VMA 1.31 : Pull up the root of material hopes…

tyaktvā saṅgaṁ dūrataḥ strī-piśācyā
sarvāśānāṁ mūlam uddhṛtya samyak |
daivāl labdhenaiva nirvāhya dehaṁ
śrīmad-vṛndā-kānane joṣam āssva ||

Renouncing from afar the company of witch-like women,
pulling up the very root of all material hopes,
maintaining the body by whatever fate gives you,
lovingly take up residence in Vrinda Devi’s forest. (1.31)

Commentary

Here we have another of Prabodhananda’s intense vairāgya verses. In the modern age, statements that associate the words woman and witch to one another are very difficult to reconcile with current ways of thinking.

Generally, however, it is conceded by spiritualists of all paths that the greatest danger to spiritual life results from an attachments to sense desires, if they take us away from service to God. If a woman who acts like a piśācī is a source of bondage for a man, then the same is true for a woman who attaches herself to a materialistic man, a piśāca.

[Misogyny, MGTOW and the Bhagavatam.]

On the other hand, a saintly man or a woman in a loving relationship, if both are dedicated to the life of devotion and service of Vrindavan, will have an enhanced devotional life. Their love for each other will be beneficial to their spiritual ambitions, of this there is no doubt.

Prabodhananda says that the resident of Vrindavan should maintain himself by whatever Fate destines for him or her. If one’s destiny is to have the companionship of a devotional partner who seeks perfection in bhakti and service, then why should one fight it with a desire for false renunciation? If, on the other hand, such a positive relation is not in the cards, then better to live the life of a renunciate and engage exclusively in hearing and chanting and service to the Divine Couple without any distractions.

The basic principle of devotion is śaraṇāgati, which begins with accepting all that is favorable for bhakti, ānukūlyasya saṁkalpaḥ and rejecting what is unfavorable, prātikūlya-vivarjanam. The companionship of a devotee is favorable, even if that companion is of the opposite sex. Bhakti stands above all material designations. Maleness or femaleness is not a pre-qualification for bhakti. That is not what is being spoken of here by Prabodhananda.

Although renunciation is a basic element of all spiritual life, the Bhagavad Gītā teaches that there is a difference between the culture of internal renunciation and the external show of renunciation (Gītā 3.6). If anything, this is one of the Gītā’s most important instructions.

karmendriyāṇi saṁyamya ya āste manasā smaran
indriyārthān vimūḍhātmā mithyācāraḥ sa ucyate

The one who restrains the working senses
but goes on brooding on their objects
does but delude himself. His every act
is false and so I call him “pretender.”

Rupa Goswami states in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu that knowledge and renunciation may have some preliminary utility in bhakti, but they are not in themselves its aṅgas or limbs.

jñāna-vairāgyayor bhakti-praveśāyopayogitā |
īṣat prathamam eveti nāṅgatvam ucitaṁ tayoḥ ||

The culture of knowledge and renunciation have some utility for entering the path of bhakti, but only in a small amount and at the beginning, and it is not proper to consider them devotional practices in themselves. (Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.2.248)

Elsewhere Rupa Goswami does say that renunciation of sense enjoyments for Krishna’s sake is an aṅga of bhakti–bhogādi-tyāgaḥ kṛṣṇasya hetave (1.2.75). But here the emphasis is on “for the sake of Krishna.” For what is love without sacrifice?

Bhakti in the form of natural attraction to Krishna is more powerful than any sensual attachment, but if one’s material attachments can be transformed or dovetailed into devotion for the Lord, then they are anukūla, helpful to devotional life. But if one’s partner is materialistic and an obstacle to the devotional life or to life in Vrindavan, then they are pratikūla. At the early stages of bhajan, especially, one should not minimize the importance of proper association.

In one place, Rupa Goswami does use the word piśācī to describe the hankering for egoic enjoyment and salvation. This verse was controversial even in his time, as indicated by the legend about it involving Vallabhacharya and Jiva Goswami told in Bhakti-ratnākara. [The story is historically doubtful, since Vallabha had left the world likely before Jiva arrived in Braj.] The verse is:

bhukti-mukti-spṛhā yāvat piśācī hṛdi vartate |
tāvad bhakti-sukhasyātra katham abhyudayo bhavet ||

How can the joy of devotion manifest in your heart while the witch of desire for sense enjoyment or liberation dwells there? (Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.2.22)

So clearly the witch in question is not the object itself, which is neutral, but the desire for it. It is egocentric desires, up to and including liberation, that are the obstacle to spiritual life, as indicated in the second quarter of the verse.

We all make mistakes in life. The biggest mistake is to think that there is something higher or more important than prema bhakti. Prabodhananda Saraswati would not make that mistake. Nor should anyone who wants to get the maximum benefit from residing in Vrindavan.

---

Ten Previous posts

VMA 1.30 : Know Suffering here to be joy
VMA 1.29 : Real life is to take refuge in Vrindavan
VMA 1.28 : I will raise my ears to hear the sweet flute sounds
VMA 1.27 : …where a swarthy, lusty youth leans on a kadamba and plays the flute
VMA 1.26 : May Vrindavan be like a nourishing mother
VMA 1.25 : What business do we have with kings or gods?
VMA 1.24 : Take pleasure in the eternal joys within Vrindavan
VMA 1.23 : When will I roam in Vrindavan?
VMA 1.22 : The Upanishads do not reveal Vrindavan
VMA 1.21 : Vrindavan enchants everyone