The book was published by the Bhakti Vikas Trust and can be ordered HERE
An Account on Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī —His Identity and Background
Introduction to the Viveka-śatakam
According to several accounts, Śrīla Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī
was a dear associate of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu and was also one of the
pioneers in praising His glories in Sanskrit poetry in his book named Caitanya-candrāmṛta. At the same time,
his figure is one of the most controversials among the Gauḍīyas. The utter
silence of Śrīla Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja and Śrīla Vṛndāvanadāsa Ṭhākura about
Prabodhānanda led to different conjectures, and the conflicting narrations of
later Gauḍīya hagiographers overshadowed him in a cloud of mystery and
confusion. We find no date of his birth,
demise, travels or any incident of his life, about which there is hardly
anything known, apart from whatever is mentioned in his own writings and the
terse verses of a few other authors. Furthermore, none of the works attributed
to Prabodhānanda seem to have ever been quoted by his contemporaries or other
Gauḍīyas until the 18th century. Most of his writings were unknown
until they started to be published in late 19th century. In
particular, two controversies have been prevalent for over a century – his
alleged past as a māyāvādī sannyāsī in
Vārāṇasī under the name ‘Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī,’ and his supposed relation
with Śrī Hita Harivaṁśa, founder of the Rādhā-vallabha sampradāya. In order to establish a plausible conclusion, it is
commendable to first go through an overview of the available data and assess
its integrity. What follows comprises most of the statements about
Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī made by notable authors between the 16th and
the 18th centuries.
From his own
statement, we know that Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī was a disciple of Prabodhānanda
Sarasvatī, the only one we hear of, although it is not clear whether he was his
śikṣā-guru, dīkṣā-guru or both. From
other sources we also hear that they had a blood connection as uncle and
nephew. Yet in the works attributed to Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, Prabodhānanda’s name is
mentioned only once. At the beginning of the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa (1.2) it is written:
bhakter vilāsāṁś
cinute prabodhānandasya śiṣyo bhagavat-priyasya
gopāla-bhaṭṭo
raghunātha-dāsaṁ santoṣayan rūpa-sanātanau ca
“Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, disciple of Śrīla Prabodhānanda, a dear
associate of Lord Caitanya, is compiling this Hari-bhakti-vilāsa to
please Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī and Śrīla Raghunātha Dāsa
Gosvāmī.”
In the
commentary attributed to Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī it is stated:
bhagavat-priyasyeti bahuvrīhiṇā
tatpuruṣeṇa vā samāsena tasya māhātmya-jātaṁ pratipāditam | evaṁ tac-chiṣyasya
śrī-gopāla-bhaṭṭasyāpi tādṛktvaṁ boddhavyam |
“By the words bhagavat-priyasya,
which can be interpreted either as a bahuvrīhi
compound (to whom Lord Caitanya is very
dear) or as a tatpuruṣa compound
(who is very dear to Lord Caitanya),
Śrī Prabodhānanda’s glories are expressed. In the same way, the glories of his
disciple, Śrī Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, are understood to be similar to his.”
In the Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā, Kavi Karṇapūra
enumerated the main associates of Lord Caitanya and their respective identities
in Kṛṣṇa-līlā. In verse 163 he says:
tuṅgavidyā vraje
yāsīt sarva-śāstra-viśāradā
sā
prabodhānanda-yatir gaurodgāna-sarasvatī
“She who was previously known in the pastimes of Kṛṣṇa in
Vraja as Tuṅgavidyā, who is fully conversant with all scriptures, has now
become Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī and is engaged in singing the glories of Lord
Gaurāṅga.”
As Prabodhānanda is identified as one of the main eight gopīs of Vraja, it is understood that
such an intimate associate must have played an essential role in Caitanya-līlā.
From the statements of Sanātana Gosvāmī and Karṇapūra it is implied that
Prabodhānanda had the association of Lord Caitanya at some point of life. Since
we find no descriptions of their meeting in Navadvīpa or Purī, the most obvious
conclusion is that they spent four months together in Śrīraṅgam during the
Lord’s South Indian tour, as pointed out by the texts quoted below. There are
no other instances of the Lord spending so much time in a family’s house, which
means the Bhaṭṭa family was very special and dear to Him. By the name ‘Tuṅgavidyā’
(she who has exalted knowledge) we
can also understand that Prabodhānanda was conversant with spiritual knowledge,
which he imparted to his disciple Gopāla, who subsequently became the main
initiator spiritual master in Vṛndāvana. From these two perspectives,
Prabodhānanda holds indeed a very distinguished position in the pastimes of
Lord Caitanya.
