Vaisnava aparädha – the most dangerous anartha
Among the four types of anarthas, nama aparädha is the most serious stumbling block for all Vaisnavas. Nama aparädha includes Vaisnava aparädha which is the single most devastating of all anarthas and aparädhas. Without a crystal clear understanding and resolution of this issue, one's progress may be severely impacted even for many lifetimes, what to speak of within this life.
Unfortunately, Vaisnava aparädha is a malicious epidemic that is rampant throughout the contemporary worldwide Vaisnava community, as witnessed by the over abundance of blasphemous statements found online on numerous websites. The seriousness of these offenses cannot be over stated. Most Gaudiya Vaisnavas understand the potentially damaging effects of Vaisnava aparädha through Lord Caitanya's description of the offense labeled, "mad elephant", which runs wild through one's devotional garden, obliterating the creeper of devotion.
CC, ML, 19.156: If the devotee commits an offense at the feet of a Vaisnava while cultivating the creeper of devotional service in the material world, his offense is compared to a mad elephant that uproots the creeper and breaks it. In this way the leaves of the creeper are dried up.
It seems quite obvious that most Vaisnavas do not comprehend the actual ramifications of such offenses, so we will expand upon the basic understanding to make the point more clearly and emphatically. Many offenders (aparadhis) try to justify their attacks by skewed philosophical word jugglery, which sadly does not conform to the standards set by the äcäryas.
There is a fundamental misunderstanding that is prevalent in the Vaisnava aparädhas that are committed in many online diatribes against fellow Vaisnavas, and the rationale goes something like this: A certain Vaisnava is not following this or that rule(s) and is not chanting sixteen rounds daily, and as such he is disobeying his spiritual master. Therefore I (the offender) conclude and declare publicly that he is a reject disciple, completely condemned and rejected by his guru and thus not a Vaisnava anymore, so it's perfectly fine to severely trash him in any way I choose without fear of committing an offense.
Unfortunately (for the offender) this perverted reasoning is fatally flawed and highly offensive in and of itself. Ignorance of the law is no excuse in these delicate matters. In light of the above typical offensive behavior, let's examine some clarifying statements about Vaisnava aparädha made by Visvanatha Cakravarti in Madhurya-kadambini, 3.5. After describing methods of repentance and atonement he says:
By the divine power of nama kirtana, certainly in time that person will be delivered from his offense. However, he should not justify himself by arguing that shastra says, namaparädha yuktanam namanyeva harantyagham: The Holy Name alone is sufficient to deliver an offender. So what is the need of humbling himself by offering repeated respects and service to the Vaisnava that he has offended? This type of mentality makes him guilty of further offense.
Nor should one be of the mentality to think that the offense of sadhu ninda discriminates between types of Vaisnavas. It does not refer only to one who is fully and perfectly qualified with all the qualities mentioned in scripture, such as mercifulness, never harming others, and forgiving to all living entities: krpalur akrta-drohas titiksuh sarva dehinam. SB 11.11.29
A person cannot minimize his offense by pointing out some defect in the devotee.
In answer the scriptures say: sarvacara vivarjitah sathadhiyo bratya jagadvancakah:
Even a person who is of very bad character, a cheater, devoid of proper behavior, malicious, devoid of samskaras, and full of worldly desires, if he surrenders to the Lord, must be considered a sadhu. What to speak of a pure Vaisnava.
Sometimes a serious offense has been committed against a Vaisnava, but the Vaisnava does not become angry because of his exalted nature. Still the offender should fall at that devotee's feet and seek ways of pleasing him to purify himself. Though the Vaisnava may forgive offenses, the dust of his feet does not tolerate the offenses and delivers the fruits of the offense on the guilty person. For it is said:
sersyam mahapurusa-pada-pamsubhir, nirasta-tejahsu tad eva sobhanam:
Those who envy exalted saints are certainly diminished by the dust of their lotus feet. SB 4.4.13
In Madhurya-kadambini, Third Shower, Visvanatha Cakravarti states:
Seeing the following verse from Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu another doubt arises:
Oh foremost of brahmanas, what are the offenses against the Name of the Lord which cancel the results of all one's performances, and lead to a material conception even of transcendental topics? BRS [?]
