Uttamasloka Dasa: I’m going to attempt to summarize all of the relevant points related to the issue of how one’s rasa manifests. The primary point of disagreement is whether one receives one’s rasa from one’s guru or a rasika devotee or whether there are other factors which collectively contribute to one’s awakening and attraction to a particular rasa.
We all agree that the jivas are tatastha-sakti and therefore, do not inherently possess bhava, prema or any aspect of the svarupa-sakti as part of their nature/svarupa. The sastric evidence is clear about that and thus, it is not a point of contention.
Considering that this particular point is a significant siddhanta, you’d expect to find unequivocal statements from all of the acaryas throughout their teachings regarding how one’s rasa is awakened. BRS, being the literal handbook for Gaudiya Vaisnavas, should have the answers for us and it does.
FACT: There are no statements in BRS that unequivocally assert that your guru ‘gives’ you your rasa, ie: he/she gives you the same rasa he/she has. In fact, I found no such statements in any of the 30+ books of the primary Gaudiya acaryas that I’ve studied.
So the question is: where did this idea come from? The only answer I’ve been able to discern is that it is part of the “tradition” of those lineages who espouse this notion. I’m not certain how it morphed along the way but it appears to be based somewhat on the idea that because so many acaryas and gurus are in madhurya-rasa as manjaris, therefore, we are all supposed to become manjaris like them too. But this idea is not supported by any acaryas either.
Last year I had a lengthy discussion about this same topic with a knowledgeable disciple of Satyanarayana Dasa Babaji, and after many exchanges of evidence and my repeated requests for sastric support, I was told, “Some things are not in the sastras or writings of the acaryas, and that’s why you need a living guru to tell you these esoteric truths.” I’m sorry, but that doesn’t cut it for me and it revealed what I suspected: there is no sastric support for this idea.
BRS, 2.5.38 and its commentaries was quoted previously regarding rati arising from having no impressions, one impression or multiple impressions. The last paragraph of VCT’s commentary reads: “In this life also, the person has that taste alone and not others, by the mercy of a great devotee with a similar taste. This is the case of for the two types of dasya and the other three higher rasas.”
This was given by ... as proof of their position, but it is hardly unequivocal or conclusive. My understanding of this one single statement is that once one has a strong impression for one rasa, by the mercy of another devotee with that same rasa, one can progress with more clarity and focus. And since the verse and commentaries state clearly “impressions accumulated from previous lives” it means that one did not “get” that rasa in this lifetime from that devotee - it has been growing over many lifetimes.
And what are these “impressions”? These samskaras come from practicing sadhana-bhakti, ie: hearing the lila, chanting the Holy Names, etc, and from sadhu-sanga. All of these - not just sadhu-sanga alone. And what is the likelihood or guarantee that one has had such association exclusively with devotees in that one rasa for many lifetimes?
This also brings up the issue of the guru planting the bhakti-lata-bija in one’s heart. Consider that if we have been devotees for many lifetimes, then the fact is the seed of bhakti was already planted in our hearts in some previous life, unless this life is one’s very first introduction to bhakti and one’s current guru is the initial seed-planter. SNB’s disciple was emphatic that in their lineage the guru also plants the seed of one’s rasa along with the seed of bhakti, but again, no evidence was given to support that notion. It was simply the interpretation of their lineage.
Part 2:
also quoted BRS, 2.5.13:
When a devotee’s rati, like a clear crystal, becomes similar in form to that of the devotee to whom he is attached, it is called svaccha-rati .
Jiva Gosvami’s Commentary:
This verse shows how devotee association acts as the seed of rati. Through association with various types of devotees, various types of sadhana which are like watering the seed will be performed.
However, he conveniently left out the previous verse:
Svaccha-suddha-rati:
When rati manifests many varieties because the practitioner associated with various types of devotees and performs various practices, it is called svaccha-rati (transparent). BRS, 2.5.12
And he left out these clarifying parts of the commentary for verse 13:
…This [various types of sadhana] will produce various bhavas in the practicing devotee.
…The devotee’s rati, like a crystal, takes on a form similar to that of another devotee to whom he is attached.
…However, this svaccha-rati is included in suddha-rati because ***the particular tastes it manifests are temporary*** (rather than permanent as in priti or other forms of rati). This also agrees with the later statement in verse 21, which describes suddha-rati (which includes svaccha-rati) as being devoid of distinctive taste.
So although sadhu-sanga is a key contributing factor, it is not described as being the sole factor and nor is it described as these devotees “giving” their rasa to the practitioner. And furthermore, as indicated, such association may result in one having many impressions due to the variety of rasas manifested by the various devotees one associates with.
So now we may ask, how, when and where does the unique individuality of the jiva come into play? The jiva is the ‘person’ upon whom these impressions are made and who is thus affected by a growing attraction, eventually to one specific rasa. The jiva ultimately makes the decision to follow one rasa.
On another thread on FB where a similar discussion is taking place, Tripurari Swami referred to JG’s statements in Paramatma-sandarbha where he says that jivas are “units of free will” and “units of consciousness” and the only distinguishing factor is that we are not each other and thus we are unique. TS asserts that there are no ‘personal’ differences between jivas otherwise - we are all identical and possess the same exact attributes.
He says that the variety among jivas is only evident within the material world where our free will has some facility for choice and action. He says that it is solely due to sadhu-sanga that we eventually choose one rasa versus another. So even though we have free will and some sort of individuality, we are not really choosing our rasa based on anything personal or individual, rather, we are doing so because we are 100% influenced by association. I personally do not accept that understanding, although there are some valid points.
