365bet娱乐

Madhusudana's exposition of bhaktirasa is modeled on a pattern that has much in common with that used by the Bengal Vaisnavas. 66 Since Rupa seems to have written his BRS by 1542, it is entirely possible that Madhusudana had access to it before writing the Bhakti-rasayana Equally possible, however, is that Madhusudana and the Gosvamins derived their ideas independently, from earlier writers such as Vopadeva, Hemadri, and perhaps Vallabha. Certainly Madhusudana was himself as well-versed in the rasasastra as was Rupa. In the absence, therefore, of a good deal of additional research on the complex religious history of this era, nothing definite can be said about any influence that Rupa may have had on the author of the Bhakti-rasayana 67

224 To establish the legitimacy of bhakti as a rasa is, at any rate, one of the central aims of the Bhaktirasayana. Madhusudana is as emphatic in his assertion of this claim as If anger, grief, and fear, which are the Gosvamins. painful, can become rasas, how can it be denied that bhakti, which is infinite bliss, is a rasa? Madhusudana, no good reason. 68 There is, says He takes up the classical objection of the orthodox aestheticians with an attitude similar to that of the Vaisnavas, but he gives his argument a slightly different twist. It may be true that "love for deities" (devadivisaya ratih) is a bhava as the rhetoricians claim. Still, this only applies when the "other" deities (devantara) are concerned. These gods are limited in nature, being themselves transmigrating souls, and do not embody the highest bliss. The objection, however, does not hold true "in reference to the supreme Self who is the highest bliss."69 Note here the implied identification of bhagavat and the paramatman, conceived in the Advaitic sense. The theologians of the Bengal school would, of course, vociferously object to this idea. In the theory of the Gosvamins, rati, the sthayibhava of bhaktirasa, is a non-phenomenal aspect of Krsna's highest sakti. It is thus, since the sakti is non-different from its possessor, in a real sense identical with Krsna himself. Madhusudana likewise suggests that the permanent

225 emotion of the sentiment of devotion is not one derived from ordinary empirical experience. He cannot, however, identify either bhaktirasa or its sthayibhava as a power of the Lord, for in Advaita, as already stated, Isvara's only sakti is maya. He attempts a more radical solution, one he hopes is a truly non-dualist way of elevating rasa above the phenomenal. The permanent emotion of bhaktirasa is not a divine Sakti. It is, we have seen, the very form of bhagavat, present in the mind as a reflection. Because it is a reflection of the Lord, who is pure bliss, the sthayibhava also is pure bliss. All the more, then, will the rasa that is developed from it be so. 70 In our discussion in chapter five above, we noted that defining bhakti as the reflection of the Lord is, according to Advaitic theory, the same as identifying it with him. This, we said, makes it impossible to speak of bhakti as a mode (vrtti) of the mind. Madhusudana confirms that this was his intention by making clear, in chapter three of the Bhakti-rasayana, both that rasa is equivalent to the supreme reality and that it is distinct from the vrtti which manifests it. His approach in the first chapter was indirect, here it is much more straightforward. Making reference to Taittiriya Upanishad 2.7.1, he explicitly identifies rasa with 路 the Upanisadic atman: 'Rasa is the supreme bliss, the very Self,' so say the scriptures."71 Again:

226 Rasa is said to be the sthayibhava manifested as bliss Since this bliss is that of the Self, it has no locus or support, but the [locus and support] of the vrtti which manifests it is the mind of the connoisseur. 72 The second half of this verse introduces the idea, so important to the Gosvamins' exposition, of the disassociation of rasa from the mental modification. This notion is repeated emphatically later on: 鈥� A single modification of the mind, consisting of the material quality of luminosity, is produced. Absorbed in the sthayibhava and the trio of causative factors, it is determined by the combination of these. 73 This [modification] immediately and necessarily manifests the supreme bliss, and that [bliss] is rasa. Some teachers, however, hold that this [modification] itself is rasa. 74 Madhusudana, then, like the Gosvamins and for similar reasons, takes pains to show that the sentiment of devotion is more than a mere mental phenomenon. The rasa is not the vrtti of the mind, as a traditional Advaitin might hold; it is the supreme bliss (sukham uttamam) itself. Another parallel with Vaisnava writers can be seen in the fact that Madhusudana consistently contradicts the secular aestheticians' estimation of their sentiments as alaukika ("supramundane") by referring to them as laukika ("mundane") in comparison with bhaktirasa. He displays, however, somewhat more sympathy than the Govamins for the non-devotional rasas, since he admits that they, like bhakti, are also blissful. From the perspective of Advaita,

