Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Early History of the Vaishnava Faith and Movement in Bengal, from Sanskrit and Bengali Sources c6.s2: 2. Life and Personality of Caitanya

Early History of the Vaiṣṇava Faith and Movement in Bengal, from Sanskrit and Bengali Sources c6.s2

Language
English

2. Life and Personality of Caitanya

c6.s2.1

The story of Caitanya's life has thus been told so often and so well that it is not necessary for us to enlarge upon the details. It is a life which is not so rich in striking external incidents as in impassioned religious consciousness, over which his devout biographers love to linger; but passing over the scenes of ecstasy, madness and miracles, which swell the bulk of his extant authoritative lives in Sanskrit and Bengali, the story can be briefly and plainly told. The abundant fancies, no doubt, envelop the few facts, but even in the orthodox pictures, a forceful religious personality emerges which is not lacking in human interest and appeal.

c6.s2.2

Caitanya's name before initiation into the monastic order was Viśvambhara. He was the son of Jagannātha Miśra and

c6.s2.3

1935), from which Dinesh Chandra Sen appears to draw, rather uncritically, much of his material about Caitanya's followers. But Bhadra's work suffers from extreme credulity for legend and hearsay, and as such it is hardly a trustworthy guide. The same remark applies, more or less, to the extensive introduction to Satish Chandra Ray's *Pada-kalpataru*, pt. v., cited above. Other Bengali modern accounts of the movement, such as Murari Lal Adhikari's *Vaiṣṇava Digdarśanī* or Madhusudana Vachaspati's *Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava Itihāsa*, record orthodox traditions, but they are hardly critical and reliable works. The alphabetical dictionary of Vaiṣṇava lives (*Bṛhat Vaiṣṇava Caritābhidhāna*, Calcutta 1924, Pt. i) compiled by Amulyadhan Ray Bhatta, is a praiseworthy and painstaking attempt, which deserves mention for its copious references to original sources, but unfortunately it does not discriminate between genuine and spurious works, and is left incomplete. Although based chiefly on Dinesh Chandra Sen's works for its information, Melville T. Kennedy's *Caitanya Movement* (Oxford University Press, 1925), apart from its obvious Christian bias, is perhaps the most sensible and popularly written account available in English. Bimanbihari Majumdar's *Śrī-Caitanya-cariter Upādān*, already mentioned above, does not expressly deal with Caitanya's life, but it examines the materials furnished by the existing records and furnishes a great deal of information on the early aspects of the movement and generally on Caitanya's life: it also gives a brief account of Assamese and Oḍiyā sources.

c6.s2.4

his wife Śacī, and was born at Navadvīpa in February 1486 (Phālguna Paurṇamāsī, Śaka 1407) before or during an eclipse of the full moon,¹ in the midst of universal taking of God's name (*haribol*), usual on such occasions. His father Jagannātha Miśra was a pious and scholarly Brahman of Vaiṣṇava faith and disposition and was probably a Rāma-worshipper. Originally an inhabitant of Dhākā Dakṣiṇa (Jājapura, according to Jayānanda) in Sylhet, Jagannātha appears to have migrated and settled in the academic city of Navadvīpa situated on the holy Ganges,² His modest dwelling house, according to Govinda Karmakāra, was situated at the extreme south of the city, on the banks of the Hooghly, and consisted of five big rooms; and he appears to have been a highly respected and fairly well-to-do middle class householder.³ The mother, Śacī, was the daughter of a devout and scholarly Brahman, named Nīlāmbara Cakravartin, who had also come from Sylhet to settle at Navadvīpa. She was a deeply religious and sensible woman, who bore the loneliness of her closing years with great patience and resignation.¹ Govinda Karmakāra describes her as a woman "of quiet temperament and of short stature" and very fond and proud of her boy.² In the midst of such traditions of piety, scholarship and affection, and with all the social advantages of well-born Brahmanhood, Viśvambhara grew up as a privileged child. The parents, who must have been fairly advanced in life when he was born, had already lost several children;³ and their only surviving boy, immediately older than Viśvambhara, named Viśvarūpa, had left home as an Advaita Saṃnyāsin under the name of Saṃkarāraṇya, and was never heard of again.⁴ It is natural, therefore, that all the wealth of their love was lavished, after Viśvarūpa had gone, upon their only surviving boy, whom pitying affection nicknamed Nimāi, but whose personal charm and beauty earned the epithet of Gaura or Gaurāṅga. It is possible that most of the miraculous legends associated with Caitanya's boyhood⁵ were piously

c6.s2.5

¹ B. Majumdar (pp. 17-21) comes to the conclusion that Caitanya's birth took place in the evening before the eclipse, and that the date would correspond to February 27, 1486 A.D. (Phālguna 23, Śaka 1407). But this is at best conjectural.

c6.s2.6

² It is curious that many of the associates and followers of Caitanya (e.g. Advaita, Śrīvāsa, Murāri, Candraśekhara, Tapana Miśra, etc.) were from Sylhet. Famine, political trouble and the temptation of living near the holy Ganges at the great seat of mediaeval learning are supposed to have been the reasons of the migration. Jagannātha and Nīlāmbara were probably settled at Navadvīpa prior to Jagannātha's marriage to Śacī. Caitanya's ancestors are supposed to have come originally from Jājpur in Orissa on account of the persecution (so Jayānanda tells us) of Raja Bhramara who has been identified with Kapilendra-deva of Orissa. The pedigree of Caitanya is given differently. According to Jayānanda, it was Kṣiracandra—Virūpākṣa—Rāmakṛṣṇa—Dhanañjaya—Janārdana—Jagannātha; but the following, from different sources, is also given: Viśuddha—Madhukara—Upendra—Jagannātha.

c6.s2.7

³ So Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja; but Murāri and Vṛndāvana-dāsa make him a man of modest means, Vṛndāvana even using the word सुदरिद्र (very poor).

c6.s2.8

¹ Kavikarṇapūra in his drama (iv. 27) likens her silent tribulation to those of Kausalyā and Yośodā.

c6.s2.9

² > śāntamūrti śacīdevī ati kharvakāya |

c6.s2.10

³ Caitanya is said by Locana-dāsa to have been the ninth child (tenth, according to Murāri, Kavikarṇapūra, Kṛṣṇadāsa and Jayānanda).

c6.s2.11

⁴ Jayānanda (probably following a hint of Kavikarṇapūra, Kāvya ii. 92, that Viśvarūpa crossed the river Ganges and became an ascetic) tells us (p. 20) that Viśvarūpa also was initiated at Katwa by Keśava Bhāratī. It is curious, however, that in the long list, given by Jayānanda (p. 88) of those who were present at Viśvambhara's initiation, the name of Saṃkarāraṇya occurs! He must have been about six or seven years older than Caitanya. According to Kṛṣṇadāsa (C-C, Madhya ix, 294-301), when Caitanya came to Paṇḍharpur during his pilgrimage and met there Śrī-Ranga Purī (an alleged disciple of Mādhavendra) who had once been a guest with his Guru at Jagannātha Miśra's house at Navadvīpa, Caitanya learnt from him that Viśvarūpa, alias Saṃkarāraṇya, had died at Paṇḍharpur.

