दिव्याङ्गनावृन्दनिषेविताय स्मितप्रभाचारुमुखाम्बुजाय। 

त्रैलोक्यसम्मोहनसुन्दराय नमोऽस्तु गोपीजनवल्लभाय।।

 

divyāṅganāvṛndaniṣevitāya smitaprabhācārumukhāmbujāya। 

trailokyasammohanasundarāya namo’stu gopījanavallabhāya।।

   -(From Gopijana Vallabha ashtakam by Sri Vallabhacharya)

Introduction

The churning going on in the human mind to understand the subtle residing within the gross is philosophy. After knowing that subtle, the attempt to mold the gross into the molds that suit the intellect is called science. Dharma is the movement in the heart of humans intending to experience the subtle; and the activity to establish the gross into the heart-tempting molds, in order to express that latent bliss of subtle experience,  is called rasa-manifestation or rasa-experience.

Some philosopher, or a religious person, or a scientist, or an artist, who is not capable of realizing or accepting the totality, then he is neither able to perceive the truth nor can he reveal the truth. To whom the truth is not revealed, he cannot recognize the Brahman. As a result, the rasa is not manifested in the philosophy, art, science, or religious conduct of such a person. Because the rasa itself is the Paramatattva Brahman presented in the upaniṣad – “Raso vai saḥ” (Taittiriya upaniṣad.2।7).  The one who cannot experience rasa, that person cannot become blissful. “Rasahyeva ayaṃ labdhvā ānandī bhavati।” (Taittiriya upaniṣad.2/7)

Here the question arises: how to manifest the rasa of Brahman? What are the ways to produce rasa? And who has the merit to experience such rasa of Brahman? In the text of Vedas – may it be saṃhitā, brāhmaṇa, āraṇyaka; similarly, in the religious representations found in the scriptures like smṛti, dharmasūtra, purāṇa, tantrāgama, etc.; or in the philosophy of the upaniṣad, brahmasūtra, gītā, bhāgavata, etc., or in the developed Indian disciplines of science like āyurveda, Astrology, Linguistics, yogaśāstra, vāstu-vijñāna etc. or in the same way, in the rasa perspective manifested in the literature or music, choreography, painting, or sculpture, etc. which appeared in the period starting from rāmāyaṇa and up until the medieval and provincial languages, rarely has there been an obstruction of glaucoma.

In the modern era, the pollution of charcoal, which has been exhaled by western culture, is now increasing in our religious, philosophical, scientific, and fine arts environments as well. As a result, the proportion of oxygen transmitted from the scriptures into these areas also appears to be decreasing, which once upon a time used to be full of pure Brahmic oxygen supplied by the scriptures. Therefore, we have started using many religious words like karma-kāṇḍa (rituals), pūjā-praṇālī (worship), and bhakti-bhāva (devotion) in derogatory ways, as a result of which we have lost the spirit of understanding the rasa perspectives inherent in all these religious activities. Many among us are also found saying that – worshiping & practicing devotion to mountains, rivers, animals, trees, birds, or stone-metallic idols as if they are God – is an example of the superstition that flourished in its undeveloped-uncivilized-rudimentary state. Anyway, if you want to make that environment pure and clean again in the fields of religion, philosophy, music, dance, etc., then it seems necessary to re-identify and establish that rasa perspective again in the practices of those fields.

Therefore, in the present context, it is indispensable to consider certain points while pondering on śrr̥ṅgāra rasa’s (emotion of love) most common example – that is – mutually divine (ādhidaivika) bhogya-bhoktṛ bhāva (enjoyable-enjoyer) between the enjoyer of līlā – Śrī Kṛṣṇa and Vraja’s Gopijan’s, which have been thought and expressed in carnal ways in modern times. 

(1) First of all, the thought of the true nature and līlā of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa.  

(2) The second point is the consideration of the true nature and emotion of the gopījans as participants in the līlā of śrī kṛṣṇa. 

(3) The third point is the Brahmic side of that līlā and the deliberation of Bhakti with the perspective of rasa. 

(4) The fourth point is the thought of emotions to follow, the imitable devotional methods out of that līlā, as well as the idea of mutual harmony for modern beings.