In other words, repeatedly hearing and chanting the Lord's name should give prema, serving the sacred tirthas should bestow perfection, tasting repeatedly the ghee, milk and betel prasadam should destroy all desires for sense enjoyment. So what are the grave offenses which cancel these results and cause all these spiritually potent activities to appear material?
This very startling and unnerving question is being raised. If this is so, does it follow that a person who commits a nama aparädha becomes averse to the Lord and thus cannot even take shelter of guru or perform devotional activities?
This is true. As during a serious fever, losing all taste for food, a person finds it impossible to eat, so a person who commits a serious offense, loses scope for hearing, chanting and performing devotional activities. There is no doubt about this. MK, 3.[?]
Thus, those who arbitrarily assign themselves the role of "bhakti enforcement police" and who then assume the position of judge, jury and executioner in relation to another Vaisnava's status and behavior on the path of bhakti, have unwittingly condemned themselves by their unwarranted vitriol towards other practicing Vaisnavas. There is no escaping this conclusion by any amount of word jugglery or rationalizations. And once again, ignorance of the law is no excuse.
As we learned in the previous section on anartha-nivritti, even at the stage of bhava, where you finally perceive your eternal spiritual body (siddha-swarup) and even meet Krsna briefly (sphurti), there are still anarthas present, though they are more or less neutralized.
For the sake of emphasis, and at the risk of being redundant, we're going to repeat the section about Vaisnava aparädha from the previous chapter's section on the definition of a pure devotee. The seriousness of this offense warrants repetition, and it is appropriate to mention it here in this section specifically discussing Vaisnava aparädha.
It is explained in Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu how one can still fall down from the stage of bhava and destroy or diminish one's bhava and possibly even one's eternal rasa! This would only happen due to a severe offense against a Vaisnava or Krsna, but it can happen. Only when one reaches the platform of prema is one guaranteed never to fall down.
Rupa Gosvami explains:
Moreover, it should be stated: By an offense against the dearest devotee of the Lord, even real bhava will be destroyed, if the offense is grave. If the offense is medium, the bhava will turn to bhavabhasa. If the offense is slight, the bhava will become an inferior type. BRS, 1.3.54
Jiva Goswami's Commentary:
By two types of grave offenses – offense to the dearest devotee or to Krsna Himself (krsna-prestha aparädhatah) – even real bhava is destroyed. By medium offense, bhava becomes bhavabhasa – a shadow of bhava. By slight offense, the bhava degrades in category. Becoming an inferior type means that there will be degradation in terms of the five rasas and the eight stages from mahabhava down to rati. Thus, change in bhava will take place according to the seriousness of the offense.
From Visvanatha Cakravarti's Commentary:
If the aparädha is slight, the bhava changes type. Madhura-rati becomes dasya-rati. Dasya-rati becomes santa-rati.
The main points above should be crystal clear and very sobering. Vaisnava aparädha is potentially devastating and should never be taken lightly by any serious sadhakas.
But an important question remains unanswered: "Are we to simply overlook the bad behavior of a Vaisnava, even criminal behavior, and not say anything ever – just turn a blind eye?" Absolutely not. There is a distinction between valid criticism, aparädha and justice.
If a Vaisnava is breaking the laws, either civil, criminal or moral, by stealing, corruption, molesting children, mental and physical abuse, etc, and one is in a position to expose these crimes to the authorities, then one is obligated to do so, as well as doing whatever one is capable of to bring the offender to the justice system for conviction and punishment. No one, Vaisnava or not, should be allowed to get away with any criminal activities. The offender can still chant and read in jail while they are atoning for their crimes against society. Vaisnavas who engage in criminal behavior do not get a religious free pass.