c6.s2.12

⁵ Murāri-gupta does not give much evidence of the divinity of Caitanya actually manifested before his Saṃnyāsa, although he believes that Caitanya had from time to time revealed divine inspiration or

c6.s2.13

nimāi nimāi bali sadā fukaraẏa ||

c6.s2.14

inspired by the Purāṇic stories of the child Kṛṣṇa,¹ but his lively boyish frolics probably had some real foundation, and indicate that the boy Caitanya was a very real boy, healthy.

c6.s2.15

¹ पूर्व श्रुतिलाम येन नन्देर कुमार। सेइ रूप तोमार पुत्रेर व्यवहार ॥ (C-bh, Ādi v) : पूर्व येन व्रजमध्ये कृष्ण क्रीड़ा कैल (Jayānanda, p. 22).

c6.s2.16

Āveśa. But Jayānanda makes him a devotee, and Kavikarṇapūra, Locana and Vṛndāvana present him as the Bhagavat himself, from his very childhood. Kṛṣṇadāsa's attitude is almost the same. In the view of his later followers, therefore, Caitanya manifested himself as the supreme god from his very childhood. But Murāri's general attitude appears to suggest that Caitanya's divinity was a matter of gradual acceptance and was not widely and firmly established before his return from Gayā. See a discussion of the question by B. Majumdar, op. cit., pp. 590-603.

c6.s2.17

Similar sentiments are found also in Murāri-gupta i. 6. 8, 12. But Caitanya's sexual purity, both in youth and manhood, is uncontested, and amorous adventures are naturally barred in his Kṛṣṇa-like exploits. In spite of the emotional and erotic tendencies of his faith, there was something rigidly ascetic in him even before he formally became an ascetic, and his attitude towards women was throughout his life above criticism (सबे परस्त्री प्रति नाहि परिहास। स्त्री देखि दरे प्रभु हयेन एकपाश ॥ C-bh, Ādi xliii). Although one section of his followers, headed by Narahari Sarkār and Locana-dāsa represent Caitanya in the erotic light as the Nāgara-vara, the biography cited above distinctly states that in this Avatāra the Lord eschewed the name of women, and one must not speak of Caitanya as a Nāgara (स्त्री हेन नाम प्रभु एह अवतारे। श्रवणओ न करिला विदित संसारे ॥ अतएव यत महामहिम सकले। गौराङ्ग नागर हेन स्तव नाहि वले ॥ loc. cit.). On one occasion after his Saṃnyāsa he rebuked his disciple Haridāsa for having accepted alms from a woman of the town. As reported by Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja, Caitanya once said to Rāmānanda: "I am a man and have taken the ascetic vow. In body and mind, in speech, and in all my dealings I must be spotless." He is reported by Govinda Karmakāra to have warned Rāmānanda Rāya that the passionate longing for women is not love, for love can dawn only on the obliteration or transfiguration of the sexual impulse (अबला लागिया कार्ति यदि प्रेम हय। तबे तो ए प्रेमतत्त्व किछुइ ये नय ॥ अभेद पुरुष नारी यखन जानिवे। तखन प्रेमेर तत्त्व उदय हइवे ॥).

c6.s2.18

light-hearted and full of fun and mischief, which must have kept his parents busy and his neighbours in a state of mild apprehension, but which never gave any ground for offence because of the innate goodness, personal charm and loveliness of the remarkable boy.

c6.s2.19

The fond parents were at first averse to sending the boy to school for fear that learning would lead him to ascetic life, and he was allowed to grow wild at will. Later on, he was sent to one Viṣṇu Paṇḍita and Sudarśana for elementary education, and then to Gaṅgādāsa, who was chiefly a grammarian,¹ for more advanced studies. Pious imagination invests him with extraodinary precocity of intellect and makes him a youthful prodigy, mastering all branches of Sanskrit learning at the age of fifteen; but it is probable that he displayed in his younger days a keenness and intelligence much above the average. He does not appear, however, to have, at any period of his life, cared much for deep or wide scholarship; and it is not necessary to present him as a great scholar when his real greatness lies in other directions. His education was certainly that of a well-born Brahman boy at such a centre of learning as Navadvīpa, but his studies appear to have been chiefly confined to Grammar, especially Kalāpa Grammar, and possibly some literature and Rhetoric to which allusion is made².

c6.s2.20

¹ Murāri, i. 9. 1; Kavikarṇapūra, Kāvya iii. 2, 3; Jayānanda, p. 17.

c6.s2.21

² His teacher Gaṅgādāsa is said to have been proficient in Grammar व्याकरण शास्त्रेर एकान्त तत्त्वविद् C-bh, Ādi vii), and Caitanya's knowledge and teaching of Grammar are more than once referred to. Keśava Kāśmirī, for instance, speaks contemptuously of his teaching of Grammar, which Caitanya himself admits as a matter of pride ( शिशुशास्त्र व्याकरण पढाय ब्राह्मण C-bh, Ādi xi : व्याकरणमध्ये जानि पढाओ कलाप । ...प्रभु कहे व्याकरण पढाइ अभिमान करि ॥ C-bh, Ādi xvi. 32-35). It is curious that he taught Kalāpa, and not Mugdhabodha, which is the grammar in general use at Navadvīpa. Reference to Kalāpa is also made by Jayānanda (p. 18). Caitanya himself is reported to have

c6.s2.22

While Viśvambhara was still a student his father died. His elder brother having become a Saṃnyāsin shortly before this, the burden of the household fell on his young shoulders. He married Lakṣmī, daughter of Vallabha Ācārya,¹ a scholar of Navadvīpa, became a householder, set up a Sanskrit school (*tol*) like most learned Brahmans of his time, under the patronage of one Mukunda Saṃjaya, and began to receive pupils. His dialectic exploits of the period are made much of in his two orthodox biographies, but the descriptions of his scholastic triumphs are obviously exaggerated and sometimes

c6.s2.23

¹ Not to be confounded (as often done, e.g. in Carpenter, *Theism in Mediaeval India*, p. 438, footnote) with Vallabhācārya, the founder of the Vaisnava sect of that name.

