Introduction (CC and other books)

Expressions researched:
"introduction" |"introductions" |"introductory"

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 3.80, Translation:

In the auspicious introduction to the Bhāgavata-sandarbha, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has given the following verse as an explanation.

CC Adi 3.81, Purport:

Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has placed the verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam quoted in text 52 (kṛṣṇa-varṇaṁ tviṣākṛṣṇam (SB 11.5.32)) as the auspicious introduction to his Bhāgavata-sandarbha, or Ṣaṭ-sandarbha.

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 10.48, Translation:

After this introduction, everyone fell to the ground like rods. Being very merciful upon them all, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu embraced each one of them.

CC Madhya 19.133, Translation:

Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has personally spoken about the mercy of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu in his auspicious introduction to his book Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu (1.1.2).

CC Madhya 24.316, Translation and Purport:

"My dear Lord, You are the original speaker of the Bhāgavatam. You therefore know its real import. But for You, no one can understand the confidential meaning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam."

Following this statement by Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī, we have written our introduction to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (First Canto, pages 1–41).

CC Antya-lila

CC Antya 1.35, Translation:

In Vṛndāvana, Rūpa Gosvāmī began to write a drama. In particular, he composed the introductory verses to invoke good fortune.

CC Antya 1.35, Purport:

Similarly, in the Sixth Chapter of the Sāhitya-darpaṇa, text 282, it is said:

āśīr-vacana-saṁyuktā stutir yasmāt prayujyate

deva-dvija-nṛ-pādīnāṁ tasmān nāndīti saṁjñitā

The introductory portion of a drama, which is written to invoke good fortune, is called nāndī-śloka.

CC Antya 1.71, Translation:

"I shall write two separate invocations of good fortune and two different introductions. Let me think deeply about the matter and then describe two different sets of incidents."

CC Antya 1.127, Translation:

Rāmānanda Rāya said, "Please recite the introductory verse of the Vidagdha-mādhava so that I can hear and examine it." Thus Śrī Rūpa Gosvāmī, being ordered by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, recited the verse (1.1).

CC Antya 1.134, Purport:

When Śrīla Rāmānanda Rāya inquired about the arrangement for introducing the assembly of players in the drama, Rūpa Gosvāmī replied that when the players first enter the stage in response to the time, the introduction is technically called pravartaka. For an example, see verse 136 below. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura says that the introduction, which is technically called āmukha, may be of five different kinds, according to the Sāhitya-darpaṇa (6.288):

udghātyakaḥ kathodghātaḥ prayogātiśayas tathā

pravartakāvalagite pañca prastāvanā-bhidāḥ

"Introductions may be classified as follows: (1) udghātyaka, (2) kathodghāta, (3) prayogātiśaya, (4) pravartaka and (5) avalagita." These five kinds of introduction are called āmukha. Thus Śrīla Rāmānanda Rāya asked which of the five introductions had been employed, and Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī replied that he had used the introduction called the pravartaka.

CC Antya 1.172, Translation:

Having heard these verses recited by Rūpa Gosvāmī, Śrīla Rāmānanda Rāya said, "Your poetic expressions are like continuous showers of nectar. Kindly let me hear the introductory portion of the second drama."

CC Antya 1.174, Translation:

"It is even impudent for me to open my mouth before you." Then, having said this, he recited the introductory verse of the Lalita-mādhava.

CC Antya 1.176, Translation:

When Śrīla Rāmānanda Rāya further inquired about the second introductory verse, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī was somewhat hesitant, but nevertheless he began to recite.

CC Antya 1.185, Translation:

"This introduction is technically called udghātyaka, and the whole scene is called vīthī. You are so expert in dramatic expression that each of my statements before you is like a wave from an ocean of impudence."

CC Antya 1.185, Purport:

In this connection Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura again quotes the following verse from the Sāhitya-darpaṇa (6.288):

udghātyakaḥ kathodghātaḥ prayogātiśayas tathā

pravartakāvalagite pañca prastāvanā-bhidāḥ

Thus the technical names for the five kinds of introductory scenes of the drama are listed as udghātyaka, kathodghāta, prayogātiśaya, pravartaka and avalagita. When Śrīla Rāmānanda Rāya inquired which of these five Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī had used to accomplish the technical introduction to his drama Lalita-mādhava, Rūpa Gosvāmī replied that he had used the introduction technically called udghātyaka. According to the Bhāratī-vṛtti, three technical terms used are prarocanā, vīthī and prahasanā. Thus Rūpa Gosvāmī also mentioned vīthī, which is a technical term for a certain type of expression.

