JIP O5 4 Smith

Journal of Indian Philosophy (2005) 33: 421453 DOI 10.1007/s10781-004-6928-2 FREDERICK M.
SMITH
Springer 2005
THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS " " ACCORDING TO VALLABHACARYA
INTRODUCTION1
Among Indias great Ved"ntic philosophers, Vallabh"c"rya (1479 a a a 1531?) is one of the more neglected by Indologists. Several reasons may be cited for this, including the concentration of Western language _ scholarship of Ved"nta on Sankara and R"m"nuja; the ascendancy of a a a r" Caitanya, Vallabh"c"ryas competitor in Krsna devotion, in eastS a a :: : ern India and the academic attention given to him by several generations of energetic English speaking Indian scholars from Bengal; the fact that far fewer such scholars ourished in Rajasthan and Gujarat, the domain of Vallabh"c"ryas ascendancy; and the unpopularity and a a cavalier misrepresentation of Vallabh"c"ryas teachings that resulted a a from a famous lawsuit against some of the leaders of Vallabh"c"ryas a a Pus: im"rga sect in 1862, which have continued to the present day.2 :t a
As usual, my deepest gratitude extends to Goswami Devakinandanacharya of Gokul, with whom I rst read this text several years ago, as a true b"laka in the a teachings of Vallabh"c"rya. Also note two other recent studies in English: James D. a a Redington, The Grace of Lord Krishna: The Sixteen Verse-Treatises [Sodasag: : ranth"h] of Vallabhacharya (Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 2000), pp. 1125; and a: Shyamdas, The Teachings of Shri Vallabhacharya (Kota and Mumbai: Pratham Peeth Publication, 2003), pp. 3137. My project diers from both of these previous eorts in that I am using the extensive commentarial literature of the Vallabha samprad"ya and am attempting to contextualize each of these sixteen brief texts a within the framework of the remaining works of Vallabh"c"rya. See also my a a Nirodha and the Nirodhalaks ana of Vallabh"c"rya, Journal of Indian Philosophy a a : : 26.6 (1998): 589651; The Samny"sanir naya, A Suddh"dvaita Text on Renunciaa : a : tion by Vallabh"c"rya, Journal of Vaisnava Studies 1.4 (1993): 135156; and Vedic a a :: and Devotional Waters: the Jalabheda of Vallabh"c"rya International Journal of a a Hindu Studies, in press. 2 The primary source for the lawsuit, lled with misrepresentations, is Karsandas ra Mulji, History of the Sect of Maha jas, or Vallabhacharyas, in Western India (London: Trubner & Co., 1865). The misrepresentations have been regularly repeated since then. See. e.g., the article on Vallabhacarya in the Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (1918), and less excusably by Wendy Doniger and Brian K. Smith in their general article on Hinduism in the Encyclopedia Britannica. It is thoroughly neglected by Klaus Klostermeier, Mythologies and Philosophies of Salvation in the Theistic Traditions of Salvation (Waterloo, Ont.: Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press, 1985),
1
422
FREDERICK M. SMITH
Continuing a modest trend of the last several decades to present a more accurate account of Vallabh"c"ryas teaching, the present work a a hopes to redress at least some of this neglect. Vallabh"c"ryas writing overows with critiques of competing a a philosophical and religious systems, both Ved"nta and non-Ved"nta, a a _ though the m"y"v"da or advaita system of Sankaras Ved"nta is never far a a a a from his crosshairs. Sometimes these critiques occur in specied tracts dedicated to this endeavor, and sometimes in isolated statements occurring in other literary contexts. He presented his philosophical arguments most systematically in his commentary, titled Anubh": ya, on the as : " a Brahmas"tras, and in the rst two parts, titled Sastr"rthaprakarana and u : Sarvanirnayaprakarana, of a long trilogy titled Tattv"rthad"panibandha. a i : : Elsewhere, notably in the B"labodha (BB), the text that will centrally a occupy our attention here, he critiques competing religious systems with an assumed s "straic apparatus.3 His interpretations, naturally enough, a were weighted toward his own Ved"nta, called suddh"dvaita, and toward a a Krsna-bhakti as a means to its realization. Thus the Bh"gavata Pur"na, a a: :: : the text generally regarded as foundational for such devotion, was accorded an authority higher than even the Vedas. The B"labodha as a doxography a The BB should be considered a doxography, though a rather peculiar one. Doxographies, such as the Sarvadarsanasamgraha, typically : address competing systems of philosophy in ascending order. Never, however, is religious practice and sectarian aliation far from their areas of concern. In the present case, the thin line separating philosophy and religion fades completely, until, as we shall see, the
(Footnote 2 Continued). and barely mentioned by Axel Michaels in his generally laudable Hinduism Past and Present (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 2004). A balanced assessment of the lawsuit may be seen in David Haberman, On Trial: The Love of the Sixteen Thousand Gopees, History of Religions 33.1 (1993): 4470. On the positive side of presentation Vallabh"c"ryas work, see Richard Barz, The Bhakti Sect of a a Vallabh"c"rya (Faridabad: Thomson Press, 1976); James D. Redington, Vala a labh"c"rya on the Love Games of Kr: na (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1983); Jethalal a a : s: G. Shah, Shri Vallabhacharya, His Philosophy and Religion (Nadiad, Gujarat: The Pushtimargiya Pustakalaya, 1969). Many excellent works are available in Hindi and Gujarati; cf. G. H. Bhatt Sodasagranth"h (M. G. Shastri Sm"raka-M"l", No. 10, a: a aa : : ND; in Gujarati); and S" ar"m Caturved" Mah"prabhu Sr"madvallabh"c"rya aur t" a , a i a a Pus:tim"rga (Varanasi: Hind" S"hitya Kut" 1967). a a : : r, 3 B"labodha with three Sanskrit commentaries. Ed. by Gosv"m" Sy"m Manohar. a a a Mathura: Girdhar Niv"s, Sam. 2036 (1979). a :
THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS
423
apparatus of philosophy is applied to the content of orthopraxis. Wilhelm Halbfass has noted that some doxographies appear almost randomly constructed while others are orderly and tidy in the sense that the order of presentation of the competing systems reveals a good deal of the authors viewpoint.4 At rst glance the BB appears so fragmented and elliptical that it could easily be mistaken for randomness. However, after studying it and reading its Sanskrit commentaries, one can see that it is in fact thoughtfully constructed and tidy. Among Vallabh"c"ryas voluminous written work is a series of a a brief treatises succinctly expounding a number of devotional and philosophical issues important to understanding his thought. Because he wrote 16 of these brief treatises, they have been collected together by his early disciples and arranged in a topically appropriate order under the rather weightless name Sodasagranth"h.5 a: : : The BB, consisting of twenty verses, and the Siddh"ntamukt"val" a a i (SM), 21 verses in length, are the second and third in the traditional enumeration of these 16 works.6 The BB has three Sanskrit commentaries and the SM nine in a samprad"ya that is not particularly a old by Indian standards, but claims an abiding engagement in Sanskritic commentarial praxis. The BB addresses directly and the SM indirectly, but in a more nuanced fashion, Vallabh"c"ryas critique of a a other philosophical systems. It is the BB, however, that may more properly be regarded as a doxography, as its direct concern is a presentation of other systems of practice in ascending order of value. Halbfass continues his remarks by pointing out that doxographies provide symptomatic testimony of a contextuality that is essential to
Cf. Wilhelm Halbfass, India and Europe (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988), pp. 349., for a detailed description of these texts. For example, the best known advaita doxography, the Sarvadarsanasamgraha, begins in a promising : " manner with its representations of the C"rv"ka, Bauddha, and Arhata schools. a a However, these are followed by two Ved"nta schools, R"m"nuja and P"rnaprajna a a a u : (i.e., Madhva), whom one might think would be ranked higher than some of the schools that follow them, the Nakuk" a-P"s upata, Saiva(siddh"nta), Pratyabhijna, s a a Rases vara, Vais es ika, Ny"ya, Jaimin" (i.e., P"rvam" ams"), P"nin" a ya u m" : a a : ya, S"mkhya, a: : Yoga, and nally Advaita Ved"nta. a 5 Now see Redington 2000. My work began well before Redington published his translations. In addition, my translation diers from his in countless places. 6 Siddh"ntamukt"val" with nine Sanskrit Commentaries. Ed. by Gosv"m" Sy"m a a i a a vit t Manohar. Kolhapur: Sr" Vallabhavidy"p": ha Sr" : : hales aprabhucaran"s rama a t :a Trust, Sam 2036 (1979). :
424
FREDERICK M. SMITH
Indian thought, a deeply rooted tendency to articulate ones own position by referring to, and trying to dispose of, other points of view, as well as by integrating ones own views into the entire framework of the tradition.7 This is certainly the case with the BB, in which Vallabh"c"rya does not mention his own views by name, but states a a his siddh"nta indirectly, through both implication and the strategic a deployment of his own technical terms. I am unable to adduce evidence to prove that Vallabh"c"rya drew from the Sarvadarsanasamgraha or a a : other doxographies in these two brief tracts or in any of his more extensive work that directly critiques other philosophical systems, such as the Sarvanirnayaprakarana. This absence of evidence probably has : : _ two causes. The rst is Vallabh"c"ryas aversion to Sankaras advaita a a Vallabh"c"ryas hated m"y"v"da which stands at the apex of the a a a a a philosophical systems presented in the Sarvadarsanasamgraha. It is this : text, along with the Jaina Saddarsanasamuccaya, that served as the : : model for doxographic discourse.8 The second reason why evidence is hard to come by to show Vallabh"c"ryas indebtedness to previous a a models is the stylistics of citation in s "straic composition, which does a not require him to specify his methodological antecedents. Nevertheless, he employs the well-known doxographical practice of commencing with the most disagreeable siddh"ntas and ending up with his own. a As mentioned, his presentation is highly condensed and elliptical, providing ample opportunity for the commentators to take charge. Vallabh"c"ryas highly compact and cryptic literary style, in the a a Sodasagranth"h at least, is to some extent due to the fact that these a: : : texts were composed for specic instructional situations in which an oral exposition was intended to accompany the text (in the timehonored Indian way).9
7 Halbfass, India and Europe, p. 356. Vallabh"c"rya does not attempt to force all a a philosophical systems to agree with his own (sarvadarsanasamanvaya, sarvau , darsanaikav"kyat"), in the style of Vijn"nabhiks u, Madhus"dana Sarasvat" and a a a : Appayya D" : ita; cf. Halbfass, India and Europe, p. 358. ks 8 Cf. Halbfass, India and Europe, pp. 349., for a detailed description of the relevant texts. 9 Gokuln"thj" Caur"s" vaisnavan k" v"rt" (esp. the commentary Bh"vprak"s by a s a i i a a a a :: Harir"yj" contains stories which relate the composition of most of the 16 treatises. a ) This is clearly hagiographical and overstated in places; but it would be a mistake to discard this v"rt" literature as baseless because hagiographical, as is all too frea a quently done in scientic scholarship.