c6.s2.24

admitted that he made no serious study of Rhetoric (नाहि पढ़ि अलंकार करियाछि श्रवण *C-C*, Ādi xvi. 52), but in his alleged disputation with Keśava he is made to rely chiefly on his stray knowledge of this subject! Although Navadvīpa was famous for its teaching of New Logic, there is, however, little evidence to show that Viśvambhara ever deeply studied or taught this subject. On the contrary, people noticing the keenness of his intellect, are said to have on one occasion wished that he had studied Nyāya and become a great Bhaṭṭācārya (केह वले ए ब्राह्मण न्याय यदि पढ़े । भट्टाचार्य हय तवे कतैन ना सवे ॥ *C-bh*, Ādi xi, although in another context the same biography speaks of Caitanya's Nyāya-vicāra with Gadādhara). No reliance, therefore, can be placed on the legend narrated in the *Advaita-prakāśa* (the historicity of which work itself and the genuineness of the printed text are not beyond question) that Caitanya wrote a commentary on Nyāya but threw the work into the Ganges out of compassion towards a Brahman who had written a similar work but who was afraid lest it should be eclipsed by the more learned commentary of Caitanya. The legend is obviously inspired by the pious tendency of glorifying Caitanya by imputing scholastic eminence to him. The *Advaita-prakāśa* also speaks of a commentary on the *Śrīmad-bhāgavata* by Caitanya, but of this there is no mention elsewhere. It is doubtful if Jayānanda's statement that Caitanya read Smṛti and Tarka (स्मृति तर्क साहित पण्डित एके एके, p. 18) is reliable. On this question of Caitanya's education see S. K. De in *IHQ*, 1934, pp. 301-2; B. Majumdar, *op. cit.*, pp. 347-49.

c6.s2.25

purile.¹ All these Navadvipa legends, however, tend to indicate that Caitanya's youthful and thoughtless mind was

c6.s2.26

1 He is said, for instance, in the two orthodox biographies of Vrndāvana and Kṛṣṇadāsa to have vanquished in disputation Keśava Bhaṭṭa Kāśmīrī, the well-known scholar and commentator of the Nimbārka school. What really happens in Viśvambhara's so-called disputation with this formidable scholar, who was the author of commentaries on the Bhagavad-gītā, the Vedānta-sūtra and other works, is somewhat strange. Viśvambhara requests Keśava to compose a hymn to the Ganges, on the banks of which they meet, and on Keśava's reciting extempore an astonishing series of verses on the subject, all that Viśvambhara does to silence him is to pick rhetorical flaws of a somewhat fastidious kind in one of the verses recited! This is the whole extent of the learned disputation, and the account in its triviality is extremely disappointing. In the same way Viśvambhara is represented elsewhere as picking trivial grammatical flaws in Īśvara Purī's poem. No concealment is made here of the fact that Viśvambhara was chiefly a teacher of grammar with some stray knowledge of rhetoric. The disputation is omitted in other biographies. It is mentioned for the first time by Vṛndāvana-dāsa, from whom Kṛṣṇadāsa obviously elaborates the legend. One might even suspect sectarian loyalty in making a veteran champion of the Nimbārka school suffer defeat at the hands of the youthful Caitanya; but apart from pious credulity, the attempt is poorly represented. Keśava of Kashmir was the son of Śrīmaṅgala, pupil of Mukunda and pra-śiṣya of Sundara Bhaṭṭa, as he himself tells us in his various Sanskrit works. He was the author of commentaries on the Brahmopaniṣad, the Bhagavad-gītā, the Śrīmad-bhāgavata (sk. x) and other works; but his most well known work for his school was the Prabhā sub-commentary on Śrīnivāsa's Kaustubha commentary on Nimbārka's Vedānta-pārijāta (ed. in the Pandit vill. ix ; also ed. Nitya-svarup Brahmachari, Brindaban 1906). Keśava could not have been, as Aufrecht notes, a pupil of Śrīnivāsa (on whose Kaustubha he commented), for Śrīnivāsa's date would be about the 13th century, while Keśava lived in the latter part of the 15th and the beginning of the 16th century. The meeting with Caitanya, as a fact, is not unlikely, but the account has been grotesquely exaggerated. On this question, see also S. K. De in IHQ, 1934, pp. 302-3 ; B. Majumdar, op. cit., pp. 206-10. For an analysis of the academic aspect of this episode, see Calcutta Oriental Journal, December 1933, pp. 91-99, in which the writer of the article comes to the conclusion that "the entire episode looks very filled at this time with the scholastic spirit and pride of learning characteristic of his native place; and the sprightliness of his boyhood had developed into the pedantic, but harmless, arrogance of a young Pandit. His personal charm, handsome presence, social standing and promise of scholarship, however, disarmed all resentment, and made him a marked figure in the city.

c6.s2.27

About this time Viśvambhara is said to have made an extensive tour in East Bengal. Although his orthodox biographies represent it in a different light, Murāri, Locana and Jayānanda agree in stating that the professed object of the tour was to acquire wealth,¹ and he seems to have received gratifying gifts from pious householders. The records of the tour are scanty and uncertain, but some tradition² extends it up to Sylhet in Assam in order to make him visit his ancestral home there. During his absence his young wife Lakṣmī, whom, he is said to have married out of love at first sight and who is depicted as an ideal wife and daughter-in-law, died of snake-bite. On his return he took the news with great calmness. He was soon married again to Viṣṇupriyā, daughter

c6.s2.28

¹ धनार्थं प्रययौ दिशि पूर्वस्याम् Murāri i. 11.5; मायेरे कहिल बात अर्थ उपार्जने Locana, Ādi, p. 43 (Amrita Bazar Patrika Ed): वङ्गदेश याव आमि अर्थेर छले। अर्थ विना संसार कसु नाहि चले॥ Jayānanda, Nadiyā Khaṇḍa, p. 47. But this is not admitted by Vṛndāvana-dāsa. Kavikarṇapūra (who, however, speaks of his teaching pupils during the travel) and others. After he came back, he amused every one by mimicking the peculiar pronunciation of East Bengal people: वङ्गदेशी वाक्य अनुकरण करिया बाङ्गलातरे कइलेन हासिया हासिया॥ (C-bh, Ādi xii); पाखण्डवर्जित देश सर्वलोके गाय। गङ्गा ह्ला गङ्गा नहे एइ साच्ची ताय॥ (Locana, p. 47).

c6.s2.29

² This is recorded in the last few suspiciously spurious chapters of the Prema-vilāsa; but there is no hint of it in any of the seven old lives of Caitanya; see B. Majumdar, op. cit., pp. 553 f.

c6.s2.30

suspicious."—The Vallabhācāris also claim Keśava Bhaṭṭa as a disciple of Vallabhācārya!

c6.s2.31

of a Navadvīpa Pandit, Sanātana Miśra,—whom Govinda Karmakāra vividly describes as "a smiling, coy and modest girl, always busy serving the Lord."¹ It is noteworthy that while the sect takes little notice of the short-lived first wife, Caitanya's second wife, who survived his Saṃnyāsa and his death, holds a place of considerable honour in its estimation. It is possible, however, that the first wife held a unique place in his affection, and the shock of her death had something to do with his Saṃnyāsa, which occurred not many years later.²

c6.s2.32

² Although Murāri (i. 15. 4) and, following him Locana, describes Caitanya as deeply attached to his second wife, Vṛndāvana-dāsa (Ādi xii) mentions Viṣṇupriyā only once. But Locana goes further and describes Caitanya's love-sport with Viṣṇupriyā on the night before his Saṃnyāsa!—In his Kāvya, Kavikarṇapūra does not describe Caitanya's marriage to Viṣṇupriyā (iii. 127-144) as elaborately as that to Lakṣmī (iii. 6-81); in the drama (i. 23, 24) he incidentally mentions the two marriages.

