Indirect (CC )
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta
CC Adi-lila
Two different principles are to be considered herein—namely āśraya, the object providing shelter, and āśrita, the dependents requiring shelter. The āśrita exist under the original principle, the āśraya. The first nine categories, described in the first nine cantos of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, from creation to liberation—including the puruṣa-avatāras, the incarnations, the marginal energy, or living entities, and the external energy, or material world—are all āśrita. The prayers of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, however, aim for the āśraya-tattva, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. The great souls expert in describing Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam have very diligently delineated the other nine categories, sometimes by direct narrations and sometimes by indirect narrations such as stories. The real purpose of doing this is to know perfectly the Absolute Transcendence, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, for the entire creation, both material and spiritual, rests on the body of Śrī Kṛṣṇa.
He can have knowledge merely by glancing over an object, whereas innumerable impediments block the cognition of ordinary living beings. The cognition of the living beings has three divisions: direct knowledge, indirect knowledge and perverted knowledge. Sense perception of material objects by the mundane senses, such as the eye, ear, nose and hand, always produces definitely perverted knowledge. This illusion is a presentation of the material energy, which is influenced by the samvit-śakti in a perverted manner. Negative cognition of an object beyond the reach of sense perception is the way of indirect knowledge, which is not altogether imperfect but which produces only fragmentary knowledge in the form of impersonal spiritual realization and monism.
Negative cognition of an object beyond the reach of sense perception is the way of indirect knowledge, which is not altogether imperfect but which produces only fragmentary knowledge in the form of impersonal spiritual realization and monism. But when the samvit factor of cognition is enlightened by the hlādinī potency of the same internal energy, they work together, and only thus can one attain knowledge of the Personality of Godhead. The samvit-śakti should be maintained in that state. Material knowledge and indirect spiritual knowledge are by-products of the samvit-śakti.
As mentioned above, the gopīs are the predominated lovers, and Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the predominator, the beloved. The love of the predominated nourishes the love of the predominator. The gopīs had no desire for selfish enjoyment. Their feeling of happiness was indirect, for it was dependent on the pleasure of Kṛṣṇa. Causeless love of Godhead is always so. Such pure love is possible only when the predominated is made happy by the happiness of the predominator. Such unadulterated love is exemplified when the lover deprecates her happiness if it hinders her from discharging her service.
In reality, the temporary manifestations of material nature are originally caused by the spiritual glance of the Lord. The Personality of Godhead is the direct, or remote, cause of creation, and material nature is the indirect, or immediate, cause. Materialistic scientists, puffed-up by the magical changes their so-called inventions have brought about, cannot see the real potency of Godhead behind matter. Therefore the jugglery of science is gradually leading people to a godless civilization at the cost of the goal of human life. Having missed the goal of life, materialists run after self-sufficiency, not knowing that material nature is already self-sufficient by the grace of God. Thus creating a colossal hoax in the name of civilization, they create an imbalance in the natural self-sufficiency of material nature.
Lord Mahā-Viṣṇu, who is lying on the Causal Ocean, is a manifestation of Saṅkarṣaṇa. He is the original Personality of Godhead who glances over the material and efficient causes of the cosmic manifestation. Advaita Prabhu is accepted as an incarnation of Mahā-Viṣṇu. All the plenary manifestations of Saṅkarṣaṇa are indirect expansions of Lord Kṛṣṇa. That consideration also makes Advaita Prabhu an eternal servitor of Gaura Kṛṣṇa. Therefore He is accepted as a devotee incarnation.
A person who cannot see is called blind, one who cannot walk is called lame, one who has no hands is called helpless, one who cannot speak is called dumb, and one who cannot hear is called deaf. The Māyāvādīs' proposition that God has no legs, no eyes, no ears and no hands is an indirect way of insulting Him by defining Him as blind, deaf, dumb, lame, helpless, etc. Therefore although they present themselves as great Vedāntists, they are factually māyayāpahṛta-jñāna; in other words, they seem to be very learned scholars, but the essence of their knowledge has been taken away.
It has become fashionable since the time of Śaṅkarācārya to explain everything regarding the śāstras in an indirect way. Scholars take pride in explaining everything in their own way, and they declare that one can understand the Vedic scriptures in any way he likes. This "any way you like" method is foolishness, and it has created havoc in the Vedic culture. One cannot accept scientific knowledge in his own whimsical way. In the science of mathematics, for example, two plus two equals four, and one cannot make it equal three or five. Yet although it is not possible to alter real knowledge, people have taken to the fashion of understanding Vedic knowledge in any way they like.
“Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya has described all the Vedic literatures in terms of indirect meanings. One who hears such explanations is ruined.
Since the purport of the Bhagavad-gītā is now being presented as it is, however, within four or five short years thousands of people all over the world have become Kṛṣṇa conscious. That is the difference between direct and indirect explanations of the Vedic literature. Therefore Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, mukhya-vṛttye sei artha parama mahattva: "To teach the Vedic literature according to its direct meaning, without false commentary, is glorious." Unfortunately, Śrī Śaṅkarācārya, by the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, compromised between atheism and theism in order to cheat the atheists and bring them to theism, and to do so he gave up the direct method of Vedic knowledge and tried to present a meaning which is indirect. It is with this purpose that he wrote his Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra.
Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura comments that mukhya-vṛtti ("the direct meaning") is abhidhā-vṛtti, or the meaning that one can understand immediately from the statements of dictionaries, whereas gauṇa-vṛtti ("the indirect meaning") is a meaning that one imagines without consulting the dictionary. For example, one politician has said that Kurukṣetra refers to the body, but in the dictionary there is no such definition. Therefore this imaginary meaning is gauṇa-vṛtti, whereas the direct meaning found in the dictionary is mukhya-vṛtti or abhidhā-vṛtti. This is the distinction between the two. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu recommends that one understand the Vedic literature in terms of abhidhā-vṛtti, and the gauṇa-vṛtti He rejects. Sometimes, however, as a matter of necessity, the Vedic literature is described in terms of the lakṣaṇā-vṛtti or gauṇa-vṛtti, but one should not accept such explanations as permanent truths.
The purpose of the discussions in the Upaniṣads and Vedānta-sūtra is to philosophically establish the personal feature of the Absolute Truth. The impersonalists, however, in order to establish their philosophy, accept these discussions in terms of lakṣaṇā-vṛtti, or indirect meanings. Thus instead of being tattva-vāda, or in search of the Absolute Truth, they become Māyāvāda, or illusioned by the material energy. When Śrī Viṣṇu Svāmī, one of the four ācāryas of the Vaiṣṇava cult, presented his thesis on the subject matter of śuddhādvaita-vāda, immediately the Māyāvādīs took advantage of this philosophy and tried to establish their advaita-vāda or kevalādvaita-vāda.
In explaining this verse, Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya interpreted various Sanskrit words in such a way that he implied, according to Jīva Gosvāmī, that Vyāsadeva had very little knowledge of higher logic. Such unscrupulous deviation from the real meaning of the Vedānta-sūtra has created a class of men who by word jugglery try to derive various indirect meanings from the Vedic literatures, especially the Bhagavad-gītā. One of them has even explained that the word kurukṣetra refers to the body. Such interpretations imply, however, that neither Lord Kṛṣṇa nor Vyāsadeva had a proper sense of word usage or etymological adjustment.
Lord Kṛṣṇa left His book to be explained later by the Māyāvādīs. Such interpretations merely prove, however, that their proponents have very little philosophical sense.
Instead of wasting one's time falsely deriving such indirect meanings from the Vedānta-sūtra and other Vedic literatures, one should accept the words of these books as they are. In presenting Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, therefore, we have not changed the meaning of the original words. Similarly, if one studies the Vedānta-sūtra as it is, without whimsical and capricious adulteration, one can understand the Vedanta-sūtra very easily. Śrīla Vyāsadeva therefore explains the Vedānta-sūtra, beginning from the first sūtra, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), in his Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.1.1):
“In all the Vedic sūtras and literatures, it is Lord Kṛṣṇa who is to be understood, but the followers of Śaṅkarācārya have covered the real meaning of the Vedas with indirect explanations.
"To prove their philosophy, the members of the Māyāvāda school have given up the real, easily understood meaning of the Vedic literature and introduced indirect meanings based on their imaginative powers."
CC Madhya-lila
In the northern division (uttara-vibhāga) there is a description of the indirect mellows of devotional service—namely, devotional service in laughter, devotional service in wonder, and devotional service in chivalry, pity, anger, dread and ghastliness. There are also mixing of mellows and the transgression of different humors. Thus there are nine waves in this part. This is but a brief outline of the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu.
There is also a description of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī and other female lovers, as well as various group leaders. Messengers and the constant associates, as well as others who are very dear to Kṛṣṇa, are all described. The book also relates how love of Kṛṣṇa is awakened and describes the ecstatic situation, the devotional situation, permanent ecstasy, disturbed ecstasy, steady ecstasy, different positions of different dresses, feelings of separation, prior attraction, anger in attraction, varieties of loving affairs, separation from the beloved, meeting with the beloved, and both direct and indirect enjoyment between the lover and the beloved. All this has been very elaborately described.
There is also a discussion of how spiritual feelings can be present when one simply imitates them and of how such mellows are far superior to the ordinary mellows of mundane love, and there are descriptions of different ecstasies, the awakening of ecstasy, transcendental qualities, the distinction of dhīrodātta, the utmost attractiveness of conjugal love, the ecstatic features, the permanent ecstatic features, the mellows divided in five transcendental features of direct loving service, and indirect loving service, considered in seven divisions. Finally there is a discussion of overlapping of different rasas, and there are discussions of śānta (neutrality), servitorship, taking shelter, parental love, conjugal love, direct transcendental enjoyment and enjoyment in separation, previous attraction and the glories of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī.
The symptoms of madness served as an impetus for remembering Kṛṣṇa. The mood of ecstasy awoke love, disdain, defamation by words, pride, honor and indirect prayer. Thus Śrī Kṛṣṇa was sometimes blasphemed and sometimes honored.
“The scriptural injunctions for shaving and fasting are indirect orders of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. However, when there is a direct order from the Lord to take prasādam, naturally the devotees take prasādam as their first duty.
