Extracts from the Caritas: No Ideology of Pure Devotion before Sankaradeva

According to the biographer (caritakāra) Daityari, there was no ideology of pure devotion before Sankaradeva. He describes[1] in the following words the state of the religion of the (majority of the) people at the time of the advent of Sankaradeva:

ইদেশত পূৰ্ব্বকালে নাছিল ভকতি .

নানা ধৰ্ম্ম কৰ্ম্ম লোকে কৰিল সম্প্ৰতি .. ৮ ..

নানাদেৱ পূজয় কৰয় বলিদান .

হংস ছাগ পাৰ কাটে সহস্ৰ প্ৰমাণ ..

তপ জপ যজ্ঞদান তীৰ্থস্নান কৰে .

ঘোৰ নৰকত পৰি পৰি সৱে মৰে .. ৯ ..

উপজয় মৰয় সংসাৰে বাৰম্বাৰ .

নাহি সুখ নেৰাৱয় সংসাৰ নিকাৰ ..

তল গৈল লোক কলি পাপ-সাগৰত .

কৃপাময় কৃষ্ণে জানি গুণিলা মনত .. ১০ ..

সিটো লোক সমস্তক কৰিবে উদ্ধাৰ .

শঙ্কৰ মাধৱ ৰূপে ভৈলা অৱতাৰ ..

ideśata pūrbbakāle nāchila bhakati .
nānā dharmma karmma loke karila samprati .. 8 ..
ānādeva pūjaẏa karaẏa balidāna .
haṃsa chāga pāra kāṭe sahasra pramāṇa ..
tapa japa yajñadāna tīrthasnāna kare .
ghora narakata pari pari save mare .. 9 ..
upajaẏa maraẏa saṃsāre bārambāra .
nāhi sukha nerāvaẏa saṃsāra nikāra ..
tala gaila loka kali pāpa-sāgarata .
kṛpāmaẏa kṛṣṇe jāni guṇilā manata .. 10 ..
siṭo loka samastaka karibe uddhāra .
śaṅkara mādhava rūpe bhailā avatāra ..

In former times, in this land, there was no (ideology of) `pure devotion` (bhakti).
The people, they did various `ordained duties` (dharma) and `acts of emulation` (karma). 8
They worshiped various devas and did `animal sacrifices` (balidāna) (to them).
They cut pigeons, ducks and goats on an infinite scale.
They did acts of penance, murmured incantations, gave offerings in yajnas and bathed in tirthas.
Yet (, in spite of all these,) all of them died, falling repeatedly into the most terrible hell. 9
They took birth and died in this `cycle of material existence` (saṃsāra) again and again.
They could not obtain happiness nor could they get rid of material affliction.
All people sank to the bottom of the sin-ocean of kali.
Knowing this, Krsna, the `embodiment of grace` (kṛpāmaẏa), pondered in mind. 10
In order to save all these people,
he became descents (avatāra) in the form of Sankara and Madhava.

---

[1] Daityari’s description appears to be more in line with Sankara’s reference to the Vedic sacrificial dharma in his rendering of the first book of the Bhagavata (Vyasa Narada Samvada):

nārada badati śunā mahāmuni byāsa |

tumise karilā sawe jagatake nāśa ||

nirantare paśura lowāilā tumi prāṇa |

nāhi manda karmma āra ihāra samāna ||32||

ākasmike lokaka karāilā hiṃsā dharmma |

nubujilā tumio bedara tattba marmma ||

garihita karmmako kahilā dharmma buli |

tohmāra bacane loka nāśila samūli ||33||

sbabhāwe lampaṭa biṣaẏata anurāga |

sbarga pāibo buli raṅge kāṭe haṃsa chāga ||

karai nānā hiṃsā dharmma nānā dewa pūjai |

puṇyakṣaẏa bhaile dunāi narakata majai ||34||

Synopsis (Beginning only) of Bhūṣaṇa's "Śrī Śrī Śaṅkaradeva"

Śrī Śrī Śaṅkaradeva
Bhūṣaṇa Dbija
Edited and published by Sri Durgadhara Barakataki
Jorhat, 1925.

The manuscript[1] begins with salutations to Sri Sankara (śrīśaṅkarāẏa namaḥ) and Sri Krsna (śrīkṛṣṇāẏa namaḥ).