c6.s2.33

As yet the young Pandit, busy with imparting secular instruction, showed no open susceptibility to the religious influences which surrounded him, and all attempts to interest him deeply in religious matters met with a half-jesting, half-sceptical response. But a great change swiftly came over the even tenour of his life; and when it came, it swept him off with its overwhelming force. At the age of about twenty-two, Viśvambhara, as a dutiful son, undertook a pilgrimage to Gayā³ for the purpose of performing his

c6.s2.34

³ According to Karṇapūra (Kāvya iv. 21) Caitanya was accompanied by his *jananī-bhaginī-pati* (i.e. Candraśekhara Ācārya). Murāri mentions no companion. Vṛndāvana-dāsa (Ādi xii) says: यात्रा करि चलिला अनेक शिष्य लइया (went accompanied by a large number of pupils), while Jayānanda (p. 32) gives a long list of followers who went with Caitanya!

c6.s2.35

¹ विष्णुप्रिया देवी इन प्रभुर घरणी। प्रभुर सेवाय व्यस्त दिवस रजनी ॥
लज्जावती विनयिनी मृदु मृदु हास। मुह इइलाम गिया चरयोर दास ॥

c6.s2.36

(p. 4) Sanātana Miśra's forefathers are said to have come from Mithilā (*Bhāratavarṣa*, vol. 28, p. 199), although he is usually supposed to have belonged to Sylhet.

c6.s2.37

father's Śrāddha at the holy place. What exactly happened there is not known, but the sacred surroundings must have strangely stirred the hidden springs of his religious emotion. He himself could hardly express what he found at Gayā to work a wonderful change¹; but the principal factor in the transformation, which his biographers also emphasise, was his meeting there with Īśvara Purī,² the emotional ascetic, who had on a previous occasion tried fruitlessly to win him over to devout life, but who was now voluntarily accepted as a spiritual guide. Īśvara Purī gave him the Kṛṣṇa-Mantra of ten syllables (*daśākṣara*), but the sudden religious awakening in him could hardly be satisfied by such formal initiation. Of the intensity and transforming quality of his religious experience there can be no doubt. The pride of learning was humbled; his love of finery, to which frequent allusions are made by his biographers,³ and care for personal appearance were gone; scholastic pursuits and worldly concerns lost their interest⁴ He had seen one of those mystic visions which turn secularly minded men into god-intoxicated devotees. People said he had come back a mad man, and he certainly behaved as such. When he taught his pupils, the subject of his discourse was Kṛṣṇa, and very soon he had to close his school. Wrapped in mystic and emotional experience, he laughed and wept, raved in abstraction, incessantly shouted Kṛṣṇa's name, and went into those mystic trances which from this time became a striking feature of his religious experience. The change in him became the talk of the town¹ and a matter of anxiety to his relatives; but the small group of Vaiṣṇava devotees, headed by Advaita, saw in him something more than symptoms of lunacy² and welcomed him with hope and joy.

c6.s2.38

¹ At the mere mention of Gayā he used to burst into tears and faint: पादपद्मतीर्थेर लइते नाम नाम। नयनेर जले सब पूर्ण कइल स्नान॥ सर्व्वअङ्गे कम्प पुलके पूरित। हा कृष्ण वलिया माल पडिल भूमित॥ (C-bh, Madhya i).

c6.s2.39

² केह वले ईश्वर पुरীর सङ्ग इइते। कि वा देखिलेन कृष्ण-प्रकाश गयाते॥ (loc. cit.).

c6.s2.40

³ अधरे ताम्बूल दिव्य वास परिधान। (C-bh. Ādi ix). यौवनवेशे अङ्गेर अङ्ग विभूषण। दिव्यवस्त्र दिव्यवेश माल्य चन्दन॥ (C-C, Ādi xvii. 5). कृष्णकेलि वसण अङ्गीर और अङ्गे।......कुङ्कुमे माजिया सरु पैता वाम कान्धे। अङ्गेर छटा दीपल फोंटा गमन गजेन्द्रछान्दे॥ धृतिमुले दोले मदनमोहन माल्याकडि। चोचरतुले बकुलमाल जुतिर माल वेडि॥ ...विचित्र पाटेर थोप हिरसयमातुलि॥ (Jayānanda, p. 26; also see p. 40).

c6.s2.41

⁴ परम सुन्नम हइया प्रभु कथा कय। सर्व्व तुष्ट हइला देखि प्रभुर विनय॥ पूर्व विद्या-औद्धत्य ना देखे कोन जन। परम विरक्तप्राय थाके सर्व्वक्षण॥ ये प्रभु आछिला भोला महाविद्यारसे। एवे कृष्ण विना आर किछु नाहि

c6.s2.42

Very soon he was joined by Nityānanda, who is said to have been for many years an Avadhūta ascetic³ and who was

c6.s2.43

वासे ॥ (C-bh. Madhya i). ना लय चन्दन माला ना परे वसन । निगमे बसिया थाके कान्दे सर्व्वक्षण ॥ वाँचर केश मा बान्धे ना शुने कारो कथा । ...कर्पूर ताम्बूल छाड़ि प्रिय कृष्णकेलि । कनक कुण्डल हार हिरण्यमादृति ॥ छाड़िया पालङ्की शय्या भूमे निद्रा याय ।...ना करे स्नान गौर ना करे भोजन । ना करे श्रीअङ्गे तैल उद्वर्त्तन ॥ etc. (Jayānanda, p. 72).

c6.s2.44

1 परम अद्भुत कथा महा असम्भव । निमाइ पण्डित हइल परम वैष्णव ॥ (C-bh. Madhya i).

c6.s2.45

2 In Caitanya-candrodaya (Act ii), Caitanya himself is made to describe his own condition as Unmāda-daśā, but Śrīvāsa thinks that Caitanya's lunacy is different from that of other people! In his Kāvya, Karṇapūra gives a rather embellished poetical account, in which Śrīvāsa is made to recount Kṛṣṇa-līlā in two cantos (ix-x) which Caitanya realises in the next canto.

