Prabodhananda, Hit Harivansh and the Radha-rasa-sudha-nidhi (Part II)
Prabodhananda Saraswati: From Benares to Braj (Part I)
Prabodhananda Saraswati: From Benares to Braj (Part II)
Prabodhananda, Hit Harivansh and the Radha-rasa-sudha-nidhi (Part I)
Prabodhananda, Hit Harivansh and the Radha-rasa-sudha-nidhi (Part II)
Similarities between RRSN and Prabodhānanda's works
We now turn to a comparison of RRSN with Prabodhānanda's writings. In particular we shall look at the three stotra kāvya works, CCA, VMA and RRSN, which are generically similar. We shall on occasion, however, also look at some of Prabodhānanda's other metrical works, in particular SaṅgM and ARP. None of the three stotra kāvyas conform to any clear structure as a whole, though on occasion certain verse sequences may be found to have some kind of unity, either metrical or semantic. Such sequences are rather more extended in VMA, the longest work, and less so in CCA, the shortest. Each of these works, being panegyrics to their chosen object of worship have a certain stylistic similarity perhaps attributable to the genre itself. There are, to be sure, differences, some of which might be attributable to the content: Caitanya is described in terms of what he had done and the effects that he produced; Vrindavan is a place, and much of the content describes the wonderful flora and fauna of the dhāman and its nature as a place naturally requires that it be treated in terms slightly different from those used for a person. In all of these works, Rādhā is to some degree or another placed in a category by herself, and service to her is the parama-pum-artha spoken of in numerous verses of CCA (compare RRSN 3, 95, 144). With this in mind, if the author of all three works were one and the same individual, it would be expected that he would have reserved the best of his creative energy for a panegyric to the ultimate object of his devotion. Thus, even though stylistic similarities can be pointed out in the three works, it must nevertheless be accepted that RRSN is indeed the superior composition with greater consistency of literary quality throughout.
(a) Content
Scholars adhering to the Gauḍīya school have pointed to certain exact correlations in content between RRSN and the other works of Prabodhānanda. A few examples of the most salient similarities are given here.
(i) The two following verses are almost exactly the same:
gatā dūre gāvo dinam api turīyāṁśam abhajad
vayaṁ kṣutkṣāmāḥ smas tava ca jananī vartmanayanā/
akasmāt tūṣṇīke sajalanayane dīnavadane
tvayi tyaktvā khelāṁ nahi nahi vayaṁ prāṇiniṣavaḥ// (SaṅgM 4.8)
gatā dūre gāvo dinam api turīyāṁśam abhajad
vayaṁ yātuṁ kṣāntās tava ca jananī vartma-nayanā/
akasmāt tūṣṇīke sajala-nayane dīna-vadane
luṭhaty asyāṁ bhūmau tvayi nahi vayaṁ prāṇiniṣavaḥ// (RRSN 229)
The cows have gone far away,
the day too has entered its third quarter,
we are waiting to go, [or we are wasting from hunger]
and your mother is watching the path [for you];
now suddenly you have fallen silent,
your eyes have filled with tears
and your face is filled with sadness
and you have fallen to the ground
[or after giving up playing with us ]
no, we do not wish to go on living.
This verse and the two prior to it in RRSN are somewhat out of context, as they are purely descriptive, containing no prayer, blessing or 'vision' markers. It may well be that it was later adopted in the SaṅgM which does have the semblance of a continuous plot, or that it was borrowed from that work.
(ii) The author of RRSN shows a devotion for Rādhā's name, which Kṛṣṇa himself chants. The same image is found in the writings of Prabodhānanda:
yaj-jāpaḥ sakṛd eva gokula-pateḥ...
yan-nāmāṅkita-mantra-jāpana-paraḥ prītyā svayaṁ mādhavaḥ
śrī-kṛṣṇo 'pi tad adbhutaṁ sphuratu me rādheti varṇa-dvayam. (RRSN 95);
rādhā-keli-nikuñja vīthiṣu caran rādhābhidhām uccaran (RRSN 139);
rādhety evaṁ japa tad aniśaṁ sārtha-saṁsmṛty-ananyaḥ (VMA 15.75);
rādhā rādhety avirata-jāpaḥ prāṭati (ARP 97).
This is paralleled by a devotion for Kṛṣṇa's name:
ati-snehād uccair api ca hari-nāmāni gṛṇataḥ...
parānandaṁ vṛndāvanam anucarantaṁ ca dadhato
mano me rādhāyāḥ pada-mṛdula-padme nivasatu (RRSN 55);
hare kṛṣṇa kṛṣṇeti kṛṣṇeti mukhyān...
kadābhyasya vṛndāvane syāṁ kṛtārthaḥ (VMA 17.89);
rādhāvat kṛṣṇa-nāmābhidadhad iha śamī tiṣṭha vṛndāvane 'taḥ (VMA 8.43)
The following verse from RRSN illustrating Rādhā's devotion to Kṛṣṇa's name is similar in spirit to a Prabodhānanda verse describing Caitanya's devotion to it.
śyāma śyāmety anupama-rasā-pūrṇa-varṇair japantī
sthitvā sthitvā madhura-madhurottāram uccārayantī/
muktā-sthūlān nayana-galitān aśru-bindūn vahantī
hṛņyad-romā pratipada-camat-kurvatī pātu rādhā//(RRSN 218)
May Rādhā deliver you, astonishing you at every step,
her bodily hairs horripilating,
teardrops as large as pearls flowing from her eyes,
chanting the words, 'Śyāma, Śyāma',
completely filled with incomparable flavour,
stopping after some time to pronounce them aloud
in a voice sweeter than sweet.
badhnan prema-bhara-prakampita-karo granthīn kaṭī-ḍorakaiḥ
saṅkhyātuṁ nija-loka-maṅgala-hare-kṛṣṇeti-nāmnāṁ japan/
aśru-snāta-mukhaḥ svam eva hi jagannāthaṁ didṛkṣur gatā
yātair gaura-tanur vilocana-mudaṁ tanvan hariḥ pātu vaḥ//(CCA 9)
May the golden bodied Hari deliver you,
bringing joy to your eyes by his pacing back and forth,
his face bathed in tears from his desire to see Jagannātha.
To count the world saving Hare Kṛṣṇa names which he chants,
he ties knots in a rope tied around his waist
with a love-filled, shaking hand.
(iii) A prayer for the engagement of all the senses in the service of Kṛṣṇa, which appears several times in BhP (e.g. ix.4.18 21 and x.10.38) is another theme found both of Vrindavan as well of Rādhā.
rādhā-nāma-sudhā-rasaṁ rasayituṁ jihvāstu me vihvalā
pādau tat-pada-kāṅkitāsu caratāṁ vṛndāṭavī-vīthiṣu/
tat-karmaiva karaḥ karotu hṛdayaṁ tasyāḥ padaṁ dhyāyatāṁ
tad-bhāvotsavataḥ paraṁ bhavatu me tat-prāṇa-nāthe ratiḥ//(RRSN 142)
May my tongue become helpless
as it relishes the taste of the nectar of Rādhā's name;
may my feet wander over the paths of Vṛndā’s forest
which are marked with her footprints;
may my hands be engaged in her work
and my heart in meditating on her feet --
O that I may become absorbed in her festive mood
and thus have love for the Lord of her life.
śrī-vṛndāvana-vandanāya satataṁ mūrdhāstu bahv-ādarī
jihvā vihvalatām upaitu satataṁ tat-sad-guṇotkīrtane/
hastau tan nava-kuñja-mārjana-vidhau pādau ca tatrāṭane
śrotre tan-mahima-śrutau dṛśi dṛśau nityaṁ smṛtau stān manaḥ// (VMA 7.49)
May my head find its purpose
by constantly bowing down to Śrī Vṛndāvana;
may my tongue become helpless
in constantly chanting its wondrous glories;
may my hands be used in cleaning its groves
and my feet in wandering throughout its territory,
may my ears be engaged in always hearing its fame,
my eyes in seeing it
and my mind in meditation on it.
The use of the word vihvalā in both verses is striking. The prayer for the service of sweeping the kuñja mentioned in VMA 7.49 is found several times in RRSN (8, 164, 180, 202, 243). Other verses written in this style include RRSN 106.
(iv) Numerous examples could be given of prayers for other types of service in the two works; only one or two more shall be given here. Compare the two following prayers for the service of massaging the feet of the couple in the kuñja after lovemaking,
mithaḥ-premāveśād ghana-pulaka-dor-valli-racita
pragāḍhāśleņeṇotsava-rasa-bharonmīlita-dṛśau/
nikuñja-kĸpte vai nava-kusuma-talpe 'bhiśayitau
kadā pat-saṁvāhādibhir aham adhīśau nu sukhaye// (RRSN 194)
Deeply absorbed in a perfectly reciprocated love
their eyes are wide open from the ecstatic festival of delights
arising from the tight embrace
of their intertwining, vine-like arms
covered with thick horripilation;
lying on a bed of fresh blossoms in the forest bower
are my Lord and Lady --
when will I bring them pleasure by massaging their feet?
kadā vā kālindī-taṭa-nikaṭa-vṛndāvana-latā
nikuñjāntaṁ suptaṁ tadati-sarasaṁ preṣṭha-mithunam/
mitho gāḍhāśliṣṭaṁ mṛdu mṛdu mayā lālita-padaṁ
mudā vīkṣye svapne 'py ahaha sukha-nidrāṁ gatam aham//VMA 17.114
And when will that day come
when that beloved couple, so filled with sacred rapture,
lay sleeping by the shores of the Kalindī
within the kuñja of Vrindavan creepers;
tightly intertwined in each other's arms
I will gently cradle their feet
and watch as they drift off
into peaceful slumber.
Another verse of this type is RRSN 17. Prayers to hear a Vrindavan parrot repeating the lovers' conversation of the previous night are similarly found in these same two works:
mat-kaṇṭhe kiṁ nakha-śikharayā daitya-rājo'smi nāhaṁ
maivaṁ pīḍāṁ kuru kuca-taṭe pūtanā nāham asmi/
itthaṁ kīrair anukṛta-vacaḥ preyasā saṅgatāyāḥ
prātaḥ śroņye tava sakhi kadā keli-kuñjaṁ mṛjantī// (RRSN 164)
“Why are you scratching my neck with your claws?
I am not Hiraṇyakaśipu!
And why are you tugging on my breasts?
Do you think that I am Pūtanā?”
O Rādhā, beloved friend! When will I hear your words
overheard and recited by a mynah bird
as I clean your love-bower
on the morning after your dalliances.
kiṁ māṁ khedayase vimuñca vasanaṁ talpottame 'smin sukhen
āgatya svapihi tyaja tyaja bhujaṁ śliņyāmi kānte sakṛt/
āḥ kiṁ nirdaya muñca muñca na kim apy āpīḍaye rādhikā
kṛṣṇālāpam imaṁ kadā nu śṛṇuyāṁ vṛndāṭavī-kīrataḥ// (VMA 17.106)
“Why are you harrassing me?”
“Drop your clothes on the delicious bed,
come here happily and sleep.”
“Leave me alone, leave my arm alone.”
“O beloved one, let me just embrace you once.”
“Merciless one! Let me go, let me go!”
“I am not hurting you at all.”
When will I hear this conversation
of Rādhā and K.r.sṇa as overheard
and recited by a V.rndâvana mynah.
(v) Prabodhānanda's proclivity for using language reminiscent of Advaita philosophy has been emphasized in our previous discussions of both CCA and VMA. This tendency is not absent from the RRSN and references to brahma-vāda are found there in verse 148 which is comparable to CCA 98 and 107. 'Some people are exclusively interested in brahman, etc., but...' The author of RRSN (84) says he is afraid of kaivalyam just as the author of the CCA calls it hellish (95).
(vi) Another conceit recurring again and again in Prabodhānanda's writing is that in which he states that perfection is beyond the great gods, or even Śuka, the speaker of the BhP.
CCA 2 (śrīśa-brahmādy-agamyā), 7 (govinda-prema-bhājām api yan na kalitam), 24 (bhrāntaṁ yatra munīśvaraiḥ), 34 (aparicita-pūrvaṁ muni-varaiḥ), 51 (śiva-brahmādīnām api ca su-mahā-vismṛti-bhṛtām), 62 (mṛgyāpi sā śiva-śukoddhava-nāradādyaiḥ), 79 (śiva-brahmādy-alabhye), 95 (vidhi-mahendrādiś ca kīṭāyate), 99 (brahmādīṁś ca hasanti nātibahu-manyante mahā-vaiṣṇavān), 132 (brahmeśādi-mahāścarya mahimāpi).
VMA 1.2 (īśo 'pi); 2.36 (śrī-śaṅkara-druhiṇa-mukhya-surendra vṛnda-durjñeya ), 17.15 (śrī-śuka-nāradādy-akalite), 17.60 (śrīśa-śukārjunoddhava-mukhāḥ paśyanti yan na kvacit).
RRSN 2 (yogīndra-durgama-gatiḥ), 3 (brahmeśvarādi-sudurūha padāravinda), 4, (brahma-rudra-śuka-nārada-bhīņma-mukhyair alakṣito), 40 (brahmādi-durgama-gateḥ), 73 (nahi prāpur brahma-śivādayo 'pi), 84 (pareśa-bhajanonmadā yadi śukādayaḥ kiṁ tataḥ), 86 (lakṣmī-śuka nāradādi), 97 (devānām atha bhakta-mukta-suhṛdām atyanta-dūraṁ ca yat), 239 (yan nāradājeśa-śukair agamyam), 240 (sambhāvyo 'pi viriñci-nārada-śiva-svāyambhuvādyair na yaḥ).