If the crimes occur within an institution, both the institutional authorities and law enforcement should be notified. No cover ups should be allowed or tolerated as that is also a punishable crime that should be reported if discovered. There is no aparädha for the reporting criminal behavior of individuals and institutions, and seeking justice.
Aparädha becomes a factor if Visvanatha Cakravarti's important qualifier is still part of the equation, ie: "if he surrenders to the Lord". In other words, if the perpetrator is genuinely engaged in sadhana and trying to maintain their status as a practicing Vaisnava, then it is an aparädha if one's criticism is full of animosity and malice directed towards the individual.
Furthermore, if you discuss the events and circumstances of that Vaisnava's bad behavior, primarily for the edification and emotional resolution of all affected parties, then there is no offense. The same applies to a neutral discussion by outside parties, if meant to foster a better understanding of that particular undesirable behavior and its consequences. However, if the discussions include statements meant to denigrate and insult the offender, then an offense is committed. It's a fine line, so it must be tread carefully. Hate the sin, not the sinner.
Here's another example to consider. If you don't like a particular Vaisnava's personality, behavior or attitude, and they are engaged in legitimate missionary work for spreading Vaisnavism, but they aren't committing any crimes, it is Vaisnava aparädha to criticize or insult them simply based on your disliking their demeanor or methods.
If you don't agree with their philosophical presentation of Vaisnava philosophy because you believe it is based on a flawed understanding of sastra, you have every right to publicly present arguments with appropriate sastric substantiation to challenge their philosophical position. In doing so, there is no aparädha. But your critique must focus on the philosophical issues and not the person, otherwise it would be aparädha.
This also includes disagreeing with how a Vaisnava manages their affairs within a spiritual organization. If you criticize the methods and management decisions but not the persons, then there is no offense. If you vilify the persons, then you have committed Vaisnava aparädha.
Let us all humbly beg for forgiveness from any Vaisnavas we may have offended, knowingly or otherwise, and offer pardons to those who request forgiveness for having committed offenses to us.
What are the criteria for being a pure devotee, self realized, or liberated?
The terms "pure devotee," "self realized" and "liberated" have been used repeatedly by Srila Prabhupada throughout his books, and throughout sastra in general, but what exactly do those terms mean? How are they correctly defined and understood? There are numerous verses in various sastras that delineate the qualities of a "self realized" or "liberated" soul, and Srila Prabhupada has written and spoken many statements saying, "a pure devotee does this and that or is like this and that". Then there are the mahabhagavatas, paramahamsas, maharsis, uttama-adhikaris, and so on.
Are all of these variously lauded exalted personalities on the same transcendental platform, or does each title imply a different level of advancement and/or realization? An inquiring practitioner can easily flounder in a sea of slokas without acquiring an accurate or comprehensive understanding. Unfortunately, many Vaiñëavas have an idealized or skewed concept of a pure devotee that is often not in sync with what the äcäryas have presented.
Is a pure devotee recognized or authenticated by examining the long list of qualities mentioned in various sastras, and then determining if those qualities are fully manifest in that individual? What if they don't pass the "pure devotee check list test" and are missing several qualities – do we reject them as not being "fully" pure? And who is qualified or authorized to make such evaluations and determinations? Is there a "Pure Devotee Verification Committee" in some Vaiñëava organization?
Does a sadhaka become a pure devotee simply by perfectly following and emulating all of the qualities found in those lengthy sastric lists? If someone is consciously emulating those qualities, is that the cause of becoming a pure devotee, or are those qualities actually symptoms and by-products of internal transformations of the heart? These questions, and many others, are answered by the äcäryas.
In the contemporary Gaudiya Vaiñëava community, many devotees have assumed the role of dékñä-guru and have later stepped down from that position in disgrace due to inappropriate and unacceptable behavior. However, during their sojourn as a dékñä-guru, their disciples and followers addressed them with adulatory saintly names and worshiped them as if they were pure devotees, and these gurus willingly accepted the adulation showered on them.
So the question is: were they truly pure devotees who then some how fell from that highly elevated position? Or were they never pure devotees or fully self realized, but simply pretended to be and allowed others to treat them that way? Let's examine what the äcäryas have written.
