Prema-pattanam of Rasikottamsa

A book that I have been interested in finding for a considerable amount of time is the Prema-pattanam of Rasikottamsa (Yadupati Bhatta). I did not know much about this book other than that it has been quoted once or twice here and there, especially in relation to Prabodhananda and Harivamsa and their rejection of many of the rules and regulations of vidhi bhakti.

I have, as I sometimes do in such cases, dropped everything [though I can ill afford to] to go through the book, typing furiously verses and tika for the Gaudiya Grantha Mandir. Will I manage to finish in this race against all external pressures, in this extreme act of renunciation for the sake of rasa? Probably not! But in the meantime, I am discovering a delicious bit of rasika literature, and it is incumbent on ME (!) to share it, after first tasting whatever few drops of this fruit of this all-too-little-known early 18th century Gaudiya text I can manage to swallow. For this is what the Grantha Mandir was meant for!

Edition and commentary

The copy I found in Shrivatsa Goswami's library was printed in 1972 with an excellent commentary attributed to "Adbhuta" (as stated in the colophon) called Prema-sarvasva. These are accompanied by a prose translation of both the commentary and the original verses, as well as a Brij Bhasha verse translation of the same by one Dharma Chand of the Sri Krishnashram in Vrindavan. This edition has been honored by brief blessings and forewords written by Akhandananda Saraswati and Hariharananda Saraswati (Swami Karpatriji Maharaj). Only 300 copies were made.

Whether or not Adbhuta is actually a different person from Rasikottamsa is something that may be drawn into question as there are indications in the commentary that it was written by the author himself. Dr. Swapna Sharma, in her Gadādhara Bhaṭṭa: Paramparā aura Sāhitya (Vrindavan: Braj Gaurav Prakashan, n.d.), in several places conflates remarks in the commentary with the main text of the work.

One verse quoted in the the commentary has also been attributed to Rasikottamsa by Ananta Dasji in his Rasa-darśana, even though Adbhuta clearly says that it was written by some "ancients" (yathā prācīnaiḥ). Nice verse:

prātaḥ paṅkaja-kuḍmalaya-dyuti-padaṁ tat-keśarollāsavān
artho'bhyantara-saurabha-pratinibhaṁ vyaṅgyaṁ camatkāri yat |
dvi-trair yad rasikaiś ciraṁ sahṛdayair bhṛṅgair ivāsvādyate
tat kāvyaṁ na punaḥ pramatta-kukaver yat kiñcid ujjalpitam ||

The ancients have written: A superior poet's verse is like a blossoming, fragrant lotus in the morning. Its words are like its petals , their meaning its whorl and stamen, and suggested meaning, when astonishing, is comparable to the fragrance it emits from within. Two or three rasikas are like the bumblebees who relish the honey sweetness of the lotus poem. That alone is poetry and not the mere ejaculations of some intoxicated would-be poet. (Commentary to passage 12g describing the parks that surround the city of love, where the trees are said to be different literary products like poems and plays.)

Doubts about the authorship of the commentary are further buttressed by a similarity of mood and language. Further instances adding fuel to the suspicion will be given below. In some cases, it may be that the commentary and text have been confused. Whatever the case, the commentary is extremely helpful in exposing the author's intent in a sweet and poetic Sanskrit and it may be said that the two form a single whole.

Author and Date

According to some souces, Rasikottamsa was one of two sons born to Gadadhar Bhatta, the other being Vallabha Rasik, who is known primarily for his Brij Bhasha poems, some of which have been quoted in Dharma Chand's translation. There are a couple of problem with this story.

First, the date of composition seems to be much later than the time of Gadadhar Bhatta (a somewhat younger contemporary of Sri Jiva Goswami), since the author quotes Vishwanath Chakravarti's commentary to Dāna-keli-kaumudī. [And I am thankful for that bit of information because I was having my doubts about Vishwanath's authorship of this work.] According to Krishna Chaitanya Bhatta, an acharya of the Gadadhar Bhatta family, basing his opinion on a number of researchers, Rasikottamsa was a contemporary of Vishwanath.

Second, the reference to Rasika Vallabha as being "my" younger brother is found in the commentary, not the text itself. So unless the author and commentator are the same person, this tells us nothing about Rasikottamsa. Furthermore, if Rasika Vallabha were the son of Gadadhar Bhatta (1560-1630?), how could he be cited by his older brother in the commentary to a work that shows signs of being written much later on?