(vī) Beside simply describing the different types of service to Rādhā, Prabodhānanda likes to describe the appearance of the sakhīs who serve her. Thus VMA's eighth century contains an extended description of their bodily features. SaṅgM 3.40 is a description of the sakhī after receiving the blessing of the divine couple. Compare the following verse to RRSN 53 which is the author's meditation on his own feminine form; both contain the same third ligne:
atha śrī-govinde vikasad-aravindekṣaṇa-lasat
kṛpā-dṛṣṭyāpūrva-praṇaya-rasa-vṛṣṭyā snapayati/
sthitā nityaṁ pārśve vividha-paricaryaika-caturā
na keņāñcid dṛśyaṁ rasika-mithunaṁ sā śritavatī//SaṅgM 3.41
And then, after Govinda had bathed her
in a downpour of incomparable affection
falling from the merciful glance
of his blooming lotus eyes,
she took shelter of the Divine Couple,
invisible to the rest of the world,
and remained always by their side,
an expert in a variety of services.
dukūlaṁ bibhrāṇām atha kuca-taṭe kañcuka-paṭaṁ
prasādaṁ svāminyāḥ sva-kara-tala-dattaṁ praṇayataḥ/
sthitāṁ nityaṁ pārśve vividha-paricaryaika-caturāṁ
kiśorīm ātmānaṁ kim iha su-kumārīṁ nu kalaye//RRSN 53.
When will I envision myself as a beautiful young girl
always standing by my mistress Rādhā’s side;
an expert in a variety of services,
I will be affectionately dressed by her personally
in a skirt and blouse that used to be hers.
Similarly, prayers to Kṛṣṇa for service to Rādhā appear in both SaṅgM (3.39 40) and RRSN (257-260)
(b) metre
In general, the three panegyrical works are written in the same few, mostly longer metres: śārdūlavikrīḍita, sragdharā, mandākrāntā, śikhariṇī, vasantatilaka, pṛthvī and mālinī, RRSN containing rather more mandākrāntā and pṛthvī verses, somewhat fewer sragdharās by roughly the same proportion. VMA and RRSN have approximately the same proportion of 11 and 12 syllable metres. The proportion of gaṇa and anuṣṭubh metres is relatively higher in VMA, somewhat lower in CCA and lowest in RRSN. RRSN is written in only 12 metres, VMA, despite its length, adds only two or three more to this repertoire. There is, however, a noticeable contrast in the metrical composition of these three works as a whole when compared with other stotra-kāvyas (see table) such as Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta (KKA) or Raghunāthadāsa's Vilāpa-kusumāñjali (VKA), a Sanskrit poem which resembles RRSN closely in spirit, or Caitanya-śataka (CŚ) a work which may have influenced the writing of CCA and also shows many signs of KKA's influence. RRSN begins with a sequence of 41 verses in vasanta-tilaka which indicates that perhaps the author set out to write the work in that metre alone before changing into a mixed work. VMA also seems to have been written in a similarly erratic fashion.
(c) figures
(i) It has already been briefly mentioned that Prabodhānanda took much inspiration from Bilvamaṅgala. Bilvamaṅgala's apparent conversion from the path of māyāvāda to a path of devotion to Kṛṣṇa would have made him the ideal role model for Prabodhānanda, similarly a convert. In all three of Prabodhānanda's stotra-kāvyas, the stylistic features of Bilvamaṅgala's work are to be encountered. In particular, the word jyotis frequently appears in RRSN, usually modified by rādhābhidham or some similar adjectives clarifying what is intended by the ambiguous 'effulgence.' Other synonyms of jyotis are found such as mahas, dhāman, etc. Altogether RRSN contains no less than 20 instances of this particular conceit. The same conceit is found repeatedly in the VMA, though mahas is preferred to jyotis in that work. Furthermore, the modifier is more often gaura-nīlam or nīla-pītam or some other adjective indicating both Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. Below is given an example from VMA, (3.30), in which both the words jyotis and mahas are used. It seems that, in general, Prabodhānanda reserved jyotis for the land of Vraja in VMA in order to contrast it more effectively with the spiritual destination of the advaitins, and used mahas for Rādhā Kṛṣṇa.
brahmānanda-mayasya nirmalatamasyāntar mahā-jyotiņo
jyotir bhāgavataṁ cakāsti kim api svānanda-sārojjvalam/
tasyāpy adbhutam antar antar asamorddhvāścarya-mādhurya-bhūr
vṛndāraṇyam iha dvayaṁ bhaja sakhe tad gaura-nīlaṁ mahaḥ//
Within the supremely flawless great light
of spiritual (brahman) ecstasy,
shines the light of the personal god
which is bright with the essence of his own ecstasy;
Wonderfully, deep within that light
is Vṛndā's forest, made of unequalled, wondrous, sweetness;
my friend, worship the pair of luminaries,
gold and blue, that is found there.
This figure plays a part in those stotra-kāvya stanzas which Hardy typifies as 'vision' verses. Such verses contain in their main clause an indefinite pronoun (kim api, ko'pi) with an ambiguous substantive, often kiśora ('a certain youth'), etc., and noticeably in KKA, jyotis, mahas, dhāman, etc., meaning light, a verb meaning 'shine' (bhāti, cakāsti) either in present indicative or optative mood, completed by a locative indicating 'my heart, my mind', etc (mama cetasi, manasi me, etc.). The verse then clarifies the nature of the 'light' or 'youth' by adjectival compounds, or occasionally a subordinate clause. Naturally, this device can be varied in many ways, changing the location, or the type of verb, even including exhortations to remember, etc. Thus, e.g. 'may a certain light (of such and such a nature) shine in my heart.'
This structure is used with such frequency in VMA that only a few examples shall be reproduced from one of its centuries, the sixth śataka. Here Prabodhānanda generally adds a dual word at the end of his compounds (e.g. mithunaṁ, dvayaṁ, dvandvaṁ, etc.): 6.54 (gaura-śyāma-maho-dvayam), 6.55 (dhāma-dvandvam anaṅga-vihvalam), 6.56 (gaura-śyāmaṁ kim api madhuraṁ dhāma-yugmaṁ kiśoram), 6.57 (nitya-kiśora-mohana-maho-dvandvaṁ kim apy adbhutam), 6.59 (gaurāsita-dhāma tad dvayam), 6.60 (kanaka-marakata-śrī-hari divyāṅgayos tan-madhura-madhura-dhāmnoḥ keli-vṛndaṁ kayościt), 6.63 (nava-suhema-campakendīvara-dala-vṛnda-sugaura-nīla-bhāsoḥ), 6.64 (druta-kanaka mahendra-nīla-rocir-dvitaya-mahaḥ), 6.65 (gaura-nīlam ātma-dvayam atikāma-vimohitaṁ kiśoram), 6.72 (gaura-śyāmāṅgakam avirahaṁ yatra bhāti dvi-dhāma), 6.73 (jyotir-dvandvam), 6.77 (gaura-nīla-śrī-dampatyoḥ), etc. etc.
A few examples of this conceit (restricted to the use of synonyms for 'light') can be found in the following verses of RRSN: 44, 66, 71, 96, 99, 126, 134, 137, 151, 157, 158, 174, 178, 187, 195 (kim api hema-gauraṁ mahaḥ), 205, 221, 227, 237, 250, 269. The following are those which do not necessarily use a 'light' word, but deal with Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa together rather than Rādhā alone: 108 (rasika-mithunam), 133 (mithunaṁ... kim api sundaraṁ nandati), 134 (jyotir-dvandvaṁ kim api paramānanda-kandaṁ cakāsti), 141 (kim api nīla-pīta-cchavi vidagdha-mithunam), 145 (nava-kaiśora-mithunaṁ), 187 (kiśoraṁ jyotir-dvandvaṁ kim api paramānanda-kandaṁ cakāsti), 196 (marakata-druta-svarṇa-cchāyaṁ sphuratu mithunaṁ), 197 (tan nīla-pītaṁ mithunaṁ cakāsti), 220 (vidagdha-dvandvam), 221 (jyotir-dvandvaṁ madhura-madhuraṁ prema-kandaṁ cakāsti), 222 (vidagdha-mithunam udeti vṛndāvane), 227 (jyotiḥ-puñja-dvayam, as an adjective describing Rādhā's breasts).
The same structure can be found in CCA, though admittedly to a lesser extent: 4 (kañcid īśam), 15 (paraṁ jyotir gauraṁ kanaka-ruci-cauraṁ), 18 (caitanya nāma paramaṁ kalayāma dhāma), 20 (kim api rasarahasyaṁ dhāma gauraṁ namasye), 45 (mūrtiḥ kācana kāñcanadravamayī), 79 (gaure dhāmani). The indefinite adjective ko'pi with devaḥ, candramāḥ etc. (21, 70, 76, 79, etc.)
(ī) Prabodhānanda is particularly enamoured of the alliterative effect produced by the repetition of the same word. This is another effect which, though not original to him, is used with inordinate frequency, suggesting his identity with the author of RRSN. There are several instances of this conceit in KKA, one which uses the word sīman, another word which is greatly favoured by Prabodhānanda:
cāpalya-sīma capalānubhavaika-sīma
cāturya-sīma caturānana-śilpa-sīma/
saurabhya-sīma sakalādbhuta-keli-sīma
saubhāgya-sīma tad idaṁ vraja-bhāgya-sīma// (KKA 74)
aiśvarya-sīmā yad api bhagavataḥ sad-guṇāścarya-sīmā
līlā-mādhurya-sīmā praṇaya-samada svāda-vaivaśya-sīmā/
saundaryāścarya-sīmā nava-lalita-vayaḥ śrī-camatkāra-sīmā
vṛndāraṇya eva pravilasati yato 'tas tad evāśraye'ham// (VMA 10.73)
premollāsaika-sīmā parama-rasa-camatkāra-vaicitrya-sīmā
saundaryasyaika-sīmā kim api nava-vayo-rūpa-lāvaṇya-sīmā/
līlā-mādhurya-sīmā nija-jana-paramaudārya-vātsalya-sīmā
sā rādhā saukhya-sīmā jayati rati-kalā-keli-mādhurya-sīmā// (RRSN 131)
Similarly, the influence of Mukunda-mālā 2 can be felt in another variety of this figure of repetition. In this case, a number of names of the deity are given in the vocative case, followed by the direct quotation marker iti:
śrī-vallabheti varadeti dayāpareti
bhakti-priyeti bhava-luṇṭhana-kovideti/
nātheti nāga-śayaneti jagannivāsety
ālāpanaṁ pratipadaṁ kuru me mukunda//(Mukundamālā 2)
caitanyeti kṛpāmayeti paramodāreti nānā-vidha
premāveśita-sarva-bhūta-hṛdayety āścarya-dhāmann iti/
gaurāṅgeti guṇārṇaveti rasarūpeti sva-nāma-priyety
aśrāntaṁ mama jalpato janir iyaṁ yāyād iti prārthaye//(CCA 67)
śyāmeti sundara-vareti manohareti
kandarpa-koṭi-laliteti sunāgareti/
sotkaṇṭham ahni gṛṇatī muhur ākulākṣī
sā rādhikā mayi kadā nu bhavet prasannā//(RRSN 38)
These and other variations on the conceit of repetition appear at least 18 times in RRSN. The key words there are: sindhu (18), sāra (26), iti (26), cāturī (64), imā (75), chavi (99), sīmā (131), dhi (136), rādhā (139), kṣaṇa (167, 204), āvinī, (182), āsinī (183), koṭi (212), kvacit (220), nidhi (245), sadā (254). In the CCA it appears also 8 times: koṭi (11, 140), mahā (22), kvacit (37), kṣaṇam (93, 94), iti (98), bahavaḥ (107). The following is a sampling taken from the 5th śataka only of the VMA: koṭi (5.1) kiñcit (5.1), nānā (5.2, 93, 94), paraspara (5.6), mahā (5.11, 55), ananta (5.32), mahā-madhura (5.34), śrī-vṛndāvanam (5.85), anyān anyān (5.96).
(īi) Another type of verse found in the KKA, etc. is one which Hardy calls the 'separation' verse and which the Vai.s.navas call āk.sepa. It is characterized simply by the word kadā or kim and contains a prayer for a vision or for service. This type of verse is found only a few times in the CCA, far more frequently in VMA and RRSN where it forms the basis for the great majority of verses. Frequently, kadā will be used at the beginning of the first foot, kadā vā at the beginning of the third, as in CCA 83, RRSN 138, 175, 192; VMA 17.81 etc.
Only one example is given here: compare these two verses describing separation, one from CCA (83), the other from RRSN 210:
saiveyaṁ bhuvi dhanya gauḍa-nagarī velāpi saivāmbudheḥ
so 'yaṁ śrī-puruņottamo madhu-pates tāny eva nāmāni ca/
no kutrāpi nirīkṣyate hari hari premotsavas tādṛśo
hā caitanya kṛpā-nidhāna tava kiṁ vīkṣe punar vaibhavam?//
This is the same city of Gauḍa, blessed on earth,
this too the very beach of the ocean,
this, the town of Puruņottama (Puri)
and these, those very names of Kṛṣṇa;
but nowhere, alas! can I see the same festival of love.
Ah, Caitanya, source of all compassion,
will I never again see your glories?
aho te 'mī kuñjās tad-anupama-rāsa-sthalam idaṁ
giri-droṇī saiva sphurati rati-raṅge praṇayinī/
na vīkṣe śrī-rādhāṁ hari hari kuto'pīti śatadhā
vidīryeta prāṇeśvari mama kadā hanta hṛdayam//
Ah, these are the very thickets,
and this the incomparable scene of the circle dance,
this the very same mountain cave, so dear, when the two made love -
alas, alas, nowhere do I see Śrī Rādhā.
O mistress of my being! When will my heart tear
into a hundred pieces as I say these words?
(d) Language
What strikes one immediately about the language of all of Prabodhānanda's works, a characteristic which applies equally to the RRSN, is that it is simple and straightforward. However great a scholar Prabodhānanda may have been, in his works of poetry and praise, he had no intention of going out of his way to demonstrate it in the traditional manner of the Sanskrit poet. There are no elaborate exhibitions of paranomasia. There is no obscure vocabulary. There are no complex allusions to mythology, no poetic fancies or metaphors that are not direct and easy to grasp. The poet's message of enthusiastic devotion to Caitanya in Caitanya-candrāmṛtam, to Rādhā in Rādhā-rasa-sudhā-nidhi, to Vṛndāvana in the Vṛndāvana mahimāmṛta all show this same quality. Hyperbole, if considered a fault of Sanskrit poets, does show its face, however, and in each of these works the object of devotion stands supreme and is shown to stand supreme often by the same devices. Though he sometimes strings together lengthy compounds, they often consist of familiar formulae, joining frequently combined superlatives. Although there is no real fixed pattern, the elements of a quintessential Prabodhānanda compound can briefly be summarized by the following table:
Table 2
mahā adbhuta prema laharī
parama āścarya anurāga pīyūņa sindhu
pūrṇa + madhura + praṇaya + rasa+(eka) + sīdhu + ambudhi
sāndra ujjvala mādhurya amṛta nidhi
śuddha camatkāra ānanda mūrti
vapuḥ
The order may be variable, but this vocabulary is so dear to Prabodhānanda, that any cursory examination of his compositions shows many of these favoured word combinations much in evidence. They are similarly very present in RRSN, the title itself being the first example.