As described in the previous sections in this chapter, the äcäryas have all agreed on the exact step by step path that every sadhaka must traverse if they want to attain prema for Krsna in Vraja, which is the highest goal of rägänugä-bhakti. At which of the more advanced stages of progress should one be understood to be a genuinely pure devotee and/or fully self realized? Is it niñöhä, ruci, äsakti, bhäva or prema?
Certainly one who is fully sincere and honestly endeavoring for prema is motivated by essentially pure intentions, in spite of lingering anarthas. If such a sadhaka is eventually blessed with prema without having been waylaid by any major setbacks along the way, then we might say that he/she was a pure devotee throughout their journey to prema.
According to the äcäryas, bhäva is the first stage of perfection (sadhya) of one's practice (sädhana). Bhava is described as a ray of the sun of prema. This is the actual threshold of one's eternal transcendental existence. Rupa Gosvami dedicates a full chapter to bhäva-bhakti in Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu. Here are some highlights.
That part of bhakti is called bhäva, whose essence is samvit and hladini sakti, which is one ray of the sun of prema which will soon rise in the heart, and which softens the heart with desires to meet, serve and exchange love with the Lord. BRS, 1.3.1
From Jiva Gosvami's commentary:
Furthermore, this bhäva softens the heart (mind) with its desires (rucibhih) for meeting the Lord, serving the Lord favorably, and attaining the friendship of the Lord. This bhäva is also the sprout which will become prema, and which will be described later.
By comparing prema to the sun, there is the suggestion that, just as the sun will appear soon after the light of dawn, prema will appear very soon after the appearance of bhäva. As well, it is like a ray of the sun; it is the first glow of the sun of prema. It will be explained later that prema is the condensed form of bhäva.
This bhäva, whose very form is the essence of the hladini function of the Lord, should also be understood to be non-material, since it makes the happiness of liberation insignificant, brings about the Lord's appearance, and produces bliss.
Further on, Rupa Gosvami delineates the manifested attributes of one who has attained bhäva:
The anubhävas or characteristics of a person who has developed the bud of bhäva are as follows: tolerance, not wasting time, detachment from enjoyment, pridelessness, confidence in the Lord's mercy, longing for the Lord, taste for chanting the name of the Lord, attachment to discussing about the Lord's qualities, and attachment to living in the abode of the Lord. BRS, 1.3.25-26
Rupa then goes on to give one or two examples of each of these characteristics. Many devotees think that this is the perfectional stage from which no one can fall down, and thus all of one's actions are absolutely perfect and without flaws because you are officially a "pure devotee".
How could one possibly have remaining anarthas or even fall down from bhäva? It seems impossible to fathom how that could ever be the case. We will hear from Rupa Gosvami, Jiva Gosvami, and Visvanatha Cakravarti about the astonishing truths of these matters.
Even at the exalted transcendental stage of bhäva/rati, the stage leading directly to prema, there may still be lingering anarthas, even though they are essentially neutralized. Visvanatha Cakravarti talks about the gradual elimination of anarthas in Madhurya-kadambini:
By continued practice:
-with the appearance of nishtha, the eradication is pervasive (affecting many anarthas)
-with the appearance of bhäva/rati, the eradication is almost complete
-with the appearance of prema, the eradication is complete
-with the attainment of the Lord's association, the eradication is absolute, with no possibility of their reappearance. MK, 3.16
[verify this quote from PBC or don't use it]
Visvanatha Cakravarti talks about the gradual elimination of anarthas in Prema-bhakti-candrika [Ch/V?]:
One who has begun taking harinama must first take shelter of the feet of a genuine guru and serve him with a mood of intimacy. Then he will engage in svarupa-siddha-bhakti by hearing, chanting and remembering hari-katha and performing all the nine types of devotion.
As he performs bhajana like this more and more, then eka-desa-vartini – one 'desa' or part of his anarthas will clear, meaning that partial nullification of his anarthas will take place. Then, when he begins to enter the stages of ruci and äsakti, bahu-desa-vartini – all his offenses and anarthas begin to dissipate.