After summarizing the speculations of various historians of Hindi literature on the dates of the two brothers, Sharma estimates that they were born in the mid 17th century and lived into the first quarter of the 18th.

The commentator Adbhuta mentions in the commentary to verse 2 that Rasikottamsa wrote another work called Mukunda-kundāṣṭakam, of which I have no further information.

Other than this sparse information, unfortunately, nothing is known about this author other than that his name, rasikottaṁsa or "foremost of the rasikas," seems to have been a worthy one. The word uttaṁsa can mean either a crown or a flower decoration for the ears, so the name rasikottaṁsa would mean one who is the crowning glory of the rasikas, or one who decorates the ears of the rasikas [with his poetry], or "the rasika who decorates the ears [of Krishna]". How Yadupati Bhatta came to have this name may be explained in the commentary to his own verse in Prema-pattanam:

māṁ vīkṣya dayita-purato
rasikottaṁsas tavāgato'yam iti |
devi vaco bhavadīyaṁ
madīyam aniśaṁ manas tudati ||

Seeing me standing before her beloved Radha said to him, "Look, your 'Rasikottamsa' has arrived.' Remembering these words of yours, O Goddess, my mind is constantly being overwhelmed." (Verse 140/52)

Commentary: The author of this work, upon completing a verse with the words harir jayati [No verse in the book contains these words.], he offered it to his Lord and went to sleep. Then he suddenly had a dream in which he saw himself in the presence of the divine loving couple. Radha said to Krishna, "Here, the rasika who decorates your ears [with his poetry] has arrived." As soon as he heard these words, [Rasikottamsa] woke up and wrote down this verse.

... Radha spoke these words because she saw him coming as an intimate servant (ceṭaka). And showing great mercy upon him and seeing him as a source of pleasure to Krishna, she said to Krishna, "he is yours" and not "he is mine." With this in mind, [Rasikottamsa says] "O Goddess! O form of transcendent, divine auspiciousness ! My divine ruler [svāminī], Radhe! Hearing you call me Krishna's servant is bringing great pain to my mind, since you did not accept me as your own servant." 

This clearly shows that even [what would ordinarily be called] great happiness is unhappiness [in the "city of love"]. It should also be noted that hearing the name Rasikottamsa in the dream is the reason that the author is known by that name.

The subject matter of the book

This book has 242 verses with 104 of them original to Rasikottamsa. There is also a prose section at the beginning that sets the scene for the portion that follows, which tells us that the "city of love" (none other than Braj) has 35 contradictory "laws" that have been put in place by the king Madhuramechaka's wife Rati. These reversals of natural law in that kingdom are explained with examples from various sources, including principally the Bhāgavatam, Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, Govardhan's Ārya-saptaśatī, Jayadeva's Gīta-govinda, Padyāvalī, etc., but also a number of anonymous verses that I could not trace.

The basic premise is that there exists a glorious "city of love" or prema-pattanam, which is situated in the sky (gagane), where everything is topsy-turvy. Adbhuta gives several meanings for "in the sky", concluding it means "in the sky of the hearts of those who know rasa" and is thus an indication of its incomprehensibility, its inaccessibility to the unworthy and its great secrecy (gagane rasajñānāṁ hṛdayākāśe tatraiva sadā sthitaṁ, na tu tair bahiḥ prakaṭitam ity arthaḥ. etena tasya durūhatvād anadhikāritvād rahasyatvāc ca sugopyatvam uktam.) In other words, though elsewhere the city of love is identified with Braj-Vrindavan, it is not to be thought of as a physical place to be perceived externally, but internally.

The other name of this city is naika-śiro-mandiram, "the home of those who do not have one head."

The city's ruler is madhuramecaka ("sweet and black"), who has two wives, Mati ("reason") and Rati ("love"). Mati finds that Rati is the king's favorite and is moreover disrespected by her co-wife, she decides to leave her husband's city and go home to get some peace of mind. But her father, Agama, is poverty stricken and so she is forced to depend on some brahmin boys who go begging for her maintenance. In the meantime, Rati is given complete control of the kingdom by her husband and she proceeds to overturn all the rules that were made by Mati, ordaining the opposite.

In his commentary, Adbhuta goes into great deal into the meaning of these various allegorical figures, which have at least two levels, one of which is that the king is Krishna and Rati is Radha. Ratipati, "husband of Rati" is of course a name for Cupid, which "sweet 'n' black" also indicates, as black is the color of śṛṅgāra-rasa.

