaji's comment: "Mahaprabhu has given only madhura-bhava manjari-bhava."

I have no problem with the principle of samghogecchAmayI kAmAnugA bhakti. If that is your passion, great. But it seems to me as though this type of devotion is discussed by Rupa Goswami in order to get a full picture of the variety of relationships which exist in Vraja - not necessarily because he's advocating following such devotion.

I think samghogecchAmayI kAmAnugA bhakti is especially relevant to followers of Rupa Goswami in order to recognize the distinctions which exist between that type of madhurya rasa and manjari bhava.

This may be relevant in that regard.

Are you attempting to speak for all the followers of zrI rUpa now? What do you know about the hearts and bhavs of his followers?
The topic at hand deals with sambhogecchAmayI rAgAnugA sAdhan as presented in his writings and not about being termed a rUpanugA...that is an entirely different area of discussion.
Kindly stick to the topic.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what it is you want to talk about. If you just want to review the verses of BRS, Gaursundar has provided a link to them.

As far as knowing the hearts of Rupa Goswami's followers, I don't know anything but what the followers of Rupa Goswami have revealed of their hearts through their writings. Have any of the Gaudiya Vaisnava acaryas in the line of Rupa Goswami revealed their heart as being in the mood of sambhogecchamayi?

I didn't start this topic on my own, it was gifted to me by one of the moderators without my prior knowledge.
In just a very simple and plain way I want to say that what he wrote about was sanctioned by Mahaprabhu and I doubt that anything useless was written down by him. There is something to be gained by understanding every topic that he instructed us in. Is it not?

No-one disagrees on whether such a bhava exists there in Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu or not, and subsequently, whether such a bhava is a legitimate relationship to aspire for or not. That is a non-issue.

It is also universally (among the followers of Rupa Goswami) agreed on that Sri Rupa established the wish of Sri Chaitanya's in this world. It is also agreed on that Sri Chaitanya's unprecedented gift, his heart's wish to give to the world, called unnata-ujjvala-rasa, means manjari-bhava (see Jiva Goswami's vyakhya on the anarpita-shloka, posted earlier). That seems to be a non-issue as well.

As for whether sambhogecchamayi-sadhana was specifically discussed in Sri Rupa's writings; he presented the general theological framework for raga-bhakti with all the different relationships. He did not specifically elaborate on the details of pursuing any of the four relationships present in Vraja.

Later acharyas, such as Vishwanath Chakravarti, have interpreted the aspect of siddha-rupa seva as indicating service in allegiance to Rupa Manjari and others, presenting the general framework in a context relevant for our sampradaya.

. . .

Please try to avoid the excessive use of you and discussions on what exactly other members are up to, such rhetoric often escalates into unsavory exchanges and leads the thread off topic. Discuss the topic, do not discuss the participants of the topic. (A note for this thread as well as others along the same lines.)

Does anyone have Sri Jiva Gosvami's and Sri Cakravartipada's commentary to those verses of Sri Rupa Gosvami's? If so, please post here, thanks.

I have the commentaries translated by Bon Maharaj. I would be willing to type them up, please indicate which verse(s) you wish to see the commentary on.

The question we need to answer is how manjari bhava is superior to bhogeccha-mayi. For many people, it is impossible to understand how anything other than direct sexual contact can be the highest sentiment. Renunciation of this undeniable pleasure seems pretty phalgu.

Of course, in the UN, Rupa writes that even if that is what you want, you should still make friends with Srimati Radharani, because ultimately, it is only if she frees her krida-mriga for a few moments that anyone can get near him.

I think that perhaps the crucial point to retain here is that the most erogenous zone anyone has is the mind.

The manjaris may engage in direct contact with Krishna, not for its own sake, but for the sake of the lila.

Yes, that is the reason you should make friends with Mother Srimati Radha Rani!



The difficult thing seems to be helping others understand how "sexual contact" could possibly even be a part of a pure spiritual relationship with Krishna. (Check out the other thread). This concept seems to be too odd and bizzare to fathom. Isn't it?



It is not, because for the manjaris, Radha is the ultimate in excellence, and they do not care to consort with the Krishna at all.



To the gopis who unite directly with Krishna, I doubt it is only a "physical" transaction.



Is that a direct translation of Rupa's words?

BTW Bhagavatam has it otherwise; Krishna can be in different places at once, as He wishes.

It might also be helpful to mention that Candravali and Her sakhis are the competitors of Radha. Not any of the other gopis are competitors (perhaps a few, but certainly not all other gopis who are having a relationship with Krishna!)

Also helpful to mention, becoming a sakhi of Radha IMHO should be done for the sake of Her friendship iteself, because Radha is such an amazing personality in Her own right, cares so much for Her sakhis, is kind to Her sakhis, loves Krishna so much, etc. Not because "you can't get near to Krishna if you don't." Radha's sakhi gana is not the Borg.