Caitanya-candrāmṛta
(1) viśuddha-premonmada-madhura-pīyūņa-laharīm
(12) parama-rasa-camatkāra-mādhurya-sīmām
(17) pūrṇa-prema-rasāmṛtābdhi-laharī-lolāṅga-gaura-cchaṭā...
(20) param apāra-prema-pīyūņa-sindhoḥ
(27) prema-mahā-rasojjvala-pade
(49) pūrṇa-premāmṛta-maya-mahā-jyotir-amalaḥ
(88) sāndrānandojjvala-nava-rasa-prema-pīyūņa-sindhoḥ
(99) caraṇāmbhoja-sravat-projjvala-premānandāmṛtādbhuta-rasān
(102) mahā-premānandojjvala-rasa-vapuḥ
(110) premojjvala-rasa-rahasyāmṛta-nidheḥ
(116) mahāścarya-premojjvala-rasa-sad-āveśa-vivaśīkṛtāṅgāḥ
(116) premojjvala-rasa-rahasyāmṛta-nidheḥ
(119) mahā-praṇaya-sīdhu-sudhā-rasaika-pāthonidhau
(137) prasārita-mahā-prema-pīyūņa-rasa-sāgare
Vṛndāvana-mahimāmṛta
(14.91) premonmāda-rasa-maya-jyotir-ekābdhi-mūrtī
(14.93) adbhuta-rati-kalā-vāridhī Kṛṣṇa-Rādhe śuddha-premojjvala-rasa-tanū
(15.3) ati-rati-rasaikābdhi-magnaṁ
(15.7) praṇaya-rasa-mahāmbodhi-koṭīḥ
(15.8) śyāmānanda-rasaika-sāgara
(15.28) hari-rasotsavānām āścaryonmada-rasa-vilāsotsavam idam
(15.76) premānanda-rasa-camatkāra-sarvasva-dhārā
(15.96) svānandāmṛta-sindhu
(15.97) mahā-rasābdhi-varņam
(15.104) parama-madhuraḥ prema-pīyūņa-sāraḥ
(15.105) kāma-rasaika-sāra-subhagaṁ śyāma-kiśoram
(16.6) mahādbhuta-camatkṛti-prakaṭa-sarva-sad-vaibhavam
(16.7) mahojjvala-mahā-maho madana-gopa-rasaṁ bhaja
(16.10) atyāścaryānanda-sandoha-sāndrā
(16.14) atisvacchair aṅga-cchavi-nava-sudhāmbhodhi-laharī parīvāhair
(16.19) satatodvela-mahā-rasāmbudheḥ
(16.25) viharat-pūrṇa-rasaika-sāgaram
(16.59) anaṅga-rasa-mādhurī-bhara-dhurīṇa-līlā-nidhiḥ
(16.67) mahā-prīti-jyoti-rasa-jala-nidhau
(16.68) viśuddhādya-premātmakaṁ parama-cij-jyotir-amṛtāmbudhi
(16.75) mahā-premānandātmaka-parama-vistīrṇa-jaladhau
(16.80) rādhā-caraṇa-paricaryā-rasa-mahā-mahodhi-
(16.83) mahāścaryaṁ jyotir vapuņi navakaiśoralalite
(16.95) mahā-premā-veśotpulaka-rasa-ghūrṇāyita-tanuḥ
(17.5) apāre śrī-vṛndāvana-mahima-pīyūņa-jaladhau
(17.8) mahojjvala-rasonmada-praṇaya-sindhu-nisyandinī
(17.14) viśuddhādvaitaika-praṇaya-rasa-pīyūņa-jaladhau
(17.32) śuddhojjvala-prema-rasāmṛtābdheḥ
Rādhā-rasa-sudhā-nidhi
(11) pūrṇānurāga-rasa-sāgara-sāra-mūrtiḥ
(13) premāmṛtaika-makaranda-rasaugha-pūrṇam
(18) anurāga-rasaika-sindhuḥ
(22) sat-prema-sindhu-makaranda-rasaugha-dhārā
(25) svānanda-sīdhu-rasa-sindhu-vivardhanendum
(28) premāmṛtāmbudhim agādham
(40) apāra-rasa-sāra-vilāsa-mūrteḥ
(41) pūrṇānurāga-rasa-mūrtiḥ
(46) kṣarad-apāra-rasāmṛtābdhim
(42) adbhuta-rasāmṛta-candrikaughaiḥ
(51) mahā-premonmīlan-nava-rasa-sudhā-sindhu-laharī
(73) prema-sudhā-rasāmbu-nidhī
(92) unmaryāda-pravṛddha-praṇaya-rasa-mahāmbhodhi-gambhīra-līlā
(93) pratikṣaṇa-camatkṛtādbhuta-rasaika-līlā-nidhe
(94) sāndrānanda-ghanānurāga-laharī-nisyanda-pādāmbuja-dvandve
(125) śoṇādhara-śrī-vidhṛta-nava-sudhā-mādhurī-sāra-sindhuḥ
(129) adbhuta-mādhavādhara-sudhā-mādhvīka-saṁsvādanaiḥ
(137) sāndra-premāmṛta-rasa-mahā-sindhu-koṭir
(153) amaryādonmīlat-surata-rasa-pīyūņa-jaladheḥ
(173) hari-mahā-prema-pīyūņa-sindhoḥ
(242) hari-mahā-prema-pīyūņa-sindhoḥ
(212) nava-sudhā-mādhurī-sindhu-koṭi
(236) madhura-rasa-sudhā-sindhu-sārair agādhām
(253) sāndrānandāmṛta-rasa-hrade
(266) yat premāmṛta-sindhu-sāra-rasadaṁ
This selection has been made primarily of lengthier compounds; shorter ones and the same selection of words outside compounds would have lengthened this paper excessively.
A number of other favoured word combinations could been pointed out such as priya-caraṇa-nakha jyotiḥ (CCA 127) or śrī-rādhā pada-nakha-jyotiḥ, found in CCA 68, RRSN 137, 148, 269. Although certain compounds, even some including a few of the key words like rasa-sindhu (36.2, 67.3, 82.1) or rasa-sāgara (52.4, 63.3.5), etc. can be found in CP, or for that matter, most Vaiṣṇava works, there is nothing like the abundant repetition of the same favoured vocabulary found, not only in these three works of Prabodhānanda, but in all his writings. This, more than anything else, constitutes his signature. Thus ARP 170:
śuddhojjvala-premarasaika-śakti tadvat-svarūpau sukha-sāra-rāsī/
tau naḥ kiśorau gaura-nīlau khelāyatāṁ citra-manoja-līlau//
Encountering possible objections
Although not many medieval Vaiṣṇava authors are noted for multilingual compositions, there is no reason to think it impossible for Harivaṁśa write both a stotra-kāvya of deliberately narrow forms as well as a number of hymns in the vernacular, designed to appeal to a wider audience. It may, however, be objected that it would be improper to expect correlations of vocabulary, etc. with another work written in Sanskrit, even if he were indeed the author. It has, however, already been noted that Harivaṁśa's Brajabhāņā is comparatively heavy in Sanskrit tat-sama and tad-bhava words, so a certain amount of similarity in vocabulary, the use of figures, favoured epithets, etc., might well be expected if the two works were both his, particularly since the general subject matter is the same. It has been shown, however, that this is not the case, at least not beyond a minimal degree of coincidence which might well be found with the works of any other Vaiṣṇava of the same period.
RRSN is a work of intense longing for service to Rādhā, whereas CP is more purely descriptive of the loving dalliances of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa without any such emotional relation of the author to the protagonists being directly expressed. If one considers this an unimportant distinction, then one neglects the fact that Harivaṁśa's audience was primarily non Sanskrit speaking (which is borne out by the literature of the sect which is overwhelmingly in Brajabhāņā). One would expect the mood of the RRSN to have penetrated at least one of his many padas, anthologized after his death - even an interpolated verse expressive of the desire to serve Rādhā in a particular way (like the songs of Narottamadāsa) would indicate that his close contemporaries expected such a mood of him. This is, however, not the case.
One may object that stylistic and lexical differences exist between Prabodhānanda's works and RRSN. This may be due to subject matter: praises of Caitanya will not necessarily be expressed in the same vocabulary as praises of Rādhā. Perhaps a more serious objection is that the similarities pointed out above are due to the conventions of the Sanskrit stotra-kāvya genre which, like all Sanskrit poetry, has its own conceits and vocabulary. Though this is easily admitted, a cursory glance at other works of the genre will show remarkable differences, even within the restrictions imposed on the authors by stylistic conventions. And even though it is possible to accept that there are bound to be a certain number of changes in a writer's mannerisms, even throughout his own career, there is a truly remarkable degree of similarity between the various works of Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, to which we must now add RRSN.
Could the similarities found between the works in question not be the result of plagiarism or well intention and perhaps even condoned stylistic imitation rather than identity of authorship? If it could be established who imitated whom, the implications (since imitation is the sincerest form of flattery) for our understanding of the relations between these personalities would certainly be great. As Prabodhānanda's compositional style (in CCA) seems to have been established even before encountering Harivaṁśa, one would have to assume the likelihood of his providing the model copied by the founder of the Rādhā-vallabhī sect, rather than RRSN providing inspiration for Prabodhānanda’s numerous V.rndāvana compositions. However, it is not likely that either of these strong personalities, who came into contact with each other when they were already in their mature years, could have been influenced to the extent that their language, style of composition, etc. could take on the other’s qualities at the expense of their own already well developed individual traits.
Conclusions
If it is accepted that RRSN was indeed written by Prabodhānanda, then the implications are clear: Prabodhānanda can no longer be looked upon as a disciple or follower of Harivaṁśa; rather, he is in the position of influence and his influence, already accepted as being extensive by the Vaiṣṇavas of the Rādhā-vallabhī school, must be seen in a rather more significant light. Even if RRSN is to be considered the work of Harivaṁśa, its great similarity to the works of Prabodhānanda would indicate that Harivaṁśa took his inspiration from Prabodhānanda. In such a case, not dissimilar conclusions would have to be drawn. Harivaṁśa's connection to the Gauḍīya school is thus confirmed. Whether this relation was ritually solemnized through initiation to Prabodhānanda’s disciple Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, though now considerably more believable, is the conclusion which we are able to state with the least conviction.
Explaining how a work by Prabodhānanda came to be known as the composition of Harivaṁśa remains another problem which is not easily answered. Two poems in the CP have the name of Naravāhana in the signature couplet. Snātaka (1968:103) argues that these were in fact written by Harivaṁśa but given as a gift to his dear disciple. He states that this was not an uncommon practice in those days. Could it not then be possible that the same could hold true for the writing of RRSN, that Prabodhānanda, an experienced author of many Sanskrit works, made a gift of this work in order to enhance the prestige of his junior contemporary? Prabodhānanda lent support to Harivaṁśa's evangelical aspirations by writing an aṣṭaka in his honour. A more comprehensive work would have helped to promote the independent movement in which they both believed, but of which Harivaṁśa was the acknowledged leader, for Prabodhānanda as a strict renunciate would have imposed on him severe limitations in the number of disciples that he could take. Indeed, other than Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, we know of no other disciples.
Whatever the case, Prabodhānanda's close relation with Harivaṁśa and his successors could not have been a matter of great joy to the Gauḍīyas, particularly in the atmosphere of increasing sectarianism following the short period of camaraderie which existed between the early 'discoverers' of Braj, the representatives of the different neo Vaiṣṇava schools. Harirāma Vyāsa could sing the glories of Haridāsa Svāmī, Hita Harivaṁśa, Rūpa and Sanātana within a single pada. Rūpa and Sanātana are known to have been on friendly terms with Vallabhācārya's son, Viṭṭhala. It is thus altogether possible that originally Prabodhānanda's close relations with both Harivaṁśa and the Gauḍīyas was univerally accepted. Sectarian feeling appears to have become quite strong by the time of Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja, however. Kṛṣṇadāsa took pains to show that Keśava Kāśmīrī of the Nimbārka school and Vallabhācārya, as well as leaders of other schools, were all defeated in debate or converted by Caitanya. For the Gauḍīyas, Rādhā was only attainable through Caitanya and Kṛṣṇadāsa made a tremendous effort to prove this in CC. For Prabodhānanda to condone Harivaṁśa's independent spirit must have seemed to him (and others surely) like reneging on the grace he had received at the hands of the avatāra. When compounded with a disregard for vidhi there was likely to have been a general feeling of distaste for him and his works. As a result, Prabodhānanda's writings other than CCA (which was already known in Bengal) had only limited circulation amongst the Gauḍīyas. Kṛṣṇadāsa would not even quote a single verse from that work in his CC, though it is impossible that he could have been ignorant of it. One version of RRSN with verses dedicated to Caitanya was preserved and eventually gained currency and even great popularity amongst the Gauḍīyas for its devotion to Rādhā. This work may even have exercised a considerable influence on certain Gauḍīya writers such as Raghunāthadāsa, whose Vilāpakusumāñjali, though stylistically different, follows it closely in spirit. By the same token, though Prabodhānanda is accepted by the Rādhā-vallabhīs as one of their own, the extent of his influence in the sampradāya has never been adequately recognized and the mood and teachings which are his contribution have been credited to Harivaṁśa alone.
