To Be or not To Be ? -

Gurudeva Kripa-Bindu Diya
by: Bhaktivinode Thakura

gurudeva!
kripa-bindu diya koro ei dase
trnapeksa ati hina
sakala sahane bala diya koro (1)

Gurudeva! Give me a drop of mercy, make me your servat. Make me more humble than a blade of grass. Give me strenth to be tolerant. Let me not hanker for my own honor and fame.

sakale sammana korite sakati
deha nath! jathajatha
tabe to' gaibo harinama sukhe
aparadha habe hata (2)

Give me the power to honor all living entities according to what they are due [ and all Vaishnavas as befitting they platform]. Then I will be able to chant the holy names blissfully, and all my offenses will be vanquished!


Dear Vaishnavas , is there anyone who can explain what is the meaning of
"To be more humble than a blade of grass"


Ys
Hari Saran das

A blade of grass is a very insignificant thing, but it is still very important since it serves the cows as foodstuff and through that the cows give milk with which the Lord can be served. Roofs of houses and temples can also be made with grass. “But”, the devotee should think, “no service has ever been done through me”. In this way he considers himself to be even lower than a blade of grass. The devotee should humbly think: “When someone steps on a blade of grass, the grass will rise again after the foot has gone off him, but I never get up so unharmed and unoffended if someone kicks me with a foot.”

Certainly these feelings of humility must be developed by the aspirant devotee. As long as one does not realize one's lowness with one's heart and mind, and only feigns humility on the outside, verbally for instance, the perfection of this trinad api sunicena-mood is not attained. Real humility is mental humility. There is no greater deceit than to feign humility through one's gestures and words and being actually filled with false pride within one's mind. Such false humility will never purify anyone's heart.

- Pandit Ananta Das Babaji Maharaja, commentary on Sri Siksastakam

trnad api sunicena
taror api sahisnuna
amanina manadena
kirtaniyah sada harih


One should chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind, thinking oneself lower than the straw in the street; one should be more tolerant than a tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige, and should be ready to offer all respect to others. In such a state of mind one can chant the holy name of the Lord constantly.

A blade of grass is a very insignificant thing, but it is still very important since it serves the cows as foodstuff and through that the cows give milk with which the Lord can be served. Roofs of houses and temples can also be made with grass. “But”, the devotee should think, “no service has ever been done through me”. In this way he considers himself to be even lower than a blade of grass. The devotee should humbly think: “When someone steps on a blade of grass, the grass will rise again after the foot has gone off him, but I never get up so unharmed and unoffended if someone kicks me with a foot.”

Certainly these feelings of humility must be developed by the aspirant devotee. As long as one does not realize one's lowness with one's heart and mind, and only feigns humility on the outside, verbally for instance, the perfection of this trinad api sunicena-mood is not attained. Real humility is mental humility. There is no greater deceit than to feign humility through one's gestures and words and being actually filled with false pride within one's mind. Such false humility will never purify anyone's heart.

- Pandit Ananta Das Babaji Maharaja, commentary on Sri Siksastakam






Thanks so much dear Madhavananda, those are enlightening words that only a true Saint speaks . Jay Panditaji !
Fotunate are the souls who takes shelter under such Kalpa-vrksa(desire tree).

vancha-kalpatarubyas ca kripa-sindhubhya eva ca
patitanam pavanebhyo vaisnavebhyo namo namah

I offer pranamas unto the Vaishnavas who are just like desire trees, who are an ocean of mercy, and who deliver the fallen, conditioned souls.


Ys
Hari Saran das

Just an aside here about the mood of humility. It does not mean that someone does not possess self-esteem, for that is a non-productive condition which is really just another side to false pride and is caused by fear and lack of faith in a divine plan. It really has respect for all others at its core. If someone holds all others in respect, then they will never feel that they are superior to someone else. A religious cult might try to elicit a docile following and think that it is achieving the cultivation of a mood of humility, when in fact it is just making blind followers that are not experiencing any measure of prema.

