Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Early History of the Vaishnava Faith and Movement in Bengal, from Sanskrit and Bengali Sources c5.s3: 3. Other Social and Religious Conditions

Early History of the Vaiṣṇava Faith and Movement in Bengal, from Sanskrit and Bengali Sources c5.s3

Language
English

3. Other Social and Religious Conditions

c5.s3.1

From what has been said above there can be no doubt about the independent origin of the Bengal sect, like that of other Vaiṣṇava sects, from the Śrīmad-bhāgavata tradition, and about its debt to the mystic emotionalism interpreted and established by a class of emotional Saṃnyāsins from the time of Śrīdhara. But into the complex texture of Bengal Vaiṣṇavism were also woven ideas from various other non-Vaiṣṇava sources which coloured, to some extent, its inherited Vaiṣṇava tradition. Tenets and practices, left behind by decadent Buddhism and already deep-set in current Hinduism, must have gone far into the religious thoughts and practices of the time.² Vajrayāna and Sahajayāna, characterised by theories of self-fulfilment and consequent corrupt practices, developed early as an obvious protest against the rigours of the Mahāyāna discipline and its difficult ideal of self-denial. Allied with these were all the coarsening features of decadent Tāntra, in both its Hindu and Buddhist guises, which were probably exotics in Bengal, but which had at this time a wild and luxuriant growth on its congenial soil. The teachings of the Vāmācārin (Left-handed) Tāntric schools, with their mystic exaltation of the female principle in the universe, and their emphasis upon the religious value of sexual passion and sexual use of women, formed an undesirable legacy of a great system, and exposed Vaiṣṇavism, with its high erotic possibilities, to considerable temptation. Milder but equally mystic cults, like the Sahajiyā and Nāthism (the former of which became strangely Vaiṣṇavised), had also dangerous erotic tendencies. They preached a doctrine of "naturalism" (*sahaja*) and self-realisation, which in actual practice meant an idealisation of the sensuous, the finding of salvation in and through the senses. Apart from their questionable ideas and mysterious rites, all these hybrid cults encouraged a mixture of mystical metaphysics, emotionalism and sensuality; and if we are to judge from contemporary Vaiṣṇava records, they had hardly any spiritual or aesthetic influence on the religious life of Bengal. Although Caitanya, himself an ascetic and a man of great personal purity, does not appear to have lent countenance to these strange ideas and practices, they yet created the environment into which the Vaiṣṇava tradition entered, and possibly had some general influence on its erotic dogmas.

c5.s3.2

² This obscure subject still awaits detailed critical study. What is offered here is necessarily imperfect and tentative.

c5.s3.3

But Tantra is a term which has been very loosely applied, and its later distorted forms have obscured its proper significance. Whether Buddhist, Vaiṣṇava, Śaiva or Śākta, it implied in its essence a mystic worship of Śakti or Female Energy, exalted in conjunction with the Male Energy in the universe. Its origin is lost in obscurity, but it assumed various forms, and its doctrines spread not only to decadent Buddhism but also to the various sectarian systems of Hinduism. The Vaiṣṇava Pañcarātra system and the Kashmirian Śaiva Āgama are openly Tāntric. It also coloured the orthodox Smārta systems, and the great Raghunandana in his *Tattvas* makes considerable use of Tāntric ideas. Kṛṣṇānanda Āgamavāgīśa, author of *Tantra-sāra*¹ and great exponent of Tāntric doctrines in Bengal, is said to have been (like Raghunandana) a contemporary of Caitanya; and there can be hardly any doubt as to the wide-spread character of Tāntric teaching in Bengal. The Vaiṣṇavism of the time could scarcely escape its influence; Its bipolar system of thought and culture, for instance, must have considerably influenced and shaped the bipolar conception of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa, which Bengal Vaiṣṇavism developed and which is certainly one of its distinguishing features. The Vaiṣṇava Śakti-tattva, the acceptance of Kāma-gāyatrī, and the idea of Rādhā as the Śakti or Energy of Kṛṣṇa point probably to Tāntric influence, both remote and direct. Quotations from Tantra works are scattered throughout the standard Vaiṣṇava treatises of Rūpa, Jīva and other authoritative theorists of the Bengal school. It is not surprising, therefore, that Rādhā figures in a Tāntric light in such later Vaiṣṇava Tantras as the Nārada-pañcarātra; and Rūpa Gosvāmin in his Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi¹ declares that Rādhā is already established in the Tantra (tantre pratiṣṭhitā) as the Hlādinī Mahāśakti of Kṛṣṇa.