According to the upaniṣads, Brahman, the supreme reality of the world, is considered to have the form of saccidānanda. The upaniṣads assert that the inevitable components, as well as perceptible names, forms, and actions, of all our external experiences, are, essentially, sustained by the Brahman who supports all. And hence, ātman (soul) is still one, even in three varieties of these (name, form, and action). In this faction, this ātman shows itself in three phenomena, even if ātman is just one. (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.6.3). It is thus proved that the dualities of the worldly infinite name-form-actions remain uniformly integrated in the unity of Brahman, and similarly, the one and only sole entity of Brahman manifests itself in the infinite dualities of name-form-actions. Originally, all these names, forms, and actions, having appeared for the enjoyment of the bliss of the soul in the līlā of saccidānanda Brahman, reveal the Brahman separated from the self with uniquely integrated characters of enjoyable and enjoyer. Brahman did not prefer to enjoy by own self. Therefore, the desire for someone else’s presence appeared within Brahman. Brahman divided itself into two parts. So brahman became both husband and wife itself. It appears everything was previously unmanifested (avyākṛta). So brahman manifested itself into multitudes of names and forms. That’s how brahman has appeared in everything via all those names and forms. (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1/4/2-7)

And assuming the corresponding form, He has entered into the object here. (Brh.Up.1.4.2-7) Under creation, the dull world in the enjoyable form of name-form-karma has appeared from the bite of Brahman, the beings in the form of enjoyers have manifested from the bite of Brahman, and the omniscient soul from the blissful bite of Brahman. The material world’s enjoyable names-forms-actions appeared out of the ‘sat’ part of the brahman; the enjoyer jīva (soul) appeared out of the ‘cit’ part of the brahman; and the indweller of all and every,  the antaryāmin has come out of the ‘ānand’ part of the brahman.

The triad of enjoyable-enjoyer-motivator does not appear to be limited to the physical (ādhibhautika) aspect alone. It is clear that in the physical trinity, material objects become enjoyable; the gross-bodied jīva (soul) becomes enjoyer, and God becomes the motivator in it. Similarly, even after leaving the five-elemental material body, which is the cause of the enjoyment of external objects, the jīva (soul), via the subtle body, enjoys the pleasures and pains concluded by the actions performed by the body – this can be considered as spiritual (ādhyātmika) enjoyment. This embodied soul (jīva), who enjoys objective pleasures and pains, becomes enjoyable in the self-blissful līlā of the supreme soul, and therefore, the true and real enjoyer is considered to be the supreme soul (God) only. This fact is also stated in the Brahmasūtra – “attā carācaragrahaṇāt, prakaraṇāt ca, guhāṃ praviṣṭau ātmānau hi taddarśanāt। (brahmasūtra.1।2।9-11)”. When the liberated soul or devotee, as the enjoyer, enjoys the bliss of form or līlā or devotion of the Supreme Being in this universe, then the same God becomes enjoyable. The knower of the brahman attains the ultimate fruit…Brahman is truth, knowledge, and infinity. He who knows such brahman as integrated inside the supreme sky within the cavity of the heart, is able to enjoy all his desires with the inspiring Brahman (Tait.Up.2.1). The senses remain systematically passionate and hateful in their senses of form, taste, smell, touch, sound, etc… The one who is able to prevent the mind from wandering into external objects and brings it under one’s control also attains the bliss of the pleasant touch of the brahman. (Gita.6.26-28, 9.23-24). So we can see that even after attaining the blissful God who is considered to be the Supreme Being, the Taitriya upaniṣad describes that, upon attaining this blissful God in all the worlds, the knower of the Brahman is able to follow the divine desires while enjoying them. (Tait. Up. 35) To regard this enjoyment of desire, therefore, as merely physical or merely spiritual, is an indication of our ignorance of the nature of Brahman and the divine mystery of its realization.

Accordingly, in the eighteenth chapter of the tenth canto of the Śrīmadbhāgavat, the sense of being enjoyed is represented as feminine and the sense of enjoyer as masculine. In the Vedas, too, the self-division of Brahman is represented in the duality of man and woman. Here, self-division cannot be considered to be limited to literally the duality of male and female because many living beings become progenitors in creation even without the distinction of male and female; it is certified. Therefore, gender division should be considered as a representative of all other modes of self-division.

