Making a display of devotion is rasābhāsa
 |
| Haridas Thakur's trial. |
Making a display of devotion is rasābhāsa, "a mere semblance of rasa," i,e,, not real rasa. There are three kinds of rasābhāsa pertaining to each of the other rasas. This here is specifically an example of the uparasa of dāsya-rasa.
The following are the characteristics of the uparasa rasābhāsa of dāsya:
kṛṣṇasyāgre’tidhārṣṭyena tad-bhakteṣv avahelayā |
svābhīṣṭa-devatānyatra paramotkarṣa-vīkṣayā |
maryādātikramādyaiś ca prītoparasatā matā ||
(1) being impudent or arrogant or cheeky in the presence of the Lord,
(2) disrespecting His devotees,
(3) seeing other devatās as superior to his own object of worship,
(4) and ignoring the rules.
Here is the example of the first:
prathayan vapur-vivaśatāṁ satāṁ kulair
avadhīryamāṇa-naṭano’py anargalaḥ |
vikira prabho dṛśam ihety akuṇṭha-vāk
caṭulo baṭur vyavṛṇutātmano ratim ||
Showing off a lack of bodily control
dancing even while being repudiated by the devotees,
the fickle, shameless brāhmaṇa boy loudly addressed the deity,
‘O Lord! cast a glance towards me!’
In this way he made a naked display of his own love.
So, showing off your devotional ecstasies in a way that invites the disapproval of the devotees--in short a lack of humility--is rasābhāsa. It is upa-rasa, which means that it is closer to rasa. Why is that? Because at least superficially the actions are correct.
But it is the expression in poetry where the rasābhāsa lies. There is an irony in the last line "He made a naked display of his own love."
"Naked display" was the translation suggested by Hariparshad Das. I thought it was an excellent choice for vyavṛṇutātmano ratim.
Kunjabihari Das suggested the following example from Caitanya-bhāgavata Adi-khaṇḍa in the recital of the glories of Haridas Thakur:
One day, at the home of a well-to-do gentleman, a snake charmer appeared on the scene and began to dance in a variety of fashions. Under the influence of the various mantras he chanted, his associates played the mridanga and kartáls and sang very loudly in a circle around him.
Just at that moment HaridásThákur happened to arrive there and stood off to one side to watch the dancing of the snake charmer. By the power of those mantras, the king of the snakes, Vásuki himself, entered within the body of that snake charmer and began to dance in great eagerness. His associates now began to sing a melody that portrayed the unlimited compassion and kindness of the activities of Srí Krishna in subduing and dancing on the heads of the Kaliya serpent.
When Haridas heard the glories of his worshipful Lord being sung, he fainted to the ground where he remained without exhibiting any symptoms of life, even that he was still breathing. After some time, however, he regained consciousness. Getting up from the ground he roared very loudly. Then Haridas began to dance in great ecstasy.
The snake charmer could perceive that Haridas was possessed by an ecstatic trance of love of God and stood off to one side. Haridas began to roll on the ground while manifesting the ecstatic symptoms of horripilation, tears in the eyes and trembling of the body. He wept loudly while remaining totally absorbed in the Lord’s wonderful qualities, which he now remembered as a result of hearing the songs of the snake charmer and his troupe.
All those present surrounded Haridas and sang in ecstatic joy while he danced. The snake charmer respectfully remained off to one side and watched their fun. Haridas remained possessed by this ecstatic trance for some moments, but when he again became externally aware, the snake charmer resumed his dancing.
The people gathered there had become thoroughly delighted to see his trance of ecstatic love. Wherever they saw the impression of his footprints in the earth they picked up the dust from that spot and smeared it on their bodies in great eagerness.
Now one very pretentious brahmana, who was present there, began to consider that he would also dance, as he said to himself, “I have understood that these stupid and boorish villagers will give respect to any ordinary fellow if he dances.” Thinking like this, he stumbled to the ground as though he was benumbed.
The moment he fell down, where the snake charmer was dancing, the snake charmer began to beat him, in a very angry mood. On the sides, on the back, everywhere, even on his head, the lashes of his cane showed no mercy, and there was no escape. That brahmana was completely shattered by the lashes of his cane. Crying out in distress he had no other recourse but to flee the wrath of the snake charmer. Then the snake charmer continued to dance to his complete self-satisfaction, though the onlookers gathered there were thoroughly amazed, as they wondered within themselves what had just happened.
Finally their curiosity prompted them to ask him, as they continued to stand off to one side while he danced, “Why did you beat that brahmana, and why, when Haridás was dancing, did you remain respectfully at some distance?”
