Two types of uttama adhikaries

[Guest guest]

> > There are two

> > > descriptions of kanistha-, madhyama- and uttama-adhikaris in Lord

> > > Caitanya's teachings to Sanatana Goswami. One is based on sraddha

> > > (faith) and another on rati-prema (attachment and love). You are

> > > talking of the uttama-adhikari who is categorized as per rati-prema

> > > and I am talking of the uttama-adhikari who is categorized based on

> > > sraddha.

> >

> > As a further comment, I wanted to mention that both Type 1

> > uttama-adhikari and Type 2 uttama-adhikari are referred to by Srila

> > Prabhupada as "uttama-adhikari". Here are three instances for each:

> >

> > Type 1 uttama-adhikari: NOI 5 purport, Madhya 15.106 purport, Madhya

> > 16.74 purport

> >

> > Type 2 uttama-adhikari: As "uttama-adhikari": Isopanisad 6 purport, NOD

> > Ch 17 para 1, TLK Ch 15

>

> Prabhu, I have my doubts regarding this. What is the proof that both

> categories of description of uttama adhikaries are not describing the same

> level from different angles?

 

Prabhu, one of the identifying characteristics of the type 1 UA is that he

has "firm faith". The word drdha-sraddha (firm faith in Krsna) shows that

the type 1 UA doesn't necessarily have to be in bhava/prema because if he

was to only be in that level of realization, then the word drdha-sraddha

wouldn't be an identifying characteristic of such a devotee. Drdha-sraddha

as an identifying characteristic would be apply to devotees who are on or

above nistha level of realization.

 

One of the identifying characteristics of the type 2 UA is that he is

"seeing" the Lord's saccidananda form constantly.

 

sarva-bhutesu yah pasyed bhagavad-bhavam atmanah

bhutani bhagavaty atmany esa bhagavatottamah

 

"'A person advanced in devotional service sees within everything the soul

of souls, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Sri Krsna. Consequently he

always sees the form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead as the cause of

all causes and understands that all things are situated in Him.'"

 

This is a quotation from Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.2.45). And seeing is a

feature of prema which is quoted in the purport to this verse.

 

Or, according to Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti's commentary on the above

verse, "seeing" refers to overwhelming desire to see the form of the Lord

such as in Sukadeva Goswami, etc.

 

So the identifying characteristics are different, we have to conclude that

these two uttama adhikaris are different.

 

> Why has Prabhupada not informed us explicitly

> of such an important point?

 

Well, Prabhupada has also referred so many times to many types of devotees

as "pure devotees". What about that?

 

> You have given the proof of vaco vegam verse from NOI in the following

> manner:

>

> > The presence of

> > these urges indicates that the guru may not in bhava or prema. Yet Srila

> > Rupa Goswami says prithvim sa sisyat: "he can make disciples all over

> > the world."

> >

> > Had it been that the "uttama-adhikari" guru should only be in bhava or

> > prema, where is the question of any of his sensual urges and the

> > injunction that he should tolerate them?

> >

> > Now the type 2 uttama-adhikari is BEYOND these six urges since his love

> > for Krsna is already developed (see the purport to SB 11.2.45). So it

> > cannot be that Srila Prabhupada is equating him with the person who is

> > qualified to be a guru in NOI verse 1. Therefore the person who is

> > qualified to be a guru according to NOI verse 1 is referred to here in

> > the purport under analysis and is the same as type 1 uttama-adhikari

>

> Beyond (or transcending or controlling) the six urges does not imply the

> absence of the six urges. Let us not forget that in the purport Prabhupada

> speaks on the how to control these urges by using them in the service of

> Krsna. I feel that it cannot be concluded from this verse that this verse

> is for the type1 ua, as you call it.

 

When one reaches, bhava, one of the symptoms is "He is always detached from

all material attraction."

 

Srila Prabhupada explains it thus in NOD:

 

 

---quote---

 

Detachment

The senses are always desiring sense enjoyment, but when a devotee

develops transcendental love for Krsna his senses are no longer attracted by

material desires. This state of mind is called detachment. There is a nice

example of this detachment in connection with the character of King Bharata.

In the Fifth Canto, Fourteenth Chapter, verse 43, of Srimad-Bhagavatam it is

stated, "Emperor Bharata was so attracted by the beauty of the lotus feet of

Krsna that even in his youthful life he gave up all kinds of attachments to

family, children, friends, kingdom, etc., as though they were untouchable

stools."

Emperor Bharata provides a typical example of detachment. He had

everything enjoyable in the material world, but he left it. This means that

detachment does not mean artificially keeping oneself aloof and apart from

the allurements of attachment. Even in the presence of such allurements, if

one can remain unattracted by material attachments, he is called detached.

In the beginning, of course, a neophyte devotee must try to keep himself

apart from all kinds of alluring attachments, but the real position of a

mature devotee is that even in the presence of all allurements, he is not at

all attracted. This is the actual criterion of detachment.

 

---unquote---

 

 

Please note that in bhava, "his senses are no longer *attracted* by

material desires." The reason why "material desires" are mentioned here is

according to Madhurya Kadambini, even in Bhava, there is a "tinge" of

material desires or whatever. In bhava, the senses are "no longer attracted"

by them. Attraction is the same as urge. The senses are not attracted means

that the sensual urges are absent.

 

The whole program of vaidhi-sadhana-bhakti is to somehow or other "engage"

the senses in KC, but in bhava-bhakti, you don't need to "engage" them since

they are not attracted to material "allurements". They are already attracted

to Krsna.