425
The commentaries Thus, in order to elucidate these succinct and often resistant verses of Vallabh"c"rya, I must draw extensively from the commentarial traa a dition, particularly from one of the three most important commentators of the Vallabha samprad"ya, Purus ottama, who lived from a : 1657 or 1668 (genealogies dier) to 1725 C.E., and was a seventh generation descendant of the founder. Purus ottama wrote long and : learned commentaries on all of Vallabh"c"ryas writing; indeed one a a of the criteria for determining which of Vallabh"c"ryas works are a a genuine is whether it has a commentary by Purus ottama.10 In : addition to Purus ottamas, two other commentaries on the BB sur: vive, by Dv"rakes a and Devak" a nandana. Dv"rakes a commented on a nandana wrote only one seven of the Sodasagranth"h,11 while Devak" a: : : other commentary, on the Sev"phalam, the last of the 16. Another a commentator was Nrsimhal"lj" who wrote his Brajbh"s " commena , a: a : : tary on all sixteen Sodasagranth"h sometime between 1775 and 1825. a: : : He largely follows Purus ottama, though he occasionally adds certain : mystical (adhidaivika) or poetic ourishes. It is tempting to recount here a catalogue of glosses, interpretations, discussions, and the vast array of evidentiary quotations (most of them traceable to the Bh"gavata Pur"na, Vallabh"c"ryas commentary on major parts of it a a: a a entitled Subodhin", and an array of Upanis ads) given by the comi : mentators, because only through this sort of thorough examination can Vallabh"c"ryas views become fully contextualized and the a a important commentarial tradition fully explicated. However, the disadvantages of such a project, namely the abstruseness of most Sanskrit commentaries (including these), their tendency towards overwrought hair-splitting and guesswork, and the often exotic constructions of the text on which the author comments, leave little choice but to steer a middle course through the commentators, and in time-honored commentarial fashion draw from them both actively and passively while negotiating Vallabh"c"ryas verses. a a
10 The other most highly regarded commentators are Vallabh"c"ryas illustrious a a son Vit : halan"tha (or Vit : haln"thj" (15161586) and the uncommonly literate a :t : t : a ) mystic Harir"ya (or Harir"yj" who is said to have lived 125 years, from 1591 to a a , 1716), whose devotional incisiveness is often counterposed to the prolix scholasticism of Purus ottama. However, neither of these two wrote commentaries on all of Val: labh"c"ryas work. a a 11 Dv"rakes as other commentaries are on the Yamun": takam, Siddh"ntamukt"a as a a val", Catuhslok", Sr"kr: nasraya, Bhaktivardhin", and Sev"phalam. Thus he was a i i i : s: " i a : major commentator in the samprad"ya. a
426
FREDERICK M. SMITH
The story of N"r"yand"s aa : a A Hindi introduction by Gosvami Shyam Manohar to the critical text states that the B"labodha was written at Pushkar in 1493 (samvat 1550), a : when Vallabh"c"rya was 14 years old, and later taught at Dv"rak" to a a a a a disciple named N"r"yand"s, a civil servant (k"yastha) from Ambala aa : a a (now in Panjab). Shyam then relates the story of this from the Caur"s" a i Vaisnavan k" V"rt", the collection of stories of 84 disciples of Vali a a :: labh"c"rya written in Brajbh"s " by his grandson Gokuln"thj" in the a a a: a a late 16th century. This is story number 57. I draw it from both Shyams Hindi account and the original Brajbh"s " by Gokuln"thj" a: a a . N"r"yand"s, it seems, was an inveterate gambler, and despite his aa : a fathers consternation, lost a thousand rupees and was forced by his father to repay it. N"r"yand"s then left home and wandered southaa : a ward, to an unnamed town, where he decided to renounce gambling and embrace knowledge. To this end he studied with a pandit and :: eventually became a teacher himself. However, he was harsh with his students, and when they gave him the wrong answer or forgot something, he would beat them mercilessly. One morning a disciple of Vallabh"c"ryas named Krsnad"s a a :: : a Meghan saw him beating up one of his students and advised him to stop. He might one day kill one of them, Krsnad"s told him, and :: : a this sin would be with him forever. This, he told him, was something he learned from Vallabh"c"rya. N"r"yand"s did not agree and a a aa : a continued the beatings. That very afternoon he beat one of his students badly and the student fell unconscious. N"r"yand"s was aa : a unable to revive him, so remembering the words of Krsnad"s, he went :: : a to see Vallabh"c"rya, who was camped at a garden at the edge of a a town. There he met Krsnad"s, and told him what had happened. :: : a Krsnad"s then brought him to meet Vallabh"c"rya, who gave him a a :: : a some water he had empowered with mantras, told him to refrain from such needless violence, and to sprinkle the water over the injured boy, after which he would recover. N"r"yand"s returned home and did aa : a that, after which the boy was indeed revived. N"r"yand"s then returned to Vallabh"c"rya and asked him to become aa : a a a his disciple. Vallabh"c"rya agreed to instruct him, after which a a N"r"yandas quickly renounced impure associations and became one of aa : Vallabh"c"ryas traveling companions. A short time later, while on a a pilgrimage to Dv"rak", Vallabh"c"rya taught N"r"yand"s the a a a a aa : a B"labodha. I tell this story to illustrate the traditional tales of Vala labh"c"ryas pedagogical milieu, as fully nine of the sixteen a a
427
Sodasagranth"h nd such places in Gokuln"thj" Caur"s" Vaisnavan a: a s a i : : :: k" V"rt".12 i a a Purus ottamas doxographical notes : In his introduction to the text, Purus ottama provides a brief account : of nine systems or philosophical points of view (siddh"ntas), from a lowest to highest: (1) Lok"yatikas, who are interested only in enjoya ment and have no spiritual inclinations; (2) politicians and the like who are only interested in worldly power for their own self-interest (he cites a few principles from Kaut ilya); (3) those interested only in fame : for its own sake; (4) those who treasure attainment of desire through their bodies. Followers of these four are interested only in artha and k"ma. Higher are those primarily concerned with dharma, including a (5) sm"rtas, a general term Purus ottama uses for those who follow the a : codes of conduct from the smrtis and other dharmas"stras,13 and who a : adhere to notions of purity and impurity as the primary gauges of success and accomplishment. More advanced are (6) ritualists who eschew k"mya and nisiddha rites in favor of nitya and naimittika rites a : only, thus avoiding pratyav"ya and directing their lives towards moksa a : " and the other purusarthas. Higher still are (7) tapasvins, as the gods in : the beginning achieved their status through tapas. Above them are (8) s"nkhyins and yogins, who have renounced externally and internally, a_ respectively. Higher than these are (9) worshippers of Siva and Visnu, : _ who can achieve moksa as well as all the siddhis. This concise and : specic list lls in many gaps in the BB; as we shall see, Vallabh"c"rya a a here deals only with the last two categories. Purus arthas and bhakti :" The notion of purusartha is very important to Vallabh"c"rya; he a a :" discusses it frequently in his writings, and his very brief Catuhslok", i : the ninth in the traditional enumeration of the Sodasagranth"h, has a: : : assumed an importance in the Pus: im"rga disproportionate to its :t a length. This text of four verses is widely regarded in the samprad"ya a as a handy summary of the way the four purusarthas should be :" viewed from the point of view of Krsna bhakti, one verse for each :: :
See also Shyamdas, Shri Mahaprabhu Vallabhacharyas 84 Vaishnavas (Baroda: International Pushti Margiya Vaishnava Parishad, 1985). 13 Purus ottama clearly does not intend this term to indicate South Indian sm"rtas a : : who follow the Samkara mathas. :
12
428
FREDERICK M. SMITH
purusartha.14 Though it is not essential to deal with that text here, it is :" relevant to mention that in a sense it completes the BB. The latter frames other schools and sectarian traditions in terms of the purusarthas they address and the extent to which they satisfy these :" purusarthas. Vallabh"c"rya does not directly discuss the central elea a :" ments of his own teachings in the BB, though certainly much of his own advocacy can be read into this work, including his views on purusartha(s). Indeed, because Purus ottama sees the notion of pur:" : usartha as of the greatest importance in the BB, he introduces the text :" _ with the following mangala verse: Victorious are the words of the illustrious preceptor (Vallabh"c"rya), whose meaning ows like a a showers of nectar; by these words suering due to confusion about human goals (pumartha), etc., is eliminated.15 Purus ottama then : " asks whether the four purusarthas are all of equal status or whether : they are prioritized, one subordinated to another. He says that if there is a relationship of superior and subordinate (gunapradh"na), a : then the fruits of the purusarthas must either be taken together, pre:" sented as options, or presented in a xed order. The fruits then may be either single or multiple. In any event, the text of the BB will remove any doubts and enable an individual of little understanding to determine what is best to do and what is to be avoided. " Throughout, Vallabh"c"rya uses the words vidhi and agama in a a general terms, indicative of proper religious behavior.16 In other con" texts, he uses the word nigama in the sense of Veda and the word agama for s"stra, knowledge based on the Vedas. The Vedas, according to a Vallabh"c"rya, provide the right means and sense of living through the a a " purusarthas. Purus ottama notes that the main subject of the pur: : usarthas is the nature of desire. Certain s"stras which are not regarded a :" as consistent with the Vedas are apr"m"nya, t"masika, etc.17 a a: a
The Catuhslok" will appear in my forthcoming translation and commentary of i : the entire Sodasagranth"h. a: : 15 jayanti srimad"c"ryav"co rth"mrtavasrsanaih / pumarth"digatabhr"ntit"po a a a a : a a a : ": : y"bhir niv"ritah //. a a : 16 Paul Dundas notes the same phenomenon in Jainism: terms like "gama and a vidhi may have come to signify for many monks not so much a body of texts and specic ordinances based on them as, more nebulously, the totality of current and traditional religious behavior which was perceived as deriving from an amorphous source loosely dened as scripture (193); cf. The Tenth Wonder: Domestication and Reform in Medieval Svetambara Jainism. Indologica Taurinensia, 14 (1987). 17 a See Vallabh"c"ryas Sarvanirnaya, where he discusses at length how s"stras a a : should be correlated and how they should be grouped according to their dominant guna or essential attribute. :
14

" THE BALABODHA
429
Purpose of the text _ The rst verse of the text includes a few words of mangala and a succinct introduction:
_ natv" harim sad"nandam sarvasiddh"ntasangraham / a a a : : b"laprabodhan"rth"ya vad"mi suviniscitam //1// a a a a Having bowed down to Hari, who is the very fruit of the form of highest bliss (sad"nandam), I will articulate very precisely an overview (samgraham) of all the a : philosophical viewpoints (siddh"nta) for the purpose of awakening children. a
Vallabh"c"rya introduces the text by stating that his purpose here a a is to awaken children (b"laprabodhan"rth"ya). Purus ottama coma a a : ments that b"la indicates immaturity in either age or knowledge; or it a may refer to vessels of compassion (day"p"tr"ni), innocent people a a a: who must learn by becoming pure and by discerning the auspicious from the inauspicious. Only in this way can eligibility (adhik"ra) for a bhakti or prapatti arise. Devak" nandana continues the discussion of adhik"ra, adding that although each s"stra has its own unique a a knowledge to oer, many of them espouse views that are deceitful, hence confusing. However, this is part of the Lords l"l", and does ia not, therefore, represent an inherent imperfection. Rather, he says, these views inscribe dierent degrees of eligibility (adhik"ra) for a proper siddh"nta. Lesser adhik"ra (jaghany"dhik"ra), he says, leads a a a a eventually to higher (mukhy"dhik"ra). a a Purus ottama also points out that this verse describes the anuban: dhacatus:taya, the fourfold motives of a s"stra that a good pandit a : :: should always address at the outset. These are the audience towards whom the teaching is directed, the identity of the teacher, the purpose of the teaching, and the means of its delivery. Purusarthas: mundane (laukika) and supramundane (alaukika) :" Vallabh"c"rya then begins his catalogue in the second verse: a a
a a is : " dharm"rthak"mamoksakhy"s catv"ro rth" man": inam / a a :" a j"vesvaravic"rena dvidh" te hi vic"rit"h //2// i a : a a a: The four aims of the sages are named dharma, artha, k"ma, and moksa. They are a : naturally classied in two ways according to the distinction between the perspectives of the j "va and the Lord ("svara). i i
430
FREDERICK M. SMITH
These are the well-known purusarthas, the four aims of man. :" Purusottama states that dharma and the other purusarthas must be : :" considered personications, deities, and names ("khy"), not simply a a abstractions, principles or events. They implicitly abide in the principle of the identity of name and form (n"mar"pa). In the same way a u that the svar"pa or manifest form of the Lord that one worships in u ones home, called T h"kurj" in the Pus: im"rga, is in fact the Supreme a :t a _ Lord, not, emphatically, a representative or icon of the Lord, the name Dharma is dharma itself, and so on. This is the adhidaivika perspective on purusartha (purusarthadevat"tattvabodhana). Nrsimhal"lj" takes this a a :" :" : : further. Dharma, artha, k"ma, and moksa, he says, are the manifesa : tations or personications of Yama, Laksm" Manmatha, and : , Brahm". He adds, however, that in spite of this Brahm" is not able to a a give moksa, a statement consistent with Vallabh"c"ryas views elucia a : dated below. Purus ottama also notes that the perspectival dierence : between the j"va and " vara on the notion of purusartha indicates that i Is :" this notion as conceived in the Veda and in the s"stras have little to do a with each other. " vara, Purus ottama emphasizes, is identical with the Is : Veda. Devak" nandana says that the purusarthas as discussed here, :" then, are intended only for people on the mary"d"m"rga. the path of a a a limitation, meaning those who are bound by the rules of ritual performances that precedes bhakti, that are designed to achieve limited selsh ends. On the other hand, the BB is meant to show the superiority of the bhaktim"rga, in which seless service to the Lord (sev") is a a the sole practice. Nrsimhal"lj" here discusses bhakti as the fth purusartha. This a : : :" resonates with the older notion that regards the Pur"nas as a fth a: a a Veda18 and Vallabh"c"ryas notion that bhakti is superior to moksa : "rthas. and the other purusa : In the third verse Vallabh"c"rya says that all purusarthas have a a :" alaukika, transcendent or supramundane, cognates. This, as mentioned above, is the subject of the Catuhslok" as well as much of the i : prameya or more mystical literature of the Vallabha samprad"ya, a notably in Vallabh"c"ryas commentary on the rst part of the tenth a a skandha of the BhP and in the works of Harir"yj" a .
