|
Gopiparanadhana Dasa, Bhaktivedanta Book Trust
(BBT) Sanskrit editor and translator for more than 25 years, addresses
the difference between Western and Eastern approaches to textual
authority. By examining texts from Srila Prabhupada's commentaries
he highlights the difference between Western ideas of plagiarism,
and the primacy of originality, and Eastern notions of ensuring
the safe passage of traditional thought. He also looks at how in
Indian traditions the qualification for authorship is based on the
ability to faithfully transmit the message of previous teachers,
but not necessarily with the same painstaking referencing demanded
in modern texts.
Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada was
the founder and organiser of a large worldwide religious movement;
that he developed it in just twelve years, all after his seventieth
birthday, shows that he was not only practical, innovative and determined
but also spiritually empowered. Although these are valid reasons
to think highly of Srila Prabhupada, he always de-emphasised his
own abilities, preferring to be judged on the more objective grounds
of his bona fide allegiance to the teachings of the Vaisnava
tradition he represented. He did not credit his preaching success
to any special abilities of his own. As he once said, 'I don't claim
that I am a pure devotee or perfect, but my only qualification is
that I am trying to follow the instruction of the perfect.'[1]
In any case, spiritual realisation is essentially a private matter,
not open to objective evaluation. There are too many false saints
who allow their disciples to fanatically advertise them as much
greater than they really are. In the opinion of orthodox Vaisnavas,
the saintliness of a person can be known only by someone just as
saintly. To publicly establish spiritual authority, then, a teacher,
rather than making an open spectacle of his intimate ecstasies,
should simply speak philosophically on the basis of what previous
authorities have said in scripture and on reputable commentaries
of scripture. Srila Prabhupada wanted his own authority to be accepted
according to how faithfully he lived up to that standard.
The Gaudiya school of Vaisnavism to which Srila
Prabhupada belongs was founded by Caitanya Mahaprabhu in Bengal
five centuries ago. This Gaudiya sampradaya is officially
connected with the Vaisnava school established by Madhva in the
thirteenth century and also has strong philosophical and cultural
bonds with the even older Srivaisnava school of Ramanuja. Although
the founding teachers of other Vaisnava schools each wrote
major commentaries on Badarayana Vyasa's Vedanta-sutra and
their followers carried on debate with Advaita impersonalists and
others on the basis of their theistic interpretation of Vedanta,
Caitanya Mahaprabhu chose not to busy His own followers in the
same way. He proposed that the ancient Bhagavata Purana (known
also as Srimad-Bhagavatam) served perfectly well as a natural
commentary on the Vedanta-sutra, having been written by the
same Veda-vyasa. Lord Caitanya advised His associates that since
the Bhagavatam was already available and easily understandable,
there was no need for them to compose new commentaries and sub-commentaries
on Vedanta. Another Purana, the Garuda Purana,
corroborates Lord Caitanya's reliance on Srimad-Bhagavatam:
purnah so 'yam atisayah
artho 'yam brahma-sutranam / bharatartha-vinirnayah
gayatri-bhasya-rupo 'sau / vedartha-paribrmhitah
purananam sama-rupah / saksad bhagavatoditah
dvadasa-skandha-yukto 'yam / sata-viccheda-samyutah
grantho 'stadasa-sahasram / sri-bhagavatabhidhah
This [Purana] is perfectly complete.
It is the purport of the Vedanta-sutra, establishes the
meaning of the Mahabharata, is a commentary on Gayatri
and completes the message of the Vedas. It is the Sama
Veda among the Puranas, spoken directly by an incarnation
of God [Vyasa]. This work, consisting of twelve cantos, hundreds
of chapters and eighteen thousand verses, is called Srimad-Bhagavatam.
Srila Prabhupada considered Srimad-Bhagavatam,
along with Bhagavad-gita, the substantial foundation
of his International Society for Krishna Consciousness. He created
ISKCON primarily for making the theology of the Gita and
Bhagavatam universally accessible, and he directed his disciples
to give first priority to the work of publishing and distributing
these two scriptures, in English and many other languages. Srila
Prabhupada's opus magnum, a multi-volume English translation
of and commentary on Srimad-Bhagavatam, was unfortunately
left incomplete when he passed away in 1977; it was finished, however,
ten years later by the collaborative effort of a few of his disciples.
