Prakirnaka
These verses were posted by me in 2003 on Gaudiya Discussions, "Pearls of Wisdom". I came across them as the result of a Google search (in fact, some of them I had completely forgotten), so I am just crossposting them here for the record, as they are so nice, with a few editing changes.
A nice simple prayer. I believe it may be Haridas Shastri's own composition.
May I have love for the Vaishnavas.
May I have love for the Lord's qualities.
May I have love for service.
May I have love and enthusiasm for Harinam Kirtan.
May I have love for those who have taken refuge in the Lord.
May I have love for those who even have a desire to engage in bhajan.
May I have love for my own eternal self,
by which devotion to Krishna comes about.
May Rupa Manjari accept me in the eternal pastimes! It is difficult for anyone whose mind is contaminated by the majestic concept of God to attain her, yet she has made herself dear to the wise by giving them the jewel of the path of raganuga bhakti revealed. She is like the cage that holds the mynah bird of dalliances engaged in by Radha, the protector of the cowherd community, with all her sakhis. (Sadhana-dipika)
Srila Govardhana Bhatta Gosvami was the grandson of Sri Gadadhara Bhatta Gosvami, a disciple of Srila Raghunatha Bhatta Gosvami. He wrote one booklet about Holi pastimes, named Madhu-keli-valli. The descendants of Sri Govardhana Bhatta Gosvami are still living in Vrindavan, opposite the Radha Vallabha temple in a beautiful place called New Madan Mohan Temple. (Information contributed by Advaita Das.) He wrote the following three verses:
Anyone who abandons Rupa Gosvami's lotus feet
and still hopes to attain Radharani's service
may as well try building a skyscraper
on a beautiful sandy beach.
He may as well try to touch the heavens with his upraised hands,
or try to cover the sun by throwing up fistfuls of dust,
or try to make a lame man walk.
Why not? He has just as much chance of success.
Who on this earth could ever understand
the pure essence of the Srimad Bhagavatam,
perceive the sweetness of Vrindavan,
or inspire anyone else to speak of it?
And who could bring the mind to meditate
on the son of Nanda's most wondrous beauty?
Without the blessings of the most merciful and virtuous
Rupa Goswami and his associates, no one.
And, my friend, pray tell,The following verse from Gopala Champu (Gopala Champu 2.31.46) is fairly well known--
who would know anything about renunciation,
devotion on either the vidhi or raga paths,
the twelve holy rasas,
the love of the residents of Vraja glorified by Shuka and other seers,
the supreme spirit of Mahabhava found in the gopis,
or their competent affection,
or Radharani's madanakhya-mahabhava?
If it weren't for Sri Rupa?
O my lord, O lifter of the mountain,The one that precedes it (Gopala Champu 2.31.45) is much less widely quoted, for reasons that will be clear--
I know of nothing other than you,
whose parents are the king and queen of the cowherds,
whose beloved is Radha,
whose friends are headed by Sridama and Subala,
whose older brother is Balaram,
whose musical instrument is the flute,
whose ornament is the peacock feather,
whose home is in Nandisvara,
and whose playground is Vrinda's forest.
O you whose name is Radhika,KAnta translated as "husband", according to Jiva's usage. Preyasi in the first verse should therefore also be translated as "wife."
whose father is Vrishabhanu
whose mother is Kirtida,
whose mother-in-law is Nanda's wife,
whose chief friend is Lalita, accompanied by Visakha and others,
whose playground is Krishna's forest,
and whose eternal husband is Krisha.
I have never known anything but you,
I know nothing but you, nor will I ever know anything but you.
=============================================================
- Where are you coming from, Vrinda?
- I was just with Krishna.
- Where is he?
- In the woods over by your pond.
- What is he doing there?
- He is learning to dance.
- And who is teaching him?
- It is You! It is your form,
which he sees manifest in every tree and vine,
which he sees whirling in every direction like a teacher of the dance,
which is making him dance as he tries in vain to catch it.
(Govinda lilamrita 8.77)
When I am at home, she is there. But she is everywhere I go.
She is behind me, She is in front of me.
She is on my bed when I try to sleep,
on every path that I walk. Ah, but I am suffering in her separation!
O my mind! There is no other woman for me but she--
She she she she--everywhere, in every nook of the universe--
Is this what is the philosophers mean when they say, "All is one"? (Amaru 105)
Were I made to choose between union and separation
I would verily take separation and not union with him.
For, when united in his company, he is but one man,
whereas when separated, the entire universe is saturated with him.
(Padyavali 239)
Comments
vaikuNThasya bhagavato jyotir-aMza-bhUtA vaikuNTha-loka-zobha-rUpA yA anantA mUrtayas tatra vartante, tAsAm ekayA saha muktasyaikasya mUrtir bhagavatA kriyata iti vaikuNTasya mUrtir iva mUrtir yeSAm ity uktam | PrItiS 10 |
"In the spiritual world, the Supreme Lord has unlimited spiritual forms, all are expansions of himself illuminating that world. With each one of those forms, the Lord enjoys pastimes with a single individual liberated soul."
The Lord of Vaikuntha (or "the Lord known as Vaikuntha") (vaikuNThasya bhagavato) there has (tatra vartante) infinite spiritual forms (anantA mUrtayas) which come out of a fragment of his light (jyotir-aMza-bhUtA) and which beautify the Vaikuntha world (or are the ornament of the people in Vaikuntha (vaikuNTha-loka-zobha-rUpA). With one of those forms (tAsAm ekayA saha), a form of a single liberated soul (muktasyaikasya mUrtir) is created by the Lord (bhagavatA kriyate). Thus (iti) it is said (ity uktam) "whose form is like Vaikuntha's form."
Jiva is here glossing the words sarve vaikuNTha-mUrtayaH from Bhagavata 3.15.14., in which context it must be seen.
The impression that there is a one-to-one correspondence of a bhagavat form to one mukta form is not quite as evident in the original as in the first translation, but still arguable I should think.
"With one of those forms (tAsAm ekayA saha), a form of a single liberated soul (muktasyaikasya mUrtir) is created by the Lord (bhagavatA kriyate)"
Is there another accurate way to translate that? The way that is worded seems to give an ambiguous meaning to the text. The way you translate "bhagavatA kriyata", if it does imply "created by", then the previous part makes little sense. Saying that one of the infinite forms of God in Vaikuntha creates the form of a single liberated soul, seems like a strange thing to say. I've seen kriyata translated as "acts with or upon" and "performs with" or variations of that. To me that makes more sense in the context of what precedes it. So instead of:
"With one of those forms (tAsAm ekayA saha), a form of a single liberated soul (muktasyaikasya mUrtir) is created by the Lord (bhagavatA kriyate)"
We get:
"With one of those forms (tAsAm ekayA saha), a form of a single liberated soul (muktasyaikasya mUrtir) performs with the Lord (bhagavatA kriyate)"
What do you think?
With one of those unlimited forms, of one liberated soul a form by the Lord is made. (Word for word literal.)