FOOTNOTES
(Fn1) 'Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī: from Benares to Braj', First appeared in BSOAS, LV, 1, 1992, 52-75. This article also first appeared in BSOAS, LV, 3, 1992, 472-497)
1. Abbreviations of other titles used here are as follows: ARP = Āścarya rāsa-prabandha; BhP = Bhāgavata-purāṇa; BRK = Bhakti-ratnākara; BRS = Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu; CP = Hita-caurāsī or Caurāsī Pada; CCA = Caitanya-candrāmṛta; CC = Caitanya-caritāmṛta; Gītag = Gīta-govinda; HBV = Hari-bhakti-vilāsa; HC = Harivaṁśa Carita or Hita Carita; KKA = Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta; PV = Prema-vilāsa; SaṅgM = Saṅgīta-mādhava; UN = Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi; VMA = Vṛndāvana-mahimāmṛta.
I should like to express here my special thanks to Dr. Rupert Snell of SOAS for corrections and suggestions which have been of great help in the writing of this article.
2. Published in Ananya Rasika Māla, ed. Lalitāprasāda Purohit, Vrindavan, 1961:99 100.
3. Bhaktakavi Vyāsajī, Agrawāl Press, Mathurā, 1953: 193 194.
4. RRSN, Introduction by Hitadāsa, 30. This anecdote appears in a rather late work by Mīṭhā Bhāī, Cf. Snātaka 1968:92. It is not in the earlier account of HC. Attention is called to note 20 in the previous article where a colophon from Gopāla Bhaṭṭa’s commentary to KKA is quoted. Note that the author of that work, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa claims to be the son of Harivaṁśa, the son of N.rsiṁha. The coincidence of names is not a little unusual.
5. Nāgarīdāsa's Aṣṭaka, Rūpalāla's Vāṇī, Jatanlāl's Rasika Ananya Sāra, etc. Cited, Snātaka (1968:98). Another version is that Rādhā appeared to Harivaṁśa and told him the mantra outright. kṛpā kari Śrī-Rādhā prakaṭa hoya darśana diyo/ apane hita ko jānikai hita soė mantra sunāya diyau//; Uttamadāsa, HC: eka divasa sovata sukha lahyau śrīrādhe supane meā kahyau/ dvāra tihāre pīpara jo hai ūācī ḍāra sabana meė so hai/ tā meė aruna patra ika nyārau jāmai jugala mantra hai mārau/ lehu mantra tuma karahu prakāsa rasika hanana kī pujibahu āsa//
6. Bābā Vṛndāvanadāsa's Śrī-Hitaharivaṁśa-sahasra-nāma, p.11 Rasik Māl, cited in Snātaka, 1968: 97. misra bāga meė kūpa nihārau tāmai dvibhuja svarūpa hamārau/ sundara śyāma bāėsurī lie mama gādī sebahu man diye//
7. (ed.) Sītārām Śaraṇ Bhagavān Prasād, (Lucknow: Tejkumar Press, 1962) chappaya 90.
rādhā-caran pradhān hṛdai ati sudṛḍha upāsī/
kuṁja keli daṁpati tahāñ kī karata khavāsī//
sarvasu mahā-prasād prasidha tāke adhikārī/
vidhi niņedh nahiṁ dās anani utkaṭ vrata-dhārī//
vyāsa-suvan path anusarai soi bhalai pahiṁcāni hai/
śrī harivaṁśa gusāī bhajan kī rīti sakṛt kou jāni hai//
8. in Śrīhita Caurāsī (i.e., CP), (ed.) Lalitācaraṇa Gosvāmī, (Vrindavan: Veṇu Prakāśana, 2nd edn. 1979), 68 9.
9. Translation by Rupert Snell (1991: 23)
10. Second letter; Jo śāstra maryādā satya hai aur guru mahimā aisā hī satya hai to Braja nava taruṇi kadamba cūṇāmaṇi ŚrīRādhe tihāre sthāpe guru mārga viņai aviśvāsa ajñānī ko hota hai. Tāte yaha maryādā rakhanau. Text taken from Snātaka (1968:331).
11. Berhampore edition, 275; Gopāla Bhaṭṭera śiņya yāra yei nāma/ kona deśe kāra vāsa śunaha ākhyāna// Śrīnivāsācārya Gauḍe Harivaṁśa Vrajavāsī/ Gopīnātha pūjāri haya baḍa guṇarāśi/ ŚrīRādhāramaṇa sevā yāre samarpila// ei tina śiņya Bhaṭṭera ākhyāne kahila// guru ājñā nā māniyā gelā Harivaṁśa/ āchila aneka guṇa saba haila dhvaṁsa// This edition has eighteen chapters. The Yaśodālāla Tālukdāra edition of 1913 is the inflated version.
12. Bhaktamāla, 224 5. śrīmān harivaṁśa gosvāmī caritra/ jagate vyāpita haya parama pavitra// śrīmān gopāla bhaṭṭajīra śiņya teāha/ mahābhaktivān teėha rādhā kṛṣṇa premavaha// eka ekādaśī dine tāmbūla prasādi/ khāilā baliyā guru kailā aparādhī// antare gosāñi ruṣṭa nāhi ta hailā/ bāhya lokaśikṣā hetu śāsana karilā// harivaṁśa gosāñira śiņya anukrame/ ebe rādhāvallabhī gosāñi vrajadhāme// śrīmān gopāla bhaṭṭa tāhāte praṇālī/ phirāilā ki hetuka nā jāni ki bali// ye hetuka anya anya sampradāya sane/ vyavahāra āhāra paramārthe nāhi bane// viccheda haila eka pataṅga nā haya/ rājā jayasiṁha bahu vicāra karaya// se saba kahāte ebe phala kichu nāi/ koṭi koṭi daṇḍavat sabhākāra ṭhāi// The translation above is from Snell (1984: 26) who credits it to Tarapada Mukherjee.
13. This reference is not available, even in secondary sources. Snātaka discusses the issue (1968:97 9, 113 7)
14. Guṇamañjarīdāsa, Śrī-Gopāla-bhaṭṭa-śataka (Vrindavan, 1908). Birth, p.2: VS. 1555; Death, p.23, VS 1642; establishment of Rādhāramaṇa, Vaiśākha-pūrṇimā VS 1599 (p.7). This author, a Gosvāmī of the Rādhāramaṇa family writing in the late nineteenth century, indicates that the Rādhā-ramaṇa house accepts the tradition that Hita Harivaṁśa was Gopāla Bhaṭṭa’s disciple (p.56).
15. See R. Snell's notes on CP 40.6 and 65.4.
16. Snell (1984:492 9) compares a number of commentaries on certain padas of CP and concludes that RRSN is the dogmatic source for the interpretative tradition. Since the purpose of this article is to ascertain the authorship of this work, we intend to use only CP as the authoritative indicator of Harivaṁśa's doctrinal position.
17. in Vāsudeva Gosvāmī (1951:193).
18. HBV, 13.
19. See the discussion in S. K. De (1942: 104 7). BRK, 1.800 1; karite vaiṣṇava smṛti haila bhaṭṭa mana/...gopālera nāme śrī gosvāmī sanātana/ karila hari-bhakti-vilāsa varṇana//, etc.
20. The same scene is portrayed in RRSN 5, 112, 201, 209, 233, See also the māna verses of CP.
21. Rūpa Gosvāmī, in his BRS identifies the qualification for rāgānugā bhakti as the 'non dependance on scriptural injunctions or logical argument' (tat-tad-bhāvādi-mādhurye śrute dhīr yad apekṣate/ nātra śāstraṁ na yuktiṁ ca tal lobhotpatti-lakṣaṇam// i.2.292).
22. Kṛṣṇavallabha commentary on verse 3.
23. Ramakanta Chakravarty, Vaiṣṇavism in Bengal (Calcutta: Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar, 1985), 308.
24. tau santoņayatā santau śrīla-rūpa-sanātanau/ dākṣiṇātyena bhaṭṭena punar etad vivicyate// tasyādyaṁ granthanālekhaṁ krānta-vyutkrānta-khaṇḍitam/ paryālocyātha paryāyaṁ kṛtvā likhati jīvakaḥ// These two verses introduce each of the six volumes of this work.
25. See Kṛṣṇa-sandarbha, para.171ff.
26. Viz. Śrīvatsa Gosvāmī, 'Rādhā, the play and perfection of rasa' in The Divine Consort, (ed.) J. S. Hawley and D. M. Wulffe, (New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984), 72 88. For a fuller discussion of Jīva’s svakīyā-vāda, see this author’s article “Does Kṛṣṇa marry the gopīs in the end?” in The Journal of Vai.sṇava Studies, 5.4, Fall 1997, 49-110.
27. 'A vernacular portrait: Rādhā in the Sūr Sāgar' in The Divine Consort, (ed.) Hawley and Wulff, 42 56, esp. 53.
28. i.7.126; tathāpi sambhoga-sukhād api stutaḥ sa ko'py anirvācyatamo manoramaḥ/ pramoda-rāśiḥ pariṇāmato dhruvaṁ tatra sphuret tad rasikaika-vedyaḥ//
29. Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta, ī.6.352 355.
30. Antya 1.66 67: Kṛṣṇake bāhira nāhi kariha Braja haite/ Braja chāḍi Kṛṣṇa kabhu nā yāya kāhāėte// This is followed by a quote from Yamala.
31. Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta 1.5.461: Kṛṣṇo 'nyo Yadusambhūto yas tu Gopendranandanaḥ/ Vṛndāvanaṁ parityajya sa kvacin naiva gacchati//; UN (Haridāsa Dāsa edition) 15.185 7: atha saṁyoga-viyoga-sthitiḥ. harer līlā-viśeņasya prakaṭasyānusārataḥ/ varṇitā virahāvasthā goṣṭha-vāma-bhruvām asau// vṛndāraṇye viharatā sadā rāsādi-vibhramaiḥ/ hariṇā vraja-devīnāṁ viraho 'sti na karhicit// tathā ca pādme pātāla-khaṇḍe mathurā-māhātmye: go-gopa-gopikā-saṅge yatra krīḍati kaṁsahā//; Padyāvalī, (ed.) S. K. De, (Dacca, 1934).
32. The words nitya-vihāra are repeated several times in GC ii.29.111: tad ittham ākhyātaṁ mama vyākhyā. Yat khalvayaṁ daśama-skandhāntarvartī śrī-śuka-siddhāntas tatra cātra ca tasya vicchedaṁ nirasya nitya-vihāram eva vyāharati. Also, GC ii.29.113, 116.
33. vidagdhānāṁ mitho līlā-vilāsena yathā sukham/ na tathā samprayogeṇa syād evaṁ rasikā viduḥ// UN, 15.253.
34. See in particular 2.1, 4.1 10.
35. (ed.) Śyāmācaraṇa Kaviratna, (Calcutta, 1911), 1329. evam ekāntināṁ prāyaḥ kīrtanaṁ smaraṇaṁ prabhoḥ/ kurvatāṁ parama-prītyā kṛtyam anyaṁ na rocayet// bhāvena kenacit preṣṭha-śrī-mūrter aṅghri-sevane/ syād iccaiņāṁ sva-mantreṇa svarasenaiva tad-vidhiḥ// vihiteņv eva nityeṣu pravartante svayaṁ hi te/ ity ādy ekāntināṁ bhāti māhātmyaṁ likhitaṁ hi tat//
36. In 1888, the Rādhāramaṇa sevāyata Rādhācaraṇa Gosvāmī wrote a book called Śrī-Caitanya-carita-sāra in which he wrote that Gopāla Bhaṭṭa was spiritual master of Hita Harivaṁśa. He was taken to court, and on the 5th of October of that year was judged guilty of defamation. He was made to pay a 5 rupee fine and revoke his claims with an apology, saying he had no proof. Snātaka (1968:98 99) has taken this information from a Hindi work by Gopālaprasāda Śarmā called Bhramoccheda about which he gives no further information.
37. Snātaka (1968: 324 30) makes a concerted effort to show that these are Harivaṁśa's own compositions. Snell (1985: 464 69) suggests that they are more likely to come from the body of anonymous literature from which both the compilers of CP and Sūrasāgara drew.
38. Hita-caurāsī aur uskī Premadāsa kṛta Vrajabhāņā ṭīkā, (ed.) Vijay Pāl Siṁha and Candrabhān Rāvat, (Kāśī: Nāgarī Pracāriṇī Sabhā, 1971). The list is somewhat arbitrary. Snātaka gives a somewhat different breakdown (1968: 294), significantly omitting dāna (51), even though this song starts with the line, dāna dai rī navala kiśorī...
39. See also CP 11, 18; RRSN 10.
40. Harivaṁśa's affinity for Gītag is pointed out by Harirāma Vyāsa: baḍe rasika jayadeva bakhānī, līlā amṛta cucāta/ vṛndāvana harivaṁsa prasaṁsita, suni gaurī musikāta//, Vāsudeva Gosvāmī (1951: 195).
41. CP, 20, mere prāṇa-nātha Śrī-Śyāmā sapatha karauė tṛṇa chiye etc.
42. CP, 24.4, śrabaṇa phuṭau jo anasunauė bina Rādhā yaśa baina.
43. (ed.) Bābā Hitadāsa, Jabalpur: Narmadā Printing Works, 1950. The earlier verses of this work are similar to those found at the beginning of the mañjarī's speech in SaṅgM (2.2).
44. In this article, references to RRSN follow the Gauḍīya recension. Verses in the Rādhā-vallabhī recensions will be one figure lower.
45. 1942:99; the references given by him are vī.1464 5; p.131, 239; vī. p.230; Notices, 2nd series, i. p.384. 46. See for example: 1.12, 1.61, 2.58, etc.
47. sad-yogīndra-sudṛśya-sāndra-rasadānandaika-san-mūrtayaḥ
sarve 'py adbhuta-san-mahimni madhure vṛndāvane saṅgatāḥ/
ye krūrā api pāpino na ca satāṁ sambhāņya-dṛśyāś ca ye
sarvān vastutayā nirīkṣya paramasvārādhyabuddhir mama//RRSN 265
48. e.g. Kṛṣṇa seeing himself reflected in Rādhā's bright golden skin is also found both in Subhāņita-ratna-kośa 4.44 and RRSN 246.
49. samasta-veda-mastakair agamya-vaibhavāṁ sadā
mahā-munīndra-nāradādibhiḥ sadaiva bhāvitām/
atulya-pāmarair api śritāṁ pumartha-sāradāṁ
bhaje kalinda-nandinīṁ duranta-moham añjanīm//, in Bṛhat-stotra-muktāhāra, vol.2, Ahmedabad: Gujarat Printing Press, 1916: 419 20.