Self esteem issues are caused by pathological conditions brought about by negative feedback from others and should not be confused with genuine humility, which arises from introspection and can only occur through wisdom and realization of the nature of the self and Sri Bhagavan. Also, someone might have a measure of humility in their character, which makes them a good person, but that is just because they are situated in sattva guna. That is not the same thing as divine humility that the trnad api verse speaks of.

This is illustrated by the cursing of Maharaj Pariksit by the sage's son. Both the sage and Maharaj Pariksit felt that they had offended the other and had disrespected the other's position as servant of the Supreme Lord. Neither of them felt that they were the victims of an injustice. The sage sought to obtain the forgiveness of the king, and the king readily accepted the curse of the fatal snake bite and welcomed the opportunity to discard his body and achieve the supreme goal.

So, someone who has come to a stage where they possess divine humility is not going to act out of an ahamkara mentality, but with accurate knowledge of the self gained by intense sadhana. One's guru may chastise one for their own benefit, but that does not mean the guru is lacking in humility, for that guru is acting on a higher platform where inflated ego dynamics do not come into play.

Hi, Prabhuji ! Many times I heard that there are three types of Gurus: Kanisthas, Madhymas and Uttamas. If that is true, how do you apply the concepts of "Ego" that you wrote about ? In other words, from which higher plataform would one's Guru be acting ?


Ys
Hari

There are certainly gurus who are a vivid demonstration of inflated ego dynamics. However, though this may be how others witness it, the disciple experiences it as the mercy of the Lord, and others should remember that interfering in a guru-disciple relationship is inappropriate. Of course if things get out of hands, a senior Vaishnava may have to interfere, but as a general policy of etiquette, one should not speak negatively about the guru in front of his disciple. In the ultimate, it is the sincerity of the disciple that counts.

I presume that there are many ways of talking about Gurus without touching anyone's ego, but the example given by K.K. is smashing; he is quite sharp about giving his opinions:



Kavi Karnapura in his Goura Ganodesa Dipika:

Isvara Puri, Brahmananda Puri, and all the other disciples of Madhavendra Puri, felt irresitably attracted to Nityananda Prabhu. Although they had met so many renounced saints, they could detect no trace of love for Krsna in any of them. And by meeting those unfortunate and wicked souls, they gaines nothing but grief. And being aggrieved, they sought refuge in the forests. But now they were relieved of all their sorrows upon beholding in one another the manifestation of love for Krsna.

Where is this text from? I could not locate it in Gaura Ganoddesa Dipika. I want to check it against the original Sanskrit. Many e-files being circulated around the internet are rather unreliable translations.

Isvara Puri, Brahmananda Puri, and all the other disciples of Madhavendra Puri, felt irresitably attracted to Nityananda Prabhu. Although they had met so many renounced saints, they could detect no trace of love for Krsna in any of them. And by meeting those unfortunate and wicked souls, they gaines nothing but grief. And being aggrieved, they sought refuge in the forests. But now they were relieved of all their sorrows upon beholding in one another the manifestation of love for Krsna.

Dear Madhava, thanks to check that. I was working with two texts at the same time and in a hurry I mistakenly did that.
The text is from:

Caitanya Bhagavat Adi-Lila Chapter 9

Do you have the original in Sanskrit ?

Caitanya Bhagavata is written in Bengali. No, I don't have a Bengali copy of CB. I'm sure Advaitadas, Jagat or anyone can look it up for us.

Thanks for your time and attention Madhanandaji,

Could you please give a brief historical about the deferent languages that the Vaishnava scriptures was written; how it happened?


Ys
Hari Saran das

"Caitanya Bhagavata is written in Bengali. No, I don't have a Bengali copy of CB. I'm sure Advaitadas, Jagat or anyone can look it up for us."