c6.s2.46

3 It is often stated that Nityānanda was a disciple of Mādhavendra Puri; but evidence on this point is not definite. In his early wanderings he appears to have met Mādhavendra in Southern India (C-bh, Ādi vi) but it is not clear if he was actually initiated by Mādhavendra. On the other hand, the universal description of him as "an Avadhūta" may indicate that he originally belonged to some Tāntric order. Jayānanda's description of him (p. 54): सुसितलोचन वारुणीमदे मत । हरषित now destined to play, along with him, an important part in the history of the movement. Although one of Vṛndāvana-dāsa's object in his biography of Caitanya is to supply information about Nityānanda,¹ not much is recorded of his earlier life. He is said to have been born at a village named Ekcākā (Ekacakra) in the district of Birbhum, but his birth-date is uncertain. His parents were Hāḍāi Paṇḍita and his wife Padmāvatī, of whom, however, nothing is known. At the early age of twelve (according to Vṛndāvana-dāsa), fourteen (according to the *Prema-vilāsa* vii), or eighteen (according to Jayānanda), Nityānanda left home for homelessness, and as a wandering Avadhūta travelled extensively over Northern and Southern India. He was older than Caitanya by some eight years, and bore such resemblance to his elder brother Viśvarūpa, who had also become a Saṃnyāsin, that Śacī Devī welcomed him as her own son.² He was living at that time at Navadvīpa, and his meeting with Viśvambhara was not only providential but mutually

c6.s2.47

¹ Curiously enough, there is no standard biography of Nityānanda, although Vṛndāvana-dāsa, who was an enthusiastic partisan of Nityānanda, actually writes a great deal about him in connexion with Caitanya; while Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja who was inspired by Nityānanda in a dream and Kavikarṇapūra in both the poetical and dramatic biographies, as well as later Vaiṣṇava works in Bengali, only incidentally record some traditions about him. Rūpa, Raghunātha and Jīva do not even mention Nityānanda, although Nityānanda's name occurs in the series of general obeisance at the commencement of Sanātana's *Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī*!

c6.s2.48

² Kṛṣṇadāsa informs us that Caitanya used to address him as Baḍa Bhāi (elder brother). This is probably the source of the curious mistake, repeated by R. G. Bhandarkar (*Vaiṣṇavism*, Strassburg 1913, p. 83) of identifying Nityānanda with Caitanya's elder brother Viśvarūpa. This mistake has been perpetuated in Aufrecht's *Catalogus Catalogorum* i, p. 190a.

c6.s2.49

हासमुत असीम महत्व ॥ is significant, although it was probably meant to indicate that he was an Avatāra of Balarāma (Karṇapūra, Kāvya vii. 19). Locana informs us (Sūtra-khaṇḍa p. 33) that Nityānanda's name before Saṃnyāsa was Kuvera.

c6.s2.50

attractive and stimulating. They discovered in each other a kindred spirit, and the stong and instant attraction endured through life.

c6.s2.51

Viśvambhara now became the centre of the devout Vaiṣṇava group in the city,¹ and came to be regarded as the very incarnation of their spirit of devotion. His extraordinary capacity for emotion had the power of evoking similar emotion in others, and the very reality of his spiritual experience and the irresistible charm of his gifted personality soon made him the natural leader of the group. One of his first and most important act was the stimulation, if not the introduction,² of an emotional and unritualistic mode of musical worship, known as Kirtana, in the daily devotional meetings which were held in the courtyard of Śrīvāsa's house³. At first these meetings were private, and the strange doings of the Vaiṣṇava devotees met with scorn and ridicule; but the increasing fervour displayed in the Kirtana parties proved contagious by creating a highly emotionalised atmosphere. This method of congregated devotional excitement,⁴ by means of enthusiastic chorus singing to the accompaniment of peculiar drums and cymbals, along with rhythmical bodily movements ending in an ecstatic abandon of dancing, proved very fruitful indeed in utilising group-emotion, and soon became a distinctive feature of the faith. Grotesquely absurd as the practice may seem, it succeeded in creating a whirlpool of emotionalism from which there was no escape. As the tireless exertions of Kīrtana grew higher and higher, they worked upon the emotions as well as on the senses, and produced ecstatic thrills and copious perspiration, wild fits, trembling and weeping, hysterical orgy of dancing, raving, stupefaction or dementia, until they brought on exhaustion and unconsciousness, ending in mystic trances. Viśvambhara soon realised its possibilities; and under his guidance it became something more than the highly emotional service of a secluded band of devotees. Its enthusiastic physical and emotional appeal was not only congenial to the essentially emotional faith, but it was also utilised effectively for spreading the contagion of Bhakti. Very soon Kīrtana processions (Nagara-kīrtana) were organised for parading the streets with lusty music, singing and dancing, and carrying the appeal from door to door.

c6.s2.52

¹ Murāri, Kavikarṇapūra and Vṛndāvana-dāsa mention about 40 persons who now formed this group, but see the list given by B. Majumdar, *op. cit.*, p. 600.

c6.s2.53

² Although the antiquity of the Kirtana is probable, Caitanya's biographies distinctly say that this mode was Caitanya's creation: cf. Murāri I. 1. 5; I. 4. 25-27: कलियुगे सङ्कीर्तन धर्म पालिबारे । अवतीर्णा इहला प्रभु सर्वपरिकरे ॥ (*C-bh*, Ādi i): आरम्भिला महाप्रभु कीर्तन प्रकाश (op. cit. Ādi ii). Kavikarṇapūra in his drama (viii. 32) (also in his Kāvya) speaks of the Kirtana as: *iyam iyam bhagavac-caitanya-sṛṣṭiḥ*. On the superiority of the Kirtana over other modes of worship, see Sanātana, *Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta*, ii. 3. 146-148, 158.

c6.s2.54

³ Śrīvāsa was the son of one Jaladhara Paṇḍita, also from Sylhet. He must have been older than Caitanya.

c6.s2.55

⁴ Rūpa Gosvāmin defines Kirtana in his *Bhakti-rasāmṛta* as: *nāma-līlā-guṇādīnām* (distinguishing three kinds) *uccair bhāṣā tu kīrtanam*. This mode has proved so effective for popular appeal that it has since been accepted more or less by other sects. In modern times the Nava Vidhān Brāhma Samāj revived it, and the salvation Army in Bengal has adopted it for their missionary purpose.