c5.s3.4

¹ From internal evidence this work is dated by P. K. Gode (*Ganganath Jha Research Institute Journal*, i, pt. 2, 1944, p. 177-84) between 1500 to 1600 A.D., narrowed down to 1494 and 1530 A.D.

c5.s3.5

¹ Ed. Kāvyamālā, p. 61.

c5.s3.6

In the midst of such conditions Caitanyaism was born. If we are to place any reliance on the picture of contemporary society given by the biographers of Caitanya, who lived not far from his time, there can be no doubt that there was a lamentable decadence of religious life and ideals in Bengal. The tyranny of an alien rule was aggravated by the greater social tyranny of dominant Brahmanism with its protective, but despotic, spirit. Minute rules and restrictions of an unchanging and stringent code of religious and social duties were prescribed, and the effort is best exemplified by the great, but narrowly conservative, work of Raghunandana who was probably an older contemporary of Caitanya. No doubt, the object of such social legislation was to secure stability of conduct, but it afforded little room for expansion and progress, and little escape from inevitable bondage and burden. On the other hand, even the exclusive Brahmanism in its instinct of self-preservation, had to relax itself so far as to adopt deities and countenance practices of strange origins, such as those associated with the local cults of Manasā, Vāśuli¹ and Dharma Ṭhākur. The degraded Sahajiyā and Nāthism, and various phases of decadent Buddhism and Tāntricism, of which we have spoken above and over all of which the mantle of Hinduism was thrown, brought in superstitious rites and doubtful practices which weakened the inherited spirituality of Brahmanism as a religion. The *Caitanya-candrodaya* of Kavikarṇapūra speaks of false ascetics, terrible Kāpālikas and corrupt Tāntrikas; and references are made in other works to the general preference of unclean meat, drink and women. "Religion" laments Vṛndāvana-dāsa "was reduced to a mere form, and there was no faith in men." The times were such as needed a reformer and saviour.

c5.s3.7

¹ Identified by some with the Buddhist Vāgīśvarī or Vajreśvarī. Cf. *Caitanya-bhāgavata*, Ādi ii, where the cults of Manasā, Vāśuli etc. are mentioned. For an account of these popular cults from literary sources, see Asutosh Bhattacharya, *Maṅgala-kāvyer Itihāsa*, Calcutta 1940.—The Dharma cult, as Haraprasad Sastri has now amply demonstrated, with its doctrine of void (*śūnya-vāda*), came out of decadent Buddhism.

c5.s3.8

The city of Navadvīpa (modern Naḍiyā), which witnessed the birth, youth and early manhood of Caitanya, was at that time a famous seat of mediaeval Sanskrit learning; but the kind of learning it favoured is typified by its production of a highly scholastic system of New Logic, the Navya Nyāya². It was also the stronghold of orthodox Brahmanism, as well as of neo-Tāntricism, and produced a stringent social dictator like Raghunandana, as well as a champion of obscure Tāntric rites like Kṛṣṇānanda. Its great reputation for Sanskrit scholarship and orthodoxy drew students from all parts of the country, but it created an arid and intellectual atmosphere, highly materialistic, narrow, proud and even sceptical.³

c5.s3.9

² This scholastic atmosphere should be borne in mind if we were to understand the scholastic trend of the theology of Bengal Vaiṣṇavism.

c5.s3.10

³ कुतर्क युधिया सब अध्यापक मरे। भक्ति हेन नाम नाहि जानये संसारे॥ (*Caitanya-bhāgavata*, Ādi, vi). Similar picture is drawn in Kavikarṇapūra's *Caitanya-candrodaya*.