Although there isn’t an inherent rasa in the jiva, the acaryas state repeatedly throughout their writings that our choice of rasa is based on our inclinations, taste, preferences, desires, etc, and these inclinations are all manifesting while we are still in the stage of practice, ie: sadhana, so it is while there is still some material conditioning present. Nonetheless, they consistently focus on the individual jiva as a core factor by using these terms.
There are also numerous statements throughout sastra about the fact that Krsna appears to the devotees in the specific form the devotee desires and He loves the devotee exactly how that devotee wants Him to. So the jiva’s desires are a huge factor, and again, these desires are expressed during sadhana, so they are not coming from a liberated jiva.
Certainly we are all subjected to unlimited influences but ultimately it is we who make the final choices and it is we whose desires will be fulfilled at the stage of bhava when Krsna awards us all that we aspired for during sadhana, all of which speaks to the individuality of the jiva as a significant factor.
Are we to believe that the jiva’s desires are irrelevant and we are simply influenced by others to go in one direction or the other, in spite of having free will? And why are we influenced in one particular way and not another? Does that have anything at all to do with us as individual persons or is it all based on external influences? Krsna in Vraja is all about fulfilling the desires of His devotees, not the desires that someone else told them to have. Otherwise, what is the actual meaning of being a unique individual?
Here is a verse from BRS to illustrate this point:
The rati takes on a specific type (one of the five) according to the individual nature of the devotee. Just as the sun takes on various forms when reflected through crystals and other items, the rati takes on various forms when manifesting in different individuals. BRS, 2.5.7
Jiva Gosvami’s commentary:
The example of the reflection of the sun in crystal and other items is used to illustrate the variety that rati assumes in different individuals, and not to illustrate that those who receive rati have only some reflection, and not genuine rati. Because of particular differences, five distinct conditions appear which are given five different names.
In conclusion, there are no statements by the acaryas that one’s guru ‘gives’ you your rasa, nor is it always the same as the guru’s rasa. The inclination for a particular rasa arises over the course of many lifetimes of sadhana-bhakti and sadhu-sanga, both of which create impressions that eventually result in the devotee becoming focused on one specific rasa and that happens due to the individual nature of each devotee in the context of their free will and innate capacity for desires.
Bhaktivinoda Thakur strongly attacked deviations present at the time. But also had great respect and was related with the authentic babajis. Now we have to admit that the Bhaktivinoda Parivar and the Saraswat Parampara were the most successful in spreading the glories of the Holy Name in india and beyond. We can not deny it. Regarding scandals, happen everywhere and especially as I said earlier it happens when you leave the jungle and go to the cities.
In relation to the topic of "inherence". I do not know why so much debate. All here agree that we didn't fall from Vaikuntha.
Association plays a key role in determining the Rasa. But ultimately it is the devotee who will decide. We have to take into consideration that we are talking about many lives. A devotee in previous lives could have received strong influences of a particular Rasa, for example, Dasya Rasa, and even if now related with a maha bhagavata manjari bhava bhakta will not change his Rasa. Nor may be forced to do so. Even if manjari bhava is the most important gift that mahaprabhu gave for this age. Rasa is not inherent in the jiva. But because it received a strong influence on other lives will not change now.
And dont forget that in the time of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati due to his purity many devotees left the Parivars and joined him.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is accepted as Siddha Mahatma by the followers of Carana Dasa Babaji and others. It is well known that many left the so called ortodhoxy and joined Bhaktisiddhanta, and a few left him to join ortodhoxy.
That's a very good point. We know from VCT's RVC that one may have greed from a previous lifetime, so one's guru in this life will not be the one to give any rasa, therefore, what does he give? I have not found any conclusive statements from any acaryas that state that one gets one's rasa from one's guru. Jīva Gosvāmī confirms the qualifications for the awakening of one’s rasa in his Bhakti-sandarbha:
For this reason we will now discuss rāgānugā-bhakti, the practice of devotion following in the wake of the moods of natural affection. When a person develops a taste for the aforesaid specific rāga [i.e., any of the four major rasas], even though that rāga itself has not arisen in her or him, the heart becomes like a crystal, shining as it reflects the rays of the moon of that rāga.
By hearing about this rāga from scripture or from one’s teacher, one develops a taste for the actions of the rāgatmika associates also, that are expressions of this rāgatmika-bhakti. Then by adhering to the rāga of a particular associate of the Lord, according to one’s taste, one executes devotion, which is called rāgānugā. BS, Anuccheda 310
“Kṛṣṇa has many types of devotees – some are servants, some are friends, some are parents, and some are conjugal lovers. Those who are situated in one of these attitudes of spontaneous love **according to their choice**, are considered to be on the path of spontaneous loving service (rāga-mārga). CC, 2.22.161
These five types of rati [i.e., the rati or bhāva associated with each of the five rasas] progressively become more blissful by increasing tastes. The particular taste arises in a devotee according to his previous experiences. BRS, 2.5.38
Jīva Gosvāmī’s Commentary:
But what determines who takes up which type of rati? Is it decided by having no impressions of a particular rati from previous lives, by having an impression of one type of rati from previous lives, or by having impressions of many types of rati?
In the first option – absence of impressions – rati cannot occur at all, because no taste could arise. In the case of persons having impressions of many types of rati, a particular rati could not manifest prominently because conflicting tastes would result in the improper manifestation of rasa (rasābhāsa). Therefore, impressions of only one type carried from previous lives produce the specific taste.
Though not being in a position to perceive the depth of that rasa, one can confirm its identity by comparing scriptural descriptions of rasas with one’s own inclinations, and by inference through seeing how rasas, different from one’s own rasa, either nourish or fail to nourish the total ingredients.
