Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Early History of the Vaishnava Faith and Movement in Bengal, from Sanskrit and Bengali Sources c6.s1.t5: Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja

Early History of the Vaiṣṇava Faith and Movement in Bengal, from Sanskrit and Bengali Sources c6.s1.t5

Language
English

Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja

c6.s1.t5.1

The rather inadequate treatment of the closing years of Caitanya's life by Vṛndāvana-dāsa was remedied by the next Bengali biography, entitled also *Caitanya-caritāmṛta*,² of Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja. In the narrative portion it makes considerable use of the previous works of Murāri, Dāmodara, Svarūpa, Kavikarṇapūra and Vṛndāvana-dāsa,¹ and professes to have been composed with the express permission of the latter.² Perhaps it also depends upon the personal reminiscences of the Vṛndāvana Gosvāmins, at whose inspiration it was undertaken as a supplement to Vṛndāvana’s work. Like the *Caitanya-bhāgavata*, it is divided into three parts, covering sixty-two chapters. The Ādi, Madhya and Antya Līlā deal respectively with the three stages of Caitanya’s life, namely, the early life ending with his Saṃnyāsa, the six years of pilgrimage, and the last eighteen years spent in residence at Puri. As the early life of Caitanya till his Saṃnyāsa has been fairly fully treated by Vṛndāvana-dāsa in thirty-two chapters, Kṛṣṇadāsa devotes only five short chapters to it (Ādi xiii-xvii), but the remainder of the life, to which Vṛndāvana gives only ten chapters, takes up forty-five chapters of the *Caritāmṛta*.

c6.s1.t5.2

² This popular work has been printed very often in Bengal, but none of the editions can be regarded as critical or even entirely reliable. Discrepancies in reading etc. are found on a comparison with original MSS which we consulted in the Dacca Univesity Library and elsewhere. An edition with full critical apparatus, based on reliable MSS, is still desirable. The most noteworthy publications of this work are those by the Vaṅgavāsī Press; by the Gauḍīya Mādhva Maṭha (Calcutta 1927; with indices etc. and commentaries in Bengali); by Gosvāmins at Kālnā (with a Sanskrit commentary and notes, Kālnā 1898), the last giving a comparatively reliable text.

c6.s1.t5.3

In literary merit the work, with its epic length, prolixity and prosiness, is much inferior to its prototype. The style is

c6.s1.t5.4

1 दामोदर स्वरुप आर गुप्त मुरारि ।
मुख्य लीलासूत्र लिखियाछे विस्तारि ॥
सेहि अनुसारे लिखि लीलासूत्रगण ।
विस्तारि वर्णियाछेन दास वृन्दावन ॥
ग्रन्थविस्तार भये छाडिला ये ये स्थाने ।
सेइ सेइ स्थाने किछु करिव व्याख्याने ॥
प्रभुर लीलामृत तिहँ कैल आस्वादन ।
ताँर भुक्शेष किछु करिव चर्वण ॥

c6.s1.t5.5

(C-C, Ādi xiii, 46-50). Indebtedness to Karṇapūra, though not acknowledged, is clear.

c6.s1.t5.6

2 चैतन्यलीलाय व्यास दास वृन्दावन ।
ताँर आज्ञाय करों ताँर उच्छिष्ट-चर्वण ॥

c6.s1.t5.7

(C-C, Madhya i; also Ādi viii, 39-48, 82).