When he begins to enter the stage of bhäva, then prayiki – only a mere scent of these things will remain. And when he enters the stage of prema, then purna – all his anarthas will be fully eradicated. But there is still the possibility of a trace of them being present at this time, so next is atyantaki – by receiving direct darsana of Bhagavan, all anarthas will be absolutely dispelled forever. Without having received direct darsana of Bhagavan, there is a possibility that a trace of these anarthas may remain.
There are gradations in the stage of prema. In the beginning there will be a little, then more, then more and then more until it is complete prema. But in the beginning of the stage of prema, a scent of anarthas may still remain. PBC, [?confirm translation or remove this section?]
This certainly provides a new perspective on the term, pure devotee. Even at the stages of bhäva there may still be anarthas present. Only at prema are the anarthas completely destroyed, and they are absolutely eradicated upon attaining Krsna's darsana and association.
Even more shocking, it is explained in Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu how one can still fall down from the stage of bhäva and diminish or even destroy one's bhäva and possibly even one's rasa! This would only happen due to a severe offense against a Vaiñëava or Krsna, but it can happen, which is precisely why Rupa discusses it. Only when one reaches the platform of prema is one guaranteed never to fall down.
Moreover, it should be stated: By an offense against the dearest devotee of the Lord, even real bhäva will be destroyed, if the offense is grave. If the offense is medium, the bhäva will turn to bhävabhasa. If the offense is slight, the bhäva will become an inferior type. BRS, 1.3.54
Jiva Goswami's Commentary:
By two types of grave offenses – offense to the dearest devotee or to Krsna Himself (krsna-prestha aparädhätah) – even real bhäva is destroyed. By a medium offense, bhäva becomes bhävabhasa – a shadow of bhäva. By a slight offense, the bhäva degrades in category. Becoming an inferior type means that there will be degradation in terms of the five rasas and the eight stages from mahabhäva down to rati. Thus, a change in bhäva will take place according to the seriousness of the offense.
From Visvanatha Cakravarti's Commentary:
If the aparädha is slight, the bhäva changes type. Madhura-rati becomes dasya-rati. Dasya-rati becomes santa-rati.
Even at the stage of transcendental bhäva, one can still commit an offensive and fall down. These powerful statements should instill a sobering and indelible impression (samskara) on all serious practitioners to guard against committing Vaiñëava aparädha at any stage of progress. To have one's rasa changed from madhurya to dasya would be beyond devastating – eternally.
Continuing on in that chapter of Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu, Rupa Gosvami makes surprising and thought provoking statements at the end of the chapter on bhäva-bhakti.
If some apparent fault is seen in a person who has developed real bhäva, one should not be hostile to him, because he has accomplished the goal in all respects. BRS, 1.3.59
From Jiva Gosvami's Commentary:
There may be some external bad conduct (vaigunyam), but one should not be hostile to him, because by having bhäva the person cannot be contaminated by those external actions. Thus it is said:
Whether one is pure or contaminated, and regardless of one's external situation, simply by remembering the lotus-eyed Personality of Godhead, one can cleanse one's internal and external existence. (Garuda Purana)
This person cannot be criticized, because he has accomplished the goal – he has attained bhäva.
Thus it is said in the Narasimha Purana: A person who is dedicated completely to the Lord may show externally, serious contamination (but internally he is pure). The full moon, though marked by the figure of a rabbit, is never overcome by darkness. BRS, 1.3.60
Jiva Gosvami's Commentary:
A person may show serious contamination. This means that it is seen externally that he performs forbidden activities. However, he shines with internal bhakti, which cannot be defeated by anyone (he is incomparable). A particular case, the moon, is introduced to support the general principle. This is called arthantara-nyasa. In the Hari-vamsa, it is said: the dark spot on the moon is called a rabbit. Though there is a fault in the beauty of the moon, that fault is only superficial.