c6.s2.56

But there was a very large and influential section of people, consisting chiefly of the proud scholars and the self-satisfied élite of the city, who looked upon the uproarious movement as a public nuisance; and their initial attitude of scornful indifference soon became one of active opposition. The aid of the Muhammadan Kāzi of Navadvīpa was invoked, but the sight of a Nagara-kīrtana, organised and led by Caitanya himself, is said to have convinced the Muhammadan magistrate of its spiritual nature, and he acknowledged it by joining the party himself!¹ At any rate, the opposition appears to have proved an obstacle to the movement. We are told in the *Caitanya-caritāmṛta* (Ādi viii. 10-11; xvii. 262-268) that Viśvambhara at last resolved to win over these unbelievers by severing all local ties and embracing the universally honoured life of a Saṃnyāsin. The motive which influenced him to adopt asceticism was probably diverse and complex; at best, it is left obscure.¹ He is reported to have said:² "As I must save these men, I have to adopt the life of asceticism. When they see me as an ascetic, they will bow down to me, and in bowing their guilt will be destroyed, and I shall rouse Bhakti in their purified hearts. Then will these godless men be saved. There is no other means, and this is the best way." But the real reason was probably much deeper. It must have been his innate predilection to asceticism and the more imperious urge of passionate devotion which drove him to a complete abandonment of self to the service of his deity; and there is a hint of such an inner motive in the report of his statement made elsewhere (*C-C*, Madhya iii. 7-9) that the life of an ascetic would give him opportunities for an exclusive devotion to Kṛṣṇa. He, therefore, induced Keśava Bhāratī to initiate him as a Saṃnyāsin under the name of Śrīkṛṣṇa-caitanya, usually abbreviated to Caitanya, which now became the universally accepted name. The initiation took place, in the presence of his three followers (Nityānanda, Candraśekhara Ācāryaratna and Mukunda-datta), at Katwa, not far from Navadvipa on the other side of the Ganges, towards the end of the month of Māgha, in Śaka 1431 (=January, 1510 A.D.), when Caitanya was barely twenty-four years old.¹ Keśava Bhāratī lived at Katwa, and as there was very little personal intercourse between him and Caitanya, he does not appear in any way to have influenced the spiritual disposition of his disciple either before or after the initiation. He was perhaps chosen as the Saṃnyāsa-guru because he happened to be a well-known Saṃnyāsin near at hand, who was capable of performing the ceremony. The particular order that Caitanya joined probably made as little difference to his religious consciousness as even his very act of becoming a Saṃnyāsin itself.² He never strictly conformed to the severe passionless life of an Indian ascetic, to which he imparted a new spirit by his emotional faith. He went beyond his ascetic teachers in matters of belief and practice: and, unlike the founders of some other Vaiṣṇava sects, he gave Rādhā a prominent place in his thought and his worship, although in matters of personal purity and self-denial he kept rigidly to his ascetic vow.

c6.s2.57

¹ Murāri alludes to the incident briefly (ii. 17. 11), but Vṛndāvana-dāsa (Madhya xxiii) makes it a fighting affair, which Kṛṣṇadāsa considerably tones down.

c6.s2.58

¹ Sārvabhauma, in Kavikarṇapūra's drama (Act vi), for instance, is made to wonder whether the Māyāvādin Saṃnyāsin was a Vaiṣṇava in his previous Āśrama; for he replies to the usual greeting not by नमो नारायणाय but by कृष्णे रतिः कृष्णे मतिः । This incident is copied by Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja.

c6.s2.59

² मोरे निन्दा करे ये ना करे नमस्कार । ए सब जीवेर अवश्य करिव उद्धार ॥ अतएव अवश्य आमि सन्न्यास करिव । सन्न्यासी वुझे मोरे प्रणत हइब ॥ प्रणतिते हवे इहार अपराध क्षय । निर्मल हृदये भक्ति करिव उदय ॥ ए सब पाखण्डীর তত্ত্বে হইবে নিস্তার । আর কোন উপায় নাহি এহ যুক্তি সার ॥ (Ādi xvii. 264-267). Also Govinda-dāsa Karmakāra: शिखामूल त्याग करि सन्न्यास लइब । ताहा ना करिले किसे जीव उद्धारिव ॥ (p. 6).

c6.s2.60

¹ Only Kavikarṇapūra explicitly tells us in his Mahākāvya (iv. 76) that Viśvambhara returned from Gayā in the month of Pauṣa, that his manifestation began from Māgha in the same year, that he taught pupils for four months more, *i.e.* till Vaiśākha of the next year (v. 24), and that he spent eight months from Jyaiṣṭha to Pauṣa in Saṃkīrtana, so that his Saṃnyāsa occurred in Māgha. Both Vṛndāvana-dāsa (Madhya ii) and Kṛṣṇadāsa (Ādi xvii. 30) generally speak of one year's interval between Caitanya's return from Gayā and his Saṃnyāsa. Kṛṣṇadāsa also says: बच्छिस वत्सर शेष येइ माघमास । तार शुक्लपक्षे प्रभु करिल सन्न्यास ॥ (Madhya iii. 3) : in this he follows Kavikarṇapūra.

c6.s2.61

² As Caitanya's reply to Advaita on this occasion, in Kavikarṇapūra's drama (v. 21), implies. Meeting Caitanya for the first time, Sārvabhauma asks whether the young ascetic belongs to the Bhāratī-sampradāya (Act vi), to which Gopinātha Ācārya replies that Caitanya's belonging to a Sampradāya is only an outward form (*bāhya*): but the orthodox Sārvabhauma replies: *samīcīnam nocyate, āśramaujvalyam na bāhyam!*

c6.s2.62

After paying a visit to the venerable Advaita's house at Sāntipur, where he took a pathetic farewel from his heart-broken mother and the assembled Vaiṣṇava devotees of Navadvīpa, to whom his renunciation came as a terrible blow, he resolved to leave for Vṛndāvana. But he yielded to his mother's entreaties to reside permanently at Puri, where his friends and followers could visit him and whence pilgrims would frequently bring his news.¹ If Śacī Devī rose to the occasion and reconciled herself to her son's abandoning the life of the householder, her worthy son honoured his mother by allowing her word to determine his place of residence for life, and by relinquishing his cherished object of reclamation of the sacred sites of Vṛndāvana, of which we will speak presently. It reminds one of the story of the great Śaṃkara, who, Saṃnyāsin as he was, is said to have performed the funeral obsequies of his mother, and thus risen superior to the strict code of the recluse. Commending the care of his mother, wife and faithful followers to Advaita and other associates,² Caitanya departed within a month for Puri with only four disciples (Nityānanda, Dāmodara Paṇḍita, Jagadānanda and Mukunda) accompanying him.

c6.s2.63

¹ Of this story of Śacī's request, there is no trace in Murāri and Kavikarṇapūra, who state that Caitanya himself declared his own intention to go to Puri.

c6.s2.64

² Murāri (iv. 14. 3-11), and following him Locana, tells us that Caitanya once again visited Navadvīpa in later years during his visit to Gauḍa. Other biographers are silent on this point, possibly because such a visit would be contrary to the usual practice of a Saṃnyāsin, but Vāsu Ghoṣa in one of his Padas alludes to it (*Gaurapada*, 2nd ed. p. 271).

c6.s2.65

Although a close connexion was kept up between the Master and his Bengal followers by their annual visits to Puri, his departure must have been a great loss¹ to a cause which had hardly had time yet to establish itself firmly. The later disruption of the sect, the organisation of which was left in the hands of Advaita and Nityānanda, was partly due to this lack of direct contact with the Master, whose personality was not only the strongest asset of the community but also the only powerful influence which could unify and organise it into a compact body. While the movement in Bengal fell into disorder after his death,² the influence of his personal presence for long years at Puri has made Orissa a stronghold of the Vaiṣṇava faith even up to the present day. If the legend (for legend it appears to be!) about the original migration of Caitanya's ancestors from Orissa were true, then Orissa had enough warrant for claiming Caitanya as her own, but she succeeded at least in proving her claim indirectly by a wide-spread and enduring belief in his faith.