Enjoyable = feminine nature, Enjoyer = masculine nature, and witness = the third nature; All three can be overt or occult

In Srīmadbhāgavat, it is stated that within every manifest masculine nature lies a secret feminine nature, and similarly, within every manifest feminine nature lies a secret masculine nature. Therefore, in such a context, the narrator of Śrīmadbhāgavat says: “The feminine (=enjoyable) feeling which remains hidden within Śrī kṛṣṇa; in the path of devotion, this same nature is the most supreme desired is Śrī kṛṣṇa form, the details of which are sometimes, somewhere revealed. (Śrīmadbhāgavat 10.18.5). In the fruitful state of the devotee, God becomes enjoyable for such devotees, and in the state of sadhana, the devotee, being the dedicated soul, becomes the object of God’s enjoyment; and God becomes the enjoyer. So we can understand that of the two kinds of the beauty of Śrī kṛṣṇa, one is being considered to be omnipresent and the other is considered to be authoritatively hidden for special ones. Also in the aforementioned scripture, Brahman (śrī kṛṣṇa) divided himself into two parts. So he became both husband and wife himself. (Brh. Up. 1.4.2-7) Because of the description of self-division in the dual variety of husband and wife, the supernatural beauty of śrī kṛṣṇa is solitarily viewed and presented as ālambanavibhāva or sthāyibhāva full of love (śṛngāra) only for the betterment of those devotees who are keen on this rasa of Brahman. Therefore, there is a practice of accepting secret masculinity and secret femininity only in the limited sense of rasa of love (śṛngāra) and of presenting śrī kṛṣṇa as the hero of this rasa of love (śṛngāra) only.

In reality, Brahman has all-inclusive rasa in reality, but Srī kṛṣṇa has a special rasa in the purview of līlā

This may be considered somehow appropriate or adequate in the context of the Gopijans of Vraja during the līlā of the incarnation of parabrahman Lord Śrī kṛṣṇa; yet this same cannot be factually valid in the other aspect of Śrī kṛṣṇa being the Supreme Brahman, the Supreme Soul, the Supreme Lord, the transcendental, above and beyond the kṣarākṣarā, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Because the commentator says in the clearest terms – “brahman raso vaisa” Brahman is determined to be all the rasa – on the basis of such scriptural statements. Therefore, the rasa is endowed with the likeness or whatever the emotions’ appearance or expressions are. Therefore, as a fabric is produced by the stretching of fibers, similarly, it is proper to accept the nondualism of Brahman from all the materials required for all and any rasa. (Brahmasūtra.3/3/10) Otherwise, if the rhetorical criteria are considered to be predominant over the upaniṣadic nondualism of Brahman, the Lord can be considered as the sringara rasa only because of the manifestation of the duality of the hero-heroine during the incarnation. Otherwise, if the rules of rhetoric are accepted to perceive God with sringara rasa by a devotional attitude in the incarnation period, only a fiasco of rasa will appear. Therefore, Pandit Jagannath Kaviraj says:

Now let us ask why only these many rasa are considered? Because how can it be possible to deny the feeling of devotional rasa that the devotees of the Lord feel when listening to the Puranas like the Bhagavad Gita, nourished by the joy felt by the thrill, tears, etc., which appear by relying on the Lord? Therefore, devotion in the form of devotion to the Lord should be considered a permanent rasa. This is not appropriate because the attitude of devotion cannot be valid as a rasa because it appears only as a feeling about gods, etc. If someone says that if this is assumed, then why isn’t love for females also assumed to be a feeling? The solution in this regard is that – on the basis of the words of sages like Bharata, there is a system of this subject which must be considered authentic while defining which one is considered a mere feeling and which one is considered a permanent emotion (i.e. rasa). (Rasganga.1)