Having served as an editor of this entire series of the Bhagavatam
and participated in its posthumous completion, I have gathered some
insights into Srila Prabhupada's hermeneutic methodology. In this
essay, I will examine Srila Prabhupada's translation and commentary
on one verse from Srimad-Bhagavatam, with the aim of showing
how he based his own presentation largely on the commentaries of
previous authorities.
Srimad-Bhagavatam is presented as literal,
albeit very ancient, history. A few narrations in this Purana,
however, are intended to be understood as fiction - most of
them allegories devised by one of the most frequent speakers in
the Bhagavatam, the itinerant preacher Narada. The text we
are going to look at belongs to one of these allegorical passages,
the story of King Puranjana told by Narada to Maharaja Pracinabarhi
in Chapters 25-9 of the Fourth Canto. In brief, the imaginary Puranjana
is equivalent to the Everyman figure in medieval European morality
plays. He represents the illusioned soul suffering from misidentification
with his temporary embodiment in material life. Puranjana tries
for years to enjoy with his consort, the female personification
of his material intelligence; he finally succumbs to old age, disease
and death, and then, because of too much attachment to his wife,
takes his next birth as a woman. This female reincarnation of Puranjana
marries a pious king who dies young, leaving his wife bewildered
in lamentation. Our text occurs at this point in the narration,
as the fifty-first verse of Chapter 28. It describes an unexpected
visit by an old, forgotten friend. Here are the original Sanskrit
text and Srila Prabhupada's translation:
tatra purvatarah kascit
sakha brahmana atmavan
santvayan valguna samna
tam aha rudatim prabho
'My dear King, one brahmana, who was an
old friend of King Puranjana, came to that place and began to pacify
the Queen with sweet words.'
Srila Prabhupada's explanation of this verse,
his 'purport', fills two pages. It is based on the short commentaries,
each only a few lines long, by two standard Vaisnava teachers, Sridhara
Svami and Visvanatha Cakravarti. We will first describe these commentaries
and then analyse how Srila Prabhupada used them.
The oldest extant commentary on Srimad-Bhagavatam
was written by Sridhara Svami; older commentaries are
known only by name or by isolated fragments. No solid evidence supports
his exact lifespan; Karl Potter has tentatively assigned his birth
to the beginning of the fifteenth century,[2]
though Sridhara Svami may have lived earlier than that, since less
than a century later Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu described Sridhara
as being a venerable authority. In India, more than one century
is usually needed for a commentator on traditional literature to
become established as an authority.
As far as is known, Sridhara Svami did not belong
to any of the major Vaisnava schools, but was probably an initiated
member of Sankara's Advaita [3]
sampradaya. Nonetheless, the opinions he expressed in his
commentaries on Srimad-Bhagavatam and the Visnu Purana
were staunchly Vaisnava. Caitanya Mahaprabhu's cutting comments
to Vallabha-acarya, a prominent Vaisnava, testify to the great
respect Caitanya had for Sridhara's opinions, as Lord Caitanya's
biographer Krsnadasa Kaviraja recounts:
Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu smilingly replied,
'One who does not accept the svami [husband] as an authority
I consider a prostitute. ... You have dared criticise Sridhara Svami,
and you have begun your own commentary on Srimad-Bhagavatam,
not accepting his authority. That is your false pride. Sridhara
Svami is the spiritual master of the entire world because by his
mercy we can understand Srimad-Bhagavatam. I therefore accept
him as a spiritual master. Whatever you might write due to false
pride, trying to surpass Sridhara Svami, would carry a contrary
purport. Therefore no one would pay attention to it. One who comments
on Srimad-Bhagavatam following in the footsteps of Sridhara
Svami will be honored and accepted by everyone.'[4]
The two-sentence commentary of Sridhara Svami
on the verse we are considering reads: 'The friend who is "very
old" in the sense of being eternal without origin is the Supreme
Lord, in accordance with the statement of revealed scripture beginning
"Two birds ... " He addressed her with sweet words of consolation.'[5]
In the first sentence, Sridhara Svami identifies
old friend of the the queen as every soul's original friend, the
supreme controller (isvara). He supports this opinion by
proposing that this verse of Srimad-Bhagavatam alludes to
one of the oldest Vedic hymns. Although it is well known that the
verse beginning dva suparna occurs in both the Mundaka
and Svetasvatara Upanisads,[6]
less well-known is that the verse is originally found, verbatim,
in the First Mandala of the Rg Veda, the most archaic
of scriptural sources:
dva suparna sayuja sakhaya
samanam vrksam parisasvajate
tayor anyah pippalam svadv atty
anasnann anyo 'bhicakasiti
Two friendly companion birds together reside
on one tree. One of them is eating the tree's fruits while the
other does not eat but simply watches His friend.[7]
Vaisnava commentators explain that this verse
refers to God in His accompanying of the finite soul in all
the soul's incarnations in material existence. In every form of
life, the finite soul and Supreme Soul sit together in the heart,
one of them trying to enjoy material life and the other simply waiting
for His eternal friend to remember Him.