c6.s1.t5.8

terse but not very elegant or attractive, and the versification poor and faulty. The author cares little for the picturesque, poetic or human possibilities of the theme; and his long residence outside Bengal, as well as his greater familiarity with languages other than Bengali, is perhaps responsible for its quaint and laboured diction. But it is a profoundly laborious and learned work, and is by far the most authoritative biography of Caitanya. It should, however, be remembered that it is not a Carita, but a Caritāmṛta, written more from the devotional than from the historical point of view. Although the work, like the other works on Caitanya's life, was written within a century of his passing away, the Caitanya myths and legends, originating from Navadvīpa and gradually expanding, must have now completed the process of deification. Kṛṣṇadāsa does not hesitate to accept them fully, but even elaborates and adds to them; sometimes his devotional fancy goes to the extreme limits of credulity and the colours are too thickly laid. This is indeed a common trait, but Kṛṣṇadāsa achieves something more than this. The Vṛndāvana Gosvāmins had come and occupied an important position in the meantime, and they supplied the necessary learned theological justification to the naïve popular adoration. The picture of a life, devoid of striking external incidents but rich in impassioned religious consciousness, is marvellously well drawn; but every thing is coloured by the Rasa-śāstra and theology of the Vṛndāvana Gosvāmins. The Caitanya-caritāmṛta is indeed a great work in Middle Bengali, but its greatness consists not so much in the literary skill or narrative interest with which the story of a great life is told, as in the profound scholasticism with which it presents and exemplifies the entire theology of Bengal Vaiṣṇavism (as propounded by the Vṛndāvana Gosvāmins) in the life of the Master. If the Gosvāmins took the life of Kṛṣṇa as their theme, Kṛṣṇadāsa exemplifies all the implications of their exposition in the life of Caitanya. But the work goes a step further. Its speciality lies in figuring Caitanya not only as an incarnation of Kṛṣṇa (and later on of Rādhā), but also as a passionate devotee who was at the same time a scholastic theologian of the devotional school. The author, himself a scholar and devotee leading a celebate old age at Vṛndāvana in company with the learned Gosvāmins,¹ was trained as their disciple in the exact school

c6.s1.t5.9

1 Not much authentic information is available about the details of Kṛṣṇadāsa's life. His Vaiṣṇava modesty apparently prevents him from speaking about himself. The names of his parents, as well as his caste, are uncertain, but he is said to have been the son of Bhagiratha and Sunandā. He was born at Jhāmatpur, near Katwa, in the district of Burdwan. His father might have been a Vaidya by caste and profession, but Kṛṣṇadāsa became an orphan in childhood. He appears to have left home in early youth; and, inspired by Nityānanda in a dream (C-C. Ādi v), he went to Vṛndāvana and lived a devout and scholarly life there till his death. His original name is not known, for Kṛṣṇadāsa must have been his name on initiation. He acknowledges the Gosvāmins of Vṛndāvana as his Śikṣā-gurus (Ādi i. 37), and makes a special obeisance to Rūpa and Raghunātha at the end of almost every chapter of his book. The Prema-vilāsa tells us that Raghunātha-dāsa initiated him into ascetic life. With their learned theological writings he shows complete familiarity. Aufrecht makes the curious mistake of making him a son of Raghunātha Bhatta, but this is entirely wrong. He was more of a Sanskrit than Bengali scholar, and wrote also several works in Sanskrit, of which the following are notable: (i) Govinda-līlāmṛta, a Kāvya in 23 cantos on the amours of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa (ed. with a Bengali trs. and in Bengali characters by Sachinandan Gosvami, printed at Vṛndavana, 1908). It was written after an indication of Rūpa Gosvāmin (xxiii. 94) and deals with the Aṣṭakālīya-līlā (beginning from morning to the end of the night) of Kṛṣṇa. On this work, see below under ch. vii. In this work also, a reverential mention is made of the Gosvāmins, including Raghunātha-dāsa and Raghunātha Bhatta, to whom the Kāvya is sometimes wrongly attributed (see IA. Nov. 1928). In his Muktā-caritra, which in its turn is quoted in Rūpa's Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi (p. 261), Raghunātha calls Kṛṣṇadāsa kavi-bhūpati; it is likely, therefore, that the Govinda-līlāmṛta was an early work, composed some time before these two works of Rūpa and Raghunātha. The work was translated into Bengali verse by Yadunandana-dāsa. (ii) Sāraṅga-raṅgadā commentary on Līlāśuka's Śrīkṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta (ed. in Bengali characters, along with the text and a Bengali verse trs. by Yadunandana-dāsa, at Murshidabad, Radharaman Press, 1925; re-edited by S. K. De in his edition of Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta in of Vaiṣṇava theology. As his work itself indicates by its imposing array of Sanskrit quotations¹ and by its frequent intrusion of abstruse theological matter, which impair its purely biographical interest, Kṛṣṇadāsa was well read in the scholarly and authoritative works of Rūpa, Sanātana and other theologians of the cult. He does not even hesitate at the risk of anachronism and absurdity to put their subtle scholastic views in the mouth of Caitanya himself. The work itself was begun, as Kṛṣṇadāsa tells us, at the special request (Ādi viii. 50-62) of the Vaiṣṇavas of Vṛndāvana,² at a time