Srí Ananta Dev, present at that moment in the body of the snake charmer, replied to their questions as follows, “What you have asked about is a very mysterious matter and though it is actually indescribable, I will certainly tell you all about it.
“When all of you showed such regard to Haridas due to his absorption in ecstatic love, that deceitful bráhmana, whose heart was burning with jealousy, feigned fainting and so fell to the ground in a tumble. Can someone interrupt the happiness I was feeling through dancing, simply on the strength of his enviousness? Because he had the audacity to try to falsely imitate the Thakur, I punished him appropriately. Only so that others might see him as a great devotee has he behaved in this way. Just to gain some cheap adoration by making one’s position prominent among the people, such deceitful rogues engage in religious activities. Such arrogant fools have no love or affection for Krishna. Only if one is sincere in his motives can he obtain devotion to Krishna.
Vidya Sundar: In some groups they flatly call it sahajiya. They also claim they are in Rupanuga dhara.
This is a bit misleading. At least in the story that Kunjabihari quoted from Chaitanya Bhagavata there is no mention of Sahajiya nor is that word to be found in Rupa Goswami's remarks in BRS.
There from 2.3.82-96 he describes four kinds of sāttvikābhāsa, i.e. apparent and not true ecstatic symptoms. These are progressively inferior to those preceding:
raty-ābhāsa-bhavās te tu sattvābhāsa-bhavās tathā |
niḥsattvāś ca pratīpāś ca yathā-pūrvam amī varāḥ ||83||
(1) Those that arise out of only apparent bhāva, as understood from BRS 1.3 where bhāva-bhakti is described, i.e, not a true sthāyi-bhāva. [Specifically 1.3.45ff] This refers to those devotees who are attached to liberation. Though the example is not given here, I think that the appropriate reference is SB 3.28.34 (q.v.)
(2) Those that arise from only a semblance of sattva, which here means the actual touching of one's emotional center. This is a reference to those who hear the pastimes of Krishna but experience it in the way they would an ordinary story and get an emotional reaction.
(3) Those that arise when there is no sattva at all but through a social imperative of some kind (seeking the approbation of others) and is being faked.
(4) Those that arise in those who harbor an inimical mood. This means identification with the enemy of Krishna, like Rāvaṇa instead of Rāma.
These are then explained with examples. The one that is most frequently referred to in the current context is the third in the list (niḥsattva), i.e:
nisarga-picchila-svānte tad-abhyāsa-pare’pi ca |
sattvābhāsaṁ vināpi syuḥ kvāpy aśru-pulakādayaḥ ||
One who has a slippery heart (i.e. hard on the inside soft on the outside) and has made a practice of showing emotion, even without the heart being touched at all sometimes displays tears and trembling, etc.
The distinction between this and number two is that some materialists have a sentimental nature and may be affected by the story without having any devotion to Krishna. The latter type are purely externally oriented.
The last category is not really of any interest to us, but it is possible that someone listening to the Rāmāyaṇa feels distress at hearing of Rāvaṇa's defeat and sheds tears. Rupa Goswami's examples are about Kamsa and his wrestlers and the listener who identifies with them.
So which of these categories is a Sahajiya? It is clear that Kunjabihari's example of the snake-charmer incident and Haridas Thakur is the third category, but the assumption is that all Sahajiyas are without any rati or sattva cannot be entirely accepted. Like all of us these different factors of inauthentic responses to Krishna bhakti are possible.
The practice of crying in kirtan (abhyāsa) is taken by the Sahajiyas to be a part of their devotional practice and not necessarily as a device to attract followers or for name and fame. It is a seeking out of the emotional experience that may have been experienced before and returning to that through the process of memory, since the emotional experience is actually what is desired. That is what is being cultivated. Is that necessarily lacking authenticity? If the original experience was authentic and one makes that the focus of one's concentration (the ālambana of dhyāna) is that not exactly what bhakti is supposed to be about?
You have felt emotional in kirtan before. Why did that happen? What was it that inspired your tears? Think about the conditions in which Mahaprabhu shed tears for Krishna, or the examples in the Bhagavatam. When you felt the great mercy of Guru and Gauranga. If you contemplate on their mercy along with the memory of the times it has happened before, tears will come.
Uncontrolled displays of emotion are frowned upon in most societies, even in Bengal! This is why the association of close friends and devotees is required, where one can express one's true feelings. But the goal is to go beyond raty-ābhāsa and sattvābhāsa and all the other ābhāsas like nāmābhāsa through cultivation of pure concentration starting with the Holy Name.
This is a bit misleading. At least in the story that Kunjabihari quoted from Chaitanya Bhagavata there is no mention of Sahajiya nor is that word to be found in Rupa Goswami's remarks in BRS.