CC Antya 1.185, Purport:

The vīthī beginning of a drama consists of only one scene. In that scene, one of the heroes enters the stage, and by means of opposing statements uttered by a voice from the sky (offstage), he introduces the abundant conjugal mellow and other mellows to some degree. In the course of the introduction, all the seeds of the play are planted. This introduction is called udghātyaka because the player dances on the stage. This term also indicates that the full moon enters the stage. In this case, when the word naṭatā ("dancing on the stage") is linked with the moon, its meaning is obscure, but because the meaning becomes very clear when the word naṭatā is linked with Kṛṣṇa, this type of introduction is called udghātyaka.

CC Antya 5 Summary:

A brāhmaṇa from Bengal composed a drama about the activities of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and went to Jagannātha Purī to show it to the associates of the Lord. When Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's secretary, Svarūpa Dāmodara Gosvāmī, heard the drama, he discerned a tinge of Māyāvāda philosophy and pointed it out to the author. Although Svarūpa Dāmodara condemned the entire drama, by reference to secondary meanings of the introductory verse he nevertheless satisfied the brāhmaṇa. That brāhmaṇa poet thus became greatly obliged to Svarūpa Dāmodara Gosvāmī, renounced his family connections and stayed at Jagannātha Purī with the associates of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

CC Antya 5.108, Translation:

"The standard for writing dramas has been set by Rūpa Gosvāmī. If a devotee hears the introductory portions of his two dramas, they enhance his transcendental pleasure."

CC Antya 5.111, Translation:

Svarūpa Dāmodara Gosvāmī sat down with other devotees to hear the poetry, and then the poet began to read the introductory verse.

CC Antya 5.134, Translation:

"You have composed this introductory verse to your great satisfaction, but the meaning you have expressed is contaminated by offenses to both Lord Jagannātha and Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu."

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 15:

In summary, Kṛṣṇa is the meaning behind all the words in the Ātmārāma verse. Up to this point Lord Caitanya spoke only of the introduction to the Ātmārāma verse. Next He explains its real position.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 23:

In the very beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the meaning and purpose of the gāyatrī mantra are also described: "I offer my obeisances unto the Supreme Truth." This is the first introductory verse dealing with the Supreme Truth, which is described in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as the source of creation, maintenance and destruction for the cosmic manifestation.

Nectar of Devotion

Nectar of Devotion 9:

When a young boy or girl sees a member of the opposite sex there is a natural attraction, without the need for any introduction. Without any training there is a natural attraction due to the sex impulse. This is a material example, but the devotee is praying that he may develop a similar spontaneous attachment for the Supreme Lord, free from any desire for profit and without any other cause. This natural attraction for the Lord is the perfectional stage of self-realization.

Nectar of Devotion 30:

When Rādhārāṇī was first introduced to Kṛṣṇa, She felt very bashful. One of Her friends addressed Her in this way: "My dear friend, You have already sold Yourself and all Your beauty to Govinda. Now You should not be bashful. Please look upon Him cheerfully. One who has sold an elephant to another person should not make a miserly quarrel about selling the trident which controls the elephant." This kind of bashfulness is due to a new introduction in ecstatic love with Kṛṣṇa.

Renunciation Through Wisdom

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.1:

Lord Kṛṣṇa spoke these words to Arjuna so that he would surrender to Him. The Sanskrit word śaraṇam in this Gītā text means "surrender." On page 62 of his "Introductory Essay", Dr. Radhakrishnan has also discussed the idea of surrender in some detail. He writes,

Prapatti (surrender) has the following accessories—good will to all (ānukūlyasya saṅkalpaḥ); (ii) absence of ill will (prātikūlyasya varjanam); (iii) faith that the Lord will protect (rakṣiṣyatīti viśvāsaḥ); (iv) resort to Him as savior (gopṛtve varanam); (v) a sense of utter helplessness (kārpaṇyam); (vi) complete surrender (ātma-nikṣepaḥ)."

These six limbs of surrender should be followed in relation to Kṛṣṇa, or Viṣṇu, because this instruction on the process of surrender appears in a Vaiṣṇava scripture. Dr. Radhakrishnan has translated the first limb (ānukūlyasya saṅkalpaḥ) as "good will to all." Question: Is it possible to surrender to everyone? Surrender should be directed toward the Supreme Lord alone. Dr. Radhakrishnan's proposal is impractical, and indeed impossible.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.2:

In his "Introductory Essay," on page 62, Dr. Radhakrishnan writes,

When we are emptied of our self (?), God takes possession of us. The obstacles to this God-possession are our own virtues, pride, knowledge, our subtle demands, and our unconscious assumptions and prejudices.