Prabodhananda Saraswati: From Benares to Braj (Part II)
Prabodhananda, Hit Harivansh and the Radha-rasa-sudha-nidhi (Part I)
Prabodhananda, Hit Harivansh and the Radha-rasa-sudha-nidhi (Part II)
Similarities between RRSN and Prabodhānanda's works
We now turn to a comparison of RRSN with Prabodhānanda's writings. In particular we shall look at the three stotra kāvya works, CCA, VMA and RRSN, which are generically similar. We shall on occasion, however, also look at some of Prabodhānanda's other metrical works, in particular SaṅgM and ARP. None of the three stotra kāvyas conform to any clear structure as a whole, though on occasion certain verse sequences may be found to have some kind of unity, either metrical or semantic. Such sequences are rather more extended in VMA, the longest work, and less so in CCA, the shortest. Each of these works, being panegyrics to their chosen object of worship have a certain stylistic similarity perhaps attributable to the genre itself. There are, to be sure, differences, some of which might be attributable to the content: Caitanya is described in terms of what he had done and the effects that he produced; Vrindavan is a place, and much of the content describes the wonderful flora and fauna of the dhāman and its nature as a place naturally requires that it be treated in terms slightly different from those used for a person. In all of these works, Rādhā is to some degree or another placed in a category by herself, and service to her is the parama-pum-artha spoken of in numerous verses of CCA (compare RRSN 3, 95, 144). With this in mind, if the author of all three works were one and the same individual, it would be expected that he would have reserved the best of his creative energy for a panegyric to the ultimate object of his devotion. Thus, even though stylistic similarities can be pointed out in the three works, it must nevertheless be accepted that RRSN is indeed the superior composition with greater consistency of literary quality throughout.
(a) Content
Scholars adhering to the Gauḍīya school have pointed to certain exact correlations in content between RRSN and the other works of Prabodhānanda. A few examples of the most salient similarities are given here.
(i) The two following verses are almost exactly the same:
gatā dūre gāvo dinam api turīyāṁśam abhajad
vayaṁ kṣutkṣāmāḥ smas tava ca jananī vartmanayanā/
akasmāt tūṣṇīke sajalanayane dīnavadane
tvayi tyaktvā khelāṁ nahi nahi vayaṁ prāṇiniṣavaḥ// (SaṅgM 4.8)
gatā dūre gāvo dinam api turīyāṁśam abhajad
vayaṁ yātuṁ kṣāntās tava ca jananī vartma-nayanā/
akasmāt tūṣṇīke sajala-nayane dīna-vadane
luṭhaty asyāṁ bhūmau tvayi nahi vayaṁ prāṇiniṣavaḥ// (RRSN 229)
The cows have gone far away,
the day too has entered its third quarter,
we are waiting to go, [or we are wasting from hunger]
and your mother is watching the path [for you];
now suddenly you have fallen silent,
your eyes have filled with tears
and your face is filled with sadness
and you have fallen to the ground
[or after giving up playing with us ]
no, we do not wish to go on living.
This verse and the two prior to it in RRSN are somewhat out of context, as they are purely descriptive, containing no prayer, blessing or 'vision' markers. It may well be that it was later adopted in the SaṅgM which does have the semblance of a continuous plot, or that it was borrowed from that work.
(ii) The author of RRSN shows a devotion for Rādhā's name, which Kṛṣṇa himself chants. The same image is found in the writings of Prabodhānanda:
yaj-jāpaḥ sakṛd eva gokula-pateḥ...
yan-nāmāṅkita-mantra-jāpana-paraḥ prītyā svayaṁ mādhavaḥ
śrī-kṛṣṇo 'pi tad adbhutaṁ sphuratu me rādheti varṇa-dvayam. (RRSN 95);
rādhā-keli-nikuñja vīthiṣu caran rādhābhidhām uccaran (RRSN 139);
rādhety evaṁ japa tad aniśaṁ sārtha-saṁsmṛty-ananyaḥ (VMA 15.75);
rādhā rādhety avirata-jāpaḥ prāṭati (ARP 97).
This is paralleled by a devotion for Kṛṣṇa's name:
ati-snehād uccair api ca hari-nāmāni gṛṇataḥ...
parānandaṁ vṛndāvanam anucarantaṁ ca dadhato
mano me rādhāyāḥ pada-mṛdula-padme nivasatu (RRSN 55);
hare kṛṣṇa kṛṣṇeti kṛṣṇeti mukhyān...
kadābhyasya vṛndāvane syāṁ kṛtārthaḥ (VMA 17.89);
rādhāvat kṛṣṇa-nāmābhidadhad iha śamī tiṣṭha vṛndāvane 'taḥ (VMA 8.43)
The following verse from RRSN illustrating Rādhā's devotion to Kṛṣṇa's name is similar in spirit to a Prabodhānanda verse describing Caitanya's devotion to it.
śyāma śyāmety anupama-rasā-pūrṇa-varṇair japantī
sthitvā sthitvā madhura-madhurottāram uccārayantī/
muktā-sthūlān nayana-galitān aśru-bindūn vahantī
hṛņyad-romā pratipada-camat-kurvatī pātu rādhā//(RRSN 218)
May Rādhā deliver you, astonishing you at every step,
her bodily hairs horripilating,
teardrops as large as pearls flowing from her eyes,
chanting the words, 'Śyāma, Śyāma',
completely filled with incomparable flavour,
stopping after some time to pronounce them aloud
in a voice sweeter than sweet.
badhnan prema-bhara-prakampita-karo granthīn kaṭī-ḍorakaiḥ
saṅkhyātuṁ nija-loka-maṅgala-hare-kṛṣṇeti-nāmnāṁ japan/
aśru-snāta-mukhaḥ svam eva hi jagannāthaṁ didṛkṣur gatā
yātair gaura-tanur vilocana-mudaṁ tanvan hariḥ pātu vaḥ//(CCA 9)
May the golden bodied Hari deliver you,
bringing joy to your eyes by his pacing back and forth,
his face bathed in tears from his desire to see Jagannātha.
To count the world saving Hare Kṛṣṇa names which he chants,
he ties knots in a rope tied around his waist
with a love-filled, shaking hand.
(iii) A prayer for the engagement of all the senses in the service of Kṛṣṇa, which appears several times in BhP (e.g. ix.4.18 21 and x.10.38) is another theme found both of Vrindavan as well of Rādhā.
rādhā-nāma-sudhā-rasaṁ rasayituṁ jihvāstu me vihvalā
pādau tat-pada-kāṅkitāsu caratāṁ vṛndāṭavī-vīthiṣu/
tat-karmaiva karaḥ karotu hṛdayaṁ tasyāḥ padaṁ dhyāyatāṁ
tad-bhāvotsavataḥ paraṁ bhavatu me tat-prāṇa-nāthe ratiḥ//(RRSN 142)
May my tongue become helpless
as it relishes the taste of the nectar of Rādhā's name;
may my feet wander over the paths of Vṛndā’s forest
which are marked with her footprints;
may my hands be engaged in her work
and my heart in meditating on her feet --
O that I may become absorbed in her festive mood
and thus have love for the Lord of her life.
śrī-vṛndāvana-vandanāya satataṁ mūrdhāstu bahv-ādarī
jihvā vihvalatām upaitu satataṁ tat-sad-guṇotkīrtane/
hastau tan nava-kuñja-mārjana-vidhau pādau ca tatrāṭane
śrotre tan-mahima-śrutau dṛśi dṛśau nityaṁ smṛtau stān manaḥ// (VMA 7.49)
May my head find its purpose
by constantly bowing down to Śrī Vṛndāvana;
may my tongue become helpless
in constantly chanting its wondrous glories;
may my hands be used in cleaning its groves
and my feet in wandering throughout its territory,
may my ears be engaged in always hearing its fame,
my eyes in seeing it
and my mind in meditation on it.
The use of the word vihvalā in both verses is striking. The prayer for the service of sweeping the kuñja mentioned in VMA 7.49 is found several times in RRSN (8, 164, 180, 202, 243). Other verses written in this style include RRSN 106.
(iv) Numerous examples could be given of prayers for other types of service in the two works; only one or two more shall be given here. Compare the two following prayers for the service of massaging the feet of the couple in the kuñja after lovemaking,
mithaḥ-premāveśād ghana-pulaka-dor-valli-racita
pragāḍhāśleņeṇotsava-rasa-bharonmīlita-dṛśau/
nikuñja-kĸpte vai nava-kusuma-talpe 'bhiśayitau
kadā pat-saṁvāhādibhir aham adhīśau nu sukhaye// (RRSN 194)
Deeply absorbed in a perfectly reciprocated love
their eyes are wide open from the ecstatic festival of delights
arising from the tight embrace
of their intertwining, vine-like arms
covered with thick horripilation;
lying on a bed of fresh blossoms in the forest bower
are my Lord and Lady --
when will I bring them pleasure by massaging their feet?
kadā vā kālindī-taṭa-nikaṭa-vṛndāvana-latā
nikuñjāntaṁ suptaṁ tadati-sarasaṁ preṣṭha-mithunam/
mitho gāḍhāśliṣṭaṁ mṛdu mṛdu mayā lālita-padaṁ
mudā vīkṣye svapne 'py ahaha sukha-nidrāṁ gatam aham//VMA 17.114
And when will that day come
when that beloved couple, so filled with sacred rapture,
lay sleeping by the shores of the Kalindī
within the kuñja of Vrindavan creepers;
tightly intertwined in each other's arms
I will gently cradle their feet
and watch as they drift off
into peaceful slumber.
Another verse of this type is RRSN 17. Prayers to hear a Vrindavan parrot repeating the lovers' conversation of the previous night are similarly found in these same two works:
mat-kaṇṭhe kiṁ nakha-śikharayā daitya-rājo'smi nāhaṁ
maivaṁ pīḍāṁ kuru kuca-taṭe pūtanā nāham asmi/
itthaṁ kīrair anukṛta-vacaḥ preyasā saṅgatāyāḥ
prātaḥ śroņye tava sakhi kadā keli-kuñjaṁ mṛjantī// (RRSN 164)
“Why are you scratching my neck with your claws?
I am not Hiraṇyakaśipu!
And why are you tugging on my breasts?
Do you think that I am Pūtanā?”
O Rādhā, beloved friend! When will I hear your words
overheard and recited by a mynah bird
as I clean your love-bower
on the morning after your dalliances.
kiṁ māṁ khedayase vimuñca vasanaṁ talpottame 'smin sukhen
āgatya svapihi tyaja tyaja bhujaṁ śliņyāmi kānte sakṛt/
āḥ kiṁ nirdaya muñca muñca na kim apy āpīḍaye rādhikā
kṛṣṇālāpam imaṁ kadā nu śṛṇuyāṁ vṛndāṭavī-kīrataḥ// (VMA 17.106)
“Why are you harrassing me?”
“Drop your clothes on the delicious bed,
come here happily and sleep.”
“Leave me alone, leave my arm alone.”
“O beloved one, let me just embrace you once.”
“Merciless one! Let me go, let me go!”
“I am not hurting you at all.”
When will I hear this conversation
of Rādhā and K.r.sṇa as overheard
and recited by a V.rndâvana mynah.
(v) Prabodhānanda's proclivity for using language reminiscent of Advaita philosophy has been emphasized in our previous discussions of both CCA and VMA. This tendency is not absent from the RRSN and references to brahma-vāda are found there in verse 148 which is comparable to CCA 98 and 107. 'Some people are exclusively interested in brahman, etc., but...' The author of RRSN (84) says he is afraid of kaivalyam just as the author of the CCA calls it hellish (95).
(vi) Another conceit recurring again and again in Prabodhānanda's writing is that in which he states that perfection is beyond the great gods, or even Śuka, the speaker of the BhP.
CCA 2 (śrīśa-brahmādy-agamyā), 7 (govinda-prema-bhājām api yan na kalitam), 24 (bhrāntaṁ yatra munīśvaraiḥ), 34 (aparicita-pūrvaṁ muni-varaiḥ), 51 (śiva-brahmādīnām api ca su-mahā-vismṛti-bhṛtām), 62 (mṛgyāpi sā śiva-śukoddhava-nāradādyaiḥ), 79 (śiva-brahmādy-alabhye), 95 (vidhi-mahendrādiś ca kīṭāyate), 99 (brahmādīṁś ca hasanti nātibahu-manyante mahā-vaiṣṇavān), 132 (brahmeśādi-mahāścarya mahimāpi).
VMA 1.2 (īśo 'pi); 2.36 (śrī-śaṅkara-druhiṇa-mukhya-surendra vṛnda-durjñeya ), 17.15 (śrī-śuka-nāradādy-akalite), 17.60 (śrīśa-śukārjunoddhava-mukhāḥ paśyanti yan na kvacit).
RRSN 2 (yogīndra-durgama-gatiḥ), 3 (brahmeśvarādi-sudurūha padāravinda), 4, (brahma-rudra-śuka-nārada-bhīņma-mukhyair alakṣito), 40 (brahmādi-durgama-gateḥ), 73 (nahi prāpur brahma-śivādayo 'pi), 84 (pareśa-bhajanonmadā yadi śukādayaḥ kiṁ tataḥ), 86 (lakṣmī-śuka nāradādi), 97 (devānām atha bhakta-mukta-suhṛdām atyanta-dūraṁ ca yat), 239 (yan nāradājeśa-śukair agamyam), 240 (sambhāvyo 'pi viriñci-nārada-śiva-svāyambhuvādyair na yaḥ).