alaukik"s tu vedokt"h s"dhyas"dhanasamyut"h / a a: a a a: : laukik" : : ibhih prokt"s tathaivesvarasiksay" //3// a rs a : : a For explication of this, see my essay Pur"naveda, in Authority, Anxiety, and a: Canon: Essays in Vedic Interpretation, ed. by Laurie Patton (Albany: State University of New York Press), pp. 97139.
18
431
The alaukika (purusarthas) spoken by the Vedas are linked with spiritual :" or religious practices (s"dhana) and goals to be realized (s"dhya); laukika a a (purusarthas) spoken by the : : is are also part of the Lords teaching. rs :"
This establishes that the pus:ti path of transcendence has a Vedic : pedigree, however vague this may be. The commentators understand :: : here that the transcendent Lord, Sr" Krsna, conceives the Veda, thus conguring its apauruseyatva. Thus, the Veda is a smaller, more : circumscribed, category than the Lord, in general disagreement with Vedic, M" ams"-inspired, orthodoxy. However, the Lord is m" : a responsible for more than sruti; indirectly he is responsible for smrti, : itih"sa, and pur"na as well. Though the Lord is the essential cause a a: (up"d"nak"rama) of these literatures, they have human agents and thus a a a : must therefore be considered laukika worldly, mundane, or ordinary.19 Purusottama states that laukika purusarthas are those spoken by Manu, : :" Kapila, etc., meaning the socioreligious provisions in the legalistic Smrti : texts. At greater length, he provides examples of all the purusarthas from :" the orthodox Vedic point of view: Dharma is sanctioned (pramitah) by : statements such as jyotis:tomena svargak"mo yajeta, One who desires a : " heaven should perform a jyotis:toma sacrice (e.g., Apastamba Srau: tas"tra 10.2.1, Sabara on P"rvam"m"ms"s"tras [PMS] 6.1.1-3) Equally u u i a: a u dharmic, he says, are a particular kind of cow and the soma to be used in the sacrice arunay" ekah"yany" gav" ping"ksy" somam kr"nati, One a a a _ a : a : a : i: purchases soma with a red, tawny-eyed yearling calf (Taittir"ya i Samhit" 6.1.6.7, PMS 3.1.6.12 and comms.). In other words, the form of a : the sacrice follows impeccably from the words of the Veda, which is to say a precise correspondence exists between Vedic injunction and eective form or activity. The same relationship between Vedic statement and eectivity is seen for the other purusarthas as well. Artha is :" exemplied by the Vedic statement, udbhid" yajeta pasuk"mah, One a a : desirous of cattle should perform the udbhid sacrice (Tattir"ya i Br"hmana 19.7.2, PMS 1.4.1.1 and comms.). Here the Veda is sanctiona : ing artha, in this case increased cattle, as rightful and legitimate. Vedic statements sanctioning k"ma are also found, for example sa striyam a :
A recent collection of articles is devoted to the issue of Purus ottamas notions : of the philosophy of language as represented in the Sabdakhanda of his :: Prasth"naratn"kara; cf. Prasth"naratn"karasabdakhand "ya Vidvatparicarc", ed. by a a a a a ::i Goswami Sharad (Mandvi, Gujarat: Shri Vallabhacharya Trust, 2000). Among the more relevant papers in this volume are: S. R. Bhatt, Meaning of Veda and Vedapr"m"nya according to Prasth"naratn"kara (145153); V. N. Jha, Vallabhas a a: a a " Philosophy of Language (201218); Sas in"tha Jh", Apabhrams as akti-vis aye a a : : rtty" a V"kyapad" a yaprasth"naratn"karayoh Sam" : " (437443); and K" ananda Jh", a a ks a : Ved"paurus eyatvanityatve (583595). a :
19
432
FREDERICK M. SMITH
sasrje t"m sr: :tv"dha up"ste, He created woman, and having created a : a : :s a her he lay down upon her (untraced). In all these examples things of this world are intended, rendering these laukika rather than alaukika purusarthas. Moksa, under certain conditions alaukika, is sanctioned :" : " by statements such as brahmavid apnoti param, One who knows brahman obtains the highest (Taittir"ya Upanisad 2.1). Purus ottama i : : says that statements such as the latter can lead to either a transcendent (pus:ti) or a limited (mary"d") moksa depending on the preparedness a a : : (adhik"ra) of the hearer. a Relevant here is the commentator Devak" nandanas citation of BhP 1.2.9, which establishes both the independence and the priority of the purusarthas, Wealth (artha) does not lead to dharma, which is :" conducive to release; nor does desire (k"ma) lead to wealth, which has a nandana adds that laukika and alaukika dharma as its end.20 Devak" worlds and objects are like vessels of polished earth and of gold, or of crystal (sphatika) and diamond, namely that they are the same type of : object but ordinarily people cannot tell them apart. Thus only a bhakta of the highest adhik"ra can recognize the alaukika Vraja, the a nal and highest state of bhakti. Vallabh"c"rya continues: a a
laukik"ms tu pravaksy"mi ved"d ady" yatah sthit"h / a: a " a a: : a : a a: a a a: i a dharmas"str"ni n"tis ca k"mas"str"ni ca kram"t //4// trivargas"dhak"n"ti na tannirnaya ucyate / a a i : I will now talk about the laukika (s"stras), since they were rst established in the Veda. a The dharmas"stras, n"tis"stra, and k"mas"stras, are, in order, the instruments for a i a a a bringing about the three (laukika) goals (dharma, artha, and k"ma). However, their a points of view will not be not discussed.