227 he points out, all objects--including even the seductive heroine (kamint) of the secular love story--are in reality non-different from Consciousness (caitanya), which is infinite joy. The happiness derived from the worldly sentiments is consequently not finally different from the supreme ananda of Brahman. It is, however, not the pure bliss of the ultimate itself, but the bliss of that Consciousness as conditioned, and hence limited, by the objects. Hence the joy of the mundane rasas is restricted. The bliss of bhaktirasa, on the other hand, since it is nothing other than the pure, unconditioned bliss of God, is unlimited and far superior to the joy of the worldly sentiments. 75 Bhakti, then, is the highest rasa, because it is the supreme bliss in its perfect fullness, untainted by sorrow. The erotic and the other secular sentiments cannot attain such levels of joy, and are therefore inferior. In comparison with bhaktirasa, they are like fireflys trying to shine in the face of the sun. 76 In the second chapter of the Bhakti-rasayana, Madhusudana enters upon a lengthy and complex analysis of the various types and possible combinations of sthayibhavas and rasas. Though the concern for complex detail is comparable with that of the Gosvamins, Madhusudana's system of rasa seems, at least on the surface, distinctly idiosyncratic. The orthodox rhetoricians accept eight or, if santa is included, at most

nine sentiments. The Gosvamins admit twelve, the 228 conventional nine plus dasya, sakhya, and vatsalya, but refuse the status of rasa to any emotion not involving love for Krsna. Madhusudana, on the other hand, accepts a total of seventeen sentiments, of which ten are recognized as possible bhaktirasas. At 2.33-34, the latter are listed as: (1) srigara ("erotic love"), (2) karuna ("compassion"), (3) hasya ("mirth"), (4) pritibhayanaka ("love-in-fear"), (5) adbhuta ("wonder"), (6) yuddhavira ("heroism in battle"), (7) danavira ("heroism in charity"), (8) suddha ("pure"), (9) vatsala ("parental affection"), and (10) preyas ("dearness" or "friendship").77 A complete exposition of the reasoning behind this list must remain beyond the scope of the present study. Madhusudana's scheme is complex, and its presentation in chapters two and three of the Bhakti-rasayana is in many places opaque. Several salient points, however, are essential to the present discussion. 78 First, santa, which is admitted by both Vopadeva and Rupa Gosvamin as a legitimate bhaktirasa, is explicitly rejected as such by Madhusudana since, according to him, it 79 cannot have bhagavat as its object. This suggests (1) that he follows the classical tradition of the aestheticians in associating santa with the disciplines of jnana and yoga, which aim at Brahman-knowledge and moksa, and (2) that he

229 wishes, because of this association, to separate santa completely from devotion, in accordance with his theory that bhakti is a distinct path with no positive relation to the quest for liberation. 80 This rejection of the tranquil mood as a possible bhaktirasa also reinforces the conceptual distinction, discussed in chapter five above, between bhagavat as the object of devotion and Brahman as the object The Gosvamins also connect santa with the of knowledge. paths of knowledge and yoga, but because they allow in it, as we have seen, both rati for Krsna and a vision of his Lordly form, they are willing to include it as a lesser form of bhakti. The Vaisnavas' santa finds a close counterpart in Madhusudana's suddharasa. Like the former, the "pure sentiment" of the Bhakti-rasayana is free from mixture with the various emotional tones associated with human love-relationships; it is prompted solely by the mind's joyous realization of the greatness (mahatmya) of the Lord.81 As we shall soon see, this sentiment plays a very important role in Bhakti-rasayana's scheme of rasas. Madhusudana's system differs from the Gosvamins' in that he retains srngara as the name of the erotic sentiment, whereas the Gosvamins tend to prefer madhura. Also, while dasya and sakhya are included in the Bhakti-rasayana's list of rasas, they are not counted separately, as in the Vaisnava scheme,