(vī) Beside simply describing the different types of service to Rādhā, Prabodhānanda likes to describe the appearance of the sakhīs who serve her. Thus VMA's eighth century contains an extended description of their bodily features. SaṅgM 3.40 is a description of the sakhī after receiving the blessing of the divine couple. Compare the following verse to RRSN 53 which is the author's meditation on his own feminine form; both contain the same third ligne:
atha śrī-govinde vikasad-aravindekṣaṇa-lasat
kṛpā-dṛṣṭyāpūrva-praṇaya-rasa-vṛṣṭyā snapayati/
sthitā nityaṁ pārśve vividha-paricaryaika-caturā
na keņāñcid dṛśyaṁ rasika-mithunaṁ sā śritavatī//SaṅgM 3.41
And then, after Govinda had bathed her
in a downpour of incomparable affection
falling from the merciful glance
of his blooming lotus eyes,
she took shelter of the Divine Couple,
invisible to the rest of the world,
and remained always by their side,
an expert in a variety of services.
dukūlaṁ bibhrāṇām atha kuca-taṭe kañcuka-paṭaṁ
prasādaṁ svāminyāḥ sva-kara-tala-dattaṁ praṇayataḥ/
sthitāṁ nityaṁ pārśve vividha-paricaryaika-caturāṁ
kiśorīm ātmānaṁ kim iha su-kumārīṁ nu kalaye//RRSN 53.
When will I envision myself as a beautiful young girl
always standing by my mistress Rādhā’s side;
an expert in a variety of services,
I will be affectionately dressed by her personally
in a skirt and blouse that used to be hers.
Similarly, prayers to Kṛṣṇa for service to Rādhā appear in both SaṅgM (3.39 40) and RRSN (257-260)
(b) metre
In general, the three panegyrical works are written in the same few, mostly longer metres: śārdūlavikrīḍita, sragdharā, mandākrāntā, śikhariṇī, vasantatilaka, pṛthvī and mālinī, RRSN containing rather more mandākrāntā and pṛthvī verses, somewhat fewer sragdharās by roughly the same proportion. VMA and RRSN have approximately the same proportion of 11 and 12 syllable metres. The proportion of gaṇa and anuṣṭubh metres is relatively higher in VMA, somewhat lower in CCA and lowest in RRSN. RRSN is written in only 12 metres, VMA, despite its length, adds only two or three more to this repertoire. There is, however, a noticeable contrast in the metrical composition of these three works as a whole when compared with other stotra-kāvyas (see table) such as Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta (KKA) or Raghunāthadāsa's Vilāpa-kusumāñjali (VKA), a Sanskrit poem which resembles RRSN closely in spirit, or Caitanya-śataka (CŚ) a work which may have influenced the writing of CCA and also shows many signs of KKA's influence. RRSN begins with a sequence of 41 verses in vasanta-tilaka which indicates that perhaps the author set out to write the work in that metre alone before changing into a mixed work. VMA also seems to have been written in a similarly erratic fashion.
(c) figures
(i) It has already been briefly mentioned that Prabodhānanda took much inspiration from Bilvamaṅgala. Bilvamaṅgala's apparent conversion from the path of māyāvāda to a path of devotion to Kṛṣṇa would have made him the ideal role model for Prabodhānanda, similarly a convert. In all three of Prabodhānanda's stotra-kāvyas, the stylistic features of Bilvamaṅgala's work are to be encountered. In particular, the word jyotis frequently appears in RRSN, usually modified by rādhābhidham or some similar adjectives clarifying what is intended by the ambiguous 'effulgence.' Other synonyms of jyotis are found such as mahas, dhāman, etc. Altogether RRSN contains no less than 20 instances of this particular conceit. The same conceit is found repeatedly in the VMA, though mahas is preferred to jyotis in that work. Furthermore, the modifier is more often gaura-nīlam or nīla-pītam or some other adjective indicating both Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. Below is given an example from VMA, (3.30), in which both the words jyotis and mahas are used. It seems that, in general, Prabodhānanda reserved jyotis for the land of Vraja in VMA in order to contrast it more effectively with the spiritual destination of the advaitins, and used mahas for Rādhā Kṛṣṇa.
brahmānanda-mayasya nirmalatamasyāntar mahā-jyotiņo
jyotir bhāgavataṁ cakāsti kim api svānanda-sārojjvalam/
tasyāpy adbhutam antar antar asamorddhvāścarya-mādhurya-bhūr
vṛndāraṇyam iha dvayaṁ bhaja sakhe tad gaura-nīlaṁ mahaḥ//
Within the supremely flawless great light
of spiritual (brahman) ecstasy,
shines the light of the personal god
which is bright with the essence of his own ecstasy;
Wonderfully, deep within that light
is Vṛndā's forest, made of unequalled, wondrous, sweetness;
my friend, worship the pair of luminaries,
gold and blue, that is found there.
This figure plays a part in those stotra-kāvya stanzas which Hardy typifies as 'vision' verses. Such verses contain in their main clause an indefinite pronoun (kim api, ko'pi) with an ambiguous substantive, often kiśora ('a certain youth'), etc., and noticeably in KKA, jyotis, mahas, dhāman, etc., meaning light, a verb meaning 'shine' (bhāti, cakāsti) either in present indicative or optative mood, completed by a locative indicating 'my heart, my mind', etc (mama cetasi, manasi me, etc.). The verse then clarifies the nature of the 'light' or 'youth' by adjectival compounds, or occasionally a subordinate clause. Naturally, this device can be varied in many ways, changing the location, or the type of verb, even including exhortations to remember, etc. Thus, e.g. 'may a certain light (of such and such a nature) shine in my heart.'
This structure is used with such frequency in VMA that only a few examples shall be reproduced from one of its centuries, the sixth śataka. Here Prabodhānanda generally adds a dual word at the end of his compounds (e.g. mithunaṁ, dvayaṁ, dvandvaṁ, etc.): 6.54 (gaura-śyāma-maho-dvayam), 6.55 (dhāma-dvandvam anaṅga-vihvalam), 6.56 (gaura-śyāmaṁ kim api madhuraṁ dhāma-yugmaṁ kiśoram), 6.57 (nitya-kiśora-mohana-maho-dvandvaṁ kim apy adbhutam), 6.59 (gaurāsita-dhāma tad dvayam), 6.60 (kanaka-marakata-śrī-hari divyāṅgayos tan-madhura-madhura-dhāmnoḥ keli-vṛndaṁ kayościt), 6.63 (nava-suhema-campakendīvara-dala-vṛnda-sugaura-nīla-bhāsoḥ), 6.64 (druta-kanaka mahendra-nīla-rocir-dvitaya-mahaḥ), 6.65 (gaura-nīlam ātma-dvayam atikāma-vimohitaṁ kiśoram), 6.72 (gaura-śyāmāṅgakam avirahaṁ yatra bhāti dvi-dhāma), 6.73 (jyotir-dvandvam), 6.77 (gaura-nīla-śrī-dampatyoḥ), etc. etc.
A few examples of this conceit (restricted to the use of synonyms for 'light') can be found in the following verses of RRSN: 44, 66, 71, 96, 99, 126, 134, 137, 151, 157, 158, 174, 178, 187, 195 (kim api hema-gauraṁ mahaḥ), 205, 221, 227, 237, 250, 269. The following are those which do not necessarily use a 'light' word, but deal with Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa together rather than Rādhā alone: 108 (rasika-mithunam), 133 (mithunaṁ... kim api sundaraṁ nandati), 134 (jyotir-dvandvaṁ kim api paramānanda-kandaṁ cakāsti), 141 (kim api nīla-pīta-cchavi vidagdha-mithunam), 145 (nava-kaiśora-mithunaṁ), 187 (kiśoraṁ jyotir-dvandvaṁ kim api paramānanda-kandaṁ cakāsti), 196 (marakata-druta-svarṇa-cchāyaṁ sphuratu mithunaṁ), 197 (tan nīla-pītaṁ mithunaṁ cakāsti), 220 (vidagdha-dvandvam), 221 (jyotir-dvandvaṁ madhura-madhuraṁ prema-kandaṁ cakāsti), 222 (vidagdha-mithunam udeti vṛndāvane), 227 (jyotiḥ-puñja-dvayam, as an adjective describing Rādhā's breasts).
The same structure can be found in CCA, though admittedly to a lesser extent: 4 (kañcid īśam), 15 (paraṁ jyotir gauraṁ kanaka-ruci-cauraṁ), 18 (caitanya nāma paramaṁ kalayāma dhāma), 20 (kim api rasarahasyaṁ dhāma gauraṁ namasye), 45 (mūrtiḥ kācana kāñcanadravamayī), 79 (gaure dhāmani). The indefinite adjective ko'pi with devaḥ, candramāḥ etc. (21, 70, 76, 79, etc.)
(ī) Prabodhānanda is particularly enamoured of the alliterative effect produced by the repetition of the same word. This is another effect which, though not original to him, is used with inordinate frequency, suggesting his identity with the author of RRSN. There are several instances of this conceit in KKA, one which uses the word sīman, another word which is greatly favoured by Prabodhānanda:
cāpalya-sīma capalānubhavaika-sīma
cāturya-sīma caturānana-śilpa-sīma/
saurabhya-sīma sakalādbhuta-keli-sīma
saubhāgya-sīma tad idaṁ vraja-bhāgya-sīma// (KKA 74)
aiśvarya-sīmā yad api bhagavataḥ sad-guṇāścarya-sīmā
līlā-mādhurya-sīmā praṇaya-samada svāda-vaivaśya-sīmā/
saundaryāścarya-sīmā nava-lalita-vayaḥ śrī-camatkāra-sīmā
vṛndāraṇya eva pravilasati yato 'tas tad evāśraye'ham// (VMA 10.73)
premollāsaika-sīmā parama-rasa-camatkāra-vaicitrya-sīmā
saundaryasyaika-sīmā kim api nava-vayo-rūpa-lāvaṇya-sīmā/
līlā-mādhurya-sīmā nija-jana-paramaudārya-vātsalya-sīmā
sā rādhā saukhya-sīmā jayati rati-kalā-keli-mādhurya-sīmā// (RRSN 131)
Similarly, the influence of Mukunda-mālā 2 can be felt in another variety of this figure of repetition. In this case, a number of names of the deity are given in the vocative case, followed by the direct quotation marker iti:
śrī-vallabheti varadeti dayāpareti
bhakti-priyeti bhava-luṇṭhana-kovideti/
nātheti nāga-śayaneti jagannivāsety
ālāpanaṁ pratipadaṁ kuru me mukunda//(Mukundamālā 2)
caitanyeti kṛpāmayeti paramodāreti nānā-vidha
premāveśita-sarva-bhūta-hṛdayety āścarya-dhāmann iti/
gaurāṅgeti guṇārṇaveti rasarūpeti sva-nāma-priyety
aśrāntaṁ mama jalpato janir iyaṁ yāyād iti prārthaye//(CCA 67)
śyāmeti sundara-vareti manohareti
kandarpa-koṭi-laliteti sunāgareti/
sotkaṇṭham ahni gṛṇatī muhur ākulākṣī
sā rādhikā mayi kadā nu bhavet prasannā//(RRSN 38)
These and other variations on the conceit of repetition appear at least 18 times in RRSN. The key words there are: sindhu (18), sāra (26), iti (26), cāturī (64), imā (75), chavi (99), sīmā (131), dhi (136), rādhā (139), kṣaṇa (167, 204), āvinī, (182), āsinī (183), koṭi (212), kvacit (220), nidhi (245), sadā (254). In the CCA it appears also 8 times: koṭi (11, 140), mahā (22), kvacit (37), kṣaṇam (93, 94), iti (98), bahavaḥ (107). The following is a sampling taken from the 5th śataka only of the VMA: koṭi (5.1) kiñcit (5.1), nānā (5.2, 93, 94), paraspara (5.6), mahā (5.11, 55), ananta (5.32), mahā-madhura (5.34), śrī-vṛndāvanam (5.85), anyān anyān (5.96).
(īi) Another type of verse found in the KKA, etc. is one which Hardy calls the 'separation' verse and which the Vai.s.navas call āk.sepa. It is characterized simply by the word kadā or kim and contains a prayer for a vision or for service. This type of verse is found only a few times in the CCA, far more frequently in VMA and RRSN where it forms the basis for the great majority of verses. Frequently, kadā will be used at the beginning of the first foot, kadā vā at the beginning of the third, as in CCA 83, RRSN 138, 175, 192; VMA 17.81 etc.
Only one example is given here: compare these two verses describing separation, one from CCA (83), the other from RRSN 210:
saiveyaṁ bhuvi dhanya gauḍa-nagarī velāpi saivāmbudheḥ
so 'yaṁ śrī-puruņottamo madhu-pates tāny eva nāmāni ca/
no kutrāpi nirīkṣyate hari hari premotsavas tādṛśo
hā caitanya kṛpā-nidhāna tava kiṁ vīkṣe punar vaibhavam?//
This is the same city of Gauḍa, blessed on earth,
this too the very beach of the ocean,
this, the town of Puruņottama (Puri)
and these, those very names of Kṛṣṇa;
but nowhere, alas! can I see the same festival of love.
Ah, Caitanya, source of all compassion,
will I never again see your glories?
aho te 'mī kuñjās tad-anupama-rāsa-sthalam idaṁ
giri-droṇī saiva sphurati rati-raṅge praṇayinī/
na vīkṣe śrī-rādhāṁ hari hari kuto'pīti śatadhā
vidīryeta prāṇeśvari mama kadā hanta hṛdayam//
Ah, these are the very thickets,
and this the incomparable scene of the circle dance,
this the very same mountain cave, so dear, when the two made love -
alas, alas, nowhere do I see Śrī Rādhā.
O mistress of my being! When will my heart tear
into a hundred pieces as I say these words?
(d) Language
What strikes one immediately about the language of all of Prabodhānanda's works, a characteristic which applies equally to the RRSN, is that it is simple and straightforward. However great a scholar Prabodhānanda may have been, in his works of poetry and praise, he had no intention of going out of his way to demonstrate it in the traditional manner of the Sanskrit poet. There are no elaborate exhibitions of paranomasia. There is no obscure vocabulary. There are no complex allusions to mythology, no poetic fancies or metaphors that are not direct and easy to grasp. The poet's message of enthusiastic devotion to Caitanya in Caitanya-candrāmṛtam, to Rādhā in Rādhā-rasa-sudhā-nidhi, to Vṛndāvana in the Vṛndāvana mahimāmṛta all show this same quality. Hyperbole, if considered a fault of Sanskrit poets, does show its face, however, and in each of these works the object of devotion stands supreme and is shown to stand supreme often by the same devices. Though he sometimes strings together lengthy compounds, they often consist of familiar formulae, joining frequently combined superlatives. Although there is no real fixed pattern, the elements of a quintessential Prabodhānanda compound can briefly be summarized by the following table:
Table 2
mahā adbhuta prema laharī
parama āścarya anurāga pīyūņa sindhu
pūrṇa + madhura + praṇaya + rasa+(eka) + sīdhu + ambudhi
sāndra ujjvala mādhurya amṛta nidhi
śuddha camatkāra ānanda mūrti
vapuḥ
The order may be variable, but this vocabulary is so dear to Prabodhānanda, that any cursory examination of his compositions shows many of these favoured word combinations much in evidence. They are similarly very present in RRSN, the title itself being the first example.