Let's understand this clearly. After attaining the exalted goal of bhäva, which is a ray of prema and the beginning of pure bhakti, one will still not be completely free from all anarthas and possibly even exhibit, "external bad conduct", or "serious contamination", or "performs forbidden activities"! How is this possible? Why didn't Rupa say that if you see any such faults ever, then you know this person has not reached bhäva?
Rupa Gosvami, Jiva Gosvami, and Visvanatha Cakravarti have given us the incontrovertible and definitive facts for serious contemplation. Although a bhäva-bhakta is pure internally and has reached the preliminary goal, still there may be the external appearance of bad behaviors. This of course is easy fodder for fault finding offenders (aparadhis), which is clearly why Rupa Gosvami brings up this issue preemptively.
You can't judge a book solely by its cover, and we shouldn't impose or project uninformed, idealistic, unrealistic preconceived ideas on another Vaiñëava's level of advancement. You have to be very learned and advanced to correctly understand who is truly advanced and who isn't. Neophyte (kaniñöhä) devotees are not qualified to properly discern who is an advanced Vaiñëava and who isn't. Even most intermediate (madhyama) devotees lack such discrimination, due to limited sastric knowledge and practical realization.
As indicated above by Jiva Gosvami, it should be understood that someone who reaches bhäva will, in most cases, certainly continue on without impediments, to the stage of prema. The lingering presence of anarthas rarely becomes an issue for such elevated devotees, and they predominantly exhibit very saintly qualities. Bhaktivinoda Öhäkura explains this in Jaiva-Dharma:
One should not criticize a person in whom true bhäva has manifested, even though one may observe some slight fault in his behavior, for once bhäva has arisen, the sädhaka becomes completely successful in all his endeavors.
Under such circumstances, it is not possible for him to behave sinfully, but if any sinful behavior is sometimes observed, it should be understood in one of two ways. The mahä-puruña-bhakta may have performed some sinful activity by force of circumstances, but he cannot possibly remain in that condition permanently.
Alternatively, some semblance of sin (päpa-äbhäsa) from his previous life has not been completely destroyed, and is still present even after bhäva has arisen in him, although it will be destroyed very soon. One should think like this and not pay any attention to the commonplace faults that may be seen in bhaktas, for it is näma-aparädha to do so. The Nåsiàha Puräëa forbids us to absorb our attention in such faults:
Just as the moon is never obscured by darkness, even though covered with black spots, similarly, a person exclusively devoted to Çré Hari remains glorious, though by appearance he may be wicked and depraved.
It should not be concluded from this instruction that a bhakta repeatedly engages in sinful activities. Once a bhakta has developed niñöhä in bhakti, he will have no inclination to sin further. However, as long as the material body exists, there is a chance that sinful activity will occur unexpectedly. If a bhakta is exclusively devoted, the influence of his bhajana immediately burns to ashes all kinds of sins, just as a blazing fire easily consumes a small heap of cotton, and he becomes cautious not to become victimized by any sinful activity again.
All kinds of sinful actions are dissipated at the stage of steady, uninterrupted ananyä-bhakti, so it may be clearly understood that those who repeatedly engage in sinful activities have not yet developed this type of bhakti. To engage repeatedly and knowingly in sinful activity while practicing bhakti-yoga is näma-aparädha, which uproots bhakti completely and casts it aside. Bhaktas therefore keep themselves distant from such offenses. JD, Chapter 22, Pages 533-534
Therefore, it is incorrect to think or say that a particular Vaiñëava cannot possibly be a bhäva-bhakta or pure devotee solely on the basis of externally observed questionable behavior. It's much deeper than that. At every stage prior to bhäva, a sadhaka is still dealing with the presence of anarthas. Though they gradually become less of an issue as one progresses through the final stages leading to prema, anarthas are still present up to and including the stage of bhäva and sometimes even prema. All of these details will be examined thoroughly in the next chapter.