The text appears in Caitanya Bhagavata Adi 9.170-173 and is more or less correctly translated.

Sanskrit is the classical language for all Hindu texts (which is quite a bit different from earlier Sanskrit of the Vedic period or the earlier Prakrit of the Jain or Pali of the Buddhist texts). Gaudiya writers like Krsndasa or Vrindavan Das of the medieval period began writing secondary works in their native tongues, such as Bengali. Bengali also lends itself to poetry and song, hence the large number of works by Narottam Das and others. Jiva, Rupa and Santana (of the six Goswamis of Vrindavan) chose to write more scholarly works in the classical Sanskrit language, as did Baladeva and Visvanatha later on. The commentaries (tikas) on the Bhagavata Purana and the Bhagavad Gita were also written in Sanskrit.

Vaishnava devotional texts have also been written in many other languages, such as Hindi, Tamil, Oriya, Kannada, etc.

We do not see much new Sanskrit literature being produced today, which is unfortunate. Modern day authors choose to write in the languages spoken today and for an audience that for the most part is not expert at Sanskrit (even if they have been schooled in it).

Some linquists today are of the opinion that Sanskrit never was a spoken language used in ordinary daily discourse, but is rather a synthetic language used by poets. One reason they adhere to that theory is that the modern spoken derivatives of Sanskrit, like Bengali or the Dravidian languages are also very ancient languages and the old Sanskrit texts themselves mention those colloquial tongues being used in ancient times.

According to Jagat @ Indiadivine:


Panini lived during the 5th century BC. Any further thoughts?

The text mentioned above is regarding the meeting of Sri Madhavendra Puri and Sri Nityananda: Sri Nityananda was on pilgrimage and he met Madhavendra Puri by divine arrangement. When they met they embraced one another and sattvika bhavas manifested on their bodies. Here is another translation:

Iswara Puri, Brahmananda Puri and all the other disciples (of Madhavendra Puri) could perceive what had just spiritually transpired (sattvika bhavas erupting on the bodies of Sri Nityananda Prabhu and Sri Madhavendra Puri upon embracing), so their natural attraction and attachment for the Lord increased. In the past, both Madhavendra Puri and Sri Nityananda had seen pilgrims, and many amongst them in saintly garb, but now they realized that none of those pilgrims had possessed the transcendental gift of prema. Remembering their brief asociation and conversations with such non-devotional persons they were overcome with remorse. They had wandered everywhere looking intently for Krishna and His pure loving devotees. They found each other--pure transcendentalist--and they felt the burden of their despondancy lift in each other's association. In each other they witnessed the manifestation of love of God.

Here is the original text with my plain translation.

Izvara-purI-brahmAnanda-purI-Adi yata |
sarva-ziSya hailena nityAnande rata || 170 ||
sabhe yata mahAjana sambhAsA karena |
kRSNa-premA kAhAro zarIre nA dekhena || 171 ||
sabhei pAyena duHkha durjana sambhASiyA |
ataeva vana sabhe bhramea dekhiyA || 172 ||
anyo 'nye se-saba duHkhera haila nAza |
anyo 'nye dekhi kRSNa-premera prakAza || 173 ||
"Isvara Puri, Brahmananda Puri and the other renunciates, all the disciples [of Madhavendra Puri mentioned in verse 169] had great attachment for Nityananda. (170)

They had spoken with many eminent men (mahajana), but had not seen Krishna-prema in anyone's body [referring to sattvika-bhavas mentioned in verse 165]. (171)

They always felt misery when discussing with bad people (durjana), and therefore they wandered through the forests. (172)

Upon meeting each other [with Nityananda], all of their misery vanished. Meeting with each other, Krishna-prema became manifest. (173)

Now, compare this with the two translations presented above. It is already stretch of imagination to join together the mahajanas who did not exhibit sattvika-bhavas (verse 170) and the worldly people whom they wanted to avoid (171), what to speak of the rest of what we read particularly in the first translation.