At the end of
his commentary on the Gopāla-tāpany-upaniṣad,
Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī states:
viśveśvaraka-janārdana-bhaṭṭābhyāṁ
vaidikācāryābhyām |
tadvat
prabodha-yatinā likhitaṁ citram atra tāratamyena ||
śrī-sanātana-rūpasya
caraṇābja-sudhepsunā |
pūritā ṭippaṇī
ceyaṁ jīvena sukha-bodhinī ||
“Previously, the Vedic preceptors named Viśveśvara and
Janārdana Bhaṭṭa, as well as the sannyāsī Prabodha have written
commentaries on this text, each more interesting than the previous one. Now
this commentary called Sukha-bodhinī
has been completed by Jīva, desiring to obtain the nectarean water from the
feet of Śrīla Rūpa and Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmīs.”
There is a work
attributed to Jīva Gosvāmī named Vaiṣṇava-vandanā,
where we find the following verse (71) :
prabodhānanda-sarasvatīṁ
vande vimalāṁ yayā mudā |
candrāmṛtaṁ
racitaṁ yac-chiṣyo gopāla-bhaṭṭakaḥ ||
“I offer my humble obeisances unto the spotless Śrīla
Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, who joyfully compiled the Caitanya-candrāmṛta, and whose disciple is Śrīla Gopāla Bhaṭṭa
Gosvāmī.”
In the
compilation Vyāsajī kī Vāṇī, we find the following verses by Harirāma
Vyāsa (16th century):
prabodhānanda se
kavi thore
jina
rādhā-vallabha kī līlā-rasa me saba rasa ghore |
kevala
prema-vilāsa āsa kari, bhava-bandhana dṛḍha tore ||
sahaja mādhurī
vacanani, rasika ananyani ke cita core |
pāvana
rūpa-nāma-guṇa ura dhari, viṣai-vikāra ju more ||
cāru caraṇa-nakha-canda-bimba
meṁ rākhe naina cakore |
jāyā, māyā, gṛha,
dehī soṁ, ravi-suta bandhana chore ||
“Poets like Prabodhānanda are very rare. He sang about all
mellows in the divine pastimes of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. Having broken the strong
bounds of material life, his only hope was to relish those loving pastimes. His
natural, sweet words stole the minds of other exclusively devoted rasikas. Inside his heart, he always
held the Lord’s pure qualities, names and forms and thus turned away from all
sensual agitation. Like a cakora
bird, he kept his eyes on the moon-like reflection of the beautiful nails of
the Lord’s feet and in this way gave up illusory happiness, wife, home, the
bodily conception and the grip of Yamarāja.”
In his Vaiṣṇava-vandanā, Devakīnandana[1]
writes:
prabodhānanda
gosāñi vandoṁ kariyā yatana
ye karilā
mahāprabhura guṇera varṇana
“I eagerly offer obeisances unto Śrīla Prabodhānanda Gosvāmī,
who described the transcendental qualities of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu.”
In his Vaiṣṇava-vandanā, Vṛndāvanadāsa[2]
writes:
vandoṁ kariyā bhakti,
prabodhānanda sarasvatī, parama mahattva guṇa-dhāma | śrī-caitanya-candrāmṛta
pustaka yāṁhāra kṛta, ei pūnthi
bhakta-dhana-prāṇa ||
“With great devotion I offer
obeisances to Śrīla Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, who is an abode of transcendental
qualities and greatness. He composed the book Śrī-Caitanya-candrāmṛta, which is the devotees’ treasure and life.”
In the Sādhana-dīpikā (Aṣṭama-kakṣā), Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa Gosvāmī[3]
states:
śrīmat-prabodhānandasya
bhrātuḥ putraṁ kṛpālayam |
śrīmad-gopāla-bhaṭṭaṁ
taṁ naumi śrī-vraja-vāsinam ||
“I offer my humble obeisances
unto Śrīla Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, who was the son of Śrīla Prabodhānanda’s brother, a
resident of Vraja and a reservoir of mercy.”