The caritakāra, first saluting reverentially at the feet of Krsna, declares that descending on earth in the form of Sankara, it is Lord Hari himself who propagated (pracāra) his own ‘qualities, deeds and glory’ (guṇa, karmma, yaśa), listening to which the people cross the uncrossable saṃsāra.[2] He (Sankara) has made well-known (bidita) Krsna alongwith nāma dharmma and the people now, with great happiness (mahā sukhe), ‘obtain redemption’ (tare) in the uttermost age of kali.[3] The carita of Sri Sankara is the ‘nemesis of sin’ (pāpara antaka),[4] and Bhusana, foolish and devoid of jñāna, is going to narrate it in metrical form.[5]
 
Taking birth into this world, Sankara showed to the people various ‘divine sports’ (krīḍā). He composed (nibandhilā) the Bhāgavata in verses (pada bandhe)[6] and now, even the ‘lowest of the low’ (antyajas), reading it and understanding its meaning (artha), ‘do pure devotion’ (bhaje) to Madhava, regarding Sankara as their guru.[7] All humans have achieved (the supreme) happiness taking to ‘devotion to Hari’ (hari-bhakti) and it is on account of this fact that the saint is named Śrīmanta Śaṅkara.[8] Which person has got the capacity to narrate in full all the details pertaining to his qualities (guṇa) and powers (mahimā)?[9] The caritakāra will reveal whatever comes to mind ‘by the grace of the pure devotees of God’ (sādhu prasādata), remembering the favor (kṛpā) of Krsna.[10] Previously, all great paṇḍitas that lived used to discuss this tale (kathā) amongst themselves joyfully.[11] But, at the end of their lives, all of them reached Vaikuntha and now, who speaks these tales anymore?[12]
 

In this manner, the caritakara has given the justification (praẏojana)[13] for writing this biography of Sankara. He desires to save the tale of Sankara from becoming lost forever and therefore he has written this carita to record and preserve these facts, hitherto circulated only orally, in the written (verse) form.

---

[1] Inserted into the printed edition is what appears to be a painting of Sankaradeva and his disciples, presumably from the manuscript of the carita. The striking aspect about this representation is that the saint is depicted as a Mughal emperor (Shah Jahan?), in full Mughal regal attire, reclining on his gaddi and holding a rose in one hand, and speaking to two of his disciples who are portrayed as courtiers of the Mughal court. Although the full details relating to this painting—the editor makes no mention of it in the preface—could not be obtained owing to the copy in possession with this author being a very low-resolution, monochromatic one, the scene in question perhaps is an imaginative portrayal of Sankaradeva bestowing his dharma rajya on Madhava, his spiritual successor. This is not conclusive, however.

[2] V. 2.

[3] V 3.1.

[4] V. 4.1.

[5] V. 3.2.

[6] V. 4.2.

[7] V. 5.1.

[8] V. 5.2.

[9] V. 6.1.

[10] V. 6.2.

[11] V. 7.1.

[12] V. 7.2.

[13] V. 8.1.

Madhavadeva’s Nama Ghosa: a Landmark Text

The chief literary oeuvre of Madhavadeva (1489-1596 CE), the foremost exponent of the sole-refuge (eka sarana) school in the post-Sankaradeva period, is the Nama Ghosa (The Proclamation of Pure Devotion). This text, which enjoys canonical status among the adherents of this school, is based primarily on the Bhagavata Purana. It celebrates the pure, joy-filled devotion (bhajana) to Krishna, the supreme spiritual personality (parama purusa, paramatma), forsaking all ‘materialness’ (krishata, in the author’s own words) engendered by the jiva’s default allegiance to primal matter. Madhavadeva has internalized the message of the Bhagavata—its call-to-action as well as its philosophical rationale—with the aid of the lucid commentary of Sridhara Svami and supplemented it further with apt translations from the other primary texts of the Vedantic-puranic tradition such as the Bhagavad Gita.