230 but rather included as two sub-varieties of preyas. 82 Madhusudana, furthermore, gives full recognition to several varieties of bhaktirasa that the Gosvamins de-emphasize or ignore completely. Of course, these differences may well be little more than minor variations on the same theme. It remains, nevertheless, that the correspondences between these two systems of cataloging devotional sentiment are not always easy to discern. This fact, combined with Madhusudana's willingness to give emotions not directed toward the Lord the status of rasa, may be taken as evidence of the independence of his work from that of the Bengal school. It is significant, however, that Madhusudana's Suddha, even though he rejects the aestheticians' santa, is hard to distinguish from the Vaisnavas' version of the latter sentiment. The term suddha, we have seen, is sometimes used by the Gosvamins themselves to designate the sthayibhava of santa. Is this an indication that Madhusudana was borrowing from the Vaisnava tradition? cannot be sure. In any case, the most important difference between Madhusudana's system and that of the Vaisnavas has yet to be discussed. It is not so much formal as We axiological; that is to say, it concerns the valuation of the rasas listed rather than the question of which sentiments happen to be included in the lists themselves.

231 Madhusudana appears at first to follow the universal Krsnaite tendency to regard srnigara, the love of the gopis for their Lord, as the highest form of bhakti and the highest rasa. He describes it as "extremely intense" (tIvratIvra), "the most powerful" (balavattara) of all sentiments.83 The gopis, he says, experience the "supreme sentiment" (paramo rasah), consisting of a sublimely delectable blending of erotic love, parental love, friendship, and love-in-fear--a mixture in which, according to a standard rule of the aestheticians, the resulting flavor is greater than the sum of its constituent elements. 84 Following the Vaisnava tradition of imitative bhakti, he says that a devotee "should subordinate his own mind to that of the VrajadevIs."85 Such thinking, evident also in Madhusudana's description of the highest stage of bhakti at the end of chapter one of the Bhakti-rasayana, 86 shows just how far he is willing to go, as an Advaitin and a renunciate, to accommodate the ecstatic devotional mood of the Vaisnavas. The description of bhaktirasa given in the second and third chapters of the Bhakti-rasayana is cast explicitly in terms of the experience of Krsna's companions in Vrndavana. It is designed to suggest the manner in which the divine bliss of bhakti can be richly articulated to include all the ecstatic nuances of the devotion enjoyed by the gopis and the other bhaktas of the Bhagavata-purana

232 The glorification of the bhakti of the gopis, however, is not final. In a radical departure from traditional Vaisnava thought, Madhusudana reserves the highest experience of devotion for those who follow, not the passionate cowherd girls of Vrndavana, but rather the tranquil sage-devotees, the enlightened renunciates who worship Krsna in a more subdued way. This change of emphasis is not immediately obvious, since the discussion of the eleventh and highest stage of devotion in Bhakti-rasayana 1 does not suggest anything beyond the bhakti based on srigara. A close examination of several key stanzas of chapter two of the text, however, reveals that Madhusudana does not wish to accept devotion based on the analogy of human passion as the ultimate. At 2.12-13 we get our first clue in this direction: Madhusudana says that "pure love" (suddharati) directed to Krsna is the end of all spiritual practice. Such love, we learn, is the basis of suddha, the sentiment of the same 87 name. As we have seen, this love arises out of contemplation of the Lord's greatness (mahatmya)--not out of erotic desire (kama), as does the love of the gopis.88 Further on, at 2.46, we pick up two more relevant pieces of We are told, first, that this suddhabhakti is information. the mood of ascetics and saints such as Sanaka and the other eternally youthful, eternally celibate, "mind-born" sons of