And to the contrary, if one is exhibiting good qualities and exemplary behavior, it does not automatically mean that they are a very advanced devotee. Visvanatha Cakravarti discusses this in relation to steadiness in bhakti (niñöhä), in Madhurya-kadambini, Fourth Shower:
Elements favorable to bhakti refer to humility, giving respect to others, friendliness, and mercifulness. However, sometimes steadiness in such qualities may be seen in a self-controlled devotee who has no steadiness (niñöhä) in bhakti. While elsewhere, steadiness in these qualities may not be perceived in an arrogant devotee who has attained steadiness in bhakti.
In spite of this, by the presence or absence of steadiness in bhakti itself (sakshat bhakti), rather than in the qualities of bhakti, learned wise men understand the actual presence or absence of nishtha, steadiness. Inexperienced perception cannot substantiate the truth. This is confirmed by the cited verses, bhaktir bhävati naistiki, with the appearance of naishtiki bhakti, tada rajas-tamo-bhävah... etair anaviddham: though traces of the qualities born of rajas and tamo guna may be present, they no longer affect the devotee. MK, 4.[?]
Obviously, there is a big difference between "acting humble" and truly possessing and manifesting humility. The same applies to all other elevated qualities. The lists of the qualities of advanced Vaiñëavas are not simply a compilation of "rules of behavior" to be followed, rather, they are by-products and symptoms of one's advanced condition in sädhana-bhakti.
The final conclusion is that a truly "pure", "self-realized" devotee is one who is situated on the platform of prema-bhakti, the highest goal attainable by jivas. Nevertheless, one on the platform of bhäva-bhakti must also be considered a fully self realized pure devotee, and must be respected as such. At any stage prior to bhäva, one is still progressing through the various stages of realizing one's eternal identity and is still becoming purified of anarthas and material conditioning.
All that being said, in India, and especially in Bengal, the term "pure devotee" has not traditionally been used in its strictest technical sense, and such is the case with Srila Prabhupada's writings. By applying the standards delineated above, we can thus discern more easily when Srila Prabhupada was actually referring to a technically pure devotee, as opposed to using the term to indicate a fully sincere advanced devotee who is nearing perfection.
The term self realized and liberated have an even broader scope, because they are used to refer to many different advanced sages and yogis who's activities appear throughout Vedic literature. Such sages and yogis have achieved various levels of brahman and paramatma realization, and some, like Narada and Brahma are Vaiñëavas – either devotees of Visnu in Vaikuntha, or Krsna in Vrndavana. All of them are referred to variously as paramahamsas, mahabhagavatas, mahamunis, siddhas, etc.
We now understand that those who are devotees of Krsna are on the highest platform of prema and as such, they are automatically self realized and liberated, which are actually lesser aspects of their exalted status. Those who are devotees of Visnu are not quite as exalted as Krsna bhaktas in terms of their prema, but they are still fully liberated and self realized.
All other transcendentalists are focused on brahman or paramatma, placing them further down the line, and depending on their actual positions, they may also be considered liberated and self realized, but certainly not in the same sense as Vaiñëavas. So it is possible to achieve levels of self realization and liberation without achieving prema for Visnu or Krsna.
Srila Prabhupada also used the term self realized rather broadly, even referring to one's siddha-deha as one's "self realized position", which is certainly a valid interpretation on some levels, as we will discover in Chapter 5.
Also, after deliberating on the above analysis, we can now understand that the "fallen gurus" mentioned initially were almost certainly not individuals who were on the platform of bhäva, and who then committed some atrocious offense, thus causing their fall down. Therefore, they were absolutely not "pure devotees" in the technical and true sense of the term, and nor were they even liberated souls or fully self realized.
The obvious and only possible conclusion is that they were still going through the phases of anartha-nivritti, and they were thwarted by various types of anarthas, including those arising from bhakti, as explained by Visvanatha Cakravarti in Madhurya-kadambini:
Next are the anarthas arising from bhakti. As many weeds grow along with the main plant, along with bhakti there appears acquisition of material wealth and other facilities, worship and respect by others, a comfortable position and fame (labha, puja, pratishtha). By their nature, they have the power to influence the heart of the devotee, expand, and retard the growth of the main plant intended for cultivation (bhakti). MK, 3.15
Therefore, just because someone presents themselves as a "guru", and has many followers who worship them, it does not automatically mean that they are self-realized pure devotees on the platform of bhava or prema. One is certainly free to choose any guru, regardless of the guru's level of advancement, but the results are definitely not the same. Choose your gurus very carefully and thoughtfully.
