Do Radha and Krishna really have nothing to do with human love?
An oft-repeated error of orthodox Vaishnavas is that the the love of Radha and Krishna has "nothing to do" with the romantic love of human experience, especially not where parakiya-rasa is being considered. I say that it would take only the blindest and most deluded observer to say such a thing. The Gaudiya Math and ISKCON have deliberately obfuscated the connection between Krishna's madhura lila and our human experience to promote the pan-Indian belief in sannyas that arises from the Buddhist and Shankarite schools.
As I often say, the entire corpus of Rupa Goswami's work is meant to demonstrate the superlative position of madhura rasa. But any such hierarchy of rasa must be based in real human experience. Ideals have a relation to reality; they are meaningless without them.
You need to see the madhura lila of Radha and Krishna as an object lesson in how to deal with sexual desire, not how to destroy it. Through worshiping Radha and Krishna we become aware of the possibility of realizing the ideal, which is the spiritual union of lovers in the mood of Vrindavan.
We see the world as what we ourselves are, rather than seeing it as it is. From my vantage point, ISKCON and the Gaudiya Math, indeed Indian spirituality in general, is possessed by a fundamental ambivalence about sexuality. And yet, the Vaishnavas have made the Divine Couple, Radha and Krishna, whose union is the result of purely erotic attraction and not dharma, the symbol of the highest love.
This is either, as Freud would have it, repressed sexual desire manifesting itself unconsciously in the spiritual symbolism of the Vaishnava sect, or it is a conscious glorification of madhura-rasa, as known in human experience and idealized in art and symbol. The idea that the world of Radha and Krishna has nothing to do with the aspirations of the human being for loving intimacy with another human person is the breeding ground for all the sexual hypocrisy that runs rife in the ISKCON-GM world.
I suggest that we all study Rupa Goswami in the light of conscious revelation rather than false renunciation and asexual idealism.
Though Rupa Goswami has given the basic sādhanā in his books with this intent, there is clearly a great deal that is unstated. Thus there are so many misconceptions.
What Rupa Goswami has stressed is rasa. Krishna consciousness makes one capable of tasting rasa, because, as the Upanishad says, rasa is the locus of the Supreme. This is, no doubt, only one of multiple definitions of the Supreme, but is the one with which most Vaishnava sampradayas prefer to work.
Rasa has two dimensions, one is the basic understanding that comes from the Sanskrit poetic tradition in India, the second is Rupa Goswami's adaptation of it for bhakti. The latter cannot be understood without the former.
In order to understand the relation between Rupa Goswami's adaptation and his contemporary (but constantly evolving) rasika tradition, it is important to understand the concept of bhava or rati. The basic premise of the material rasa-śāstra is that we possess natural (archetypal) moods that are awakened through hearing (etc.) of literature or other artistic products (i.e., "entertainments"). These are said to be eight in number. These instinctual moods make it possible for us to identify with universals that are mediated through characters in such a play or novel, etc.
In other worlds, we hear about Ram and identify with Ram in his epic struggles with Ravana. Or with Arjuna and the Pandavas, etc. The most powerful of these identifications generally occurs with the erotic mood, whether it is the grossest tāmasika levels of pornography or the most transcendent of sattvika love poetry. This points to sexual desire as the most fundamental elements of human psychology.
It is my sincere belief is that we need, as Vaishnava doctrine advises, to find a way to adapt this fundamental human problem in sacralized ways so that it enhances our bhakti rather than being seen as a purely animal corruption of the flesh that must be uprooted. That is what Rupa Goswami is really talking about.
The idea of fundamental or instinctive identification is adapted by Rupa. He says that we need to purify our nature and transform our natural inclinations so that they produce a different kind of rasa.
This different kind of rasa is transcendental and devotional. It is connected to Radha and Krishna. Rupa Goswami’s philosophy does not deny the “material” rasas, but simply converts them, finding the ideal essence of each of them. There is no meaning to parenthood or sexual relations in the spiritual world, as spirit has no need of physical reproduction. The essence of these relationships is the quality of love that they embody.
The process of developing bhāva or Krishna-rati (the two words divided here by Rupa, the former a purely bhakti term, the latter coming from the poetic tradition) has both components (i.e., related to the spiritual essence and the so-called material forms). In the earlier stages, we reform the mind by inundating it with the archetypal universe represented by Braj, in which Radha and Krishna and their erotic love takes the central place. In the middle stage we apply this transformed psychology to our own lives, as type related to idea or archetype.
This identification has multiple levels. Although on one level, it appears to be the hated ahaṁgrahopāsanā, on higher levels it takes the form of Radha-sakhya. Ahaṁgrahopāsanā should be understood as the capacity to identify with Radha-Krishna lila, without which no rasa can be experienced. This is the abheda aspect of acintya-bhedābheda. The sakhi-bhāva or mañjarī-bhāva is the essentially devotional stance that represents the bheda. Ahaṁgrahopāsanā is clearly not looked upon favorably in the Vaishnava philosophical view, but not from the point of view of rasa, where it should be seen as essentially the same as sādhāranīkaraṇa.
This latter understanding is a bit mysterious, but essential to the practice. Without taking on the feminine vantage point, no man can understand love. Therefore simply engaging in sexual acts in the masculine identity is not in itself bhakti. It might carry some secondary spiritual benefits as tantra, etc., but that is not prema.