c5.s3.11

Vedāntism formed the topic of conversation of the cultured few, who looked down upon the emotional abandon of Bhakti as weak and vulgar,¹ but they are characterised by Karṇapūra as pantheists who believed in no other gods than their own selves. The self-satisfied formalism of the orthodox Smārta system, which prescribed religious merit and absolving efficacy to a somewhat mechanical observance of fixed duties and ceremonies, hardly encouraged any exhibition of personal devotional fervour, or any inner sensibility for morality or religion.²

c5.s3.12

¹ The Vaiṣṇava Kīrtana and emotionalism were scoffed at: शुनिलेइ कीर्तन करये परिहास ।...केह बले ज्ञानयोग एड़िया विचार । जन्मलेर प्राय तुल्य कोन व्यवहार ॥ (op. cit., Ādi. ix).

c5.s3.13

² See the story of Śrīvāsa who was turned out of Devānanda's house because on the reading of the Bhāgavata he sobbed and showed signs of devotional emotion (op. cit., Ādi. ix).

c5.s3.14

But there existed in the city a devout Vaiṣṇava community although it was neither a numerous nor an important group. Dissatisfied with their unspiritual surroundings, this religious group used to meet in certain houses to hold religious discourses, to listen to the reading of the Śrīmad-bhāgavata and to satisfy their spiritual longings by an enthusiastic singing of the name, praises or exploits of Śrī-Kṛṣṇa. Even Caitanya's father Jagannātha Miśra, though a Vaidika-Brahman scholar, had devout Vaiṣṇava tendencies, and the family had probably been Vaiṣṇava for generations. His hospitable house is said to have entertained many a venerable Vaiṣṇava guest, who must have created some subconscious impression on Caitanya's mind in his boyhood and youth.

c5.s3.15

This small community must have been inspired and encouraged in its Vaiṣṇava tendencies by Mādhavendra Purī and his disciples: for we find that the most commanding figure of this group was a disciple of Mādhavendra, named Kamalākṣa Bhaṭṭācārya, better known by his other name of Advaita Ācārya. He was an elderly Brahman scholar of Śāntipur who lived for the most part at Navadvīpa, and whose scholarly attainments, pious life and sincere devotion made him a natural leader of his group. He came of distinguished and learned ancestry, and his original home, like that of Caitanya's father, was in Sylhet¹. He was probably older than Caitanya, and an old friend of the family, whom Caitanya's mother accused of having led her two sons to asceticism. There can be no doubt that Advaita very early recognised the power and fell under the spell of Caitanya's rapturous devotion, and a close relationship sprang up between the pious old man and the young religious enthusiast. The *Prema-vilāsa* (ch. i) tells us that at one time Advaita taught the older doctrine of Mukti (Jñāna) and deviated from the emotional creed of Vaiṣṇava Bhakti; and this seems probable from his very title Advaita Ācārya,² which apparently indicates his leanings towards non-dualistic Vedānta¹. The *Caitanya-bhāgavata* describes him as the greatest teacher of Jñāna, Bhakti and Vairāgya (ज्ञान भक्ति वैराग्येर गुरु मुख्यतर). The *Caitanya-caritāmṛta* of Kṛṣṇadāsa also refers unmistakably to Advaita's leanings towards Jñāna-mārga, and speaks of occasions when his views did not receive entire approval of Caitanya (Ādi xii. 40; xvii. 67). It is highly probable that Advaita, following the tradition of Śrīdhara Svāmin and Mādhavendra Purī, believed in tempering intellectual Advaitaism with emotional Bhakti. But he seems to have very closely identified himself with the new movement, and influenced its course of development to such an extent that he came to be regarded in the later history of the sect as one of the five Tattvas or Realities of the new faith². It is also recorded piously that Advaita was an Avatāra of Śiva and preceded Caitanya in his descent to the world, and that it was in response to Advaita's prayer and appeal that the descent of Caitanya took place¹. Whatever may be the value of this belief, there can be no doubt that in spite of his Vedāntic scholarship, Advaita was the precursor of the devotional Vaiṣṇava tendency which later on took definite shape as Caitanyaism; and the small band of devout men who gathered round him formed the nucleus and presented the incipient features which were to mark the course of the new movement. They prepared the way for Caitanya and welcomed him as their leader; and to his life and personality, therefore, which gathered together the prevalent religious forces, we must now turn our attention.