The second commentary drawn upon by Srila Prabhupada
in his purport to Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.28.51 is the one written
by Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura in the second half of the seventeenth
century. Sri Visvanatha Cakravarti was the most prominent spiritual
master of sixth-generation Vaisnavas in Caitanya Mahaprabhu's sampradaya.
Srila Visvanatha led the Gaudiya Vaisnava community in Vrndavana
during the time of the Mogul Emperor Aurangzeb, who persecuted the
Vaisnavas. Visvanatha's own predecessor was the celebrated devotional
poet Narottama Dasa, and among his disciples was Baladeva Vidyabhusana,
author of the Govinda-bhasya commentary on Vedanta-sutra.
Visvanatha Cakravarti's commentary on this verse
is four sentences long. The first sentence suggests a deep meaning
to the allegory of Queen Puranjani's lamentation:
[This verse] implies that in such a mood of
distress as is suffered when one's spiritual master has departed
from this world, a disciple can experience the direct presence
of God.[8]
In this realisation of Visvanatha Cakravarti,
Everyman has been replaced with a rare, special soul - the surrendered
disciple of a pure Vaisnava. Without any other qualifications of
his own, a sincere disciple earns the right to see God simply by
his attachment to his spiritual master. After the guru has passed
away, the serious disciple does not lose his spiritual strength
but continues to advance by remembering and executing the guru's
instructions. The intense devotional mood of separation can develop
into direct vision of the Supreme Person.
Visvanatha Cakravarti's second sentence is an
almost exact repeat of Sridhara Svami's first sentence:
In this context, the friend who is 'very old'
in the sense of being eternal without origin is the Supreme Lord,
in accordance with such statements of revealed scripture as the
one beginning 'Two birds....'[9]
In the Sanskrit commentary tradition, this sort
of 'plagiarism' is considered ethical. It is appropriate to simply
repeat the statements of one's predecessors when further explanation
for one's own generation was not required. To pretend to be original,
furthermore, is frowned upon. Most of Visvanatha Cakravarti's contemporaries
who could read Sanskrit were probably acquainted with Sridhara Svami's
commentary and would have recognised this citation; for those who
were unfamiliar with Sridhara, Visvanatha was being considerate
by passing on the past master's words.
The third sentence explains why the old friend
in the allegory appears as a brahmana:
He [the Supreme Lord in the heart] is a brahmana,
or in other words, he is in the guise of a brahmana;
by this [the present verse] means to inform us that without pure
love of God one can never have direct realization of God's true,
original form.[10]
The sincere disciple represented by Queen Puranjani
is not prepared to fully realise God's personality, but even in
His disguised form the Lord kindly gives the soul instructions that
enable him to gradually achieve perfection.
Visvanatha Cakravarti's fourth sentence explains
another word in the verse, the adjective atma-van (literally,
'self-possessed' or 'self-realised'), which further characterises
the brahmana: 'Self-possessed' here means also having His
original form, which He kept hidden within Himself.[11]
Ordinarily, God, who sits silently within every
person's heart, limits His functions to being a witness, sanctioner
and facilitator of the living being's endeavours. In the case of
the rare soul who has become purified from material desires, God
advises the soul directly from within the heart how to progress
toward liberation. Besides being the Supersoul, however, He is simultaneously
nondifferent from God in His full personal form. Those who progress
beyond liberation to pure devotion thus realise their own personal
relationship with God.
Now we can look at Srila Prabhupada's purport.
He begins by retelling Visvanatha Cakravarti's second sentence,
which, as we have seen, is Sridhara Svami's first sentence and refers
back to the Upanisads and the Rg Veda. Visvanatha
Cakravarti had said:
In this context, the friend who is 'very old'
in the sense of being eternal without origin is the Supreme Lord,
in accordance with such statements of revealed scripture as the
one beginning 'Two birds....'