233 Brahma. Second, we learn that Madhusudana classifies himself in this category of devotees, though of course on a 89 lower level than that of Sanaka. This personal statement, though brief and discrete, is particularly important, since it is the only clue we have as to Madhusudana's understanding of his own place in the scheme of bhakti outlined in the Bhakti-rasayana, and since it would be quite natural for him to regard his own style of devotion as the highest. We begin to see--even if only in vaguest outline--a move toward the reclamation, revalorization, and reinsertion into Krsnaite devotionalism of a mode of bhakti reminiscent of that of the Bhagavad Gita and the Visnu Purana. Although relegated to the lowest level by the Gosvamins, this style of devotion is certainly more compatible with the ascetic, non-dualistic orientation of the Samkara samnyasin than the passionate and loving attachment of the cowherd girls. And it is not without scriptural precedent, even in the Bhagavata. 90 Stanzas 2.73 and 2.64-65 confirm that this is the direction in which Madhusudana is heading. While the love of the gopis is mixed with elements of a variety of sentiments rooted in secular and very human emotions, Madhusudana tells us that this is not the case with the Suddhabhakti of the great saints: Being devoid of elements of other sentiments, [pure love] like that of Sanaka and the rest, attains the Essential Nature (svarupa) and becomes the tenth sentiment, which is even greater. 91

234 Again: The pure (suddha) is declared to be unconditioned, and the mixed, to be conditioned. The unconditioned is based solely on the majesty of the Supreme Bliss. It is said, owing to the infinite virtues of its object of worship, to have only one form. 92 Several points are worthy of mention here. The first is that, taken together, these verses help explain the significance of Madhusudana's characterization of bhakti, at Bhakti-rasayana 1.1, as "either mixed with the nine sentiments or pure (kevala)."93 Since Madhusudana lists ten bhaktirasas at 2.33-34, we may be initially confused as to the meaning of his reference to nine in the first verse of the work, until at 2.73 we see that he understands suddha as the "tenth" sentiment. The "pure" or "unmixed" devotion of 1.1 is, then, the suddhabhaktirasa of Bhakti-rasayana 2. Second, by saying that this type of bhakti is "unconditioned," he means that it is free of the various emotional colorings associated with the nine "mixed" sentiments. Madhusudana's conception of suddha thus again resembles that of the Gosvamins. But while the latter seem to believe that this particular kind of "purity" is a drawback, Madhusudana regards it as an advantage. is our third point, and here the similarity between the two views ceases abruptly. The author of the Bhakti-rasayana implicitly rejects the Vaisnava evaluation of the mood of the ascetics in his assertion that suddhabhakti is able, by virtue of its lack of extraneous emotional conditioning, to participate This

235 more intimately in the bliss of the "essential nature" (svarupa) of God. It is therefore an "even greater" sentiment. Although one wishes here even more earnestly than elsewhere in the second and third chapters of the Bhakti-rasayana for a commentary to provide further elucidation of Madhusudana's meaning, his elevation of the tranquil bhakti of the renunciates above the passionate rasa of the gopis, and in this his flagrant violation of hallowed Vaisnava precedent, is clear enough. 94 The last and certainly not the least important idea introduced here is contained in the enigmatic attribution to suddhabhakti of "only one form" (ekarupa). Pandeya, the author of the Hindi commentary, explains this as meaning that suddhabhakti is experienced only in the mode of union or consummation (sambhoga) and not, as in the case of sragara, in the two forms of union and separation (vipralamba).95 If this is Madhusudana's intention, as seems likely, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that, at the pinnacle of his scheme of devotion, he is allowing a dramatic resurgence of the spirit of Advaita. The ecstatic pain of love-in-separation, while an essential ingredient of gopi-bhakti and a vital element in the traditional Krsnaite understanding of preman and mahabhava, is ultimately 96 eliminated in Madhusudana's version of suddhabhakti.

236 We thus find that the higher Vaisnava bhavas, which are patterned after normal human modes of love (and involve the tension of union/separation as a defining feature), are finally subordinated in the Bhakti-rasayana to a more ascetic, contemplative, and essentially unitive style of devotionone that is, we can venture to say, more appropriate to the emotional life of a sophisticated non-dualist renunciate.