c6.s2.66

¹ Kavikarṇapūra in his drama (iv. 36) makes Caitanya's followers lament over it as *sarvasva-nāśo hi naḥ*.

c6.s2.67

² Apart from the general bifurcation into the devotees of Navadvīpa (Murāri, Kavikarṇapūra, Vṛndāvana-dāsa, Jayānanda and some early Pada-composers on Caitanya) and Vṛndāvana (the six Gosvāmins, Kṛṣṇadāsa, Narottama and Śrīnivāsa) respectively, who looked at Caitanya from different angles, we know that even at the time when Vṛndāvana-dāsa wrote, there were other small groups, e.g. Gaura-nāgara-vādins (Narahari, Locana and some Pada-composers, Ādi x), Advaita-bhaktas (Madhya x; Antya iv), followers of Gadādhara (Madhya xiii), disciples and detractors of Nityānanda (Madhya iii).

c6.s2.68

The first short stay at Puri³ was marked by two important incidents. The first was the conversion of a famous Vedāntist, Vāsudeva Sārvabhauma, and the other was the homage of Gajapati Pratāparudra, ruler of Orissa, who is also said to have come under the spell of Caitanya's influence. Vāsudeva Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, some of whose devotional verses are cited in the *Padyāvali*,⁴ was a Navadvīpa scholar, born about the middle of the 15th century. His father was (Maheśvara ?) Viśārada, whom Vāsudeva mentions reverentially at the close of his commentary on Lakṣmīdhara's *Advaita-makaranda*,¹ and to whom the so-called *Pratyakṣa-maṇi-māheśvarī* on the *Tattva-cintāmaṇi*, is dubiously ascribed.² There is a legend that Vāsudeva went to Mithilā to study Nyāya at the school established by Pakṣadhara Miśra.³ As his teachers in Mithilā, it is said, would not allow any outsider to copy out their famous manuscripts on Nyāya, Vāsudeva committed the entire *Tattva-cintāmaṇi*, as well as the metrical portion of the *Kusumāñjali*, to memory, and brought them in this manner to Bengal. This is said to have transferred the study of Navya Nyāya from Mithilā to Bengal,

c6.s2.69

³ Kavikarṇapūra in his Mahākāvya (xii. 94) states that Caitanya stayed only 18 days at Puri before he set out on his Southern pilgrimage.

c6.s2.70

⁴ Altogether seven verses are cited in the anthology under the name of Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, by which title the great scholar appears

c6.s2.71

¹ Rajendralal Mitra, *Notices* viii, pp. 291-2, no. 2854. The colophon designates the author as Gauḍīyācārya-sārvabhauma-bhaṭṭācārya. The terms of reference to his father Viśārada indicate that Viśārada was also a Vedāntist (*vedānta-vidyā-maya*). The name occurs as Narahari, although Bengal Vaiṣṇava works make it Maheśvara! He was a Vandyaghaṭīya Brahman (*irī vandyānvaya*).—The work was written under the patronage of Gajapati Pratāparudra of Orissa.

c6.s2.72

² By Gopinath Kaviraj in *Sarasvatī Bhavana Studies*, iv, p. 60. Dinesh Chandra Bhattacharya (*Bhāratvarṣa*, xxviii, pt. 2, 1347 B.E., p. 423 f) points out that the name of the work is missing in the fragmentary MS, but was supplied by Vindhyesvariprasad Dvivedi; and the author's name also does not occur. It is a commentary on Pakṣadhara's *Aloka* and probably belongs to Maheśa or Maheśvara of Mithilā.

c6.s2.73

³ Vāsudeva Sārvabhauma must not be confounded (as done by Aufrecht) with Vāsudeva Miśra Nyāya-siddhānta, who was a nephew and pupil of Pakṣadhara Miśra and wrote a commentary on the *Tattva-cintāmaṇi*. Pakṣadhara's date is uncertain. Satish Chandra Vidyabhusan (*Indian Logic*, Calcutta 1921, pp. 455-56) would place him in the last quarter of the 13th century, but Gopinath Kaviraj (*Sarasvatī Bhavana Studies*, iv, pp. 62 f) would shift the date to the third quarter of the 15th century.

c6.s2.74

to have been known and generally referred to in the Bengal Vaiṣṇava works. Locana alone gives the full name Vāsudeva Sārvabhauma. On Stotras and ślokas ascribed to Vāsudeva Sārvabhauma, see S. K. De in *Indian Culture*, I, 1934, pp. 22-29; also S. K. De, *Padyāvalī*, Dacca 1934, pp. 228-230.

c6.s2.75

which now became possessed of the original books to work upon. Returning to Bengal, he set up a dialectic school of Navya Nyāya at Navadvīpa; but his fame is said to have been eclipsed by that of his more distinguished pupil, Raghunātha Śiromaṇi, the great champion of the Bengal school of Logic.¹ This legend, however, is also told in connexion with Raghunātha Śiromaṇi himself, and there is nothing to show that Raghunātha was ever a pupil of Vāsudeva. Vāsudeva was perhaps more of a Vedāntist than a Naiyāyika, as his learned commentary on Lakṣmīdhara's *Advaita-makaranda*, written at Puri, indicates; and Murāri, Kavikarṇapūra and Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja represent him chiefly as teaching Vedānta at Puri. Jayānanda tells us that Vāsudeva was driven from Navadvīpa by Muhammadan persecution and settled at Puri, where he passed the closing years of his life under the patronage of Gajapati Pratāparudra of Orissa.²

c6.s2.76

¹ It is noteworthy that Raghunātha, in his *Anumāna-dīdhiti* quotes and refutes *sārvabhauma-mata*.—A work on Nyāya by Vāsudeva Sārvabhauma, called *Samāsa-vāda*, is mentioned in Aufrecht i, 698 a, but the work is now known to have been composed by Rāmabhadra Sārvabhauma. Tradition ascribes to him a *Sārvabhauma-nirukti*, apparently a glossorial commentary, on the *Tattva-cintāmaṇi*; but nothing is known about this alleged work. Gopinath Kaviraj (*op. cit.*, p. 63), however, informs us that Vāsudeva's commentary on the *Tattva-cintāmaṇi*, called *Sārāvalī*, is available only in fragments. The MS does not contain the names of the work or the author; but D. C. Bhattacharya (*loc. cit.*) believes that the author was Vāsudeva Sārvabhauma, and conjectures the real name of the work to have been *Anumāna-maṇi-parīkṣā*.