There from 2.3.82-96 he describes four kinds of sāttvikābhāsa, i.e. apparent and not true ecstatic symptoms. These are progressively inferior to those preceding:
raty-ābhāsa-bhavās te tu sattvābhāsa-bhavās tathā |
niḥsattvāś ca pratīpāś ca yathā-pūrvam amī varāḥ ||83||
(1) Those that arise out of only apparent bhāva, as understood from BRS 1.3 where bhāva-bhakti is described, i.e, not a true sthāyi-bhāva. [Specifically 1.3.45ff] This refers to those devotees who are attached to liberation. Though the example is not given here, I think that the appropriate reference is SB 3.28.34 (q.v.)
(2) Those that arise from only a semblance of sattva, which here means the actual touching of one's emotional center. This is a reference to those who hear the pastimes of Krishna but experience it in the way they would an ordinary story and get an emotional reaction.
(3) Those that arise when there is no sattva at all but through a social imperative of some kind (seeking the approbation of others) and is being faked.
(4) Those that arise in those who harbor an inimical mood. This means identification with the enemy of Krishna, like Rāvaṇa instead of Rāma.
These are then explained with examples. The one that is most frequently referred to in the current context is the third in the list (niḥsattva), i.e:
nisarga-picchila-svānte tad-abhyāsa-pare’pi ca |
sattvābhāsaṁ vināpi syuḥ kvāpy aśru-pulakādayaḥ ||
One who has a slippery heart (i.e. hard on the inside soft on the outside) and has made a practice of showing emotion, even without the heart being touched at all sometimes displays tears and trembling, etc.
The distinction between this and number two is that some materialists have a sentimental nature and may be affected by the story without having any devotion to Krishna. The latter type are purely externally oriented.
The last category is not really of any interest to us, but it is possible that someone listening to the Rāmāyaṇa feels distress at hearing of Rāvaṇa's defeat and sheds tears. Rupa Goswami's examples are about Kamsa and his wrestlers and the listener who identifies with them.
So which of these categories is a Sahajiya? It is clear that Kunjabihari's example of the snake-charmer incident and Haridas Thakur is the third category, but the assumption is that all Sahajiyas are without any rati or sattva cannot be entirely accepted. Like all of us these different factors of inauthentic responses to Krishna bhakti are possible.
The practice of crying in kirtan (abhyāsa) is taken by the Sahajiyas to be a part of their devotional practice and not necessarily as a device to attract followers or for name and fame. It is a seeking out of the emotional experience that may have been experienced before and returning to that through the process of memory, since the emotional experience is actually what is desired. That is what is being cultivated. Is that necessarily lacking authenticity? If the original experience was authentic and one makes that the focus of one's concentration (the ālambana of dhyāna) is that not exactly what bhakti is supposed to be about?
You have felt emotional in kirtan before. Why did that happen? What was it that inspired your tears? Think about the conditions in which Mahaprabhu shed tears for Krishna, or the examples in the Bhagavatam. When you felt the great mercy of Guru and Gauranga. If you contemplate on their mercy along with the memory of the times it has happened before, tears will come.
Uncontrolled displays of emotion are frowned upon in most societies, even in Bengal! This is why the association of close friends and devotees is required, where one can express one's true feelings. But the goal is to go beyond raty-ābhāsa and sattvābhāsa and all the other ābhāsas like nāmābhāsa through cultivation of pure concentration starting with the Holy Name.
Comments
evaṁ harau bhagavati pratilabdha-bhāvo
bhaktyā dravad-dhṛdaya utpulakaḥ pramodāt
autkaṇṭhya-bāṣpa-kalayā muhur ardyamānas
tac cāpi citta-baḍiśaṁ śanakair viyuṅkte
Having thus attained a feeling of love for Bhagavān Hari, [the yogī’s] heart melts out of devotion and the hair on his body stands upraised out of joy. He is repeatedly overwhelmed by tears arising from intense longing. And then he also gradually withdraws the hook of his mind [from Hari, just as one separates a hook from the fish after it is caught].
This verse is further discussed in Prīti-sandarbha, 73.
[The explanation of the verse is as follows:] In this way by following the practice of bhakti mixed with yoga described [in the preceding verses], he attains love (bhāva ) for Bhagavān Hari. The symptoms of bhāva are described in the words beginning with “his heart melts out of devotion,” etc., devotion here referring to remembrance [of Bhagavān, i.e., meditation] and so on. The intent of the word “also” (api) means that even though his mind has through bhāva thus attained such a state of sweetness from the object of his meditation, it slowly detaches itself from it, i.e., liberates itself from that object. This is due to the flaw of deceit [he harbors] in the form of his desire for kaivalya, by which he has been engaged in bhakti as an element of his yoga practice. This deceit was refered to in the words, “in this Bhāgavatam is described the supreme dharma, which completely rejects all deceit” (SB 1.1.2), where in the phrase, “completely rejects all deceit” (projjhita-kaitavaḥ), the prefix pra (“completely”) indicates that the desire for liberation is also considered deceitful (kaitava).