c6.s1.t5.10

¹ For a full list of the works actually cited by name, prepared from a MS of the work (no. 207, dated Śaka 1672) existing in the Dacca University Library, by Subodh Chandra Banerji, Keeper of these MSS, see *IHQ*, 1933, pp. 100-102. The printed editions do not distinguish between actually cited works and those anonymously cited, but sometimes the editors themselves supply as a heading the names, by chapter and verse, of the works which the manuscripts quote anonymously.—The work is calculated to contain roughly 15,000 couplets. The Gauḍīya Mādhva Maṭha ed. calculates total number of couplets to be 11, 515.

c6.s1.t5.11

² It is doubtful if the six Gosvāmins were alive at the time of the writing of the work. In his *Govinda-līlāmṛta*, the author speaks of the personal interest of four Gosvāmins (Rūpa, Raghunātha-dāsa, Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa and Jīva), but here no such direct acknowledgment is found, although the Gosvāmins are reverentially mentioned as his Śikṣā-gurus (Ādi i. 37). On the other hand, Kṛṣṇadāsa (Ādi viii. 57-55) informs us that he undertook his *Caitanya-caritāmṛta* at the direction and request of Haridāsa (a Pra-śiṣya of Gadādhara), Govinda (a disciple of Kāśīśvara), Yādavācārya (a friend of Rūpa), Śivānanda Cakravartin (according to one reading of the text, a disciple of Advaita), Caitanyadāsa (a disciple of Bhūgarbha), Mukunda Cakravartin, Kṛṣṇadāsa (with the epithet Premin) and other Vaiṣṇavas then living at Vṛndāvana,—a list which omits all reference to the six Gosvāmins and suggests that they were probably not alive when the work was completed.—In spite of his scholasticism, Kṛṣṇadāsa's devout attitude and mystic inclination are quite conspicuous throughout the work. While in theology he draws entirely upon the Vṛndāvana Gosvāmins, in biographical matters he borrows a great deal from his predecessors; but his imagination is too pious to be strictly historical, and too inelastic to be imbued with common sense. Himself

c6.s1.t5.12

Devanāgarī characters, Dacca 1935—which see for details of the commentary).

c6.s1.t5.13

when its erudite author had already attained a mature old age;¹ and it was completed with exemplary patience and labour of seven (or according to some, nine) years in Śaka 1537=1615 A.D.² This fact adds sanctity as well as

c6.s1.t5.14

¹ The verse which gives the date of composition is: *śake sindvagni-bāṇendau jyaisthe vṛndāvanāntare / sūryāhe sita-saptamyāṃ grantho'yaṃ pūrṇatāṃ gataḥ//*. It gives Śaka 1537=1615 A.D. But the reading *śake'gni-bindu-bāṇendau*, which gives Śaka 1503=1581 A.D., is also found. It is noteworthy that the verse is not found in all MSS and printed texts (e.g. the Kālnī ed. omits it, and it is missing in some of the Dacca University MSS. See note at the end of the Gauḍīya Mādhva Maṭha ed.). It occurs in most MSS, which contain it, after the colophon and is thus probably a scribal addition, which is naturally omitted in some MSS. The authenticity of the verse, therefore, is not beyond question, but probably it records the traditional date, which may be

c6.s1.t5.15

a learned man, he deprecates learned discussion as the croaking of frogs (मेककोलाहल Ādi viii. 6), and does not accept anything but the sectarian theology of his school! In his impatience, he prescribes punishment in hell for those wicked people who would argue, and not accept with faith (Ādi xvii. 298) :

c6.s1.t5.16

तर्के इहा नाहि माने येइ दुराचार ।
कुम्भीपाके पचे तार नाहिक निस्तार ॥

c6.s1.t5.17

But then, this is the attitude of nearly all the devout biographers; and Murāri reports (ii. 13. 11) that Caitanya himself declared that he would not bring salvation to one who is hostile to a Vaisnava (वैष्णवद्वेषकर्तारं नोद्धरामि कदाचन).