Purus ottama paraphrases: the dharmas"stra, n"tis"stra, and a i a : k"mas"stra are, in order, the instruments for bringing about the three a a mundane (laukika) purusarthas (dharma, artha, and k"ma). He cites a a :" passage from V"tsy"yana, who wants to claim at least some moral a a high ground, that he too is concerned with the next world, and that according to the learned neither wealth nor happiness are forfeited in the practice of k"ma.21 Purus ottamas main point, consistent with a : V"tsy"yanas statement, is that the texts of these three s"stras and a a a
" dharmasya hy apavargyasya n"rtho rth"yopakalpate / n"rthasya dhara a a maik"ntasya k"mo l"bh"ya hi smrtah //. a a a a : : 21 " _ a kim sy"t paratrety asank" yasmin k"rye na j"yate / na c"rthaghnam sukham ceti a a a : a : : sis:tas tasmin vyavasthit" //. a : "
20
433
their respective purusarthas help each other; in other words, dharma, :" artha, and k"ma are not in conict when practiced with the help of a their s"stras. Nevertheless, these three s"stras are not attentive to the a a highest dharma (paramadharm"dyabh"va), thus Purus ottama says a a : that Vallabh"c"rya will not deal with them. a a With respect to the orthodox philosophical systems, Vallabh"c"rya a a does not address the place of Ny"ya or Vais es ika. Purus ottama, a : : however, cites the authority of the Par"sara Upapur"na22 to the eect a a: that those portions of Ny"ya, Vais esika, S"mkhya, and Yoga that a a: : disagree with the Veda should be discarded by people who take sole a a refuge in the Vedas.23 Worse (kaimutikany"y"t), he says, are the a a doctrines of Buddhism, Jainism, and Lok"yata,24 which Vallabh"c"rya a fails to mention. S"mkhya and Yoga a: Verses 5c-9 of the BB discuss S"mkhya and Yoga, the rst systems a: Vallabh"c"rya recognizes and represents here: a a
mokse catv"ri s"str"ni laukike paratah svatah //5// a a a: : : : dvidh" dve dve svatas tatra s"nkhyayogau prak"rtitau / a a_ i ty"g"ty"gavibh"gena s"nkhye ty"gah prak"rtitah //6// a a a a a_ a : i : Four s"stras extol worldly liberation. (This may be achieved) through the a agency of others (paratah) or through ones own eorts (svatah). Within : : this division are two other twofold subdivisions. In one, S"mkhya and a: Yoga are declared to advocate liberation through self-eort. The second
This work is not mentioned by Ludo Rocher, The Pur"nas (Wiesbaden: Otto a: Harrassowitz, 1986). However, reference in the Visnu Pur"na to Par"s ara as the a: a :: composer (kartr) of the Pur"nasamhit" (Rocher, pp. 246247) invites the possibility a: : :: a that a Vaisnava text of this name did exist (cf. Hazra, quoted by Rocher, p. 68 n. 6), :: or that a section of a Pur"na was known in some circles as the Par"sara Upapur"na a: a a: a (cf. P. V. Kane, History of Dharmas"stra, vol. 5, pt. 2 [Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1962], p. 835 on the Matsya Pur"na), or even that at least one a: manuscript tradition (that has yet to come to light, but which must have existed in North India, where Purus ottama lived) re-titled a well-known Pur"na as the a: : Par"sara Upapur"na. R. C. Hazra does, however, mention a Par"sara Upapur"na, a a a: a a: Saiva Upapur"na which is unpublished but preserved in manuscripts; cf. The a: Upapur"nas, in The Cultural Heritage of India, Vol. 3 (Calcutta: the Ramakrishna a: Mission Institute of Culture, 1962), p. 282. 23 a_ a : aksap"dapran "te ca kanade s"nkhyayogyayoh / ty"yjah srutiviruddho msah : : : :" : a :i srutyekasaranair nrbhih //. : : : 24 tena kaimutikany"y"d eva tath"gat"rhatalok"yat"divy"vrttir api sucit" / On the a a a a a a a : a kaimutikany"ya, derived from the word kimuta, how much more. See Kane, a History of Dharmas"stra, vol. V pt. 2, p. 1342. a
22
434
FREDERICK M. SMITH
consists of a distinction between external renunciation (ty"ga) and internal a renunciation (aty"ga). According to S"mkhya renunciation is declared to be external. a a:
The four s"stras mentioned in 5c are the ones Vallabh"c"rya deals a a a with in this text. These are S"mkhya, Yoga, and Vaisnava and Saiva a: :: philosophical and devotional systems. The latter two will be dealt with below, but for the moment it will suce to mention that Vallabh"c"rya does not regard his system as merely Vaisnava; to a a :: him Krsna is the avat"rin, the source (m"lar"pa) of the avat"ras, a a u u a :: : category in which he places Visnu. Purus ottama says that Val: : _ labh"c"rya is referring in these verses to vedic moksa, by which he a a : means predominantly ritualistic and non-devotionally generated liberation, in which the beloved ancestors bestowed upon men heaven, liberation, happiness, and kingdom.25 The religio-philosophical systems worth mentioning which confer these rewards are, rst of all, S"mkhya and Yoga. Vallabh"c"rya deals with these two systems a: a a rst, says Purus ottama, because they are the easiest, and can thus be : dispensed with easily. To facilitate this he invokes the s"c"katahany"ya. In the same way an ironsmith rst manufactures u i :" a needles (s"c"), because it is easy, then cauldrons (kataha), the easy u i :" topic, liberation achieved through self-eort (svatahprayatna), is : addressed rst, followed by the dicult topic, liberation achieved through the eort of others (paratahprayatna).26 Thus, Purus ottama : : glosses svatah as sv"yatta, in the control of oneself, and paratah as a : : par"yatta, in the control of others, By the latter, Vallabh"c"rya a a a indicates his own views, particularly the view that realization is exclusively a gift of grace; and this he regards as a dicult topic. In other words, in Vallabh"c"ryas system of brahmav"da or a a a suddh"dvaita, the dominant indeed the only architect of an india viduals achieving advanced states of devotion is Krsna, the Supreme :: : Lord himself. Without going quite as far in this as Vallabh"c"rya, or a a in adhering to the same sectarian beliefs, this notion of paratahprayatna is recognized in other schools. Thus Vallabh"c"rya is a a : careful to distinguish his views from those of sects and schools of thought close to his. To this end his primary classicatory devices are rst whether the type of liberation is ordinary (laukika) or supra25 svargam moksam sukh"ni ca / prayacchanti tath" r"jyam pr"t" n"nam a a a : i a : : ": r : : : pit"mah"h // Purus ottama does not cite the author, text, or even genre of this verse. a a: : 26 Peter Bennett deals cogently with the opposition between self-eort and divine grace; cf. The Path of Grace: Social Organization and Temple Worship in a Vaishnava Sect (Delhi: Hindustan Publishing Corporation, 1993), p. 75.
435
mundane (alaukika), and second whether the eort involved to achieve the nal goal is regarded as ones own or whether it is due to divine grace alone. This distinction between svatahprayatna and : paratahprayatna is of the greatest importance for Vallabh"c"rya. a a : Because of their laukika liberation and their reliance on self-eort (svatahprayatna), both S"mkhya and Yoga are given low marks, a: : though Yoga is accorded a slightly higher rating because its renunciation is said to be deeper. An early form of this distinction can be found in the Mah"bh"rata a a (10.2.2): All men are dependent on and bound to two types of action, fate and human eort; there is nothing other than these two ("baddh" m"nusah sarve nirbaddh"h karmanor dvayoh / daive pura a a : ": a: : : usak"re ca param t"bhy"m na vidyate //). The text continues that the : a : a a: wise employ eort skillfully, though in the end even the best eorts cannot succeed except through the mediation of fate (10.2.1011). Vallabh"c"rya would agree, but nonetheless carry the logic a step a a further: daiva in its literal sense of the will of the Lord is the only determining factor in success, at least in bhakti. Purus ottama states that this text will not deal with the views : of Ny"ya or Vais es ika (kanabhaksaksacaranadarsanagranthau a : : :" : : sis:tan"drtatvena vy"vartitau), citing the authority of the Par"sara a a : " a : Upapur"na, which, he says, declares that those portions of Ny"ya, a: a Vais es ika, S"mkhya, and Yoga that disagree with the Veda should be a: : discarded by people who take sole refuge in the Vedas (aksap"da: a pran "te ca kanade s"nkhyayogayoh / ty"yjah srutiviruddho msah sruta_ a : :i :" : : : yekasaranair nrbhih //). Even worse, he says, are the views of Buddhism, : : : Jainism, and Lok"yata (kaimutikany"y"d eva tath"gat"rhata a a a a alok"yat"divy"vrttir api s"cit"). a a a: u a Vallabh"c"rya continues this topic for three more verses: a a
_ : ahant"mamat"n"se sarvath" nirahankrtau / a a a a svar"pastho yad" j"vah krt"rthah sa nigadyate //7// u a i : : a : When I-ness and my-ness disappear into complete egolessness, the j"va i becomes established in its own nature. (In this way the S"nkhya a_ preceptors) have described the state of complete fulllment (krt"thah). : a :
This cuts to the heart of Vallabh"c"ryas use of the words ty"ga and a a a aty"ga to indicate the external renunciation espoused by S"mkhya a a: and the internal renunciation advocated by Yoga. Purus ottama cites : S"mkhyak"rik" 64, which mentions that acute discrimination of a: a a fundamental principles or tattvas can lead to egolessness, to its
436
FREDERICK M. SMITH
elimination as a vital category: Through study (abhy"sa) of the a principles (of S"mkhya), discriminating knowledge (jnana) which is a: " complete and pure, because it is free from error (viparyaya), arises (to wit): I am not (activity), this is not mine, I am not (an agent of knowledge).27 More important than this is a citation from the S"mkhyapravacana by Vijn"nabhiks u, a commentary on the anonya: a : mous S"mkhyas"tras,28 in which the word ty"ga appears (s"nkhyaa: u a a_ pravacane pi tattv"bhy"s"n neti neti ty"g"d vivekasiddir itis"tritam): a aa a a u From studying the tattvas and realizing their nonexistence (neti neti), one receives perfection of discrimination from abandoning them (as viable categories). Thus, moksa for the s"mkhyin arises when he or a: : she recognizes that ne point between sentience and insentience, purusa : and pradh"na. I-ness, then, must be removed from the gross and subtle a bodies, and my-ness eliminated from all that accrues to them.
tadartham prakriy" k"cit pur"ne pi nir"pit" / a a a: u a : rs a a a : : ibhir bahudh" prokt" phalam ekam ab"hyatah //8// : In the Pur"nas as well, certain practices are described which have the same goal in a: mind (moksa as described in S"mkhya). The : : is have spoken in various ways about a: rs : this. (Nevertheless,) the result of all of them is the same, because none of them lie outside (the basic teachings of S"mkhya). a:
The commentators agree that this verse refers to alternative enumerations of tattvas or basic principles. The enumeration in " varakrsnas S"mkhyak"rik" is 25, though some of the Pur"nas list Is a: a a a: :: : 36 (cf. BhP 11.2.1.). Indeed, prakriy" can refer to enumerations. The a S"mkhya referred to in the Pur"nas is sesvara, which is to say it a: a: describes the Lord. Thus it is deemed superior to the an"svara, i 29 _ godless, type found in the S"nkhya texts. In spite of this, it a remains S"mkhya, and cannot be other than an external apparatus. a:
aty"ge yogam"rgo hi ty"go pi manasaiva hi / a a a yam"dayas tu kartavy"h siddhe yoge krt"rthat" //9// a a: a : a
" Following V"caspatis Tattvakaumudi. The text reads: evam tattv"bhy"s"n no a a aa : smi na me n"ham ity aparisesam / aviparyay"d visuddham kevalam utpadyate jnanam a a " : : : // Cf. also the trans. by Gerald Larson and Ram Shankar Bhattacharya (eds.), S"mkhya: A Dualist Tradition in Indian Philosophy, Encyclopedia of Indian Philosa_ ophies, Volume IV; General Editor, Karl Potter (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1987), p. 163. 28 See Larson and Bhattacharya, op. cit., pp. 327., for speculations on its authorship. 29 For more on this, see below, on BB 1314b.
27
437
Even as it lacks this sort of renunciation, the path of yoga is also a suitable (path to moksa). This is because its renunciation is mental. Yama and the other (limbs of : Patanjalis eightfold path of yoga) should be practiced; when yoga is perfected, one experiences complete fulllment.