There are 35 contradictions found in the city of love.

(1) yatrādharma eva dharmaḥ sthāpitaḥ | Abandonment of duty has become a duty.
(2) yathāsatyam eva satyam | Untruth is truth.
(3) yathānācāra evācāraḥ | Improper behavior is the norm.
(4) tathānādara evādaraḥ | Disrespect is respect.
(5) yatrāsantoṣa eva santoṣaḥ | Dissatisfaction is satisfaction.
(6) yatrāvinaya eva vinayaḥ | Impoliteness is politeness.
(7) yatrālaṅkṛtir evānalaṅkṛtiḥ | Ornamention is to be without ornaments.
(8) yatra puruṣā eva striyaḥ | Men are women.
(9) yatrājñānam eva jñānam | Ignorance is knowledge.
(10) yatra parājaya eva jayaḥ | Defeat is victory.
(11) yatra nikṛṣṭatvam evotkṛṣṭatvam | Lowliness is superiority.
(12) yatra tama eva prakāśaḥ | Darkness is light.
(13) yatra niṣedha eva vidhiḥ | Prohibitions are injunctions.
(14) yatrānuttaram eva pratyuttaram | Silence is the answer.
(15) yatrāśirasa eva sahasra-śirasaḥ | Having no head is having a thousand heads.
(16) yathācakṣuṣa eva sahasra-cakṣuṣaḥ | Having no eyes is having a thousand eyes.
(17) yatrābāhava eva sahasra-bāhavaḥ | Having no arms is having a thousand arms.
(18) yatrāpada eva sahasra-padaḥ | Having no feet is having a thousand feet.
(19) yatrānidratvam eva sa-nidratvam | Where wakefulness is sleep.
(20) yatra viyoga eva saṁyogaḥ | Where separation is union.
(21) yatra saṁyoga eva viyogaḥ | Where union is separation.
(22) yatra maraṇam eva jīvanam |Where death is life.
(23) yatra laghutvam eva gurutvam | Where lightness is heaviness.
(24) yatra stutir eva nindā | Where praise is censure.
(25) yatra nindaiva stutir asti | Where censure is praise.
(26) yatra natir eva paramonnatiḥ | Where bowing down is the greatest upliftment.
(27) yatra vyaya eva lābhaḥ | Where spending is gain.
(28) tatra vismaraṇam eva smaraṇam | Where forgetfulness is memory.
(29) yatrāgarvatvam eva sa-garvatvam | Where pridelessness is pride.
(30) yatra sakāmatvam evākāmatvam | Where desire is freedom from desire.
(31) yatra ravir eva candraḥ | Where the sun is the moon.
(32) yatra candra eva raviḥ | Where the moon is the sun.
(33) yatrāsanta eva santaḥ | Where the unholy are saints.
(34) yatrāsatītvam eva satītvam | Where infidelity is chastity.
(35) yatra satītvam evāsatītvam | Where the faithful woman is considered unchaste.

The commentary adds four more such contradictions at the very end: where infamy is glory, where chastisment is mercy, where non-poets are poets, and where students are teachers. He gives one example for each. But there are so many contradictions, how can one mention them all. This is simply an indication of the general direction to take in understanding the world of love. What must be borne in mind is that love is by definition crooked in its movement (svabhāva-kuṭilā) and thus those who experience this love often behave in ways that are puzzling to the ordinary observer, as stated by Rupa Goswami himself:

dhanyasyāyaṁ navaḥ premā yasyonmīlati cetasi |
antar-vāṇībhir apy asya mudrā suṣṭhu sudurgamā ||

The behavior of the fortunate person in whose heart such a new love has blossomed is truly difficult for even those knowledgeable in the sacred sciences to understand. (BRS 1.4.17)

Dharma and adharma

In Prema-pattana, both Harivams, as the author of Rādhā-rasa-sudhā-nidhi (RRSN), and Prabodhananda Saraswati, as the author of Vṛndāvana-mahimāmṛta (VMA), are quoted under the rubric "where irreligion is established as religion."