In the first
chapter of the Anurāgavallī (dated
1696 AD), Manohara Dāsa[4]
writes:
sei tīrthe vaise
tailaṅga-viprarāja |
śrī-trimalla-bhaṭṭa
nāma brāhmaṇa-samāja ||
tāṁhāra kaniṣṭha
jyeṣṭha haye dui bhāi |
veṅkaṭa
prabodhānanda bhaṭṭa bali gāi ||
veṅkaṭera kaniṣṭha
prabodhānanda nāma |
gopāla-bhaṭṭera
pūrve guru se pramāṇa ||
adhyayana
upanayana yogya ācaraṇe |
pūrvate sakala
śikṣā pitṛvyera sthāne ||
“In that holy place, Śrīraṅgam,
lived Trimalla Bhaṭṭa, the best in the Tailaṅga brāhmaṇa community. He had an older and a younger brother named Veṅkaṭa
Bhaṭṭa and Prabodhānanda Bhaṭṭa. Veṅkaṭa Bhaṭṭa’s younger brother was named
Prabodhānanda, who was the first guru of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa according to his own
testimony. By his good
conduct, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa was qualified for studying the scriptures and receiving
the sacred thread. He formerly received his whole education in the house of his
uncle.”
In the Bhakta-māla (paragraph 182), Nābhājī (16th-
17th century AD) refers to Prabodhānanda in the following words:
prabodhānanda,
rāmabhadra, jagadānanda kali-jugga dhani
parama-dharma
prati poṣakauṁ, sannyāsī e mukuṭamani
“Prabodhānanda, Rāmabhadra and Jagadānanda made Kali-yuga
blessed. They were the crest jewels among sannyāsīs
and maintained the highest religious principles.”
In the commentary (dated 1712 AD) to the above paragraph,
Priyādāsa[5]
says:
śrī-prabodhānanda
baḍe rasika ānanda-kanda śrī-caitanya-canda jū ke pārakhada pyāre haiṁ |
rādhā-kṛṣṇa-kuñja-keli, nipaṭa naveli kahī, jheli rasa-rūpa, doū kie dṛg tāre
haiṁ || vṛndāvana vāsa kau hulāsa lai prakāśa kiyau, diyau sukha-sindhu, karma
dharma saba ṭāre haiṁ | tāhī suni suni koṭi koṭi jana raṅga pāyo, vipina
suhāyau vase tana mana cāre haiṁ ||
“Śrīla Prabodhānanda was a great rasika and a beloved associate of Lord Caitanya, bliss
personified. He gave fresh descriptions of the amorous pastimes of Śrī Śrī
Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa in the groves of Vraja. He relished Their forms and rasas and made Them his dearmost. In his
poems, he revealed the splendour of residing in Śrī Vṛndāvana and thus merged
the devotees in an ocean of happiness. He became aloof from all materially
motivated activities and religiosity. Listening to his poems, millions of
people fell in love. While residing himself in the beautiful Vṛndāvana, he
sacrificed his body and mind in Their service.”
In the first chapter of the Bhakti-ratnākara, Narahari
Cakravartī[6]
says:
saṁkṣepe kahile
ethā bhaṭṭa-vivaraṇa |
śrī-gopāla-bhaṭṭa
hana vyeṅkaṭa-nandana || 81 ||
trimalla, vyeṅkaṭa
āra śrī-prabodhānanda |
e tina bhrātāra
prāṇa-dhana gauracandra || 83 ||
gaura-guṇa-mahimā
ye sarvatra prakāśe |
māyāvāda-khaṇḍana
karaye anāyāse || 145 ||
gopāla-bhaṭṭera
ślāghā kare śiṣṭa-gaṇa |
kirūpe karila
aiche vidyā-upārjana || 146 ||
keha kahe
śrī-prabodhānanda yatna kaila |
alpa-kāla haite
adhyayana karāila || 147 ||
pitṛvya-kṛpāya
sarva-śāstre haila jñāna |
gopālera sama
ethā nāi vidyāvān || 148 ||
keha kahe
prabodhānandera guṇa ati |
sarvatra haila
yāṁra khyāti sarasvatī|| 149 ||
pūrṇa-brahma
śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya bhagavān |
tāṁra priya, tāṁra
vinā svapane nāhi āna || 150 ||
parama-vairāgya-sneha
mūrti manorama |
mahā-kavi,
gīta-vādya-nṛtya anupama || 152 ||
yāṁhāra vākya
śuni’ sukha bāḍaye sabāra |
prabodhānandera
mahā-mahimā apāra || 153 ||
prabodhānandera
bhrātuṣputra śrī-gopāla |
sarva-mate suśikṣita
parama dayāla || 155 ||
“I will now briefly describe the Bhaṭṭa family. Śrī Gopāla
Bhaṭṭa was the son of Śrī Veṅkaṭa Bhaṭṭa. Lord Gauracandra was the life and
treasure of the three brothers, Trimalla, Veṅkaṭa and Prabodhānanda. Śrī Gopāla
Bhaṭṭa revealed the glories and transcendental qualities of Lord Gaurāṅga
