Early History of the Vaishnava Faith and Movement in Bengal, from Sanskrit and Bengali Sources c9.s5.60

c9.s5.60

For those who see in this verse an anticipation of Caitanya's advent it is not difficult to interpret it accordingly. Such methods of interpretative ingenuity are not unknown in Sanskrit mediaeval theology or philosophy; and such feats are comparatively easy in a language like Sanskrit which affords special facilities regarding the large number of meaning which may be assigned to particular words, the different modes of splitting up compounds and the diverse ways in which the syllables comprising a word or a sentence can be disjoined. It is quite natural, therefore, for the predisposed Vṛndāvana Gosvāmins to find in this verse a prophecy of Caitanya's appearance and press it into sectarian service. Accordingly, they agree in splitting up the phrase tviṣākṛṣṇam only in one way, namely, tviṣā akṛṣṇam 'in brightness not dark' and making it refer to Caitanya's bright and fair complexion; while the phrase kṛṣṇa-varṇa is supposed to refer to the citation of the syllables (varṇa) of Kṛṣṇa's name by Caitanya, although the more subtle Jīva Gosvāmin appears¹ to think that the phrase refers to the fact that Caitanya was inwardly Kṛṣṇa himself (antaḥ-kṛṣṇa) but outwardly Gaura or Caitanya, fair in complexion (*bahir gaura*, with the usual pun on the word *gaura*), with an implied allusion to the Prakaṭa and Aprakaṭa aspects of the divine sport. All interpretations of the Bengal school, however, agree that the *saṃkīrtana-prāya yajña* in the verse undoubtedly refers to the new mode of emotional worship by loud singing, music and dancing which the school made so popular. They also agree that the rest of the verse means that in this Līlā Caitanya had for his weapon (*astra*) only his companions like Nityānanda (*aṅga*), associates like Advaita (*upāṅga*), as well as followers like Gadādhara and others (*pārṣada*). What value this interpretation in itself may be judged to possess, there can be no doubt that it has an important bearing on the practical creed of Caitanyaism. But it is at the same time somewhat extraordinary that, apart from such passing references in the Namaskriyās and poetical effusions, neither Rūpa, Sanātana nor Jiva in the body of their elaborate and voluminous theological writing ever discusses, amplifies or illustrates the question from the point of view of this important bearing.