It is thus proved that if Śrī kṛṣṇa is to be regarded as the Supreme Brahman, the Supreme Soul, the Supreme Lord, the transcendental Purushottama, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and not merely a worldly man who is the master of the rasa of sringara or love, so, the self-love (ātmarati) of the Self-loving supreme being must be considered to be manifested within the devotees of Śrī kṛṣṇa. Because the scripture says that – That is its ultimate joy. All other living consciousnesses subsist on the tiny amounts of the bliss of God, here nothing seems dear because it is dear in itself; on the contrary, it seems dear because it is dear to that inner dwelling God. (Brh. Up. 4.3.32,2.4.5) This transcendental love is neither limited to the feminine-masculine rasa of śṛngāra; nor limited to the lord-devotee’s devotional love. It is beyond all these, a love of reality. (tāttvikī priyatā)

According to the Upaniṣads and the Bhagavad Gita, the basic aspect of the Lord’s rasa can be explained as follows:

So, love is just another substance which is devoted to the Lord and concerned with the Lord; for example, knowledge or self-sufficiency manifests elsewhere because of the proximity to God when one has a relationship with God. For example, heat is transmitted elsewhere due to the proximity of a fire. The closer one is to God, the more affection he begins to manifest. (śrīmadbhāgavat 1.19.16) Love is the attribute of God which God distributes in pieces among all living beings for their happiness. So whoever wants whatever, get happiness there. In fact, one gets one’s own happiness. (Bhag. Pu. 2.27). It is very clear that the process of manifestation of affection or love here is not rhetorical but that prescribed in Vedanta or Śrīmadbhāgavat. Therefore, it is said in the Śrīmadbhāgavat that – When God Himself becomes the enjoyer in the world and wants to make the world enjoyable, everything becomes Lakshmi-like. When God wants to reveal himself, then among the infinite powers of God, first of all, the ‘Sri’ power, which resides within the Lord like one of the primordial forces, appears as the enjoyable wife or beloved of the Lord. Even though these powers’ true form is Sacchidanand, they take the form of Akshara Brahmanand. At the time of the Lord’s incarnation, all (such hidden bliss) becomes enjoyable for God, either in the form of Lakshmi; or its charges. (śrīmadbhāgavat P.2.9.13-14)

Devotion is an independent rasa

Therefore, keeping all these secrets in mind, Sri Purushottamji, the author of the Avatarvadavali, commands in his book Bhaktirasattvavada: Therefore, śṛngāra’s permanent rasa/emotion is nothing but a special light of the love/affection. So, only such love in sringara can produce rasa. Since there is no inference, both should be considered as separate rasa. Therefore, the heroine’s passion for the hero and the hero’s passion for the heroine is considered to be sringara (at the request of the authenticity of the words of the sages like Bharata). Similarly, why can’t the affection of mother etc. for son etc. and of son etc. for mother be considered as motherly rasa? (because the process of manifestation of sthayibhava arising from vibhavanubhavam-sancharibhavas has also occurred here). Similarly, unconditional love concerning the Lord, whether it is in union or separation, being supernatural, it should be accepted as the main rasa (atma-paramatmaratirupa bhakti). “Raso vai saḥ” – on the basis of this scripture, the Lord is considered to be the form of rasa. It is noteworthy here that, basically, worldly love is itself in the form of a mirage of love because it is generated by ulterior motives (Av.Vada.Bhaktiras.Vada)

Discussing the various sensations that appear in the heart of the devotee by merely seeing the Lord, Śrīmadbhāgavat states: The Lord entered the stage in such a way that the sensations in the hearts of all were nourished according to their merits. (Bhag. Pu. 10.40.17) Therefore, the assumption arising from the view of rasa is also resolved here in the following way: where it is appropriate to act out worldly rasa, there must be some theatrical justification for the eight numbers of rasa prescribed by Bharata and other sages; but in the divine realm of God’s līlā to be heard, chanted, acted or felt, the rasas cannot be limited to eight numbers on the basis of the upaniṣads and Bhagavad Puranas.