everywhere and would easily defeat māyāvāda
arguments. Even learned scholars praised Gopāla Bhaṭṭa. How had he acquired
such knowledge? Some say that this was all due to the efforts of Śrī
Prabodhānanda, who taught him in a very short time. By his uncle’s mercy, he
obtained knowledge of all scriptures. There is no learned man like Gopāla Bhaṭṭa
in this world. Some say that Prabodhānanda had many virtues. He became famous
everywhere as ‘Sarasvatī.’ Even in dreams he did not know anyone else besides
Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya, the Supreme Brahman, Who was so dear to him. He was
fascinating, supremely detached, affection personified, a great poet and
incomparable in dance and music, both vocal and instrumental. He would increase
the happiness of those who heard him speak. Prabodhānanda’s glories are
immense. In the opinion of everyone, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, the son of Prabodhānanda’s
brother, was very well educated and very kind.”
Up to this point there is no
controversy, except for one issue mentioned by Manohara Dāsa that in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya-līlā 1.108 it is stated that
Mahāprabhu stayed at the house of Trimalla Bhaṭṭa, while in the Madhya-līlā 9.82 and subsequent verses it is stated that He was taken to
Veṅkaṭa Bhaṭṭa’s house. This is a minor issue that can be easily solved by
assuming that the brothers lived in the same house. Yet it seems that for this
reason some authors described either Trimalla or Veṅkaṭa as the eldest and the
father of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa. In this regard, it is also interesting to note that
the present descendants of this family in Śrīraṅgam, headed by Śrī Muralī Bhaṭṭar,
do not have any information or records of a third brother called Prabodha or
Prabodhānanda. This could be due to several factors, such as the extinction of
his lineage or the migration of his descendants to a distant region, which
within the time frame of five centuries could not be easily traced. It is also
possible that Prabodhānanda was a cousin-brother or a distant relative of the
same generation and was therefore affectionately considered a brother in the
family.
From the above verses it is
crystal clear that none of these respectable authors ever gave the slightest
hint that Prabodhānanda might have been anyone else but a South Indian Vaiṣṇava
and the instructor of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa. It is thus also understood that the idea
that he was a māyāvādī sannyāsī in
Vārāṇasī was a much later misunderstanding perpetrated by texts written by
doubtful authors. If there were any apprehension in this regard in the days of
Narahari Cakravartī and Manohara Dāsa, they would surely have addressed it in
their works, where they did not hesitate to deal with several other
controversies. This means that this only became an issue subsequently. One of
the earliest authors responsible for this misconception is Ānandī, who wrote
the first known Sanskrit commentary (dated 1723 AD) on the Caitanya-candrāmṛta, which starts with the following words:
śrī-śrīpāda-parivrāja-rājo
vedānta-sāṅkhya-vaiśeṣika-pātañjala-mīmāṁsāgama-nigama-mahā-purāṇa-purāṇa-setihāsa-pañcarātrālaṅkāra-kāvya-nāṭakādi-rahasya-siddhāntānargala-vaktṛtvojjvalī-kṛtāsaṅkhya-kāśī-vāsy-antevāsika-janānām
antaḥ-karaṇakaḥ |
“Śrīla Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī was the king of the itinerant
mendicants in the renounced order and was very dear to innumerable students who
lived in Kāśī and shined by their fluent eloquence in the secret conclusions of
many subject matters such as Vedānta, Sāṅkhya, Vaiśeṣika, Pātañjala yoga, Mīmāṁsā,
Āgama, Nigama, Purāṇas, Mahāpurāṇas, itihāsas, Pañcarātra, rhetorics, poetry,
dramaturgy, etc.”