The word aty"ga literally means non-renunciation. On the surface a it appears to be used with irony. Yet irony does not appear to be part of Vallabh"c"ryas semantic repertoire, at least in the Sodasaga a : : ranth"h. Thus, it must be exclusively a technical term, though I know a: of no precedent for its use in this sense. It indicates internal renunciation, to be distinguished from ty"ga, the external renuncia ation that Vallabh"c"rya says characterizes the S"nkhya conguraa a a_ tion of moksa. In a state of ty"ga, the renunciation is conscious, a a : process of observational and discriminative renunciation; in Yoga. The renunciation is more internal in that it results from the practice of the eight-limbed (as:tanga) path, including meditation. : "_ Saiva and Vaisnava systems :: Having dispensed with S"mkhya and Yoga, Vallabh"c"rya now turns a: a a to Saiva and Vaisnava systems, which comprise the second of his :: twofold division of the four s"stras that commend laukika moksa. In a : order to demonstrate why this division must be limited to Vaisnava :: and Saiva s"stras, he inquires in verses 10 and 11 into the third and a oft forgotten member of the well-known trinity, namely Brahm". a
par"srayena moksas tu dvidh" so pi nir"pyate / a a u : : brahm" br"hmanat"m y"tas tadr"pena susevyate //10// a a u : : a: a a i te sarv"rth" na c"dyena s"stram kimcid ud "ritam / a a a : : atah sivas ca visnus ca jagato hitak"rakau //11// a : :: Moksa brought about by taking refuge in another is similarly twofold, and is now : described. Brahm" attained the status of brahman, and is worshipped in this form. a All (four) purusarthas cannot be attained by (worshipping) the rst one (of the three, :" a a namely Brahm"). In the s"stra (dedicated to Brahm") little is said (about liberation). a Therefore Siva and Visnu are the benefactors of living beings (jagatah). : : _
Vallabh"c"rya returns to the subject of paratahprayatna, liberation a a : achieved through the eort of others, expressed here as par"srayena a : moksah (10a), liberation brought about by taking refuge in another. : : Though he accepts that devotion to Brahm" is possible, we must assume a that he was aware of the virtual non-existence of Brahm" worship. His a authority for accepting Brahm" is a passage from the BhP, a text for him a equal to sruti as sabdapram"na. The passage is BhP 12.10.19, which a:
438
FREDERICK M. SMITH
Purusottama says is referenced by the word api in 10b: Choose from us : a boon of your choice, since we three (Brahm", Visnu and Siva) are the a :: masters ("s"h) of granting boons. Mortals gain immortality through i a: those whose purview (darsanam) is unerring.30 Thus, in theory, Brahm" is the equal of Visnu and Siva, at least in the granting of boons. a :: The reason for this, Purusottama explains, is that Brahm" is a gunadeva, a : : the ruler of rajas or activity, while Visnu rules sattva and Siva rules :: tamas. The three are equal as controllers of a guna, thus as granters of : boons which arise out of each guna. In spite of this, says Purusottama, : : the position of Brahm" deteriorated due to a curse placed on him by a Sarasvat" Thus, his position fell below that of Siva and Visnu. A more . :: important reason Brahm" does not give moksa is that he cannot, it is a : simply not part of his nature. He is bound to his job as creator, and as such he cannot enjoy destruction, which is essential for moksa. : Vallabh"c"rya says Brahm" is br"hmanat"m, explained, perhaps a a a a : a unusually, by Purus ottama as the Veda or parabrahman, the highest : absolute. The text might also be read to mean that Brahm" attained the a status of brahman-hood and is worshipped when one worships brahmans, because they yield all the purusarthas. But this is unlikely; :" more likely is that Purus ottama correctly understands the context. : Brahm", thus, is worshipped as a gunadeva, as an equal to Visnu and a : :: Siva, who are, to Vallabh"c"rya, limited. The reason for this is because a a they represent the body of the Supreme Lord, called by Vallabh"c"rya a a the aksarabrahman. He is thus not the true transcendent (alaukika) : Lord beyond the aksarabrahman. Brahm" becomes or attains the state a : of the Veda, of parabrahman, and is worshipped in order to obtain knowledge of brahman or to facilitate study of the Veda. He is not, however, worshipped for giving moksa, and least of all for achieving : higher states of bhakti. Vallabh"c"rya now turns to the s"stras of Visnu and Siva. a a a ::
vastunah sthitisamh"rau k"ryau s"strapravarttakau / a a : : a brahmaiva t"drsam yasm"t sarv"tmakatayoditau //12// a a a : _ a nirdosap"rnagunat" tattacch"stre tayoh krt" / a : u : : : : a The denitive activities (of Visnu and Siva), who are promulgators of their own :: a a s"stras, are the maintenance and dissolution of the created universe. The s"stras of these two, composed faultlessly and with full virtue, declare that brahman alone, which has assumed the forms (of Visnu and Siva), is the essence of all beings. ::
30 varam vrn ": va nah k"mam varades" vayam trayah / amogham darsanam yesam a : : : is : a : : : : : : ": marty" yad vindate mrtam //. a :
439
Thus, Visnu and Siva are not mere deities about whom texts were :: written, but are originators or promulgators of s"stras. Purus ottama a : says that these s"stras are equal to the Vedas (srutisam"n"dhikarana-) a a a : with respect to the four purusarthas. While this appears to be a strong :" statement, it is important to understand that in Vallabh"c"ryas view a a the Vedas largely delineate both laukika concerns and purusarthas, :" even if their texts can be justly employed as pram"na for alaukika a: concerns when necessary. Thus these Vaisnava and Saiva s"stras are a :: accorded greater credibility than S"mkhya, Yoga, and others that do a: not merit discussion. In his discussion of these verses, Purus ottama provides several : reasons why self-induced liberation is impossible. Created beings, he says, are under the complete control of Visnu and Siva. Furthermore, :: their nature is to fear suering and to desire moksa. Because of the : control of Visnu and Siva, it is incorrect for an individual to claim :: exclusive responsibility for achieving liberation. Most seekers are immature, adds Purus ottama, a situation which generates further : confusion over actual agency. Visnu and Siva extend their compas:: sion when they see people fearful and confused. To alleviate this fear and confusion, to establish mature bhaktas, they create s"stras which a do not conict with sruti. Regardless of whether a person is intelligent or stupid, deluded or confused, or near or far from the Lord, Visnu :: and Siva generate texts that lead the j"va towards dharma and away i from adharma. With respect to agency, Vallabh"c"rya could see that Visnu and a a :: Siva did not compose literary works, just as he could see that Krsna :: : did not write his own texts (in spite of the later Pus: im"rga identit a : cation of him as the mukh"vat"ra or incarnation of Krsnas mouth). a a :: : In his own compositions, the only words Vallabh"c"rya attributed a a directly to Krsna were the two m"lamantras of the samprad"ya, u a :: : discussed in the Siddh"ntarahasya, the fth in the traditional enua meration of the Sodasagranth"h This, then, does not dispute the a: : : notion of personal agency or responsibility, even in Vallabh"c"ryas a a own case; it does, however, suggest that human compositions are sustained by one of the three gunas, and the gunadeva of that guna is : : : in some sense the controller, and therefore the author, of that s"stra. a Thus, Visnu and Siva, whose positive existence Vallabh"c"rya did not a a :: question, could very well be s"strapravarttakau, propounders of their a own s"stras. a The relationship of Visnu and Siva with Brahm" is also an issue a :: here. Purus ottama says that Brahm" is regarded by some as merely a :
440
FREDERICK M. SMITH
the instrumental cause (nimittak"rana) of the universe. In fact, a : however, Brahm" is the essential cause (up"d"nak"rana) as well. a a a a : Brahm" is fully responsible for creation, thus for the interests of a Visnu and Siva, who support and destroy his creation. The latter two :: are therefore in excellent positions to explore the nature of Brahm" / a brahman / parabrahman in their s"stras. a Purus ottama introduces a question familiar to all religious tradi: tions: If the supreme deity, Bhagav"n in this case, wants people to be a happy or enlightened, why is there suering, and where does it come from? Purus@ottama provides an unsurprising answer in the Indian context: that Visnu and Siva create delusion (vimohana) so an indi:: viduals karmas will ripen, rendering him or her eligible for higher epistemological and devotional experience. However, Purus ottama is : quick to emphasize, the s "straic views of Visnu and Siva, who have a a :: vested interest in deluding people, are theirs alone, and not the view of sruti, even if these views do not conict with sruti. Purus ottama : : quotes the K"rma Pur"na (1.15.109, 111113): O Samkara, there is u a: no merit whatsoever in a man who lives outside the Veda Therefore, in order to protect evil people who abide outside the Vedas, O Vrs adhvaja, we compose these deluding s"stras (vimohan"ni s"str"ni). a a a a: :: Thus addressed by M"dhava, the enemy of Mura, Rudra composed a deluding s"stras, and Kes ava did so as well, impelled by Siva. These a are the s"stras of the K"p"likas, the L"gudas the V"ma(-t"ntrikas), a a a a : a a the Bhairavas, the P"rvapas cimas(?), the P"s upatas, the P"ncar"trins u a a a 31 and thousands of others. In his India and Europe, Wilhelm Halbfass discusses the notion of deluding s"stras: In the Pur"nas, a a: the appearance of erroneous and corruptive texts and deceptive traditions opposed to the Veda (mohanas"stra) is often seen as a a symptom of the emerging Kaliyuga (p. 364). In certain cases, however, Visnu uses these in order to confuse and ruin such demonic :: and infamous beings as the Asura and Daitya (p. 361).32 In order to
31 tath" ca k"rmapur"ne devad"ruvanasth"n"m gautamasapt"n"m mun"n"m praa u a: a a a: a a: i a: _ _ sange na vedab"hye puruse punyaleso sti sankara ity upakramya tasm"d vai vea a : : a a: a i a a dab"hy"n"m raksanarth"ya p"p"n"m / vimohan"ni s"str"ni karisy"mo vr: adhvaja / a a a: : a :s : :" a evam sambodhito rudro m"dhaven"sur"rina / cak"ra mohas"str"ni kesavo pi siver itah a a a :" a a a: : : : / k"p"lam l"gudam v"mam bhairavam p"rvapascimam / p"n atram p"s"patam a a : a : : a : a car" : a u : u : tath"ny"ni sahasrasah iti / A few minor variant readings are found in the printed text, a a : ed. by Sri Anand Swarup Gupta (Varanasi: All-India Kashiraj Trust, 1972), pp. 116117. 32 " Halbfass cites Y"muna, Agamapr"m"nya, ed. and trans. by J. A. B. van a a a: Buitenen (Madras: Ramanuja Research Society, 1971), section 86, p. 45, in an application similar to Purus ottamas present use of the notion. :
441
summarily refute the views of the schools mentioned in these verses form the K"rmaP, Purus ottama invokes s"tras 2.2.37,42, of u u : B"d"rayanas Brahmas"tras, which counter the views of the a a u P"ncar"tra and the P"s upata s"stras.33 a a a a Another important source Purus ottama cites on the nature of Siva : and Visnu is BhP 10.88.1-5: King Par" : it inquires: Those among ks :: gods, demons, and men who worship the inauspicious (asivam) Siva are usually wealthy and sensual; ironically, however, this is not the case among those who worship Hari, the husband of Laksm" the : , goddess of wealth. The fate (gatih) of those who worship these two : lords of opposite disposition is (also) opposite. We wish to understand this, as our doubt on this point is indeed great. Sr" Suka replies: iva is permanently united with Sakti. He is endowed with the three S types of guna (and) is (Lord of) the threefold division of the I: that : which is subject to modication (i.e. the r"jasika form), that which is a luminous (the s"ttvika form), and that which is dark and inert (the a t"masika form). These (three) forms evolve into the 16 evolutes.34 One a who seeks the assistance (of any aspect of Siva that presides over these three forms) assumes as his or her fate all kinds of prosperity. On the other hand, Hari is without the gunas, is the Supreme (s"ksat) Person, a :" : is beyond prakrti, is all-seeing and the witness (upadras:ta) (of all). One : : " who worships him becomes free from the gunas.35 It is important to : note here that the BhP (4.29.74) denes a j"va or individual as a subtle i body constituted of the ve subtle elements, which through a dierentiation into three gunas compounds into 16 modications and then : becomes endowed with consciousness.36 This ironic characterization
Purus ottama characterizes Saiva philosophy as P"s upata; no other schools are a : mentioned. He refers to the parts of the P"ncar"tra that are not opposed to sruti. These a a are the instructions on the arc"vidhi: tam abhigamanop"d"nejy"sv"dhy"yayaugair a a a a a a y"vajj"vam is:tv" ks "nakleso bhagavantam eva pratipadyata ity uktam / tena prameyam a i : a : i: : srutyaviruddham /. 34 dhara explains: the mind (manas) from the Following Bhagavadg"t" 13.16, Sr" ia s"ttvika vik"ra, the 10 indriyas from the r"jasika vik"ra, and the ve gross elements a a a a (mah"bh"ta) from the t"masika vik"ra. a u a a 35 dev"suramanusyesu ye bhajanty asivam sivam / pr"yas te dhanino bhoj" na tu a a a : : laksmy"h patim harim //1// etad veditum icch"mah samdeho tra mah"n hi nah / vira : a : a: : : : _ uddhas"layoh prabhvor vbiruddh" bhajat"m gatih //2// sivah saktiyutah sasvat trilingo i a a: : : : : gunasamvrtah / vaik"rikas taijasas ca t"masas cety aham tridh" //3// tato vik"r" a a a aa : : : : a u i a: aa abhavan : odas"m": u kamcana / upadh"van vibh"t"n"m sarv"s"m asnute gatim //4// s : a is : harir hi nirgunah s"ksat purusah prakrteh parah / sa sarvadrg upadras:ta tam bhajan : : a :" : : : : : : : " : nirguno bhavet //5//. : 36 evam pa~cavidham lingam trivrt : odasavistrtam / esa cetanay" yukto j"va ity n a i : : _ : : s : : : abhidh"yate //. i
33
442
FREDERICK M. SMITH
of Siva and Visnu galvanizes Vallabh"c"ryas conclusions about these a a :: two deities in the remaining verses of the BB. Finally, Purus ottama : concludes that Siva proclaims all four purusarthas, but Visnu pro:" :: mulgates moksa only. : Thus, the question arises, what are they capable of bestowing on their devotees? The next verses supply the logical, but surprising, answer:
bhogamoksaphale d"tum saktau dv"v api yady api //13// a : a : bhogah sivena moksas tu visnuneti viniscayah / : : :: : _ loke pi yat prabhur bhunkte tan na yacchati karhicit //14// Although both (Visnu and Siva) denitely have the capacity to bestow the fruits of :: enjoyment (bhoga) and liberation (moksa), it is clearly understood that Siva grants : enjoyment while Visnu grants liberation. Indeed, (it is) as in the world, (where) a :: lordly person will never give away that which he enjoys (most).