Caitanya-candrāmṛta
(1) viśuddha-premonmada-madhura-pīyūņa-laharīm
(12) parama-rasa-camatkāra-mādhurya-sīmām
(17) pūrṇa-prema-rasāmṛtābdhi-laharī-lolāṅga-gaura-cchaṭā...
(20) param apāra-prema-pīyūņa-sindhoḥ
(27) prema-mahā-rasojjvala-pade
(49) pūrṇa-premāmṛta-maya-mahā-jyotir-amalaḥ
(88) sāndrānandojjvala-nava-rasa-prema-pīyūņa-sindhoḥ
(99) caraṇāmbhoja-sravat-projjvala-premānandāmṛtādbhuta-rasān
(102) mahā-premānandojjvala-rasa-vapuḥ
(110) premojjvala-rasa-rahasyāmṛta-nidheḥ
(116) mahāścarya-premojjvala-rasa-sad-āveśa-vivaśīkṛtāṅgāḥ
(116) premojjvala-rasa-rahasyāmṛta-nidheḥ
(119) mahā-praṇaya-sīdhu-sudhā-rasaika-pāthonidhau
(137) prasārita-mahā-prema-pīyūņa-rasa-sāgare
Vṛndāvana-mahimāmṛta
(14.91) premonmāda-rasa-maya-jyotir-ekābdhi-mūrtī
(14.93) adbhuta-rati-kalā-vāridhī Kṛṣṇa-Rādhe śuddha-premojjvala-rasa-tanū
(15.3) ati-rati-rasaikābdhi-magnaṁ
(15.7) praṇaya-rasa-mahāmbodhi-koṭīḥ
(15.8) śyāmānanda-rasaika-sāgara
(15.28) hari-rasotsavānām āścaryonmada-rasa-vilāsotsavam idam
(15.76) premānanda-rasa-camatkāra-sarvasva-dhārā
(15.96) svānandāmṛta-sindhu
(15.97) mahā-rasābdhi-varņam
(15.104) parama-madhuraḥ prema-pīyūņa-sāraḥ
(15.105) kāma-rasaika-sāra-subhagaṁ śyāma-kiśoram
(16.6) mahādbhuta-camatkṛti-prakaṭa-sarva-sad-vaibhavam
(16.7) mahojjvala-mahā-maho madana-gopa-rasaṁ bhaja
(16.10) atyāścaryānanda-sandoha-sāndrā
(16.14) atisvacchair aṅga-cchavi-nava-sudhāmbhodhi-laharī parīvāhair
(16.19) satatodvela-mahā-rasāmbudheḥ
(16.25) viharat-pūrṇa-rasaika-sāgaram
(16.59) anaṅga-rasa-mādhurī-bhara-dhurīṇa-līlā-nidhiḥ
(16.67) mahā-prīti-jyoti-rasa-jala-nidhau
(16.68) viśuddhādya-premātmakaṁ parama-cij-jyotir-amṛtāmbudhi
(16.75) mahā-premānandātmaka-parama-vistīrṇa-jaladhau
(16.80) rādhā-caraṇa-paricaryā-rasa-mahā-mahodhi-
(16.83) mahāścaryaṁ jyotir vapuņi navakaiśoralalite
(16.95) mahā-premā-veśotpulaka-rasa-ghūrṇāyita-tanuḥ
(17.5) apāre śrī-vṛndāvana-mahima-pīyūņa-jaladhau
(17.8) mahojjvala-rasonmada-praṇaya-sindhu-nisyandinī
(17.14) viśuddhādvaitaika-praṇaya-rasa-pīyūņa-jaladhau
(17.32) śuddhojjvala-prema-rasāmṛtābdheḥ
Rādhā-rasa-sudhā-nidhi
(11) pūrṇānurāga-rasa-sāgara-sāra-mūrtiḥ
(13) premāmṛtaika-makaranda-rasaugha-pūrṇam
(18) anurāga-rasaika-sindhuḥ
(22) sat-prema-sindhu-makaranda-rasaugha-dhārā
(25) svānanda-sīdhu-rasa-sindhu-vivardhanendum
(28) premāmṛtāmbudhim agādham
(40) apāra-rasa-sāra-vilāsa-mūrteḥ
(41) pūrṇānurāga-rasa-mūrtiḥ
(46) kṣarad-apāra-rasāmṛtābdhim
(42) adbhuta-rasāmṛta-candrikaughaiḥ
(51) mahā-premonmīlan-nava-rasa-sudhā-sindhu-laharī
(73) prema-sudhā-rasāmbu-nidhī
(92) unmaryāda-pravṛddha-praṇaya-rasa-mahāmbhodhi-gambhīra-līlā
(93) pratikṣaṇa-camatkṛtādbhuta-rasaika-līlā-nidhe
(94) sāndrānanda-ghanānurāga-laharī-nisyanda-pādāmbuja-dvandve
(125) śoṇādhara-śrī-vidhṛta-nava-sudhā-mādhurī-sāra-sindhuḥ
(129) adbhuta-mādhavādhara-sudhā-mādhvīka-saṁsvādanaiḥ
(137) sāndra-premāmṛta-rasa-mahā-sindhu-koṭir
(153) amaryādonmīlat-surata-rasa-pīyūņa-jaladheḥ
(173) hari-mahā-prema-pīyūņa-sindhoḥ
(242) hari-mahā-prema-pīyūņa-sindhoḥ
(212) nava-sudhā-mādhurī-sindhu-koṭi
(236) madhura-rasa-sudhā-sindhu-sārair agādhām
(253) sāndrānandāmṛta-rasa-hrade
(266) yat premāmṛta-sindhu-sāra-rasadaṁ
This selection has been made primarily of lengthier compounds; shorter ones and the same selection of words outside compounds would have lengthened this paper excessively.
A number of other favoured word combinations could been pointed out such as priya-caraṇa-nakha jyotiḥ (CCA 127) or śrī-rādhā pada-nakha-jyotiḥ, found in CCA 68, RRSN 137, 148, 269. Although certain compounds, even some including a few of the key words like rasa-sindhu (36.2, 67.3, 82.1) or rasa-sāgara (52.4, 63.3.5), etc. can be found in CP, or for that matter, most Vaiṣṇava works, there is nothing like the abundant repetition of the same favoured vocabulary found, not only in these three works of Prabodhānanda, but in all his writings. This, more than anything else, constitutes his signature. Thus ARP 170:
śuddhojjvala-premarasaika-śakti tadvat-svarūpau sukha-sāra-rāsī/
tau naḥ kiśorau gaura-nīlau khelāyatāṁ citra-manoja-līlau//
Encountering possible objections
Although not many medieval Vaiṣṇava authors are noted for multilingual compositions, there is no reason to think it impossible for Harivaṁśa write both a stotra-kāvya of deliberately narrow forms as well as a number of hymns in the vernacular, designed to appeal to a wider audience. It may, however, be objected that it would be improper to expect correlations of vocabulary, etc. with another work written in Sanskrit, even if he were indeed the author. It has, however, already been noted that Harivaṁśa's Brajabhāņā is comparatively heavy in Sanskrit tat-sama and tad-bhava words, so a certain amount of similarity in vocabulary, the use of figures, favoured epithets, etc., might well be expected if the two works were both his, particularly since the general subject matter is the same. It has been shown, however, that this is not the case, at least not beyond a minimal degree of coincidence which might well be found with the works of any other Vaiṣṇava of the same period.
RRSN is a work of intense longing for service to Rādhā, whereas CP is more purely descriptive of the loving dalliances of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa without any such emotional relation of the author to the protagonists being directly expressed. If one considers this an unimportant distinction, then one neglects the fact that Harivaṁśa's audience was primarily non Sanskrit speaking (which is borne out by the literature of the sect which is overwhelmingly in Brajabhāņā). One would expect the mood of the RRSN to have penetrated at least one of his many padas, anthologized after his death - even an interpolated verse expressive of the desire to serve Rādhā in a particular way (like the songs of Narottamadāsa) would indicate that his close contemporaries expected such a mood of him. This is, however, not the case.
One may object that stylistic and lexical differences exist between Prabodhānanda's works and RRSN. This may be due to subject matter: praises of Caitanya will not necessarily be expressed in the same vocabulary as praises of Rādhā. Perhaps a more serious objection is that the similarities pointed out above are due to the conventions of the Sanskrit stotra-kāvya genre which, like all Sanskrit poetry, has its own conceits and vocabulary. Though this is easily admitted, a cursory glance at other works of the genre will show remarkable differences, even within the restrictions imposed on the authors by stylistic conventions. And even though it is possible to accept that there are bound to be a certain number of changes in a writer's mannerisms, even throughout his own career, there is a truly remarkable degree of similarity between the various works of Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, to which we must now add RRSN.
Could the similarities found between the works in question not be the result of plagiarism or well intention and perhaps even condoned stylistic imitation rather than identity of authorship? If it could be established who imitated whom, the implications (since imitation is the sincerest form of flattery) for our understanding of the relations between these personalities would certainly be great. As Prabodhānanda's compositional style (in CCA) seems to have been established even before encountering Harivaṁśa, one would have to assume the likelihood of his providing the model copied by the founder of the Rādhā-vallabhī sect, rather than RRSN providing inspiration for Prabodhānanda’s numerous V.rndāvana compositions. However, it is not likely that either of these strong personalities, who came into contact with each other when they were already in their mature years, could have been influenced to the extent that their language, style of composition, etc. could take on the other’s qualities at the expense of their own already well developed individual traits.
Conclusions
If it is accepted that RRSN was indeed written by Prabodhānanda, then the implications are clear: Prabodhānanda can no longer be looked upon as a disciple or follower of Harivaṁśa; rather, he is in the position of influence and his influence, already accepted as being extensive by the Vaiṣṇavas of the Rādhā-vallabhī school, must be seen in a rather more significant light. Even if RRSN is to be considered the work of Harivaṁśa, its great similarity to the works of Prabodhānanda would indicate that Harivaṁśa took his inspiration from Prabodhānanda. In such a case, not dissimilar conclusions would have to be drawn. Harivaṁśa's connection to the Gauḍīya school is thus confirmed. Whether this relation was ritually solemnized through initiation to Prabodhānanda’s disciple Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, though now considerably more believable, is the conclusion which we are able to state with the least conviction.
Explaining how a work by Prabodhānanda came to be known as the composition of Harivaṁśa remains another problem which is not easily answered. Two poems in the CP have the name of Naravāhana in the signature couplet. Snātaka (1968:103) argues that these were in fact written by Harivaṁśa but given as a gift to his dear disciple. He states that this was not an uncommon practice in those days. Could it not then be possible that the same could hold true for the writing of RRSN, that Prabodhānanda, an experienced author of many Sanskrit works, made a gift of this work in order to enhance the prestige of his junior contemporary? Prabodhānanda lent support to Harivaṁśa's evangelical aspirations by writing an aṣṭaka in his honour. A more comprehensive work would have helped to promote the independent movement in which they both believed, but of which Harivaṁśa was the acknowledged leader, for Prabodhānanda as a strict renunciate would have imposed on him severe limitations in the number of disciples that he could take. Indeed, other than Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, we know of no other disciples.
Whatever the case, Prabodhānanda's close relation with Harivaṁśa and his successors could not have been a matter of great joy to the Gauḍīyas, particularly in the atmosphere of increasing sectarianism following the short period of camaraderie which existed between the early 'discoverers' of Braj, the representatives of the different neo Vaiṣṇava schools. Harirāma Vyāsa could sing the glories of Haridāsa Svāmī, Hita Harivaṁśa, Rūpa and Sanātana within a single pada. Rūpa and Sanātana are known to have been on friendly terms with Vallabhācārya's son, Viṭṭhala. It is thus altogether possible that originally Prabodhānanda's close relations with both Harivaṁśa and the Gauḍīyas was univerally accepted. Sectarian feeling appears to have become quite strong by the time of Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja, however. Kṛṣṇadāsa took pains to show that Keśava Kāśmīrī of the Nimbārka school and Vallabhācārya, as well as leaders of other schools, were all defeated in debate or converted by Caitanya. For the Gauḍīyas, Rādhā was only attainable through Caitanya and Kṛṣṇadāsa made a tremendous effort to prove this in CC. For Prabodhānanda to condone Harivaṁśa's independent spirit must have seemed to him (and others surely) like reneging on the grace he had received at the hands of the avatāra. When compounded with a disregard for vidhi there was likely to have been a general feeling of distaste for him and his works. As a result, Prabodhānanda's writings other than CCA (which was already known in Bengal) had only limited circulation amongst the Gauḍīyas. Kṛṣṇadāsa would not even quote a single verse from that work in his CC, though it is impossible that he could have been ignorant of it. One version of RRSN with verses dedicated to Caitanya was preserved and eventually gained currency and even great popularity amongst the Gauḍīyas for its devotion to Rādhā. This work may even have exercised a considerable influence on certain Gauḍīya writers such as Raghunāthadāsa, whose Vilāpakusumāñjali, though stylistically different, follows it closely in spirit. By the same token, though Prabodhānanda is accepted by the Rādhā-vallabhīs as one of their own, the extent of his influence in the sampradāya has never been adequately recognized and the mood and teachings which are his contribution have been credited to Harivaṁśa alone.
FOOTNOTES
(Fn1) 'Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī: from Benares to Braj', First appeared in BSOAS, LV, 1, 1992, 52-75. This article also first appeared in BSOAS, LV, 3, 1992, 472-497)
1. Abbreviations of other titles used here are as follows: ARP = Āścarya rāsa-prabandha; BhP = Bhāgavata-purāṇa; BRK = Bhakti-ratnākara; BRS = Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu; CP = Hita-caurāsī or Caurāsī Pada; CCA = Caitanya-candrāmṛta; CC = Caitanya-caritāmṛta; Gītag = Gīta-govinda; HBV = Hari-bhakti-vilāsa; HC = Harivaṁśa Carita or Hita Carita; KKA = Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta; PV = Prema-vilāsa; SaṅgM = Saṅgīta-mādhava; UN = Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi; VMA = Vṛndāvana-mahimāmṛta.