c6.s2.77

² There is nothing to support the accuracy of Jayānanda's story of Vāsudeva's exodus from Navadvīpa. Jayānanda tells us that in his adoration of Caitanya, Sārvabhauma composed then and there a *Caitanyāṣṭaka Stotra* (चैतन्याष्टक श्लोक करिला प्रबन्धे । सार्वभौम ध्यानस्तुति करि गौरचन्द्रे ॥ p. 125), and a *Caitanya-sahasra-nāma* (चैतन्यसहस्रनाम श्लोकप्रबन्धे । सार्वभौम रचिल केवल प्रेमानन्दे ॥ p. 3), also in hundred verses (चैतन्येर शत श्लोक सार्वभौम-मुखे p. 125). Vṛndāvana-dāsa also

c6.s2.78

There are different versions of the story of Caitanya's first meeting at Puri¹ with this venerable Bengali scholar; but one of the orthodox accounts gives a dramatic setting to the whole incident.² While beholding for the first time the image of Jagannātha, Caitanya is said to have been so much overpowered by his ecstatic emotions that he made a frenzied attempt to embrace the holy image and dropped senseless on the ground in his effort. The priests of the temple, mistaking him for a mad man, began to ill-treat him. Vāsudeva, who

c6.s2.79

² This is narrated by Vṛndāvana-dāsa, whom Kṛṣṇadāsa substantially follows. But both Murāri and Kavikarṇapūra give a somewhat different account. See B. Majumdar, op. cit., pp. 355-57.

c6.s2.80

refers to Sārvabhauma's Śata-śloka (hundred verses) in praise of Caitanya. So far, a work, entitled Caitanya-dvādaśa-nāma-stotra, by Vāsudeva, is known to exist at Tübingen (Roth's Tübingen Catalogue, p. 10). Jayānanda also says: सार्वभौम करिलेन अष्टोत्तरशतनाम (p. 125). An anonymous Caitanyāṣṭottara-śata-nāma is mentioned in Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1865, p. 139, which list also enters an Advaitāṣṭaka by Sārvabhauma. Sārvabhauma might have also written something on the life of Caitanya, for Jayānanda states: सार्वभौम भट्टाचार्य व्यास अवतार । चैतन्यचरित आगे करिल प्रचार ॥ p. 3. The verses put in Sārvabhauma's mouth in Kavikarṇapūra's Caitanya-candrodaya (vi. 43-44), as well as in his Mahākāvya (xii. 86-87), have been, as tradition alleges, directly taken from his own composition. From what is implied by Karṇapūra and Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja, Sārvabhauma probably spent his last days after Caitanya's passing away, at Benares.

c6.s2.81

1 Tradition delights to make a great academic figure out of Vāsudeva Sārvabhauma and assigns to him four distinguished pupils, who achieved great success in four different spheres, viz. Raghunātha Śiromaṇi, the Naiyāyika; Raghunandana, the Smārta; Kṛṣṇānanda Āgamavāgīśa, the Tāntrika; and lastly, Caitanya. But Caitanya's pupilship, even though plausible, appears to have no foundation in fact; for Caitanya's first meeting with Vāsudeva, as described by Kavikarṇapūra and Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja, appears to have taken place at Puri. Probably the venerable old scholar had already left Navadvīpa before Caitanya was old enough to be his pupil. In the accounts of Caitanya's early life no reference is made to Vāsudeva's teaching Caitanya, whose attitude at Puri was hardly that of a pupil towards his teacher.

c6.s2.82

had by chance come to the temple and witnessed the scene, had the unconscious youth carried to his house, where he must have been interested to learn that the charming young man belonged to Navadvīpa and was a grandson of Nilāmbara Cakravartin, a friend of his own father Viśārada. The story of the interview, which followed, is shrouded in the pious accounts by a cloud of miraculous and theological legends, but the facts are fairly obvious. Struck by Caitanya's youth and personality, the compassionate old scholar sought at first to dissuade him from the difficult path of renunciation and tried to make him a Vedāntist. After listening to his learned discourse for seven days (the entire episode in one account lasting at least for twelve days!), Caitanya observed that the Vedānta-sūtra, like the Upaniṣads, was clear to him, but the views of Śaṃkara, as expounded by Sārvabhauma, obscured the real meaning of the Sūtras. A learned discussion followed in which Caitanya advanced a series of abstruse exposition of dualistic Vaiṣṇava tenets, diametrically opposed to Advaita Vedānta. The result of the disputation was that Sārvabhauma became a convert to Caitanyaism. In the course of the debate, however, as described in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta, quotations are freely made and interpreted, with an evident theological relish, from the Bhāgavata, as well as from such works as Rūpa's Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu which, as we shall see presently, was not composed till several years after Caitanya's death¹ In the orthodox account, however, it appears that the great Vedāntist was not fully convinced by the metaphysics of the young enthusiast, but that he was finally overpowered when Caitanya revealed himself to his vision as the divine Kṛṣṇa. Apart from miracles, what probably happened was that Sārvabhauma was finally won over from the path of dry doctrines to that of passionate devotion, not so much by theological arguments as by the irresistible appeal of Caitanya's impassioned religious personality.¹

c6.s2.83

¹ While the details of the debate are omitted in other accounts, Kṛṣṇadāsa appears to have elaborated it, not from Vṛndāvana-dāsa's brief account of one day's disputation, but mainly from Kavikarṇapūra's poetical description in his Kāvya. See B. Majumdar, op. cit., pp. 358-66. It is curious that one of the well known Bhāgavata verses is said to have been interpreted by Caitanya ingeniously in different ways—the number of ways being given as nine by Kavikarṇapūra, more than thirteen by Vṛndāvana-dāsa, and eighteen by Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja, while during Sanātana's teaching (Madhya xxiv), sixty-one different interpretations of the same verse are mentioned!

c6.s2.84

¹ Sārvabhauma is reported to have acknowledged: तर्कशास्त्रे जड आमि म्लेच्छ लौहदंड । क्षमा कराइले तुमि प्रताप प्रचण्ड ॥ (C-C. Madhya vi. 214). Kavikarṇapūra's accounts, both in his drama and in his poem, also suggest a similar process, in spite of miracle and extravagant description.—At the time when Sārvabhauma wrote his commentary on Advaita-makaranda, which is distinctly Advaita Vedāntic, he could not have accepted Caitanya's dualistic faith. In this work he refers to the vanquishing of Kṛṣṇa-rāya of Karṇāṭa by his patron Gajapati Pratāparudra of Orissa; but Kṛṣṇa-rāya did not come to the throne till 1510 A.D., and his expedition against Orissa did not begin till 1513, so that the work could not have been composed before this date. And yet the biographies of Caitanya represent Sārvabhauma's conversion to have occurred at about 1510 A.D., immediately after Caitanya's arrival at Puri!—It should also be noted that Sārvabhauma's son, Jaleśvara Vāhinīpati, author of Śabdālokoddyota on Pakṣadhara's Āloka, and his grandson Svapneśvara, author of the well known Bhāṣya on the Sāṇḍilya-sūtra (in which the genealogy is given), do not appear to have accepted Caitanyism.

First 84 of 126 passages. Read on

Linked texts (28)