In other words, nobody likes to part with what they have, including Visnu and Siva. Thus states Vallabh"c"rya, rather tongue in cheek. a a :: Because Siva is himself a devotee of Visnu, he cannot fulll a devotees :: yearning for moksa. In order to attain moksa, a devotee must even: : tually turn to Visnu. Siva is inuenced by t"masika saktis, dark a :: energies, says Purus ottama; he is, after all, the gunadeva of tamas. : : Therefore he gives bhoga. Visnu, however, is free of these energies, and :: therefore grants moksa. Purus ottama cites certain verses from the BhP : : as evidence for the nature of Siva and Visnu: For Siva he cites BhP :: 3.14.24-28, 4.24.18; for Vis@nu BhP 1.11.33, 4.7.34, 10.82.37.37 : Nrsimhal"lj" explains Vallabh"c"ryas siddh"nta: Advanced devoa a a a : : tees (nirguna bhaktas) would suer if Visnu were to bestow bhoga on : :: them. Indeed, It is impossible for Visnu to bestow bhoga alone, as it is :: contrary to his nature. At most Visnu is capable of bestowing both :: bhoga and moksa on exalted bhaktas, which is to say those who are : intimate (tad"yatvam) and fully surrendered (tad"srayah). In fact, i a : : Nrsimhal"lj" states, true bhaktas have no use for either Visnu or Siva; a : :: _ receive all laukika and alaukika fruits from merely engaging in they bhagavadbhakti, devotion to Krsna. All their bhoga is perfected in :: : sev" for Krsna, who gives things not possible by Visnu or Siva. Note a :: : :: that here again is evidence of the doctrine that Krsna is superior to :: _ Visnu in matters spiritual. :: Purus ottama here sums up the present discussion: Kapilas : S"mkhya as expressed in the BhP is higher than " varakrsnas a: Is :: : because the formers is sesvara, it contains the doctrine of " vara, Is
37
Cf. also 3.3.7, 4.7.34, 10.88.15.
443
while the latters, expressed in the S"mkhyak"rik", is nir"svara. The a: a a i highest goal of S"mkhya and Yoga is self-realization (svar"p"vasth"), a: u a a but this is lower than realization found in Saiva and Vaisnava sys:: tems, which are themselves only limited forms of moksa. The main : source for this is BhP 3.24-33, the story of Kapila. This is, of course, mythicized, but it is convenient for the author to identify him as the legendary founder of S"mkhya. Especially important in this passage a: is BhP 3.27, which introduces categories of Yoga along with those of S"mkhya, ultimately allowing the perceiver to achieve liberation by a: dierentiating purusa from prakrti, identifying the former as Bha: : gav"n. This passage requires much more attention that I can give it in a a: the present context.38 Purus ottama also cites as pram"na the story of : Pratardana and Indra from Kaus "taki Up. 3.1 and Vallabh"c"ryas a a :i Anubh": ya on Brahmas"tras (BS) 1.4. In the former Pratardana, the as u : son of Divod"sa, refuses a gift from Indra, oered because of his a valor. Indra, taken with Pratardanas sincerity, oers the following instead: Perceive just me. What I consider to be most benecial to a human being is that he should perceive me.39 Here Purus ottama : acknowledges that Indra occupies the same position in the Vedas as Krsna does with Vallabh"c"rya, namely that of supreme principle a a :: : in embodied form. Thus, the Vedas counter the an"svara view of i classical S"mkhya. Similarly, Vallabh"c"ryas argues that BS 1.4 a: a a does not teach the doctrine of causality articulated in classical S"mkhya. Rather, as he sees it, these s"tras demonstrate that braha: u man, rather than prakrti, is both the ecient and material cause : of all existent things. This brahman, according to Vallabh"c"ryas a a theology, is none other than the Supreme Lord, Sr" Krsna, thus :: _ once again proving by virtue of Vallabh"c"ryas conguration of a a sabdapram"na the truth of sesvara S"mkhya. Purus ottama backs this a: a: : up with a clever touch of commentarial prestidigitation by interpreting the prex (upasarga) vi in the word viniscaya in 14b as vistrti, : extension, meaning that the Pur"nas are extensions of the Vedas. a:
Larson and Bhattacharya do not deal with this distinction their volume. They elected to limit the volume exclusively to philosophical texts devoted solely to S"mkhya doctrine. This excludes S"mkhya as it is represented in the Mah"bh"rata, a: a: a a " Pur"nas, Agamas, heterodox philosophical writing and doxographies, in orthodox a: " philosophical tracts including Yoga and Kashmir Saivism, as well as in Ayurveda texts, where the principles, predispositions, and categories of S"mkhya are often a: congured dierently from the purely philosophical texts. 39 m"m eva vij"n"ha / etad ev"ham manusy"ya hitatamam manye yan m"m a a i a : a : a : vij"n"y"t. Trans. by Patrick Olivelle, The Early Upanisads: Annotated Text and a i a : Translation (New York, Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), p. 347.
38
444 The text continues:
FREDERICK M. SMITH
atipriy"ya tad api d"yate kvacid eva hi / a i niyat"rthaprad"nena tad"yatvam tad"srayah //15// a a i a : : pratyekam s"dhanam caitad dvit"y"rthe mah"n sramah / i a a : a : : Liberation or enjoyment (tad api) may occasionally be given (by Siva or Visnu, :: respectively,) to one who is particularly beloved. (In order to become extremely beloved) the prerequisite for each person is becoming an intimate devotee (tad"yai tvam) and taking refuge (tad"srayah), the fruits of which are granted according to the a : : condition (of the devotees eligibility). (However,) it is very burdensome for Visnu or :: Siva to confer the second one, the fruit not usually given, because it is the natural capacity of the other one.
In 16b the word dvit"ya refers to the second fruit, the one not i usually given by Siva or Visnu, moksa in the case of Siva and bhoga in :: : 40 the case of Visnu. :: Purus ottama explains that intimacy with the Lord (tad"yatvam,41 i : lit, belonging to him) and taking refuge in him (tad"srayah) must a : occur in order to become especially beloved of the Lord (atipriyatvam), which is to say chosen as a special devotee destined for the highest levels of bhakti. Though this is a central tenet of Vallabh"c"ryas conception of Krsna devotion, which extends easily a a :: : from the notion of paratahprayatna, eort undertaken by others : (namely the Lord), it is, in theory at least, applicable to other deities, such as Visnu and Siva. In other words, regardless of the deity :: worshipped, it is the eligibility (adhik"ra) that determines the fruit a after tad"yatva and tad"sraya have been achieved. Vallabh"c"rya i a a a delineates his views on this in several other works of the Sodasag: : ranth"h, notably in the Pus:tiprav"hamary"d"bhedah. a: a a a : : Purus ottama provides an alternative explanation to 15cd. By : reading the line: niyat"rthaprad"ne na tad"yatvam tad"srayah, a a a i a : : legitimate (if not, in my view, a likely) possibility given the vagaries of Sanskrit textuality and manuscript transmission, the meaning
40 Purus ottama explains: atipriyatvaniyato yo bhogamoksar"po rthas tasya : : u prad"nena samp"danena hetun" tad"yatvam tad"srayah etad ubhayam pur"noktam a a a i a a: : : : : samuditam pratyekam ca s"dhanam. a : : 41 It is interesting that this word, which connotes a chosen one, was selected by Bh"ratendu Haris candra in 1873 for the name of his organization designed to unite a the disparate sects of Hindu India, namely the Tad" Sam"j. See Vasudha Dalmia, ya a The Only Real Religion of the Hindus: Vaisnava Self-representation in the Late :: Nineteenth Century (in Representing Hinduism: the Construction of Religious Tradition and National Identity, ed. by Vasudha Dalmia and Heinrich von Stietencron; New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1995; pp. 176210). It is necessary to mention that in many places Dalmia seriously misunderstands Vallabh"c"ryas teaching. a a
445
changes to when bestowing the fruit on one who is beloved in an ordinary way (niyata indicating priya rather than atipriya) there can be neither intimacy (tad"yatvam) nor shelter (tad"srayah). The i a : : commentator Dv"rakes vara adopts this reading and Purus ottama a : suggests it as an alternative. It does make some contextual sense, though I doubt this is what Vallabh"c"rya had in mind. a a Purus ottama glosses occasionally (kvacid eva) as purusavisesa : : : eva, a special person chosen by the Lord. As examples, he cites the demons Maya and B"na, asuras who were granted liberation by Siva a: (cf. BhP 5.4.28, 6.10.31, 11.12.5 for Maya; and 6.18.17-18, and esp. 11.62-63 for B"na). Note that in an imaginaire and a complementary a: universe of discourse ruled by and thoroughly referenced by l"l", the ia experience of demons, deities, and sages from the Pur"nas sustain a: tremendous authenticity and paradigmatic power. Thus, the sage Uparicara was granted worldly enjoyment (bhoga) by Visnu (BhP :: 9.22.5, VisnuP 4.19.80-81). In all cases, these devotees were atipriya in :: that they received special degrees of Sivas or Visnus love and grace. :: Purus ottama makes the point that s"stras are complete if they ada : dress all four purusarthas. The examples of Maya and B"na demona: :" strate that the doctrine of P"s upata is complete because Siva grants a moksa; similarly, the P"ncar"tra is complete because Visnu grants a a : :: bhoga to Uparicara. It should be clear that Vallabh"c"rya uses the terms a a P"ncar"tra and P"s upata emblematically, to embrace all schools of a a a Vaisnava and Saiva thought, including both sectarian philosophical :: treatises and sectarian Pur"nas which they consider authoritative.42 a: The reason for this is probably because the commentarial tradition _ (beginning with Sankara) on Brahmas"tras interprets BS 2.2.37-43 as a u refutation of the P"s upatas (s"tras 37-41) and P"ncar"trins (s"tras a u a a u 42-43). Nrsimhal"lj" adds that if a devotee of Visnu wants bhoga he must a : : :: take at least some refuge in Siva, and if a devotee of Siva wants moksa : he must surrender at least to some extent to Visnu. He adds, though, :: that if an aspirant is extremely devoted to one of the two then he or she will eventually receive both bhoga and moksa. More directly, says : Nrsimhal"lj" Sivas s"dhana is bhoga and Visnus is moksa; if either a , a : : :: : tries to practice or obtain the other it is a great eort. Sivas gift of bhoga is a kind of worldly liberation (laukikamoksa), while Visnu : ::
Assuming here that Vallabh"c"rya follows the lead of Madhva (and no doubt a a others), who considers the Vaisnava Pur"nas an integral part of P"ncar"tra; cf. a: a a :: Halbfass, India and Europe, p. 360.