 

But the NOI 1 talks of "tolerating" the urges and controlling the senses (by

devotional service, of course) which means that the senses or mind are still

*attracted* by material desires.

 

So aren't these two different? In one you have to put in effort and in

another you don't need to put in any effort since it is automatic.

 

> Like for example, Srila Yamunacharya, guru of Srila Ramanujacharya

> according to my understanding falls in your type2 category because he was

> a very great devotee and atleast on the bhava platform. But still he wrote

> this verse, yadavadhi bata nari sangame smaryamane... That means the

> thought was there but he immediately rejected it because he constantly

> enjoying the everfresh nectar from the lotus feet of Krsna (which should

> mean that he was a bhava or prema bhakta).

 

If you take this reasoning, you can also cite Bhaktivinoda Thakura,

Narottama das Thakura and Raghunatha dasa Goswami from our own line who said

so many things like that, even though they were absorbed in prema and there

is no question of their mind/senses being attracted/urged to enjoy maya. It

is my understanding that the acaryas have stated things like that simply to

help us learn (loka-siksa).

 

Either it is loka-siksa or it is his factual description of his own bhava or

prema status. But it cannot be prema, because the Madhurya Kadambini states

that the mind and senses of one in prema-bhakti are totally surcharged with

the bliss of KC so much so that there is no question of their senses being

*attracted* to the sense objects, though that may be the case while one is

still rendering sadhana-bhakti, especially vaidhi-bhakti. As quoted above,

even in bhava-bhakti, the "attraction" to sense objects or "allurements" are

absent.

 

What to speak of bhava, even in asakti, the mind WITHOUT EFFORT is attracted

TO Krsna AWAY FROM MATTER, according to Madhurya Kadambini. I quote below

(emphasis mine) from an English translation of Madhurya Kadambini published

by Dina Bandhu Prabhu (I don't have the Sanskrit text at hand, I am sorry):

 

 

---quote---

 

"PRIOR TO ASAKTI, on realizing his mind has been overpowered by material

objects and desires, the devotee BY HIS DELIBERATE EFFORT almost withdraws

his mind from them and tries to fix it on the Lord's form, qualities, and

so on. AT THE APPEARANCE OF ASAKTI, however, absorption of the mind in the

Lord is AUTOMATIC, WITHOUT EFFORT. Even at the stage of nistha, a devotee is

unable to detect how and when his mind withdraws from the topics of the

Lord's forms, qualities, and so on and fixes itself on material affairs. On

the contrary, at the stage of asakti one doesn't know how and when his mind

withdraws from the material topics and spontaneously absorbs itself in the

topics of the Lord."

 

---unquote---

 

 

So this is just in asakti, what to speak of bhava or prema??? Not only is

the mind is without any effort attracted to Krsna, but VCT says that the

devotee doesn't even know HOW the mind goes towards Krsna! Where is the

question of the urges of the senses towards sense objects then at the stage

where one is constantly seeing (or overwhelmingly desiring to see as in

Sukadeva Goswami) Krsna, which is prema!!!

 

The senses and minds of atmaramas such as Sukadeva Goswami are NOT attracted

to material nature. He was parinisthito 'pi nairgunye, situated in

transcendence beyond the three modes of nature. That means that he didn't

have the six urges. Yet he was attracted to Krsna and that is taken as proof

that Krsna is transcendental to material nature.

 

Another point is that it is not that every statement made by an acarya

absorbed in bhava/prema is a description of his bhava/prema status. For

example, in the Mukunda-mala-stotra by King Kulasekhara, you find the

following verses:

 

"O lotus-eyed Lord, please sustain our lives as we constantly relish the

nectar of meditating on Your lotus feet, with our palms prayerfully joined,

our heads bowed down, our bodily hair standing up in jubilation, our voices

choked with emotion, and our eyes flowing with tears." (18)

 

"O Cupid, abandon your residence in my mind, which is now the home of Lord

Mukunda's lotus feet..." (22)

 

"O Lord, the powerful thieves of my senses have blinded me by stealing my

most precious possession, my discrimination, and they have thrown me deep

into the pitch-dark well of delusion. Please, O Lord of lords, extend Your

hand and save this wretched soul." (36)

 

So verse 18 talks of ecstatic symptoms, while verses 22 and 36 seem to talk

of lower levels of bhakti. Both types cannot be taken as evidence regarding

King Kulasekhara's own devotional experience or status. So one of them has

to be loka-siksa and the other a factual description of his own experience.

 

King Kulasekhara, in his Perumal-tirumoli, has even expressed the

transcendental feelings of Mother Devaki and Mother Kausalya. And he is

accepted in the Sri Vaisnava tradition as a nitya-siddha associate of the

Lord, and as one of the Alvars who are literally "immersed (in the

devotional mellows)".

 

Similarly, in Siksastaka, Lord Caitanya says in the verse 2, durdaivam

idrsam ihajani nanuragah "I have no attraction to the holy names of the

Lord" while in verse 7, He says yugayitam nimesena... "I feel a moment of

separation from Lord Govinda to be a yuga." Both these verses cannot be

taken literally regarding a prema-bhakta's experience even though if a

prema-bhakta says like that. Indeed, according to Bhaktivinoda Thakura's

Bhajana-rahasya, each of the verses of Siksastaka reveals the experiences of

a devotee while he is progressing from sraddha to prema.

 

So the point is that not every statement made by an acarya need be taken

literally as a description of his prema status.

 

Your servant,

VG Das

 

PS. BTW, Yamunacarya was also a nitya-siddha associate of the Lord according

to the Sri Vaisnava authorized biography of Ramanujacarya, Prapannamrta,

that is referred to by Srila Prabhupada.