It isn't that it isn't sanctioned by current Gaudiyas. The descriptions are there in Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu for good. Moreover, each and every Gaudiya engaged in lila-smaran in the spirit of the manjaris renders service under the orders of a particular yutheshvari (who is a sambhogecchamayi-sakhi). There are also descriptions of Krishna enjoying with the asta-sakhis and a good many others in our manjari-bhavuk literature.

The bhava certainly finds its place in current Gaudiya Vaishnavism just as it did in the days of the yore; however, I do not believe its practice as a personal pursuit was there in the days of the yore any more than it is there today. I do not say it should not or cannot; I am saying I don't know of any precedent in the tradition of someone pursuing the said mood.

What about those who trace their lineage back to jahnava thakurani. She was in that mood. Could not someone imbibe this mood from her?

Ananga manjari is called "manjari" although she is not. I wonder if any of the other "manjaris" in her line are this kind of "manjari."

I have not heard of any examples of such. There's Ananga Manjari all right, and she's sambhogecchatmika. Then there's Gadadhar-parivar, and Gadadhar is of course Radha. Vakreshvar has a tradition of his own, he was Tungavidya. Gopal Bhatta's guru, Prabodhananda, was also Tungavidya. (She had three avatars, the third I believe was Madhava Ghosh.) The same question could be asked in all these cases.

The answer is rather simple. If they did not wish to give that mood onwards, then I'd say it cannot be imbibed, as sthayi-bhavas appear via grace, and grace is the outcome of someone's good wishes upon you. If they did wish to give that mood onwards, I would expect there to be at least some examples in the five hundred years of tradition that have passed.

See Bhakti Rasamrita Sindhu :: 1 - Purva-lahari :: Rupa Gosvamin :: Three Commentaries in Gaudiya Grantha Mandir.

This line struck me as odd. Obviously renouncing sex pleasure is a big hassle for a conditioned soul. But I've always understood that sex in the spiritual word is done in consciousness that is entirely different from the consciousness we struggle so hard to renounce in this world.

The gopis, including those that meet directly with Krishna, act and behave exclusively for the pleasure and happiness of Krishna, with absolutely no concern for their personal happiness at any time. Even their happiness or unhappiness is exclusively dedicated to the pleasure of Krishna. Personal happiness is never a concern for the gopis.

So whether one is the type of gopi that meets directly with Krishna or not, there is never any question of how much one has renounced one's personal quest for pleasure and happiness, or renouncing such a thing falsely. As a prerequisite for participating in such lilas, these ladies have already renounced such considerations absolutely.

I'm sorry if I'm making a simple and obvious point, but it seems that if you're concerned with whether or not you'll be able to renounce sex life eternally in the spiritual world, you've missed the point of gopi bhava entirely. If you're concerned about your personal happiness and sense gratification when weighing out your possibilities for spiritual aspirations, you're qualification for thinking about such things is really quite low.

Perhaps this is a start to answering your question about the superiority of manjari bhava?

------

On Meeting with Krishna and Competing with Radha

There are a number of sections in our Gaudiya texts which illustrate Krishna expanding to meet with Radha's girlfriends. From my limited and humble study, it generally seems to come from Radharani's desire to satisfy Krishna by having Him meet with many ladies. I think this is interesting and important to recognize for those who may be concerned about serving Radha verses competing with Her in the matter of personally meeting with Krishna.

This is from Ascarya Rasa Prabandha 182-184(trans. by Dasaratha-suta):







I remember similar sections in Govinda lilamrta chapter 15, and Krishna Bhavanamrta chapter 19 (as well as one of the midday pastime chapters), if someone is interested in pursuing this consideration further.

This is also an expression of Radha's love for her girlfriends, and pity for their condition of longing for Him. As you'll notice:

Well, since sadhakas are not supposed to talk about their inner bhav, it might be difficult to find "examples."

The poetry of Rupa and Raghunatha, the songs of Narottama das Thakura, Bhaktivinoda Thakura and many others all reveal their inner bhava. We can provide many examples of manjari bhava in Gaudiya literature, so I think this is a poor argument. Can anyone provide any examples of sambhogecchamayi bhakti in Gaudiya Vaisnavism? If not, I think Madhavas position stands.

You used nitya siddhas in your list, so I will too.

Caitanya Mahaprabhu
Gadadhara Pandita
Ramananda Raya
Svarupa Damodara
Jahnava Thakurani
and so on.

Plus all the nadiya nagari upasakas, ie. Locana Dasa, etc.