42
446
FREDERICK M. SMITH
gives moksa, which is alaukika or totally supramundane, through : bhoga, which is to say moksa is achieved through sev" to Krsna, a : :: : singing his divine names, and narrating stories of his life. Purus ottama decides it is necessary here to discuss the distinctive : characteristics of kalpas. The Matsya Pur"na lists four types: a: _ i : a sank"rna, s"ttvika, r"jasa, and t"masa.43 In the t"masa kalpas, reports a a a Purus ottama, the greatness of Agni and Siva is proclaimed; in r"jasa a : _ irna kalpas, the kalpas, Brahm" is considered the highest deity; in sank" : a mixed periods at the junction of two ages, Sarasvat" and the Pitrs : are worshipped; and in the s"ttvika or pure kalpas Hari is wora shipped. Purus ottama cites prat"kas of supporting passages from the i : K"rma Pur"na and V"mana Pur"na. He then links dierent kinds of u a: a a: beings (devat"s, humans, asuras) and their kinds of s"dhana and elia a gibility with the characteristics of the kalpas (BhP 12.3.18-52, ViP 6.3.9-60, K"rmaP 1.27.8-57, MatsyaP 164, etc.). Ultimately he conu cludes that worshippers of Siva are t"masika, which is the reason it is a iva to grant them moksa. dicult for S : It is worth mentioning here that in Vallabh"c"ryas analysis of the a a BhP in his Subodhin" on the tenth skandha as well as in his lengthy i Bh"gavat"rthaprakarana, the third section of the Tattv"rthad"pania a a i : bandha, t"masa bhaktas are regarded as exemplary for all aspiring a devotees. These bhaktas are identied as the gop"s or sv"min"s (to use i a i Vallabh"c"ryas preferred word), the milkmaids of Vraja, who cling a a most stubbornly (t"masa) to the Lord. Thus, in matters religious or a spiritual a t"masika nature is not to be condemned outright, because a applied properly it attracts the grace (krp", anugraha) of Krsna. Krsna, : a :: : :: : however, is utterly transcendent and is capable of granting the highest fruit on s"ttvika devotees as well, while Visnu, according to the BhP, a : _ cannot. As the text of the BB states, it is very dicult for Siva and Visnu to change their own natures and give the fruits that the other :: would normally give. In any case, Siva can give moksa and Visnu : :: bhoga if the devotee is ready, is practicing the right s"dhanas, and has a the right adhik"ra. It is not that the generosity of the deity is lacking; it a is that the deity simply cannot change his nature. However, Krsna, the :: : m"lar"pa (synonymous with avat"rin), can give both fruits, can destroy u u a the dosas, even if the disciple is completely lacking proper s"dhana and a :
I do not nd this in the obvious place, MatsyaP ch. 164; but this division into four is a common idea, cf. Manusmrti 1.6873 where the word samdhy", junction or a : : _ i : twilight, is used rather than sank"rna, mixed.
43
447
adhik"ra. The avat"ras (Siva and Visnu) cannot do this; they are a a : _ " a gunavat"ras, presiding over the gunas, therefore over the kalpas. : : It is important to note that the concepts of tad"yatva and tad"sraya i a are powerful ones for Vallabh"c"rya. These terms not only indicate a a devotees who are intimate with the Lord and fully-dedicated, but are also the true s"dhanas of the Pus: im"rga in that they represent the a :t a m"lamantras of the samprad"ya. For those who are intimate bhaktas u a " of Krsna, there is a single s"dhana: asraya, refuge in the Lord. Only a :: : after this refuge is fully accepted does true intimacy with the Lord develop of its own accord. Vallabh"c"rya emphasizes the practices which are necessary on the a a path to fulllment:
j"v"h svabh"vato dus:ta dosabh"v"ya sarvad" //16// i a: a a : " :" a a sravanadi tatah premn" sarvam k"ryam hi siddhyati / a :" : : a : J"vas are naturally deled. In order to eliminate this stigma forever, listening to the i stories of the Lord, etc., must be continually cultivated. Unquestionably, one perfects every practice through this love.
Purus ottama says that the word k"ryam indicates the practices of a : Saiva and Vaisnava schools, and only secondarily those of the :: Bh"gavata or Pus: im"rga. He notes that sravana, etc., constitute the a :t a : nine practices (navakam) according to the Bh"gavata teaching,44 that a the Saivas have three practices (trikam), and Vaisnava tantras ve :: (pan cakam). Regardless of the sectarian nature of the teaching, however, it is the power of love generated by regular devotional practice that energizes any practice. Thus, Purus ottama says that : Vallabh"c"ryas intention here is to remind the reader that the true a a k"ryas, tad"yatva and tad"sraya are achieved by the love emerging a i a from sravana and the others as described in the BhP. : Purus ottama comments that beings are naturally deled or : defective in the sense that delements or defects subsist in the subtle _ body (linga). These arise from subtle impressions borne of ignorance,
BhP 7.5.23 describes nine aspects of bhakti: (1) hearing (sravanam) the names : and stories of Visnu, (2) singing his praises (k"rtanam), (3) meditating on him i :: (smaranam, lit. remembering), (4) serving his image (p"dasevanam), (5) oering a : worship to him (arcanam), (6) prostrating to him (vandanam), (7) dedicating ones actions to him (d"syam), (8) cultivating friendship with him (sakhyam), and (9) a dedicating ones entire life and being to him ("tmanivedanam). (sravanam k"rtanam a : : i : " visnoh smaranam p"dasevanam / arcanam vandanam d"syam sakhyam atmanivedanam :: : : : a : : a : //). See also Richard Barz, The Bhakti Sect of Vallabh"c"rya (Faridabad: Thomson a a Press, 1976), p. 83f. Barz comments on the importance of the present verse, pp. 80.
44
448
FREDERICK M. SMITH
desire, and action (avidy"k"makarmajav"san"visesadosabh"jah), and a a a a a : : : render a j"va an unt vessel for exalted states of bhakti unless the i delements are attenuated by practice of the ninefold s"dhana and the a j"va is especially beloved of the Lord. Nrsimhal"lj" adds that Visnu is i a : : :: s"ttvik and peaceful, and would never allow impurities to arise in his a devotees. However, Siva brings his devotees beyond the three gunas : only with great diculty, and that is the reason he usually ends up giving bhoga. It is easier, says Nrsimhal"lj" to traverse the distance a , : : from sattva to nirgun than from tamas to nirgun. : : Vallabh"c"rya continues: a a
moksas tu sulabho visnor bhogas ca sivatas tath" //17// a : :: samarpanen"tmano hi tad"yatvam bhaved dhr"vam / i u : : a : atad"yatay" c"pi kevalas cet sam"sritah //18// i a a a : tad"srayatad"yatvabuddhyai kin sam"caret / a i a cit svadharmam anutis:than vai bh"radvaigunyam anyath" //19// a a : : Liberation is easily obtained from Visnu and similarly enjoyment from Siva. Inti:: macy with the Lord (tad"yatvam) becomes certain when self-surrender is complete. If i one has only taken refuge in the Lord but has not attained intimacy with him, then a little more practice (listening to the stories of the Lord, etc.) should be undertaken in order to bring about (more fully) the attitudes of refuge and intimacy with the Lord. Otherwise a twofold burden arises with respect to the performance of ones particular dharma.
Purus ottama states that samarpanen"tmanah is a denition of : : a : tad"yatvam. In this state the aspirant says: The attitude of the self in i a state of surrender is Let the Lord provide a way for me and my loved ones to accomplish whatever I desire that is conducive to " good.45 The BhP often uses the term atmanivedin (e.g. 11.19.24) as equivalent to samarpanatman, as found here. In this sense surrender :" means fully extending oneself towards and into the Lord, fully giving oneself, living in the Lord. Self-dedication is an adequate translation " for samarpanatman or atmanivedana, but it does not fully convey this :" intensity. Purus ottama remarks that this supreme state of bhakti is : possible for all people, but can be achieved only after one has surrendered and extended oneself fully towards the Supreme Lord " (etesam ca paratvam atmanivedan"nantaratva eva). Purus ottama a : ": : continues that moreover, tad"yatva is only possible if there is no i remaining trace of self-interest (tath" sati svasatt"lesasy"py abh"v"t a a a a a
45 mad"y"n"m mama ca yathes:tam viniyogam prabhuh karotv iti buddhir [attitude] i a a: : : : : " hy atmasamarpane k"ranam. We can argue that this is a variety of Hindu ethics; cf. : a : most recently Wilhelm Halbfass, Practical Ved"nta (in Dalmia and von Stietena cron, Representing Hinduism; pp. 211223).