c6.s1.t5.18

वृद्ध जरातुर आमि अन्ध ओ बधिर ।
हस्त हाले मन बुद्धि नहे मोर स्थिर ॥
नानारोगग्रस्त चलिते बसिते ना पारि ।
पञ्चरोगपीडाय व्याकुल राति दिने मरि ॥

c6.s1.t5.19

(Antya xx. 93-94). If any reliance can be placed on the rather dramatic story of his death a little after the completion of his great work at the age of 86, it is likely that he flourished from about 1530 A.D. to 1616 A.D. For a discussion of the question, see B. Majumdar *op. cit.* pp. 323f, who disbelieves the story, but places Kṛṣṇadāsa's date of birth (p. 305) at about 1527 A.D.

c6.s1.t5.20

importance to the work. Hitherto all learned theological treatises of Bengal Vaiṣṇavism were written in Sanskrit; and the idea probably occurred to popularise the tenets in the vernacular in a recognised standard work, so that they would not be confined to the learned few.¹ The choice of Kṛṣṇadāsa for this propagandist purpose was fully justified, and the work he produced at once took its place among the most authoritative texts of the sect. It is more than a biography. It is a remarkable mediaeval document of mature theological scholarship, which is by no means easy or elegant to read, and which perhaps presents Caitanya and his simple impassioned faith in a distorted perspective; but from the specialist point of view, it is a work of rare merit and gives a complete exposition of the scholastic theological presuppositions of Bengal Vaiṣṇavism. If Vṛndāvana-dāsa's inspiration came chiefly from the orthodox circle of Navadvīpa.² Kṛṣṇa-

c6.s1.t5.21

¹ The story is recorded that the Vṛndāvana Gosvāmins, who initiated the work, became afraid of its publication, lest its merit and completeness in doctrinal matters should eclipse their own standard Sanskrit works!

c6.s1.t5.22

² We use the term 'Navadvīpa circle' in a general and extended sense, for the Navadvīpa followers of Caitanya came from Śrīkhaṇḍa and other places, and covered a large tract of Bengal; but the inspiration came from Navadvīpa and centred round the earlier phase of Caitanya's life which occurred at that place. Murāri, Kavikarṇapūra, Locana and Jayānanda, as well as the composers of Padas on Caitanya, represent this group, along with Vṛndāvana-dāsa. They have their own theology, but it is somewhat different from that of the Vṛndāvana Gosvāmins and Kṛṣṇadāsa. The works of the Gosvāmins and the Navadvīpa devotees were, however, composed at about the same time, although the Navadvīpa tradition probably originated earlier than the other.

c6.s1.t5.23

correct. But unfortunately the difference of reading makes a difference of 34 years. From internal evidence, however, it appears that the latest work cited in it (C-C, Madhya i, 144 : Antya iv, 230) is Jiva Gosvamin's *Gopāla-campū*, which was not completed till Saka 1514 (=1592 A.D.), the Pūrvārdha of the work being dated Saka 1510 (=1588 A.D.). See below, ch. iii and vii. Kṛṣṇadāsa, therefore, could not have completed his work in 1581 A.D. The date Saka 1537=1615 A.D., therefore, appears to be more likely. See S. K. De in *IHQ*, 1933, pp. 98-99.

c6.s1.t5.24

dāsa's inspiration came from the scholastic Gosvāmins of Vṛndāvana; and each in his own way throws interesting light on different aspects of the faith and the movement. The two works of Vṛndāvana-dāsa and Kṛṣṇadāsa, therefore, are in a sense complementary to each other as representing two distinct traditions.

Cites (4)