Therefore, the word “hook” [badiśa, used as a metaphor for the mind of the yogī], implies hardheartedness, ignorance of rasa, hypocrisy and seeking only its own self-interest.
(continued)
dhautātmā puruṣaḥ kṛṣṇa-pāda-mūlaṁ na muñcati
mukta-sarva-parikleśaḥ pānthaḥ sva-śaraṇaṁ yathā
A person whose heart is thus purified becomes free of all miseries and never leaves the feet of Bhagavān Kṛṣṇa, just as a traveler does not abandon his home after reaching it. (SB 2.8.6)
Śrī Nārada also said:
na vai jano jātu kathañcanāvrajen
mukunda-sevy anyavad aṅga saṁsṛtim
smaran mukundāṅghry-upagūhanaṁ punar
vihātum icchen na rasa-graho janaḥ
A servant of Mukunda never returns to worldly life the way that others do, O dear Vyāsa. Reflecting on the bliss of embracing the lotus feet of Bhagavān, he does not wish to relinquish them because he has become attached to the taste [of their sweetness]. (1.5.19)
bhaktyā gṛhīta-caraṇaḥ parayā ca teṣāṁ
nāpaiṣi nātha hṛdayāmburuhāt sva-puṁsām
One who is attached to the taste (rasa-grahaḥ ) certainly does not give it up. By this it is indicated that others [have hearts] like iron and stone. Even Bhagavān would not do otherwise [i.e., would not abandon such a devotee], as Brahmā said:
O Master, You never leave the lotus heart of Your own devotees, who savor through their ears the fragrance of Your lotus feet carried by the breeze of the Vedas. They hold onto Your feet with supreme devotion. (SB 3.9.5)
Āvirhotra also said:
visṛjati hṛdayaṁ na yasya sākṣād
dharir avaśābhihito'py aghaugha-nāśaḥ
praṇaya-raśanayā dhṛtāṅghri-padmaḥ
sa bhavati bhāgavata-pradhāna uktaḥ
He is called the best of devotees whose heart Bhagavān, whose name destroys unlimited sins even when uttered helplessly, does not leave. This is so because His lotus feet are bound there by the ropes of love. (SB 11.2.55)
Therefore, in the previous verse quoted above (SB 3.9.5) “Your own” (sva) is the adjective in “Your own devotees” (sva-puṁsām ).
Satyanarayana Dasji Maharaja's comment:
Next Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī gives an example of ābhāsa. In Bhakti Sandarbha it was explained that without bhakti the path of jñāna, yoga and karma cannot give their respective results. Knowing this some yogis and jñānīs practice bhakti with the intention of attaining sāyujyā mukti. This process is described by Kapiladeva in the 28th chapter of the Third Canto. The practicing yogi meditates on a form of Bhagavān in his heart. Gradually his mind becomes focused on Bhagavān and he has no other thoughts. The verse cited in this anuccheda describes the state of yogi who experiences symptoms of prīti. But this prīti is not real because the yogi’s interest is in mukti and not in Bhagavān. Bhagavān is only a means to attain the desired result.
His mind is likened to a hook, which is hard, bent, sharp and without any juice in it. It is hard because it does not have real love; it is bent or not straightforward because his intention is not to love Bhagavān. Just as the fishhook is hard but is covered with soft bait; in the same way, the mind of the yogi is hard, being devoid of real love, but is covered with a show of prīti to get Bhagavān. Even after attaining such a state of mind in which he can have the vision of Bhagavān, he retracts it from Him and tries to enter the thoughtless state of nirvikalpa samādhi. This is because his desire is to attain mukti and not prīti. If it were real prīti then he would not be able to give up Bhagavān. He would find it impossible to do so.
This is confirmed by the words of King Parikṣit and sage Nārada. In fact Bhagavān Himself cannot leave the heart of such a devotee. He becomes bound by the ropes of love. Although Bhagavān is supremely independent yet He relishes being bound by the love of His devotee. On the other hand the heart of a yogī is compared to a hook. It is painful to stay in such a heart.
One may ask: Then why does Bhagavān appear in the heart iof such a yogī? The reply is that He appears by the power of bhakti but because this bhakti is not pure He blesses the yogī with mukti and then leaves.