Nothing definite is known about
Ānandī’s lineage and background, so against the weight of all the previous
authors, there is no reason to accept him as an authority regarding
Prabodhānanda’s life. Yet this single mistaken statement has misled future
generations. He might have assumed that Prabodhānanda was a resident of Kāśī on
the basis of verse 99 in the
Caitanya-candrāmṛta:
kāśī-vāsīn api
na gaṇaye kiṁ gayāṁ mārgayāmo
muktiḥ
śuktībhavati yadi me kaḥ parārtha-prasaṅgaḥ |
trāsābhāsaḥ
sphurati na mahā-raurave’pi kva bhītiḥ
strī-putrādau
yadi kṛpayate deva-devaḥ sa gauraḥ ||
“If Lord Gaurāṅga, the Supreme God of all demigods, is
merciful upon me, then I do not take into consideration even the residents of
Kāśī. Why then should we visit Gayā to offer oblations to our ancestors? If
Lord Gaurāṅga is merciful upon me, I consider mukti itself a trifle, so what to speak of dharma, artha and kāma? If Lord Gaurāṅga is merciful upon
me, I do not have the slightest fear of even going to hell, so where is the
question of fearing for my wife, sons and other relatives?”
Such an
assumption, however, is not well thought, for the point the author is making
here is that he considers the mercy of Lord Caitanya much higher than residence
in Vārāṇasī, which is praised as a place where the residents attain liberation
upon giving up their present body. This is confirmed in the next line, when he
further states that he actually considers Mahaprabhu’s mercy to be superior to
even liberation itself.
The Advaita-prakāśa (17th
chapter), attributed to Īśāna Nāgara, describes the supposed meeting of Lord
Caitanya with Prabodhānanda in Vārāṇasī:
kāśī pūrṇa haila
gorāra prabhāva-sambandhe |
aneka vaiṣṇava
hailā sei anubandha ||
tathi
śrī-prabodhānanda sarasvatī khyāti |
sannyāsīra
madhye yiṁha buddhe bṛhaspati ||
bahu-śāstra-vettā
paṇḍitera śikhāmaṇi |
gaurāṅga nindiye
tiṁha hañā abhimānī ||
dayā-sindhu
śrī-caitanya dayā prakāśilā |
bahu-śāstra-yuktyā
tare svamate ānilā||
śrī-prabodhānandera
saba khaṇḍila saṁśaya |
gaurāṅge īśvara
bali karilā niścaya ||
śrī-prabodhānande
horā baḍa dayā kailā |
śakti sañcāriyā
tare prema-bhakti dilā ||
parama vaiṣṇava
haila śrī-prabodhānanda |
khaṇḍila kutarka
vāda pāila premānanda ||
sarasvatī hailā
gaurera bhakata pravīṇa |
kṛta pīta rūpe
prakaṭa kahe rātri dina ||
“By Lord Caitanya’s
transcendental power, Kāśī attained plenitude and many people became Vaiṣṇavas.
Among the sannyāsīs, Prabodhānanda
was famous like Sarasvatī and intelligent like Bṛhaspati. He knew so many scriptures
and was the crest jewel among learned scholars. Thus becoming very proud, he
indulged in criticizing Lord Gaurāṅga. Lord Caitanya is an ocean of mercy and
therefore showed kindness to him. By debating with logic on the conclusion of
the scriptures, He convinced him about His philosophy. Mahāprabhu removed all
his doubts, and at last Prabodhānanda accepted Him as the Supreme Lord. Showing
great mercy on Prabodhānanda, Lord Caitanya empowered him and gave him pure
loving devotional service. Once his flawed arguments were defeated,
Prabodhānanda became an exalted Vaiṣṇava and attained the bliss of love of God.
He became a staunch devotee of Lord Caitanya and spent day and night saying
that the Lord was Kṛṣṇa in a golden colour.”
Īśāna
Nāgara is said to have been a servant in Advaita Prabhu’s house and supposedly
wrote this book in 1568 AD. If it is true that such a person wrote Advaita-prakāśa in this year, then what
has been passed down to our hands is an extensively interpolated version. While
some accounts in Advaita-prakāśa seem
to be legitimate and match with those found in other books, on the other hand
there are several suspicious incidents which are not to be found anywhere else
and others that clash with versions that are present within more reliable and
widely accepted hagiographies. This undermines its credibility to a great
extent, therefore some Gauḍīya scholars hold the opinion that Advaita-prakāśa is a much later
compilation of someone else and was intentionally given a backdate. In fact, no
ancient author has ever quoted it, and until the late 19th century
its very name seemed to be unknown. The Catalogus Catalogorum of Bengali
Manuscripts lists only two existent copies, which makes us wonder why those in
Advaitācārya’s line never took an interest in circulating this book if it is an
authentic hagiography.