In my opinion, it is criminal to insert one's own additions and interpretations inside the text when presenting a translation. One should produce the translation as literally as ever possible, without adding or substracting anything. Notes should be given either inside brackets, or otherwise in footnotes or a separate commentary, and they should be clearly presented as such.

I agree about attempting to be as literal as possible in a translation, although that can often be a problem in rendering something in English, due to different idioms and grammatical structures. As long as the original meaning (or multiple meanings) come across, without interpretation that might alter it to be something that the author had not intended, then it is proper translation work, IMO. Commentary and opinion should be left separate or in footnotes, not to put one's own twist on a verse.

A little earlier on this thread there was a discussion going on about humility. Ananta dasa Babaji tells a wonderful story in his commentary to Sri Siksastaka's third verse. So, I thought to post it here.

---

Long ago one highly educated person came from Bengal to Vrindavana, desiring to live in Vraja and to receive instructions and initiation from a bonafide spiritual master. He used to come regularly to a famous bhajananandi mahatma, (a great saint who loves to worship God) who understood from speaking with him that the aspirant was inwardly proud of his learning. Although the aspirant had asked him for initiation and instruction, the mahatma did not lend an ear to the request.

One day, when the aspirant came to him blubbering about initiation, the mahatma told him that he could get initiated if he could bring him a person or object that was in all respects inferior to him (the aspirant) within seven days.

At first the aspirant thought: “O, what’s so difficult about that? Almost everyone in this world is inferior to me! I can bring anyone along with me to my guru!”

But by the grace of that mahatma the aspirant became more and more aware of his own faults and others’ qualities. After all, all of Lord Brahma’s creatures are a mixture of qualities and faults! Thinking like this, the aspirant could not find any human being inferior to himself. Then he began to look for an inferior being within the animal- and bird-world, but there also he was unsuccessful, because each animal and bird has some qualities that even human beings don’t have!

Finally he searched amongst the trees and vines, but there he was also unsuccessful, because Mahaprabhu had instructed the Vaishnavas to be as tolerant as a tree (so trees were definitely superior to him). In this way he spent six days searching.

There was only one day left, and if he could not find anyone inferior to him today, then he could not get initiated. In the morning of the seventh day, the aspirant went out into the field to pass stool with a very agitated mind. It was, after all, his initiation-day. While he was passing stool, he thought: “Aw, this stool is inferior to me in all respects! Let me tell that to my spiritual master!”

But by the grace of his teacher his intelligence had become so much trained in seeing others’ qualities and his own faults, that he began to think: “Brother, just see! You say that this stool is inferior to you, but before this substance came in contact with you, it was divine prasada offered to the deity. Now, because you wanted to stay alive and you wanted to feed your body, it has become such a disgusting substance! Is there anybody lower than he who gives himself such a nice substance for feeding his own body and turns it into something so bad?”

Thinking like this, the aspirant became startled and thought to himself: “No, no! This substance is also much better than me!” Meanwhile a worm crawled into the stool and the aspirant thought: “Now I have it! This worm in the stool is inferior to me in every respect!”

But then he began to think about the worm, saying to himself. “Brother! You have turned the Lord’s prasada into this stool and you cannot make it pure anymore, but this worm will ultimately make this stool merge with the earth again, and even that you cannot do! In that respect you are inferior!”

Anyway, the aspirant finished his bath and went to his master. The master asked him: “And, did you bring that which is inferior to you in all respects?”

The aspirant offered his prostrated obeisances and said: “O master! By your mercy I have seen within these seven days that if there is any thoroughly low creature or substance in this world, then it is me! There is no lower creature in the whole world than me!”

The mahatma laughed and embraced the candidate, saying: “You have brought yourself here after giving up your pride and accepting a humble mood. Now there is no more obstacle to your initiation!”

By the mercy of that saint, the aspirant was then blessed with a life full of tasteful bhajan.