PS.- Once could use the excuse that Rupa, Raghunath, etc. were playing the roles of sadhakas thus setting an example for sadhakas to come. But the same goes for Mahaprabhu and His close associates, who also played as bhaktas in this world.

Some of the selling points seem to be the manjari's access to certain aspects of Radha and Krishna's lila that no one else gets to see and serve, i.e. they may be able to look through slits in the kunja to see the loveplay of Radha and Krishna and they may attend to Radharani's needs in circumstances where She is too embarrassed for other sakhis to discover how She has related with Krishna.

Also, they are the most intimately connected with the heart of Radharani - Radharani's ecstacy is reflected in their hearts and on their bodies like none of the other sakhis.

Can anyone think of other points?

In that manner, you could provide examples of the presence of just about any and all bhavas. The point is, however, in providing examples of the cultivation of the said bhava -- nor examples of an already existing nitya-siddha-bhava.



That isn't exactly the same thing as sambhogecchamayi for Krishna in Vraja, which is what I believe we're after. That is, unless there are some traditions among them that aspire for a dual relationship of Gaura-nagari and Krishna-nagari, which is something I am unfamiliar with.



Again, the point is not the presence of a certain bhava, but the cultivation of a certain bhava. If you come across poems along the lines, "When will the day be mine when I'll embrace Shyama Nagar in my arms," do let us know; or, if you come across manuals describing the path of such a mode of worship, that'd be interesting to learn of.

But none quite as prominent, eh?



It is really quite similar. Rasaraj Krishna covered over with a golden complexion and acting like a debauchee, is not much different than black Rasaraj Krishna who acts like a debauchee. I find a miniscule difference of setting and complexion, but no substantial ontological difference. It is Sri Hari in either case.



There may be so many hidden saints that we have never heard of, and out of those thousands perhaps one or two may have this bhav- that is enough.

The argument about affairs between Krishna and any of the other asta-sakhis becomes redundant when you consider that, theologically speaking, they are all none other than Radha Herself.

The big problem with this is that Krishna in a golden complexion never acted like a debauchee. Yes, some people may say so but that is their idea.


This argument is unbelievable. I wouldn't think it is proper to hinge one's entire life on the premise that there may have been some saints with a similar bhava, even those who no one has ever heard of. And then what about respect for parampara?

Nobody thinks Krishna in a golden complexion acted like a debauchee.

The nagaris, it seems, merely see Krishna in Gauranga. This is the inner reality or inner Personhood (as opposed to the "inner mood") of Mahaprabhu. Deep down inside under Radha's bhav and kanti, Mahaprabhu is Krishna. The nagaris are seeing the Krishna in Him and start to envision Him as Krishna.

Their whole eternal state is a love affair with Mahaprabhu acting out His inner Personhood as Krishna, almost like a dream sequence or a play-within-a-play where the actors stop playing roles, and start acting as themselves. Like suddenly Hamlet stops his soliloquy and says "Hello, I'm Laurence Olivier, nice to see you." That is not a perfect illustration, but it will do.

It seems to me that the nagaris are pursuing a love affair with Krishna, whom they see through Gaura-colored glasses.



However, her other sakhis (some of which are jivas) do meet with Krishna. It's just a question of, can one get to become a sakhi of Radha through bhajan in a gaudiya line, or does one need to approach another sampradaya like pusti kula or some other?



Radha and Krishna are also "non-different," but they are also "different." They are not the same Person/Personality even if made up of the same stuff.



There are certainly saints in this bhava (in other sampradayas, I don't know about this one )



I respect very much parampara. However the parampara which does not desire to give me shelter, is not my parampara, is it?

Though not really on topic, allow me to sweeten up the mood a bit with some katha of Radha expressing Her love for Her sakhis...In this case Visakha sakhi...

srI vizAkhA is zrI rAdhA's narma bhUmi, the abode of Her confidence (literally the abode of joking and humour).

This is written in vizAkhAnandaA-stotram (17):







zrI rUpa goswAmi in ujjvala nIlamaNi (dUtibheda 87:)



zrI rAdhA told vizAkhA:



From the commentary of Sri ADP VK 99

Now that's better!

OK I forgot about this post, and also to hopefully inject new life into this thread:


Ok, I guess I got carried away with your statement earlier that "Rasaraj Krishna covered over with a golden complexion and acting like a debauchee" is "really much similar".

Nagari rationale aside, would you happen to know if nagari-upasakas wish for Krishna's direct association (even if viewing Him through Gauranga-spectacles) or do they hope to be Vishnupriya's dasis or something? If they are trying to pursue a love affair with Krishna in His guise as Gaura, does this count as sambhogecchAmayi-bhakti? Some padas seem to suggest so?


What do you mean that some of the sakhis are jivas?


Probably.