From his own arguments we can safely surmise that Dr. Radhakrishnan, due to his carelessness and previous upbringing, is seeing a difference between Lord Kṛṣṇa's body and His soul. He is still not free from false ego, that is, "emptied of self." Therefore his "virtues, pride, knowledge, subtle demands, and unconscious assumptions and prejudices" are all preventing him from understanding the transcendental truth. He must have been brought up in an atmosphere of Māyāvāda thought; for this reason he was unable to grasp the truth.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.2:

Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, the founder and propagator of Māyāvāda philosophy, proved that the material world was an illusion—mithyā—and so he diligently pursued the path of austerity and renunciation, and he stressed it in his teachings. He did not waste valuable time trying to lord it over this illusory material world. But if he were to see the present condition of the philosophy he propounded, perhaps he would be ashamed. We have no doubt that Dr. Radhakrishnan was influenced by him; this is evident from his writings. Yet in his "Introductory Essay," page 25, he writes, "The emphasis of the Gītā is on the Supreme as the personal God who creates the perceptible world by His Nature (prakṛti). He resides within the heart of every being; He is the enjoyer and Lord of sacrifices. He stirs our heart to devotion and grants our prayers. He is the source and retainer of values. He enters into personal relations with us in worship and prayer."

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.3:

From the writings of Dr. Radhakrishnan one can easily prove how he is perplexed in trying to fathom the science of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. He tries to present Lord Kṛṣṇa as an extraordinary human being and a historical figure of India, but the Bhagavad-gītā makes such a task impossible. In his "Introductory Essay" (page 30) he writes:

In the Gītā Kṛṣṇa is identified with the Supreme Lord, the unity that lies behind the manifold universes, the changeless truth behind all appearances, transcendent over all and immanent in all. He is the manifested Lord, making it easy for mortals to know, for those who seek the Imperishable Brahman reach Him no doubt but after great toil. He is called Paramātmān.

How can we identify a historical individual with the Supreme God? The representation of an individual as identical with the universal Self is familiar to Hindu thought. In the Upaniṣads, we are informed that the fully awakened soul, which apprehends the true relation to the Absolute, sees that it is essentially one with the latter and declares itself to be so.

But the jīva's becoming "essentially one" with the Lord is not the last word in spiritual life. Of course, Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya propagated this idea so that atheists could at least come to this level of realization. But beyond this is the realm of the Supreme Absolute Personality of Godhead. Having entered the sphere of transcendence, if one does not perceive the supreme transcendental personality, one's spiritual practice remains incomplete due to contaminated intelligence, and one has to return to the realm of materialism. Though claiming that the world is an illusion—jagan mithyā—such an unsuccessful transcendentalist then becomes entangled in political, social, and altruistic affairs.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.5:

The devotee never prays for the jñānī's sāyujya-mukti, for it is an impossible proposition. By sāyujya-mukti the impersonalists mean relinquishing one's identity, or individuality. This is nothing less than spiritual suicide. In this regard, I reproduce Dr. Radhakrishnan's comment on the Bible:

The doctrine of the Incarnation agitated the Christian world a great deal. Arioes maintained that the Son is not the equal of the Father but created by Him. The view that they are not distinct but only different aspects of one Being is the theory of Sabellius. The former emphasized the distinctness of the Father and the Son and the latter their oneness. The view that finally prevailed was that the Father and the Son were equal and of the same substance; they were, however, distinct persons. ("Introductory Essay," p. 35).

These words vaguely describe the philosophy of "simultaneously one and different"; therefore we acknowledge it. Jesus, the son of God, is a jīva, a separated part of the Supreme Godhead. But the jīva is also spiritual, and hence Jesus is qualitatively the same as the Supreme Lord. But the son can never be equal to the Father in all respects; that is to say, the jīva is never on the same platform as the Supreme Lord. Also, all the jīvas are separate individuals. And just as each jīva is a unique personality, so God is also a unique personality, but the difference is that He is absolute. By describing the Lord as impersonal and formless, one loses sight of His perfect wholeness.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 5.1:

The Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the natural commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra and offers solid education on how to conduct life perfectly. In recent ages the smṛti texts have become prominent and influenced human thought and action. All these scriptures fully support the varṇāśrama system of four social and four religious orders. But what is today being labeled varṇāśrama is an atheistic concept totally unsupported by the scriptures. Real varṇāśrama is based not on birth but on people's qualities and activities. One cannot reach the goal of the scriptures by practicing today's demoniac caste system. Only the introduction of daivī-varṇāśrama, the transcendental varṇāśrama system, will serve the purpose of the scriptures. This will move humanity toward liberation.