kaiśorādbhuta-mādhurī-bhara-dhurīṇāṅga-cchaviṁ rādhikāṁ
premollāsa-bharādhikāṁ niravadhi dhyāyanti ye tad-dhiyaḥ |
tyaktāḥ karmabhir ātmanaiva bhagavad-dharme'py aho nirmamāḥ
sarvāścarya-gatiṁ gatā rasa-mayīṁ tebhyo mahadbhyo namaḥ ||

<

Those who always meditate on Radhika, whose form is the amazing embodiment of all the amazing sweetness of adolescence, filled with the weighty enthusiastic joy of love and whose intelligence has become one with her, are themselves abandoned by duty and they do not even have any possessiveness towards the regulative duties of Bhagavat-dharma. They have attained the most amazing goal filled with rasa and so I repeatedly bow down to them. (82)

likhanti bhuja-mūlato na khalu śaṅkha-cakrādikaṁ
vicitra-hari-mandiraṁ na racayanti bhāla-sthale |
lasat-tulasi-mālikāṁ dadhati kaṇṭha-pīṭhe na vā
guror bhajana-vikramāt ka iha te mahā-buddhayaḥ ||

Who are those greatly intelligent persons here who on the strength of their worship of the guru do not stamp their arms with the conch and discus, who do not mark their foreheads with the beautiful temple of Hari, and who do not place the string of tulasi beads around their necks? (81)

Those Gaudiyas who use the RRSN as a religious book interpret the word mahā-buddhayaḥ ("most intelligent") in RRSN 81 as mahā-abuddhayaḥ ("most foolish"), even though Prabodhananda uses the term in its clear sense in VMA (5.58).

To be properly understood, both verses should be read together as the former makes clear what is meant by mahā-buddhayaḥ. Harilal Vyas points out that the intention of the verses is made clear by the words tyaktāḥ karmabhir ātmanaiva, which means that these devotees do not intentionally or consciously abandon religious principles, but are abandoned by them.

kuru sakalam adharmaṁ muñca sarvaṁ sva-dharmaṁ
tyaja gurum api vṛndāraṇya-vāsānurodhāt |
sa tava parama-dharmaḥ sā ca bhaktir gurūṇāṁ
sa kila kaluṣa-rāśir yad dhi vāsāntarāyaḥ ||

Do all kinds of irreligious works, abandon your own prescribed duties, give up your guru if need be in order to live in Vrindavan. That is your supreme duty and that is devotion to your gurus! Whatever is an obstacle to residence in Vrindavan is a mound of sin. (VMA 17.49)

This appears to confirm that, as a direct neighbor of the Radha-vallabha temple, Rasikottamsa of the Gadadhar Bhatta family was aware that both Prabodhananda and Harivams shared a common attitude towards the external rules, regulations and rituals of religion and that he was sympathetic to this attitude.

Heads and no heads

As mentioned above, an alternate name of the kingdom of love was "the home of those who do not have one head" (verse 6). This idea appears again in the list of contents as subject #15, "Where having no head is having a thousand heads."

In the commentary to verse 6, Adbhuta quotes the verse by his younger brother (?) Rasika Vallabha:

gagana-talād avani-talaṁ 
daiva-vaśād etya sukha-nivāsāya |
pṛcchati muhuḥ sa-śirasaḥ
 sadanam aśirasaḥ paraṁ prema ||

When supreme love fortuitously came down from the heavens on the earth, in order to find a place where it could live happily, it constantly asked the whereabouts of the home of one without a head from those with heads.

This is followed by a number of other quotes, most of which seem to be either Adbhuta or Rasikottamsa's own compositions:

na pītam amṛtaṁ mayā dina-niśākṛtor antare
vanāgama-virodhitā bata kṛtā na sītā-pateḥ |
na puṇya-salilāplutaṁ nija-śiraḥ śivāyārpitaṁ
mudhā bhavitum īhate mama mano rater āspadam ||

I did not drink of the nectar found between the sun and the moon. I did not protest against the banishment of Rama to the forest. I did not immerse myself in the holy waters nor surrender my head to Shiva, so futile is my hope of ever attaining divine love (rati).