Srila Prabhupada writes:
The appearance of an old friend in the form
of a brahmana is very significant. In His Paramatma feature,
Krsna is the old friend of everyone. According to Vedic injunction,
Krsna is sitting with the living entity side by side. According
to the sruti-mantra (dva suparna sayuja sakhayah),
the Lord is sitting within the heart of every living entity as
suhrt, the best friend. The Lord is always eager to have
the living entity come home, back to Godhead. Sitting with the
living entity as witness, the Lord gives him all chances to enjoy
himself materially, but whenever there is an opportunity, the
Lord gives good counsel and advises the living entity to abandon
trying to become happy through material adjustment and instead
turn his face toward the Supreme Personality of Godhead and surrender
unto Him.
Srila Prabhupada next presents the idea of Visvanatha
Cakravarti's first sentence, which reads:
[This verse] implies that in such a mood of
distress as is suffered when one's spiritual master has departed
from this world, a disciple can experience the direct presence
of God.
From this, Srila Prabhupada's derives the following:
When one becomes serious to follow the mission
of the spiritual master, his resolution is tantamount to seeing
the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As explained before, this
means meeting the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the instruction
of the spiritual master. This is technically called vani-seva.
In Sanskrit the word vani means 'the faculty
of speech', 'words', and 'instructions'. Seva means 'service'.
A disciple can serve his spiritual master's body (vapuh)
whenever opportunities arise, but more important is serving his
vani. Vani-seva is not limited by the absence of the
person being served. Srila Prabhupada continues in his purport:
Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura states
in his Bhagavad-gita commentary on the verse vyavasayatmika
buddhir ekeha kuru-nandana (Bg. 2.41) that one should
serve the words of the spiritual master. The disciple must stick
to whatever the spiritual master orders. Simply by following
on that line, one sees the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Then Srila Prabhupada renders the third sentence
of Visvanatha Cakravarti:
He [the Supreme Lord in the heart] is a brahmana,
or in other words, he is in the guise of a brahmana;
by this [the present verse] means to inform us that without pure
love of God one can never have direct realization of God's true,
original form.
Srila Prabhupada writes,
The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Paramatma,
appeared before the Queen as a brahmana, but why didn't
He appear in His original form as Sri Krsna? Srila Visvanatha
Cakravarti Thakura remarks that unless one is very highly elevated
in loving the Supreme Personality of Godhead, one cannot see Him
as He is.
Visvanatha Cakravarti's fourth sentence was:
'Self-possessed' here means also having His
original form, which He kept hidden within Himself.
Srila Prabhupada's version of this is:
Nonetheless, if one sticks to the principles
enunciated by the spiritual master, somehow or other he is in
association with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Since the
Lord is in the heart, He can advise a sincere disciple from within.
This is also confirmed in Bhagavad-gita (10.10):
tesam satata-yuktanam
bhajatam priti-purvakam
dadami buddhi-yogam tam
yena mam upayanti te
'To those who are constantly devoted and worship
Me with love, I give the understanding by which they can come
to Me.'
Srila Prabhupada finishes his purport with a citation
from another Vaisnava authority:
In conclusion, if a disciple is very serious
to execute the mission of the spiritual master, he immediately
associates with the Supreme Personality of Godhead by vani
or vapuh. This is the only secret of success in seeing
the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Instead of being eager to
see the Lord in some bush of Vrndavana while at the same time
engaging in sense gratification, if one instead sticks to the
principle of following the words of the spiritual master, he will
see the Supreme Lord without difficulty. Srila Bilvamangala Thakura
has therefore said:
bhaktis tvayi sthiratara bhagavan
yadi syad
daivena nah phalati divya-kisora-murtih
muktih svayam mukulitanjali sevate 'sman
dharmartha-kama-gatayah samaya-pratiksah
'If I am engaged in devotional service unto
You, my dear Lord, then very easily can I perceive Your presence
everywhere. And as far as liberation is concerned, I think that
liberation stands at my door with folded hands, waiting to serve
me - and all material conveniences of dharma [religiosity],
artha [economic development] and kama [sense gratification]
stand with her.' (Krsna-karnamrta 107) If one is very highly
advanced in devotional service, he will have no difficulty in
seeing the Supreme Personality of Godhead. If one engages in
the service of the spiritual master, he not only sees the Supreme
Personality of Godhead but attains liberation. As far as material
conveniences are concerned, they automatically come, just as the
maidservants of a queen follow the queen wherever she goes. Liberation
is no problem for the pure devotee, and all material conveniences
are simply awaiting him at all stages of life.