Śrī kṛṣṇa may have adorned the Śṛngāra Rasa for the sake of līlā, yet for the sake of worship with sarvatma emotion, He is the Soul of Rasa of Devotion

Considering Śrī kṛṣṇa to be worshiped, devotees should surrender all their emotions to the Lord in the form of Navadhābhakti. The narrator of Śrīmadbhāgavat says: Ranging from the body to God, whatever emotions are worthy of worship, all those emotions should be deployed in the Lord and worship the Lord. All these emotions should be made appropriate to the worship while keeping devotional feelings. (Bhag. Pu. 3.32.22) In such a situation, the worship of the Lord with Śṛngāra Rasa proves to be acceptable only for the particular meritorious devotees; yet devotion in merely sringara rasa is no longer acceptable in the period of no present incarnation of the Lord.

In conclusion, therefore, it is to be understood that the most important fact about the nature of God is that He can hold both the opposite attributes “Ubhayavyapedaśāttvahikuṇḍalavat prakāśāśrayavadvā tejastvāt (Brahma.sū.3।2।27-28)” – twofold nature – in a human limited form of Purushottam and the formless unlimited form of Aksharbrahman. And hence, God can have a sole rasa or an all-inclusive rasas – this twofold nature of God is accepted in the scriptures. They are both with Śṛngāra and non-Śṛngāra too! Therefore, to the specific meritorious being to whom he reveals his one form, that form actually becomes God’s form for that being only, it could be different for other beings.

Similarly, in Vraja, Śrī kṛṣṇa’s power of action and knowledge are accepted to be embodied in the form of the cowherd women of Vraja, i.e. Gopijans. The Gopikas in the form of Kriyashakti are considered to be Kumarika, in the form of Rushi, and the Gopikas in the form of Jnanashakti are considered to be married in the form of Shruti. The first type of gopikas are an example of a means-fruit relationship with their beloved cowherd princes. The second type of gopikas, even though they are secondarily married or associated with other cowherd men, wants to be associated with their supremely meaningful theorem, Śrī kṛṣṇa. Because the same theoretical Śrī kṛṣṇa tattva appears in the form of many different names, forms, and actions in the form of many different cowherd men. This manifestation is considered to be secondary for the purpose of līlā and the revealing of the basic essence remains supremely meaningful. Therefore, self-love (ātamrati) has manifested in raas-līlā as the soul of the śṛngāra rasa. Two important things about this are found in the Śrīmadbhāgavat in the form of the words of the Gopis themselves and the words of Shukdevji as follows: (1) Not just to us, but to each embodied soul, You (Śrī kṛṣṇa) are the only God, beloved, Supreme, Soul and everything. Therefore, learned and skillful people are attracted to you. (Bhag.Pu.10.26.3233), (2) Not only to the Gopis and their husbands; rather, to each being’s indwelling supreme reality called Śrī kṛṣṇa has appeared in human form to manifest the līlā. He has appeared in human form only to shower His grace. (Bhag. Pu. 10.30.36-37) It is therefore clear that the Gopis, who are believed to be worshiping Śrī kṛṣṇa with the feeling of lust, have actually, to the contrary,  completely understood & saw Śrī kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Brahman and Supreme Reality of the world. 

Therefore, just like how one and only unique supreme being took many forms and manifested in this world for the sake of līlā, similarly, self-separated this one and only Supreme Being secretly entered in many forms of Gopikas of the Vraja to show the unity for the fans of this rasa – and this is the main primary subject matter and permanent emotion of the entire raas-līlā. This is described in the fift chapter of the tenth canto of the Śrīmadbhāgavat by the reference to the Sringara līlā. The ultimate meaning of that is the sense of the unity hidden in the infinite differences of names, forms, and actions of the one and only essence, which is explicitly mentioned in the Upaniṣads. Therefore, instead of considering the enjoyer in the Raas-līlā performed by many indweller Gods in many forms for the enjoyment of self-love, the form of enjoyable Śrī kṛṣṇa, who reveals his hidden sense of enjoyability before his own many forms, is considered as the ‘dharmi’ form fit for devotion. That is why the thirtieth chapter of the tenth canto of the Śrīmadbhāgavat is considered to be the expounder of Dharmi Lila. While the līlā represented in the thirty-second chapter, despite being given as “antarantu param phalam (Bhag. Pu. Subo. 10.26.5), is regarded as merely a knowledge attribute. So, the self-loving God assumed many forms, each with one gopika, and performed the Līlā of raas with them. (Bhag. Pu. 10.30.20) Thus, Śrī kṛṣṇa, who reveals the secret feminine nature, that is, the sense of enjoyable, is considered to be, the blissful dharmi form. 