Devotees often reduce love between devotees as mere "mundane attraction." Devotees who fall in love with one another need to make their love an integral part of their devotional practice. Then it is no longer mundane, but becomes the very inspiration for devotion. Love between devotees makes Radha and Krishna real. It makes their lila a living thing, being lived in your own experience.
This is the real art of sādhanā.
As I often say, the entire corpus of Rupa Goswami's work is meant to demonstrate the superlative position of madhura rasa. But any such hierarchy of rasa must be based in real human experience. Ideals have a relation to reality; they are meaningless without them.
You need to see the madhura lila of Radha and Krishna as an object lesson in how to deal with sexual desire, not how to destroy it. Through worshiping Radha and Krishna we become aware of the possibility of realizing the ideal, which is the spiritual union of lovers in the mood of Vrindavan.
We see the world as what we ourselves are, rather than seeing it as it is. From my vantage point, ISKCON and the Gaudiya Math, indeed Indian spirituality in general, is possessed by a fundamental ambivalence about sexuality. And yet, the Vaishnavas have made the Divine Couple, Radha and Krishna, whose union is the result of purely erotic attraction and not dharma, the symbol of the highest love.
This is either, as Freud would have it, repressed sexual desire manifesting itself unconsciously in the spiritual symbolism of the Vaishnava sect, or it is a conscious glorification of madhura-rasa, as known in human experience and idealized in art and symbol. The idea that the world of Radha and Krishna has nothing to do with the aspirations of the human being for loving intimacy with another human person is the breeding ground for all the sexual hypocrisy that runs rife in the ISKCON-GM world.
I suggest that we all study Rupa Goswami in the light of conscious revelation rather than false renunciation and asexual idealism.
Though Rupa Goswami has given the basic sādhanā in his books with this intent, there is clearly a great deal that is unstated. Thus there are so many misconceptions.
What Rupa Goswami has stressed is rasa. Krishna consciousness makes one capable of tasting rasa, because, as the Upanishad says, rasa is the locus of the Supreme. This is, no doubt, only one of multiple definitions of the Supreme, but is the one with which most Vaishnava sampradayas prefer to work.
Rasa has two dimensions, one is the basic understanding that comes from the Sanskrit poetic tradition in India, the second is Rupa Goswami's adaptation of it for bhakti. The latter cannot be understood without the former.
In order to understand the relation between Rupa Goswami's adaptation and his contemporary (but constantly evolving) rasika tradition, it is important to understand the concept of bhava or rati. The basic premise of the material rasa-śāstra is that we possess natural (archetypal) moods that are awakened through hearing (etc.) of literature or other artistic products (i.e., "entertainments"). These are said to be eight in number. These instinctual moods make it possible for us to identify with universals that are mediated through characters in such a play or novel, etc.
In other worlds, we hear about Ram and identify with Ram in his epic struggles with Ravana. Or with Arjuna and the Pandavas, etc. The most powerful of these identifications generally occurs with the erotic mood, whether it is the grossest tāmasika levels of pornography or the most transcendent of sattvika love poetry. This points to sexual desire as the most fundamental elements of human psychology.
It is my sincere belief is that we need, as Vaishnava doctrine advises, to find a way to adapt this fundamental human problem in sacralized ways so that it enhances our bhakti rather than being seen as a purely animal corruption of the flesh that must be uprooted. That is what Rupa Goswami is really talking about.
The idea of fundamental or instinctive identification is adapted by Rupa. He says that we need to purify our nature and transform our natural inclinations so that they produce a different kind of rasa.
This different kind of rasa is transcendental and devotional. It is connected to Radha and Krishna. Rupa Goswami’s philosophy does not deny the “material” rasas, but simply converts them, finding the ideal essence of each of them. There is no meaning to parenthood or sexual relations in the spiritual world, as spirit has no need of physical reproduction. The essence of these relationships is the quality of love that they embody.
The process of developing bhāva or Krishna-rati (the two words divided here by Rupa, the former a purely bhakti term, the latter coming from the poetic tradition) has both components (i.e., related to the spiritual essence and the so-called material forms). In the earlier stages, we reform the mind by inundating it with the archetypal universe represented by Braj, in which Radha and Krishna and their erotic love takes the central place. In the middle stage we apply this transformed psychology to our own lives, as type related to idea or archetype.
This identification has multiple levels. Although on one level, it appears to be the hated ahaṁgrahopāsanā, on higher levels it takes the form of Radha-sakhya. Ahaṁgrahopāsanā should be understood as the capacity to identify with Radha-Krishna lila, without which no rasa can be experienced. This is the abheda aspect of acintya-bhedābheda. The sakhi-bhāva or mañjarī-bhāva is the essentially devotional stance that represents the bheda. Ahaṁgrahopāsanā is clearly not looked upon favorably in the Vaishnava philosophical view, but not from the point of view of rasa, where it should be seen as essentially the same as sādhāranīkaraṇa.
This latter understanding is a bit mysterious, but essential to the practice. Without taking on the feminine vantage point, no man can understand love. Therefore simply engaging in sexual acts in the masculine identity is not in itself bhakti. It might carry some secondary spiritual benefits as tantra, etc., but that is not prema.
Devotees often reduce love between devotees as mere "mundane attraction." Devotees who fall in love with one another need to make their love an integral part of their devotional practice. Then it is no longer mundane, but becomes the very inspiration for devotion. Love between devotees makes Radha and Krishna real. It makes their lila a living thing, being lived in your own experience.
This is the real art of sādhanā.
Comments