This verse may also be by Rasika Vallabha since there is a Brij Bhasha song that seems to be a translation of it. Otherwise, they are introduced by the words yathā vā, which seems to be the mark of original verses from Rasikottamsa's pen [even though these happen to be in the commentary].

dūre lagnaṁ prema-phalaṁ sarvathaiva yad īhase |
nidhehi rasika svīyaṁ śiraḥ sva-padayor adhaḥ ||

If you really want that fruit of love that is hanging so far away, then, my dear rasika, place your head below your feet.

mā prema-pūraṁ viśa vā śiraḥ svaṁ
dūraṁ nidhāyaiva padaṁ nidhehi |
vyadhāyi dhātraiva gatoparodhaḥ
premottamāṅgottamayor virodhaḥ ||

Do not go into the stream of love! Or, first leave your head somewhere far away, and then step forward. For God had decreed that there should be opposition between love and even the best of heads. 

These are "interesting" and mysterious utterances indeed. Adbhuta quotes by way of explanation Bhagavatam 11.21.35 and 4.28.65, where the Lord is said to favor indirect speech (parokṣa-vāda). "Indirect speech such as that used in the story of Puranjana in the Bhagavatam, is comparable to the veil by which a newly-wed bride keeps her face covered, thereby increasing her groom's eagerness to see it; it makes one more aware of the delightful wonder that is hidden in those words; it also has the purpose of hiding the object of one's worship and thereby making the literary composition (sandarbha) more dear to the Lord. (atra purañjanopākhyānādivat parokṣatvena kathanaṁ tu nava-vadhūnām avaguṇöhanam iva nijoktīnāṁ darśanotkalikayā camatkāra-viśeṣārthaṁ tathā nijopāsyasya vastunaḥ saṅgopanārtham nija-sandarbhasya bhagavat-priyatvāpādanārthaṁ ca.)

To what extent we can find a parallel between parokṣa-vāda and the so-called sandhyā-bhāṣā of the Tantriks is debatable; there is no necessity to presume the same kinds of secrets that the Tantriks hide with their language. Though the words na pītam amṛtaṁ mayā dina-niśākṛtor antare are tantalizingly Tantrik in flavor, it would seem to me that the purpose is to mock any indirect practices and their incapacity to reach prema or rati. Nevertheless, the mysterious nexus of human and divine love is something to which one is repeatedly drawn when discussing madhura-rasa and the mystery of the similarity and difference of human and divine.

The idea that allegorical interpretation is necessary, even when the allegory is not obvious as in this case or in that of Puranjan, leaves the doors fairly wide open when we try to determine the meaning of a text. At the very least, it leaves the doors open to a multivalenced interpretation that reminds us of the permanent mystery of divine love and the impossibility of ever achieving full understanding.

Saintliness in the city of love.

anyatra pīta-gītā
bhava-bhītā viṣaya-vāsanā-vītāḥ |
santas tad-viparītā
hanta sakhi prema-pattane gītāḥ ||

Elsewhere people drink the Gita, fear entanglement in material life and free themselves from material desires, they are called saintly, O friend, here in the city of love it is the opposite who are so glorified. (verse 239)

There is a lengthy commentary here, first setting up the verse as follows, "Once upon a time, by some good fortune, a holy woman came to Vrindavan from a far off land. She had regularly been reading the Bhagavad-gītā and the Viṣṇu-sahasra-nāma and other general devotional practices, but being a practitioner in the mood of peaceful devotion, she had no concept of the ways of divine love. Then, by another burst of good fortune, she came into contact with an exclusive rasika devotee whose life and soul was the sweet nectar of devotion to the Divine Couple. So she asked him, 'Why do the Vaishnavas here seem to have no respect for the Gita and these other texts?' In answer, the devotee laughed compassionately and slowly spoke this verse."

The commentary goes on to explain how there are different levels of qualification indicated by the three adjectives in the verse, offering plenty of Bhagavata pramana. Those living in Vrindavan have attained a higher adhikara than that for the Gita because they are free of other desires, karma and jnana, they have no more fear of death or worldly suffering, and here also they take care of their bodies, wearing nice clothes and using sandalwood paste and so on without renouncing them as sense objects. [Quotes 11.6.46 here, indicating that this means prasad.]

"So," the rasika devotee said, "now that you understand the behavior of the local people who have attained this ultimate state of perfection, stop trying to change them! O friend! There is a saying, 'Walk seven steps in the company of a saint and you will get his friendship,' (satāṁ sāptapadī maitrī). If you want to become like them, then live here in Vrindavan, sincerely serve the rasika devotees, and bathe in the Yamuna. These are the only means of attaining this state, as we ourselves testify."

That should give you a little taste of what is in this little-known book of the Gaudiya Sampradaya. The 1.01 version can now be found on the Gaudiya Grantha Mandira.