I should like to express here my special thanks to Dr. Rupert Snell of SOAS for corrections and suggestions which have been of great help in the writing of this article.
2. Published in Ananya Rasika Māla, ed. Lalitāprasāda Purohit, Vrindavan, 1961:99 100.
3. Bhaktakavi Vyāsajī, Agrawāl Press, Mathurā, 1953: 193 194.
4. RRSN, Introduction by Hitadāsa, 30. This anecdote appears in a rather late work by Mīṭhā Bhāī, Cf. Snātaka 1968:92. It is not in the earlier account of HC. Attention is called to note 20 in the previous article where a colophon from Gopāla Bhaṭṭa’s commentary to KKA is quoted. Note that the author of that work, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa claims to be the son of Harivaṁśa, the son of N.rsiṁha. The coincidence of names is not a little unusual.
5. Nāgarīdāsa's Aṣṭaka, Rūpalāla's Vāṇī, Jatanlāl's Rasika Ananya Sāra, etc. Cited, Snātaka (1968:98). Another version is that Rādhā appeared to Harivaṁśa and told him the mantra outright. kṛpā kari Śrī-Rādhā prakaṭa hoya darśana diyo/ apane hita ko jānikai hita soė mantra sunāya diyau//; Uttamadāsa, HC: eka divasa sovata sukha lahyau śrīrādhe supane meā kahyau/ dvāra tihāre pīpara jo hai ūācī ḍāra sabana meė so hai/ tā meė aruna patra ika nyārau jāmai jugala mantra hai mārau/ lehu mantra tuma karahu prakāsa rasika hanana kī pujibahu āsa//
6. Bābā Vṛndāvanadāsa's Śrī-Hitaharivaṁśa-sahasra-nāma, p.11 Rasik Māl, cited in Snātaka, 1968: 97. misra bāga meė kūpa nihārau tāmai dvibhuja svarūpa hamārau/ sundara śyāma bāėsurī lie mama gādī sebahu man diye//
7. (ed.) Sītārām Śaraṇ Bhagavān Prasād, (Lucknow: Tejkumar Press, 1962) chappaya 90.
rādhā-caran pradhān hṛdai ati sudṛḍha upāsī/
kuṁja keli daṁpati tahāñ kī karata khavāsī//
sarvasu mahā-prasād prasidha tāke adhikārī/
vidhi niņedh nahiṁ dās anani utkaṭ vrata-dhārī//
vyāsa-suvan path anusarai soi bhalai pahiṁcāni hai/
śrī harivaṁśa gusāī bhajan kī rīti sakṛt kou jāni hai//
8. in Śrīhita Caurāsī (i.e., CP), (ed.) Lalitācaraṇa Gosvāmī, (Vrindavan: Veṇu Prakāśana, 2nd edn. 1979), 68 9.
9. Translation by Rupert Snell (1991: 23)
10. Second letter; Jo śāstra maryādā satya hai aur guru mahimā aisā hī satya hai to Braja nava taruṇi kadamba cūṇāmaṇi ŚrīRādhe tihāre sthāpe guru mārga viņai aviśvāsa ajñānī ko hota hai. Tāte yaha maryādā rakhanau. Text taken from Snātaka (1968:331).
11. Berhampore edition, 275; Gopāla Bhaṭṭera śiņya yāra yei nāma/ kona deśe kāra vāsa śunaha ākhyāna// Śrīnivāsācārya Gauḍe Harivaṁśa Vrajavāsī/ Gopīnātha pūjāri haya baḍa guṇarāśi/ ŚrīRādhāramaṇa sevā yāre samarpila// ei tina śiņya Bhaṭṭera ākhyāne kahila// guru ājñā nā māniyā gelā Harivaṁśa/ āchila aneka guṇa saba haila dhvaṁsa// This edition has eighteen chapters. The Yaśodālāla Tālukdāra edition of 1913 is the inflated version.
12. Bhaktamāla, 224 5. śrīmān harivaṁśa gosvāmī caritra/ jagate vyāpita haya parama pavitra// śrīmān gopāla bhaṭṭajīra śiņya teāha/ mahābhaktivān teėha rādhā kṛṣṇa premavaha// eka ekādaśī dine tāmbūla prasādi/ khāilā baliyā guru kailā aparādhī// antare gosāñi ruṣṭa nāhi ta hailā/ bāhya lokaśikṣā hetu śāsana karilā// harivaṁśa gosāñira śiņya anukrame/ ebe rādhāvallabhī gosāñi vrajadhāme// śrīmān gopāla bhaṭṭa tāhāte praṇālī/ phirāilā ki hetuka nā jāni ki bali// ye hetuka anya anya sampradāya sane/ vyavahāra āhāra paramārthe nāhi bane// viccheda haila eka pataṅga nā haya/ rājā jayasiṁha bahu vicāra karaya// se saba kahāte ebe phala kichu nāi/ koṭi koṭi daṇḍavat sabhākāra ṭhāi// The translation above is from Snell (1984: 26) who credits it to Tarapada Mukherjee.
13. This reference is not available, even in secondary sources. Snātaka discusses the issue (1968:97 9, 113 7)
14. Guṇamañjarīdāsa, Śrī-Gopāla-bhaṭṭa-śataka (Vrindavan, 1908). Birth, p.2: VS. 1555; Death, p.23, VS 1642; establishment of Rādhāramaṇa, Vaiśākha-pūrṇimā VS 1599 (p.7). This author, a Gosvāmī of the Rādhāramaṇa family writing in the late nineteenth century, indicates that the Rādhā-ramaṇa house accepts the tradition that Hita Harivaṁśa was Gopāla Bhaṭṭa’s disciple (p.56).
15. See R. Snell's notes on CP 40.6 and 65.4.
16. Snell (1984:492 9) compares a number of commentaries on certain padas of CP and concludes that RRSN is the dogmatic source for the interpretative tradition. Since the purpose of this article is to ascertain the authorship of this work, we intend to use only CP as the authoritative indicator of Harivaṁśa's doctrinal position.
17. in Vāsudeva Gosvāmī (1951:193).
18. HBV, 13.
19. See the discussion in S. K. De (1942: 104 7). BRK, 1.800 1; karite vaiṣṇava smṛti haila bhaṭṭa mana/...gopālera nāme śrī gosvāmī sanātana/ karila hari-bhakti-vilāsa varṇana//, etc.
20. The same scene is portrayed in RRSN 5, 112, 201, 209, 233, See also the māna verses of CP.
21. Rūpa Gosvāmī, in his BRS identifies the qualification for rāgānugā bhakti as the 'non dependance on scriptural injunctions or logical argument' (tat-tad-bhāvādi-mādhurye śrute dhīr yad apekṣate/ nātra śāstraṁ na yuktiṁ ca tal lobhotpatti-lakṣaṇam// i.2.292).
22. Kṛṣṇavallabha commentary on verse 3.
23. Ramakanta Chakravarty, Vaiṣṇavism in Bengal (Calcutta: Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar, 1985), 308.
24. tau santoņayatā santau śrīla-rūpa-sanātanau/ dākṣiṇātyena bhaṭṭena punar etad vivicyate// tasyādyaṁ granthanālekhaṁ krānta-vyutkrānta-khaṇḍitam/ paryālocyātha paryāyaṁ kṛtvā likhati jīvakaḥ// These two verses introduce each of the six volumes of this work.
25. See Kṛṣṇa-sandarbha, para.171ff.
26. Viz. Śrīvatsa Gosvāmī, 'Rādhā, the play and perfection of rasa' in The Divine Consort, (ed.) J. S. Hawley and D. M. Wulffe, (New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984), 72 88. For a fuller discussion of Jīva’s svakīyā-vāda, see this author’s article “Does Kṛṣṇa marry the gopīs in the end?” in The Journal of Vai.sṇava Studies, 5.4, Fall 1997, 49-110.
27. 'A vernacular portrait: Rādhā in the Sūr Sāgar' in The Divine Consort, (ed.) Hawley and Wulff, 42 56, esp. 53.
28. i.7.126; tathāpi sambhoga-sukhād api stutaḥ sa ko'py anirvācyatamo manoramaḥ/ pramoda-rāśiḥ pariṇāmato dhruvaṁ tatra sphuret tad rasikaika-vedyaḥ//
29. Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta, ī.6.352 355.
30. Antya 1.66 67: Kṛṣṇake bāhira nāhi kariha Braja haite/ Braja chāḍi Kṛṣṇa kabhu nā yāya kāhāėte// This is followed by a quote from Yamala.
31. Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta 1.5.461: Kṛṣṇo 'nyo Yadusambhūto yas tu Gopendranandanaḥ/ Vṛndāvanaṁ parityajya sa kvacin naiva gacchati//; UN (Haridāsa Dāsa edition) 15.185 7: atha saṁyoga-viyoga-sthitiḥ. harer līlā-viśeņasya prakaṭasyānusārataḥ/ varṇitā virahāvasthā goṣṭha-vāma-bhruvām asau// vṛndāraṇye viharatā sadā rāsādi-vibhramaiḥ/ hariṇā vraja-devīnāṁ viraho 'sti na karhicit// tathā ca pādme pātāla-khaṇḍe mathurā-māhātmye: go-gopa-gopikā-saṅge yatra krīḍati kaṁsahā//; Padyāvalī, (ed.) S. K. De, (Dacca, 1934).
32. The words nitya-vihāra are repeated several times in GC ii.29.111: tad ittham ākhyātaṁ mama vyākhyā. Yat khalvayaṁ daśama-skandhāntarvartī śrī-śuka-siddhāntas tatra cātra ca tasya vicchedaṁ nirasya nitya-vihāram eva vyāharati. Also, GC ii.29.113, 116.
33. vidagdhānāṁ mitho līlā-vilāsena yathā sukham/ na tathā samprayogeṇa syād evaṁ rasikā viduḥ// UN, 15.253.
34. See in particular 2.1, 4.1 10.
35. (ed.) Śyāmācaraṇa Kaviratna, (Calcutta, 1911), 1329. evam ekāntināṁ prāyaḥ kīrtanaṁ smaraṇaṁ prabhoḥ/ kurvatāṁ parama-prītyā kṛtyam anyaṁ na rocayet// bhāvena kenacit preṣṭha-śrī-mūrter aṅghri-sevane/ syād iccaiņāṁ sva-mantreṇa svarasenaiva tad-vidhiḥ// vihiteņv eva nityeṣu pravartante svayaṁ hi te/ ity ādy ekāntināṁ bhāti māhātmyaṁ likhitaṁ hi tat//
36. In 1888, the Rādhāramaṇa sevāyata Rādhācaraṇa Gosvāmī wrote a book called Śrī-Caitanya-carita-sāra in which he wrote that Gopāla Bhaṭṭa was spiritual master of Hita Harivaṁśa. He was taken to court, and on the 5th of October of that year was judged guilty of defamation. He was made to pay a 5 rupee fine and revoke his claims with an apology, saying he had no proof. Snātaka (1968:98 99) has taken this information from a Hindi work by Gopālaprasāda Śarmā called Bhramoccheda about which he gives no further information.
37. Snātaka (1968: 324 30) makes a concerted effort to show that these are Harivaṁśa's own compositions. Snell (1985: 464 69) suggests that they are more likely to come from the body of anonymous literature from which both the compilers of CP and Sūrasāgara drew.
38. Hita-caurāsī aur uskī Premadāsa kṛta Vrajabhāņā ṭīkā, (ed.) Vijay Pāl Siṁha and Candrabhān Rāvat, (Kāśī: Nāgarī Pracāriṇī Sabhā, 1971). The list is somewhat arbitrary. Snātaka gives a somewhat different breakdown (1968: 294), significantly omitting dāna (51), even though this song starts with the line, dāna dai rī navala kiśorī...
39. See also CP 11, 18; RRSN 10.
40. Harivaṁśa's affinity for Gītag is pointed out by Harirāma Vyāsa: baḍe rasika jayadeva bakhānī, līlā amṛta cucāta/ vṛndāvana harivaṁsa prasaṁsita, suni gaurī musikāta//, Vāsudeva Gosvāmī (1951: 195).
41. CP, 20, mere prāṇa-nātha Śrī-Śyāmā sapatha karauė tṛṇa chiye etc.
42. CP, 24.4, śrabaṇa phuṭau jo anasunauė bina Rādhā yaśa baina.
43. (ed.) Bābā Hitadāsa, Jabalpur: Narmadā Printing Works, 1950. The earlier verses of this work are similar to those found at the beginning of the mañjarī's speech in SaṅgM (2.2).
44. In this article, references to RRSN follow the Gauḍīya recension. Verses in the Rādhā-vallabhī recensions will be one figure lower.
45. 1942:99; the references given by him are vī.1464 5; p.131, 239; vī. p.230; Notices, 2nd series, i. p.384. 46. See for example: 1.12, 1.61, 2.58, etc.
47. sad-yogīndra-sudṛśya-sāndra-rasadānandaika-san-mūrtayaḥ
sarve 'py adbhuta-san-mahimni madhure vṛndāvane saṅgatāḥ/
ye krūrā api pāpino na ca satāṁ sambhāņya-dṛśyāś ca ye
sarvān vastutayā nirīkṣya paramasvārādhyabuddhir mama//RRSN 265
48. e.g. Kṛṣṇa seeing himself reflected in Rādhā's bright golden skin is also found both in Subhāņita-ratna-kośa 4.44 and RRSN 246.
49. samasta-veda-mastakair agamya-vaibhavāṁ sadā
mahā-munīndra-nāradādibhiḥ sadaiva bhāvitām/
atulya-pāmarair api śritāṁ pumartha-sāradāṁ
bhaje kalinda-nandinīṁ duranta-moham añjanīm//, in Bṛhat-stotra-muktāhāra, vol.2, Ahmedabad: Gujarat Printing Press, 1916: 419 20.
Comments