This single text, of course, is only a tiny sample
of Srila Prabhupada's purports. A much broader survey needs to be
taken before a fair appraisal can be made of how he used his predecessor's
commentaries. The project of researching the sources of Srila Prabhupada's
purports in Srimad-Bhagavatam and Bhagavad-gita As It
Is is only beginning, and requires the ongoing diligence of
any number of disciples and scholars.
Srila Prabhupada was firmly convinced of the relevance
of Srimad-Bhagavatam. In his view, the Bhagavatam's
teachings were timeless, the perennial science of God consciousness.
His own responsibility was simply to translate them without distortion.
If the instructions of his authoritative predecessors were properly
served, the whole world would surely benefit.
Admittedly, the ideas and images Srila Prabhupada
strove to convey in his purports are sometimes difficult for modern
readers to comprehend, what to speak of assimilate. The original
texts he translated are messages from a different world, ancient
and foreign. But Prabhupada felt the urgent need to deliver these
messages as best he could. He was thus always concerned with how
to make the Bhagavatam's enlightening instructions comprehensible
to the average, contemporary public. Certainly not everyone would
understand, but even if only a few readers received benefit from
this transcendental knowledge, the endeavour could be counted as
a great success. Before Srila Prabhupada came to America in 1965
with his first English volumes of Srimad-Bhagavatam, a well-intentioned
person could have questioned him, 'Why present this work, which
has a very small audience? Why not something else, easier and more
popular?' Prabhupada, however, did not think in such a way. To him
it did not matter that there were no readers for Srimad-Bhagavatam;
he created his own readership. In a few years, thousands of
disciples became serious students of the Bhagavatam, and
millions of other people around the world brought the book into
their homes. This is the sign of a great author - that he creates
an audience where there was none.
Notes:
1 Lecture
on Bhagavad-gita 2.1-10, 25 November 1968, Los Angeles.
2
Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, vol. 1, Bibliography,
p. 328.
3
Sri Jiva Goswami (Tattva-sandarbha 27) writes about Sridhara
Svami's association with the Advaita school: samprati madhya-desadau
vyaptan advaita-vadino nunam bhagavan-mahimanam avagahayitum tad-vadena
karvurita-lipinam parama-vaisnavanam sridhara-svami-carananami suddha-vaisnava-siddhantanugata
cet tarhi yathavad eva vilikhyate. 'Srila Sridhara Svami is
a perfect Vaisnava. But to entice the Advaita-vadis - nowadays prominent
all over Madhya-desa and other parts of the country - to become
absorbed in the glories of the Supreme Lord, he mixed some traces
of their theories into his writings.'
4
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Antya-lila 7.115 and 132-136, translation
by Srila Prabhupada. Following is the original Bengali text:
prabhu hasi' kahe,--'svami na mane yei jana
/ vesyara bhitare tare kariye ganana'"..."sridhara-svami nindi'
nija-tika kara! / sridhara-svami nahi mana',--eta 'garva' dhara!"sridhara-svami-prasade
'bhagavata' jani / jagad-guru sridhara-svami 'guru' kari' mani"sridhara-upare
garve ye kichu likhibe / 'artha-vyasta' likhana sei, loke na manibe"sridharera
anugata ye kare likhana / saba loka manya kari' karibe grahana
5
purvataro 'nadir isvarah sakha 'dva suparna' iti sruteh. samna priya-vakyena
sambodhayan.
6
Mundaka Upanisad 3.1.1, Svetasvatara Upanisad 4.6.
7 Rg
Veda Samhita 1.164.20.
8
sva-guru-viraha-vyakuli-bhava-dasayam iva sisyasya bhagavad-darsanam
syad iti dyotayati.
9
tatreti purvataro 'nadir isvarah sakha 'dva suparna' ity-adi sruteh.
10
brahmano brahmana-vesa-dhariti saksat sviya-svarupa-darsanam premna
vina na bhavatiti jnapayatiti smeti bhavah.
11
atma-van antar-acchani-krta-sva-svarupa-yuktah.
|