Madhavadeva’s Nama Ghosa (NG) is a landmark ‘essence-text’ in the history of spiritual thought in India not only because its author shows extreme courage for his time to boldly assert the supremacy of pure devotion over the path of microcosmic emulations technically referred to as karma, but also due to the revolutionary impact of some of its pronouncements on society. Spiritual and social reforms go hand in hand in Madhavadeva. This made the preaching of the eka-sarana faith also very much a social movement. In the modern period, some scholars have glossed over this important social aspect. In their view, Sankaradeva and Madhavadeva sought merely to establish equality for all on the spiritual plane without seeking to disturb the status quo in the social order. This is a mistake of epic proportions.

The society of the time was organized into a hierarchy on the basis of a system of varna and asrama which laid down separate ‘ordained duties’ (dharmas) for the different categories and castes. This was essentially born of a philosophy of bheda or difference which saw man as a part of matter (prakriti) rather than as a spiritual personality. It sought to emulate the material ‘personalities’—the sensory and motor units in particular—of the microcosm.

However, the philosophy of pure devotion championed by Madhavadeva in the NG, which runs counter to such a philosophy of difference, is that of intrinsic equality. Here, man is an amsa, a (tiny) part, as it were, of God. Madhavadeva says, “You are eternal, unstained, Narayana. We too are your amsas” [v. 273]. In fact, here, the very doing of pure bhakti is predicated on the existence of a transcendental society in which all members are essentially of one kind; all are purusas or pure personalities. They are by nature immutable (unlike matter) and, hence, not subject to placement at different levels on a material scale. Therefore, the bhaktic philosophy envisages a kind of society which is modeled on Vaikuntha, the transcendental society, in which the governing ideal is one of equality. In the NG, we find perhaps the most clear and emphatic rejection of caste in the entire corpus of Sankaradeva-ite literature: noho jana ami cari jati, cario asrami noho ati [v. 670]. “Know that we are no member of the four castes nor do we adhere to the system of four asramas”.

The embracing of such a philosophy and its widespread dissemination among the masses automatically put the conception of the ‘dharmic’ society at peril and in threat of diminution, if not eventual extinction. For caste, it now was logically concluded, could be sustained only in the state of ignorance (avidya, maya) in which there is the identification of the self with matter. The NG thus contains the framework of a unique philosophical rejection of caste based on the contradictions between two opposite ideologies.

Many a page in the history of medieval Assam is riddled with instances of persecution of the leaders of the Sankaradeva movement. It is in consequence of the preaching of the idea that was carried in germ form by the NG. There was a nexus of religion and politics in this period with the preservation of dharmic ideals weighing heavily on the decisions of the rulers.

For scholars and students of religion, the NG offers, on reflection, several instructive lessons. It challenges the traditional and rote interpretation of a religion. It points to the pitfalls of stereotyping and opens up the mind to newer possibilities. The idea of ‘two Hinduisms’, one mutually opposed to the other, is perhaps unimaginable to some, even more so in a scenario where we are keen to present a religion as a monolith. Yet, as we saw above, that is precisely the impression one gets on studying the NG. Left to themselves, the dharmic one would retain the caste-system and the truly bhaktic one would abolish it. Madhavadeva clearly says [v. 599] that the doing of karmas is antithetical (birodhi) to the singing of the Lord’s glories. Does not such a word-selection fly in the face of the conventional understanding in which the path of karma is seen to be supplementary or even a prerequisite to bhakti? How can such irreconcilable differences be explained? Madhavadeva’s NG forces us to raise these interesting questions.

The fact is that, as with any religion, there have always been two contradictory currents of thought operating within Hinduism. The first is that of the status quoist; the second, that of the reformer. The reformer always challenges the misinterpretation of the former. The reformer’s prime strategy is that of engaging with the orthodoxy through a dialogue (samvada). In the dialogic strategy of the Gita, for instance, the dharmic side is represented by Arjuna and the bhaktic one, by Krishna. It would seem that Madhavadeva’s NG has no dialogue but there is the author and the reader (or listener)! It is through this dialogic strategy that the individual and social consciousness is sought to be sublimated. The final verdict of Krishna in the Gita [18.66]: “Forsake all dharmas, O Arjuna” (sarva dharman parityajya), may be understood in the context of this dialogue between two opposing ideologies.

[Posted on the occasion of the birth anniversary of Mahapurusa Madhavadeva. Salutations to the great preceptor.]