The statements of the Gopis describing their enjoyment with the Lord and the principles concluded from the answers given by the Lord seem very thought-provoking in the present context: the use of the Lord for worship is possible in four ways:

(1) to regard God as enjoyable because He is the fulfiller of our desires,  (2) to regard Him as enjoyable without binding Him in the contract of fulfilling our desires, that is, keeping Him free, (3) whatever God has made accessible to us, should be dedicated to God and surrender with such devotion and belief that God is enjoyer of all that we dedicated,(4) as we enjoy material objects; similarly, God is a petty enjoyer like us who enjoys our enjoyment or external objects.

It is thus proven that in the gradually enhanced forms of devotion in the aspects of love, attachment, addiction, restraint (nirodh), and all-self-consciousness, just as how the śṛngāra love of the gopis developed, so did the affectionate love of Sri Nanda and Yashoda. Also, the friendly love of the other cowherd boys also developed. The other servants of the Vraja also saw development in their love, full of servitude to God. By letting all emotions in our devotional love on visiting basis, our devotion will be able to develop into the unifying-separating and revealed/concealed, enjoyable-enjoyer-witness emotions. Therefore, under the nine modes of devotion, hearing, chanting, remembering, serving the feet, worshiping, bowing, serving, friendship, and self-surrender, the devotee surrenders all his worldly and transcendental emotions to his dear deity, and in such surrender, God is the devotee’s everything. Therefore, in the surrendering of all emotions, the state of being permanent in any one emotion comes in the final fruitive state, not in the state of sadhana. It is only possible to become steady in any one emotion you have given that God has graced us with the fruit; otherwise, under the various aspects of nine-fold devotion, the surrender of everything is the ideal form of devotion and, most importantly, the duty of the devotee. 

Such divinity of knowledge, strength, wealth, bliss, grace, and non-duality of God exists in every gross essence in subtle form. This can be known by a careful study of our scriptures; this can also be understood when the knowledge of the greatness of God blossoms; and if the instinctive natural love between the soul and the Supreme Soul is not covered up by unnatural and borrowed concepts, one can also perceive this divinity subtly present in the gross form of the idol.

Conclusion

Śṛngāra/passion is just another form of love; That is, the affection between the hero and heroine is called Śṛngāra love, but the love of parents and children is non-Śṛngāra love. The Śṛngāra, affectionate or soul-God relational love that is void of any ulterior motives, is always divine and supernatural. The affection or attraction of any living entity to the Supreme Self is essentially unconditioned, even if it is co-conditioned due to ignorance. Whereas affection for worldly objects or persons may seem unconditional due to ignorance, it is essentially conditioned with all three gunas of the world. The Love of God, because it shows with the grace of God, is considered unconditioned since it is only a natural līlā extension of the self-love of God.

The root of all sensations lies in our affectionate instincts, and that affection is situated in the blissful God in the form of self-love. Just like how the divine qualities of God reveal in us this love for God, just as the expansion of the Lord’s Līlā of self-bliss in our hearts, reveals based on how close we are to the Lord due to our relationship with Him, that proportion also manifests itself within us. It is only to experience the bliss of that infinite bliss of the Lord, that the narrator of Śrīmadbhāgavat wants to add the rasa of devotion to the list of all the other universally accepted rasa like sringara, calm, compassion, and so on. The hidden purpose is to make our lives full of devotional rasa. Such supernatural devotional rasa remains untouched by the attitudes that look at the relationship between Śrī kṛṣṇa and intimate devotees from a petty worldly point of view, devoid of knowledge of the scriptures, devoid of love and devotion; and even the wrongdoings committed by the mere consideration of the worldly feelings in the supernatural activities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and Gods’ devotees cannot be remedied…!!

।।श्रीकृष्णार्पणमस्तु।।