When Sarvabhauma was an impersonalist how could he appreciate symptoms of love of God in Lord Chaitanya?

Answer Podcast:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
The question is that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is an impersonalist. And if he saw and recognized and appreciated the symptoms of advanced emotion, advanced love of God, in Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, how is this? Actually there is a book called Navadvipa Bhava Tamil, written by Bhaktivinoda Thakur. And there as well as in some of the other books, he goes into technicalities.
And one of the things he has to reconcile is that the depiction of Sarvabhauma in Chaitanya Bhagwat and Chaitanya Chaitanya Amrita. There is a substantial difference. Chaitanya Bhagwat actually depicts Sarvabhauma as a Vaishnav and eagerly receives Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu depicts him as an impersonalist who is transformed by Sarvabhauma, by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. So he explains that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu explains that actually these personalities were there in Arjuna’s past life. They are his general associates.
And they may take different roles to fulfill certain purposes. So in his heart, he was a devotee. But he was, in that particular socio-cultural situation, acting like a Mayavati.
But more importantly, this is more like an esoteric explanation. But along with that, one more point is that within a couple of centuries of Mayavad, the Mayavadini’s recognized that impersonalism will never have a mask on. Because people need someone who, in any life, they need emotions.
They need to have access to God through the path of emotions. So within, among the impersonalists also, the path of bhakti started acquiring more and more importance. So that means, that with Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, you see, Shankaracharya himself, he wrote many bhakti compositions.
There is Vajagobindam, Vajagobindam, there is Lakshmi Narasimha, Lakshmi Narasimha, Karavindra Narasimha. There are many bhakti and very intense devotional compositions. So now, the impersonalists say that their tradition is that when Shankaracharya would go into ecstasy of bhakti, at that time he would glorify bhakti, and at ecstasy of bhakti he would glorify ecstasy of bhakti.
So their explanation is that jnana and bhakti is the highest. But sometimes in the world, bhakti-shankaracharya has become disordered. So the point is that there is a tradition of bhakti right from Shankaracharya himself.
So now, they may contextualize and say that bhakti is abhorrent, and bhakti is ultimately against bhakti. But bhakti itself was and even now is there within the impersonalist tradition also. And over the centuries, bhakti has become more and more prominent.
Sridhara Swami, in the commentary that he wrote, Sridhara Swami officially, the nomenclature of the impersonalists is under that. But he wrote a bhakti commentary. And the last one, which is his own bhakti commentary, is bhakti-shankaracharya.
So, bhakti did become prominent even among the impersonalists. And then they also have an understanding that there is a very advanced bhakti. So, their idea is that they don’t reject bhakti, but rather they say that bhakti also has to be transcended into it.
So, bhakti has to be transcended. As long as bhakti is being practiced, there can be levels of bhakti. And within those levels, there can be a high level or there can be a low level.
So, he saw that with the monk who had very exalted symptoms of love of God. So, they accept the symptoms also as a sign of advancement. But they consider that, oh, but you have to advance further.
So, for example, the impersonalists, they also accept the five asanas. But their idea is that the five asanas are hierarchical. You start from Chandra and you move upwards.
And then, in the Madhurya, there is physical intricacy between God and his associates. And then, after going beyond Madhurya, there is Paramesh. You have to come closer and closer towards Dasya, Puchak, Vatsala and Madhurya.
And then, you merge with them. So, what they do is, they also recognize levels of bhakti. But they consider bhakti is above bhakti.
So, he realized that’s why. You see that he appreciated when he was exalted in love of God. But he said, now, I will institute Vedanta.
Because the idea is, okay, you have already got Vedanta. So, now you have to understand the importance of Vedanta. Understand how the impersonal is the highest level.
So, he had that appreciation of bhakti. Because bhakti is also recognized in impersonalism. But it’s not considered the highest.