In his Caitanya-çikñämrita, Bhaktivinoda Öhäkura describes the spiritual potency of Vaiñëavas at various levels of advancement, to help us understand what a guru at each level is capable of conveying to their disciples. Those aspiring for initiation (diksa) should take serious note of these differences in order to make an informed and wise decision:
Concerning the bestowal of devotional energy by the mercy of the devotee, something should be mentioned. The power of the prema-bhakta is unlimited, and thus the prema- bhakta, if he is merciful, can transfer his power to any type of person.
The merciful bhäva-bhakta can instill power in the sädhana-bhaktas so that they can assume a position similar to his own, and by the strength of his personality, the bhäva-bhakta can raise materialistic people who have gained some qualification due to previous deeds to the level of ruci.
Vaidhé and rägänugä-sädhana-bhaktas can instill faith in materialistic people who have attained qualification by previous deeds, by dint of their teaching and example. CS, Chapter 5, Part 1, Bhava bhakti
What about uttama-adhikari devotees? Where do they stand in the scheme of things? Some devotees may be under the impression that all uttama-adhikaris are pure, self-realized devotees on the platform of bhäva or prema. This is not entirely correct. In the chapter on sädhana-bhakti, in Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu, Rupa Gosvami states:
There are three types of persons qualified for vaidhé-sädhana-bhakti: the uttama, the madhyama, and the kaniñöhä. BRS, 1.2.16
The uttama-adhikari is defined as follows: The person who is skillful in scripture and logic, completely firm in his belief, with deep faith, is considered qualified as an uttama in vaidhé-bhakti. BRS, 1.2.17
From Jiva Gosvami's commentary:
Previously, in defining vaidhé-bhakti, it was said that vaidhé-bhakti existed where the actions were inspired by the teachings of scripture. Thus, it may be concluded that the root cause of a person's bhakti is faith in the content of scriptures. Conviction in the contents of the scriptures is called shraddha or faith. According to the degree of faith in the scriptures, there will be classifications of persons possessing that faith. That is now the topic of discussion for two verses. … A person who is qualified as above, and has deep faith, is the uttama-adhikari.
By this definition, an uttama-adhikari devotee is still practicing vaidhé-sädhana-bhakti, and thus is not yet self-realized, and certainly not on the platform of bhäva. This same verse is quoted in Caitanya-caritamrita, along with other verses discussing the three levels of devotees according to faith (CC, 2.22.64-70). Another revealing point to mention is that these three classifications of practitioners do not apply to those who are on the path of rägänugä-bhakti.
Srila Prabhupada sometimes spoke about uttama-adhikaris in the same context as Rupa Gosvami defined them (ie: advanced sadhakas), and then again at other times he referred to them as self realized or pure devotees, as described in the 11th Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, Chapter 2. [not finished with this part yet]
And finally, in consideration of all these details, what does it then mean to be an "advanced devotee"? That's another term that is used quite liberally. It should now be very easy to see that a truly advanced devotee is one who is at the very least at the stage of niñöhä – firm faith and steadiness in sädhana and bhajana. Once niñöhä is attained, ruci and äsakti evolve, leading directly to bhäva, so any sadhaka who is immersed in ruci or äsakti, is even more of an "advanced devotee." Outside of that specific framework, any other application of the term "advanced devotee" doesn't make much sense.
Hopefully our considered review of this important subject will provide deeper insights into the subtleties of these advanced topics. Sorting through and understanding the complexities of this subject is essential to achieving a comprehensive grasp of the complete process. The contemporary Vaiñëava community would be well served if more devotees understood this deeper and more complete perspective.
Comments