c5.s3.16

¹ His father Kubera Tarka-pañcānana is said to have been a *dvāra-paṇḍita* of Divya-simha, Rājā of Lāuḍ in Sylhet, who himself later on became a devout Vaiṣṇava under the name of Lāuḍiya Kṛṣṇadāsa and wrote an account of the early life of Advaita. The story of Advaita's life is told in Bengali by Advaita's follower and disciple, Īśāna Nāgara, in his *Advaita-prakāśa* (ed. Amrita Bazar Patrika Office, Calcutta, no date), which is said to have been composed in Saka 1490=1568 A.D., when its author was an old man of over seventy. Īśāna tells us that Lāuḍiya Kṛṣṇadāsa wrote an account of Advaita's early life in a Sanskrit work, entitled *Bālya-līlā-sūtra* (published by Acyuta Charan Chaudhuri, with a Bengali metrical translation, B. S. 1322=1916 A.D.) on which Īśāna's own work professes to draw considerably. One must confess to serious doubts regarding the genuineness of the printed texts of these two works, manuscripts of which are not forthcoming anywhere. By a critical examination of their contents, Bimanbihari Majumdar (*Sri-Caitanya-cariter Upādān*, Calcutta University 1939, pp. 433-465 and 473-480) makes out a good case that the works are modern fabrications.

c5.s3.17

² Attempts have been made to interpret the title Advaita fancifully, as signifying identity with Hari (*i.e.* Caitanya) or as meaning 'advitīya' or unique. See Amar Nath Ray in *Udbodhana*, Agrahāyaṇa 1337 B.S., pp. 685 f.

c5.s3.18

¹ See, for instance, the report of his conversation with Nityānanda in C-C, Madhya xii, 193 f; his Mukti interpretation of *Yoga-vāsiṣṭha* in Ādi, xii, 40; his explanation of Jñāna-mārga in Ādi, xvii, 67, etc. Tradition alleges that Advaita's two disciples, Kāmadeva Nāgara of Gujarat and Saṃkara Deva, apparently of Assam, refused to renounce Vedāntism and accept the new faith, leaving their teacher and the country on account of this difference of opinion. But this is only a legend. Saṃkara Deva is not explicitly mentioned in any Bengal Vaiṣṇava work. For a discussion of the question, see B. Majumdar, op. cit., pp. 540 f.

c5.s3.19

² It is remarkable, however, that the Vṛndāvana Gosvāmins do not, in their authoritative Sanskrit works, explicitly recognise this doctrine, and seldom mention Advaita and Nityānanda. Only in the introductory verses to the *Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī* (1578 A.D.), obeisance is made to Advaita and Nityānanda but there is nothing there to distinguish them from the other disciples and associates of Caitanya, mentioned along with them in a fairly long list. Recognition is found, however, in the works of Kavikarṇapūra (especially *Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā*) and in the Bengali lives of Caitanya; and the promotion to the exclusive dignity is thus of popular growth in the Navadvīpa, rather than in the Vṛndāvana, circle. Kavikarṇapūra, however, attributes the origin of the doctrine of Pañca-tattva to Svarūpa Dāmodara, the five Tattvas being Caitanya, Nityānanda, Advaita, Gadādhara and Śrīvāsa (Locana substitutes his own Guru Narahari Surakāra for Śrīvāsa). Advaita is mentioned in the first *Caitanyāṣṭaka* of Rūpa Gosvāmin (verse 3).

c5.s3.20

¹ अद्वैतेर कारणे चैतन्य अवतार । सेह प्रभु कहियाछेन बारवार ॥ (C-bh, Ādi ii; also Madhya v). This belief probably originated from the first worship of Caitanya as the Bhagavat by Advaita at Śrīvāsa's house, described by Murāri (ii. 9. 18), Kavikarṇapūra (Kāvya vii. 30), Vṛndāvana-dāsa (Madhya vi), as well as from Advaita's first public declaration of the belief at Puri.

Linked texts (5)