Not having perfect knowledge of Kṛṣṇa, such impersonalists certainly commit offenses at His lotus feet. Therefore they do not utter "Kṛṣṇa, " the original name of the Absolute Truth. In their impersonal way, they utter the name of impersonal Brahman, spirit soul. In other words, they indulge in indirect indications of the Absolute Truth. Even if they happen to utter the names "Govinda," "Kṛṣṇa" or "Mādhava," they still cannot understand that these names are as good as Govinda, Kṛṣṇa or Mādhava the person. Because they are ultimately impersonalists, their uttering of the personal name has no potency. Actually they do not believe in Kṛṣṇa but consider all these names to be material vibrations. Not being able to appreciate the holy name of the Lord, they simply utter indirect names like Brahman, ātmā and caitanya.
“"Besides the five direct mellows, there are seven indirect mellows, known as laughter, wonder, chivalry, compassion, anger, disaster and fear."
“In addition to the five direct mellows, there are seven indirect mellows, known as laughter, wonder, chivalry, compassion, anger, disaster and fear.
Hāsya, adbhuta, vīra, karuṇa, raudra, bhaya and bībhatsa—the seven indirect mellows—are explained in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu (4.1.6). The hāsya-bhakti-rasa, laughing devotion, is explained as follows:
“When one's attachment for Kṛṣṇa develops in an abominable way, and the devotee enjoys it, that is called bībhatsa-bhakti-rasa.”
In conclusion, when a pure devotee is situated in any of the five principal mellows (śānta, dāsya, sakhya, vātsalya or madhura) and that mellow is mixed with one or more of the seven indirect bhakti-rasas (hāsya, adbhuta, vīra, karuṇa, raudra, bhayānaka or bībhatsa), the indirect mellows become prominent.
“The five direct transcendental mellows of devotional service are permanently situated in the heart of the devotee, whereas the seven indirect emotions appear suddenly under certain conditions and appear more powerful.
“(Lord Kṛṣṇa said:) "What is the purpose of all Vedic literatures? On whom do they focus? Who is the object of all speculation? Outside of Me no one knows these things. Now you should know that all these activities are aimed at ordaining and setting forth Me. The purpose of the Vedic literatures is to know Me by different speculations, either by indirect understanding or by dictionary understanding. Everyone is speculating about Me. The essence of all Vedic literatures is to distinguish Me from māyā. By considering the illusory energy, one comes to the platform of understanding Me. In this way one becomes free from speculation about the Vedas and comes to Me as the conclusion. Thus one is satisfied."
"Thus I have given a description of the incarnations of the four different yugas." After hearing all this, Sanātana Gosvāmī gave an indirect hint to the Lord.
The first ten items are dos and the second ten items are don’ts. Thus the first ten items give direct action, and the second ten items give indirect action.
“Saintly persons who are always meditating upon Kṛṣṇa are engaged in the devotional service of the Lord. The ātmārāmas are also engaged in the Lord's service. That is the indirect import.
CC Antya-lila
In an indirect way, this verse explains the chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra. The Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra—Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare—includes both the holy name of Lord Kṛṣṇa and the name of Lord Rāma. Lord Rāma gives one the opportunity to be liberated, but simply by liberation one does not get actual spiritual benefit. Sometimes if one is liberated from the material world but has no shelter at the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, one falls down to the material world again. Liberation is like a state of convalescence, in which one is free from a fever but is still not healthy. Even in the stage of convalescence, if one is not very careful, one may have a relapse. Similarly, liberation does not offer as much security as the shelter of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. It is stated in the śāstra:
When the twelve mellows—such as neutrality, servitorship and friendship—are characterized by adverse sthāyi-bhāva, vibhāva and anubhāva ecstasies, they are known as uparasa, submellows. When the seven indirect transcendental mellows and the dried-up mellow of neutrality are produced by devotees and moods not directly related to Kṛṣṇa and devotional service in ecstatic love, they are described as anurasa, imitation mellows. If Kṛṣṇa and the enemies who harbor feelings of opposition toward Him are respectively the object and abodes of the mellow of laughter, the resulting feelings are called aparasa, opposing mellows. Experts in distinguishing one mellow from another sometimes accept some overlapping transcendental mellows (rasābhāsa) as rasas due to their being pleasurable and tasteful.”
If one enjoys the material world for sense gratification, he is certainly doomed. Advancement in material opulence is not the direct mercy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead; nevertheless, it indicates the indirect mercy of the Lord, for even a person too attached to material prosperity can gradually be detached and raised to the spiritual platform. Then he can offer causeless, purified service to the Lord. When Śrī Caitanya said, āmā haite kichu nahe ("It is not My business to do anything"), He set the ideal example for a person in the renounced order. If a sannyāsī takes the side of a viṣayī, a person engaged in material activities, his character will be criticized. A person in the renounced order should not take interest in material activities, but if he does so out of affection for a particular person, that should be considered his special mercy.
| Page Title: | Indirect (CC ) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, RupaManjari |
| Created: | 10 of Dec, 2011 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=33, OB=0, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 33 |