365bet娱乐

This question is made more pressing by the fact that the Bhagavata-purana itself juxtaposes its ecstatic gopf-bhakti with,

107 unlikely as it may seem, an Advaitic metaphysic. This has been recognized by, among others, Dasgupta, Hacker, and Hardy. 37 According to the latter: In general terms it is quite clear that by the eight century Hinduism had developed its new ideological identity with the purva- and uttara-mimamsa. For the next few centuries, Vedanta means advaita, and it is predictable that the BhP, trying to reconcile bhakti with brahmin orthodoxy, adopts an advaita position. This distinguishes it from the ViP [Visnu Purana], which otherwise was its major source in the Sanskrit puranic tradition. 38 39 Here the Lord The non-dualism of the Bhagavata-purana is perhaps most striking at 11.13, a section known as the Hamsagita. teaches that there is only one atman, with which he identifies himself. 40 Then, in a passage that Madhusudana quotes in the Bhakti-rasayana, 41 Krsna states that the notion of multiplicity is false like a dream and that the world is superimposed on him by maya. The discourse continues: One should regard this world as a delusion (vibhrama), a play of the mind, subject to perception, [yet] transient and extremely unstable [like the circle created by a whirling] firebrand. Consciousness is one but appears as if manifold; the diversity produced by the three-fold manifestation of the material qualities is an illusion (maya), a dream. Having turned one's vision away from that, having abandoned all desire, one should become silent, enjoying the innate bliss [of the Self], free from anxious exertion. If sometimes that which one has renounced with the idea that it is unreal should be seen, one should not be lead into error, [knowing that its] memory will last [only] until the falling away of 42 the body. Commenting on this passage, Dasgupta remarks: "It may generally appear rather surprising to find such an extreme idealistic monism in the Bhagavata, but there are numerous

! passages which show that an extreme form of idealism recurs now and then as one of the principal lines of thought in the Bhagavata. "43 I have already referred to Hacker's study of the religious background of Sankara and his early followers. In addition to showing that these early Advaitins grew up in a Vaisnava environment, this writer suggests that other Vaisnava groups were cultivating a "radical advaitism" at a fairly early date. He refers to certain texts which are overtly Vaisnava yet simultaneously teach a non-dualist metaphysic, especially the Paramarthasara of Adisesa, which he places to the sixth century A.D. this text reads as follows: 44 The first verse of I resort for refuge to you alone, Visnu, who transcend the highest form of prakrti, who are without beginning; though One, you abide in manifold caves of illusion, you the abode of the All, present in all that moves and does not move. 45 Given this evidence of non-dualistic thinking in early Vaisnava circles, the Advaitic passages in the Bhagavata-purana, which Hacker notes "may date from a time not far distant from Samkara's lifetime, #46 are less perplexing than they might at first appear. The purana does not confine its monistic language to its philosophical portions. In fact, it goes so far as to include the relation between the gopis and their beloved Krsna within the scope of its non-dualist vision. We read 108

109 more than once, for example, that the cowherd women attain tanmayata ("the state of consisting of Him," i.e., "identity with Him") 47 and that they are tadatmika ("having Him as their Self").48 Indeed, the cultivation of the mood of aikya ("oneness") with Krsna is included, along with erotic desire and affection, in a list of attitudes that are capable of leading to union (tanmayata) with the deity. 49 At 10.30.3 we find the gopis engaged in an exercise in identification with Krsna together with a play on the mahavakya "I am Brahman": The affectionate women imitated their beloved's gait, smile, affectionate glances, and speech. Mimicking the playful pastimes of Krsna, they became one with Him [tadatmika), proclaiming: "I am Hel"50 Any idea that this identification is intended to be solely on the dramatic or the emotional level can be removed by turning to the message Krsna sent to the distraught gopis after he had left them and gone to Mathura: You can never, honored ladies, be separated from Me, since I am the Self of all (sarvatmana). Just as the elements ether, air, fire, water and earth are in all creatures, so I am the support of mind, breath, the elements, the sense organs, and all material qualities. In Myself, by Myself, I create, preserve, and destroy Myself [as the universe] by the power of My maya which consists of the elements, the senses, and the material qualities. 51 This implies that the gopt, in a metaphysical sense, is always united with her beloved: first, of course, on the level of spirit or atman, but also psychically and even, despite the apparent state of viraha, physically. If the

110 universe and everything in it is nothing but an expression of Krsna through His maya, then the entire being of gopi-body and mind as well as atman--is constantly one with Him, and the sense of separation from God is nothing more than a superficial reading of the situation. Ultimately, as even the Gosvamins of the Caitanya school recognize, the whole divine drama being enacted in Vrndavana is but a multileveled sport (1 fla) in which the Lord himself plays all the parts, appearing by his mysterious power in various forms, 52 including those of the gopis. Sridhara Svamin (thirteenth century), the early and perhaps greatest commentator on the Bhagavata-purana, recognized and championed its non-dualistic tendencies.53 Nevertheless, in introducing a work such as the Bhakti-rasayana, which attempts to integrate the bhakti of the Bhagavata-purana and Advaita, they must be emphasized anew, because they were (I think it is fair to say) ignored or glossed over by later Vaisnava commentators. These writers, although they regarded the work highly and did much to popularize it, were for the most part, like Ramanuja and Madhva, extremely hostile toward Advaita.54 The conflict between devotion and non-dualism remains one of the key internal tensions of the Bhagavata-purana In this the text functions as a microcosm of the whole Hindu tradition. I cannot here enter into the lengthy task of determining to what extent or by what means the purana is

111 successful in resolving this conflict. Hardy for one thinks that the resolution is not even attempted. The important 55 point is that the tension undeniably does exist even here where one might least expect it, in this the scriptural heart of ecstatic devotionalism. That the text has Advaitic tendencies, of course, does not mean that it teaches the systematic and rigorously conceived non-dualism of Samkara and his followers. A purana is primarily a mythic-devotional narrative, and, given this genre, such philosophical precision would not have been possible or desirable. Taken as a whole, the Bhagavata seems to suggest a type of theistic advaita, one that is willing--perhaps naively, perhaps not--to maintain a tension between the impersonal Reality of metaphysics and the personal God of devotion. Not feeling compelled to collapse one into the other, or elevate one above the other, the text seems to delight in the mystery of an unsystematically conceived ultimate that is both personal and impersonal. 56