449
tanniscitam bhavati). Only after other s"dhanas such as sravana (cf. a : : BhP 7.5.23) have been exhausted and one is fully, selessly, dedicated " to the Lord, does tad"yatva or atmaniveditva naturally arise. i With respect to the twofold burden (bh"radvaigunyam) mena : tioned in 19d, Purus ottama glosses bh"ra, burden, as dosa, fault, a : : shortcoming. He identies the twofold burden as adharmakrto : dosah, a shortcoming created by not attending to proper codes of : : conduct, and svabh"vakrto dosah, a shortcoming arising out of a : : : ones own nature. The rst is a burden which arises through lapses in ones sociocultural practice (svadharma, 19c), or more legalistically through neglect of dharmas"stra. Because of this neglect the function a " of the body, namely varnasramadharma, lapses. The second burden : (which may in fact be prior to the rst) consists of the delements or lapses which are natural (16c). This leads to a unique form of " misery (duhkha) in which the atmadharma, the function of the soul, : the true self, lapses. These are addressed through the process of " atmanivedana as Vallabh"c"rya conceives of them in spiritual praca a tice. First one takes initiation in the eight-syllabled mantra, through the practice of which one becomes dedicated to the Lord (tad"sraya atva). Second, one becomes initiated into the ve-syllabled mantra through which the practitioner realizes a state of belonging to the Lord (tad"yatva). Thus, say the teachers of the Pus: im"rga, these i :t a verses contain the epitome of Vallabh"c"ryas teaching, because they a a describe concisely, if elliptically, both the problem and the solution. Nrsimhal"lj" comments that if one seeks intimacy with either Visnu a : : :: or Siva, self-dedication is a matter of constant attention. If me (ahant") and mine (mamat") are used in service of the Lord, it is a a because the Lord wishes that these gifts of self-possession be turned towards his sev". The self ("tman) must be dedicated to the Lord in a a order to produce the right kind of intelligence necessary for bhakti. It is dicult for the Lord to uplift (uddh"ra)46 one who has these two a burdens. Nrsimhal"lj" rhetorically asks what happens if one doesnt a : : practice proper varnasramadharma but worships the Lords feet? His :" answer: it is just not enough. And conversely, if one merely follows varnasramadharma but does not practice bhakti, one achieves nothing. :" Purus ottama concludes with a lengthy section which includes : several citations from the BhP (2.1.6 and Subodhin"; and many from i 11th skandha: 11.3.47, 11.11.37,49, 11.12.1,14, 11.19.19,24, 11.20.6, 11.21.23-26, 11.27.1,7,53) and other supporting srutis and smrtis, :
46
On this term see Barz, The Bhakti Sect of Vallabh"c"rya, pp. 612. a a
450
FREDERICK M. SMITH
demonstrating that the ve schools discussed here, Veda, S"mkhya, a: Yoga, P"s upata, and P"ncar"tra are secondary (gauna). They may be a a a : helpful in obtaining the basic adhik"ra for bhakti and as well as a certain raw devotional skills, but they cannot result in attaining the :: : Supreme Lord (purusottama), Sr" Krsna. Vedic ritual practice, though : necessary for the minimum maintenance of proper dharma, is in the nal view subordinate to the s"dhanas prescribed in the BhP, as are a the practices and renunciation of S"mkhya and Yoga. They help in a: establishing the nal state of readiness for death, but not in establishing the most important thought, the smarana or remembrance of : the Lord at the last moment of life: antime y" matih s" gatih, One a : a : reincarnates into a situation determined by ones nal thought. Nothing other than the nine s"dhanas from BhP establish that rmly. a The karmayoga of BhP is the Vaisnava system (tantra), which even in :: this case indicates it is a means to attaining bhaktiyoga, not to attaining Purus ottama. Purus ottama is not under the control of any : : s"dhana, even if it is prescribed in the Vedas. One who practices these a only attains a state of absence from suering (duhkh"bh"va), a state : a a of middling eligibility (madhyam"dhik"ra) for devotional realization. a a This doctrine is articulated more fully in the Pus:tiprav"haa : mary"d"bheda, but its mention here by Purus ottama is an illustration a a : of the integrated nature of the texts of the Sodasagranth"h. In fact, a: : : Purus ottama continues, the Supreme Lord chooses (varana, var: : anasruti) his intimate devotees, he gives his svar"pa to them. The best, u : and only, s"dhana for this is d"natva, surrender borne of compasa i sionate love (varanasrutir varanasya d"natvam eva s"dhanam). Finally, i a : : " he returns to the subject of purusarthas, of which, he says, the rst : three serve only to develop bhakti; they are only to entice (rocan"rtha) a the practitioner towards moksa. : Conclusion
Vallabh"c"rya concludes: a a
ity evam kathitam sarvam naitaj jnane bhramah punah //20// " : : : : : Thus, all of this said, confusion with respect to this knowledge (about purusarthas) :" should never again arise.
In sum, The B"labodha, in twenty verses, critiques ve religious and a philosophical systems: the Veda, S"mkhya, and Yoga, as well as a: Saiva and other Vaisnava systems. Vallabh"c"rya contends that all a a :: true Vedic systems have laukika and alaukika extensions, and can
451
be analyzed in terms of purusarthas. Stated conversely, since his :" " a a discourse addresses purusarthas, Vallabh"c"rya and the Pus: im"rga :t a : commentarial tradition regard it as Vedic. This is because, in a rather non-specic way, the Indian orthodox tradition regards the Veda as the locus of all purusarthas. The BB began with a dis:" " cussion of purusarthas, and Vallabh"c"ryas conclusion recapitulates a a : the notions of confusion and knowledge, which can be worked out initially through adherence to the purusarthas, and nally to tran:" scendent knowledge that frees the j"va from the bondage of the i " purus arthas. This is especially the case with the fourth one, moksa, by : : changing its direction from svatah or self-induced liberation, which : Vallabh"c"rya declares to be laukika or worldly, to paratah or othera a : induced liberation, which can be achieved only through the grace of the Supreme Lord as a result of devotional practice. Vallabh"c"rya a a does not allow his teachings to escape grounding in other purusarthas, :" however, as his writings as a whole abundantly reveal.47 Indeed, his teachings substantiate these purus arthas, supporting the various rules :" of dharma and caste, even if he interprets them in a manner that is more in tune with devotional practice and experience than limited (mary"d") ritualistic, rule-bound or mechanistic performance as the a a supreme practice. He addresses the problem of competing systems in grand systemic terms: purus arthas and the ability of certain s"stras to a :" satisfy some of them, notions of grace which frame the concepts of paratahprayatna and tad"yatva, and of sabdapram"na in justifying i a: : the superiority of the practices mentioned in the BhP. In certain other texts, particularly the Anubh"s ya on the Brahmas"tras and the a: u : Sarvanirnayaprakarana, he engages competing systems according to : : the standards of Indian s "straic and logical discourse, but in the BB a he engages them on more orthopractic and experiential grounds, though in these they are supported by pram"na. a: The inuence of the B"labodha a As somewhat of a postscript, we may ask how does Vallabh"c"ryas a a brief doxography inuence later Pus: im"rgi literary production? t a : The most extensive Pus: im"rgi doxography is Purus ottamas :t a : Avat"rav"d"val". This is not a single sustained work, but a collection a a a i of independent v"dagranthas, or prose treatises (usually short) that a discuss individual topics. Though it was likely edited by Purus ottama :
47 For example the Catuhslok" and Pus : iprav"hamary"d"bheda among the i a a a : :t Sodasagranth"h, and numerous passages ion the Tattv"rthad"panibandha. a: a i : :
452
FREDERICK M. SMITH
himself as a single volume, the 24 v"dagranthas contained within it a appear to have been printed separately, at least until 18 of them were published as part of an early 20th century Pus: im"rga doxography :t a 48 called V"d"vali. A few, however, appear to have not been published a a at all, and, according to A. D. Shastri, who has written on a Purus ottama, are probably lost.49 Besides the eighteen v"dagranthas : found in the later V"d"vali, I have been able to locate two others, a a the Prahastav"da a (book length in itself) and the Panditakarabhindip"lav"da.50 These two works were composed to a a :: refute the writings of the great m"y"v"dins of the time, notably Apa a a payya D" : ita, the South Indian Saiva advaitin. ks It is not germane in this space to summarize each of Purus ottamas : available v"dagranthas, but I can say, briey, that several refute a technical points of samkar"dvaita; one (the Sr: :tibhedav"da) discusses a a : :s causation, refuting the atomism of the Vais es ika, the parinamav"da of a : :" nir"svara S"mkhya, and the m"y"v"da of advaita; some deal with the i a: a a a mechanics of devotion, e.g. the Prakrtip"janav"da, which deals with a : u the value of sev" to an image of the Lord something which is not a recommended by other systems, and the N"mav"da, which demona a strates that the highest fruit of bhakti can be achieved only by knowing the divine name; and a few address matters of pure s"mprad"yika or sectarian concern, such as the a a " Urdhvapundradh"ranav"da which deals with the practice of inscribing a : a :: the characteristic sectarian mark on the forehead with sandalwood, and the Tulas"m"l"dh"ranav"da, which sets out to show why i aa a : a Vaisnavas should wear tulsi necklaces. Some have notably peculiar :: themes: for example, the Andhak"rav"da sets out to prove that a a darkness is a substance; the Khal"lapanavidhvamsav"da tries to a a : demonstrate, among other things, the masculinity of the Lord, cona tending that other Vaisnavas are really S"ktas in disguise; while the :: Br"hmanatv"didevat"v"da tries to prove that brahmanahood, a a a : a ks atriyahood, etc. are devat"s. Because Vallabh"c"rya justies his a a a : teachings through references to both alaukika aspects of his doctrine, citing the BhP as pram"na (in this case sabdapram"na), and laukika a: a:
a V"d"valih, edited with T ippani by Pandita Sr" Ram"n"tha S"str" (Bhules var, a a a a : :: _ : Bombay: Bad"mandir, 1920 [samvat 1976]). :a 49 A. D. Shastri, Purusottamaj": A Study (Surat: Chunilal Gandhi Vidyabhavan, i : 1966), pp. 6580. 50 Avat"rav"d"val"h (Part I ), by Gosv"m" Sr" Purus ottamaj" Mah"r"ja; ed. by a a a i: a aa : Vasantar"ma Harikrsna S"str" (Ananadr [Bharatpur State]: V. H. Shastri, 1928). The a ::: a Prahastav"da is 246 pages in length and the Panditakarabhindip"lav"da 31 pp. a a a ::
48
453
aspects, in this case accepted philosophical practice, the latter doxographies of Purus ottama engage competing systems with texts on : the grounds of logic and philosophy, as well as on the mechanics of bhakti and the minutiae of ritual and devotional practice. To the untrained eye, the latter doxographies may appear quixotically peculiar, with texts that, for example, attempt to prove, in s astraic language, the value of wearing a tulsi m"l". But it is consistent with aa the Pus: im"rga panditic approach of utilizing s "straic strategies to a :t a :: argue positions that some would consider non-s "straic. The point, a then, is that the apparatus of s"stra, including the use of logic and a appeal to accepted pram"na, was, by the time of Vallabh"c"rya, a: a a admitted into arguments of a more religious nature, and, as we can see from the work of Purus ottama in the Avat"rav"d"val", eventually a a a i : applied to claims of a very specic nature. Department of Religious Studies University of Iowa 314 Gilmore Hall Iowa, IA 52242 USA E-mail: frederick-smith@uiowa.edu

JIP O5 4 Smith

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

JIP O5 4 Smith

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Indian Philosophy (2005) 33: 421453 DOI 10.1007/s10781-004-6928-2 FREDERICK M.

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS " " ACCORDING TO VALLABHACARYA

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

Cf. also 3.3.7, 4.7.34, 10.88.15.

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

444 The text continues:

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

THE HIERARCHY OF PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS

You might also like