In
the Bengali Bhakta-māla, Lāladāsa (18th
century) declares:
prakāśānanda
sarasvatī nāma chila |
prabhura
prabodhānanda baliyā rākhila ||
“Mahāprabhu then changed the
name of Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī into Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī.”
This
might be the first instance in which both are described as the same person.
Originally meant to be a Bengali version of the Hindi Bhakta-māla with emphasis on the Gauḍīya devotees, the author could
not refrain from adding many obscure episodes and descriptions without
precedents. Despite Lāladāsa’s claims that he is presenting the facts as they
are, in many respects his compilation is so flawed that Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta
Sarasvatī referred to it as a sahajiyā
book. Although very popular in West Bengal, this work has never earned the
trust of historians and Gauḍīya scholars at large on account of several
absurdities and anachronisms. It is apparent that many of the statements are
rumours or mere concoctions – for example, the exchange of letters between Lord
Caitanya and Prakāśānanda. Mahāprabhu did not usually change the names of His
followers. Rūpa and Sanātana are the most well-known instances, and their
change of name was well justified, since they were being addressed by Muslim
names. However, in the case of Prakāśānanda (the bliss of light), there is hardly any improvement by changing
his name into Prabodhānanda (the bliss of
awakening). If the former name sounded too impersonal for a Vaiṣṇava, the
new name did not sound any more devotional.
Shishir Kumar Ghosh (1840-1911), a famous Bengali journalist
and founder of the Amrita Bazar Patrika,
appreciated Lāladāsa’s divagations so much that he wrote a hundred-page novel
entitled Śrī Prabodhānanda O Śrī Gopāla
Bhaṭṭa, which culminates with the metamorphosis of Prakāśānanda into
Prabodhānanda. This book played a definite role in propagating the myth among
the Bengali public, although it includes fanciful imaginary descriptions and
lacks historical evidence or authentic sources to support the author’s
assumptions.
The advocates of the Prakāśānanda tale also owe us an
explanation as to when and where he taught Gopāla Bhaṭṭa. Even the texts that
support their claim totally omit this point. We hear from the Bhakti-ratnākara and other works that by
the time Gopāla Bhaṭṭa left Śrīraṅgam and reached Vṛndāvana as a young man, he
was already an accomplished scholar. Nowhere can we find descriptions of a māyāvādī sannyāsī coming from Kāśī to
Śrīraṅgam to teach him. Furthermore, we hear from the Bhakti-ratnākara that Gopāla Bhaṭṭa could easily defeat
māyāvāda, and this would not be possible if he had been educated by a māyāvādī.
It is also unlikely that an exalted Vaiṣṇava like Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī would
have been educated by a māyāvādī. The present descendants of the
Bhaṭṭa family flatly deny such a possibility, for it is totally unprecedented
that one of them would give up their spiritual lineage to join the Śaṅkara
line. This would have demoralized the family, and by no means would they be
able to still hold a prestigious position as leading priests in the Śrī Raṅganātha
Temple as they do even today. No Śrī Vaiṣṇava would allow his children to be
taught by a follower of Śaṅkara, what to speak of in Śrīraṅgam, the headquarters
of the Śrī sampradāya. Also, sannyāsīs
do not visit householders in order to teach their children. To visit one’s
family’s house is also completely against the code of conduct for a sannyāsī. Additionally, we do not find
any description of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa going to Kāśī to study. If it be said that
Prabodhānanda took māyāvādī sannyāsa
after teaching Gopāla in Śrīraṅgam, then we have to ask how an obscure resident
of South India would have become so popular in Vārāṇasī to have already secured
thousands of disciples by the time Lord Caitanya arrived there in 1514 AD, just
three years after his visit to Śrīraṅgam. We also know from different sources that Lord Caitanya could not
tolerate māyāvāda at all, so why would he accept to stay four months
with the family of a māyāvādī? On the contrary, the Caitanya-bhāgavata
(Madhya, 3.3,18-40) tells us how even before taking sannyāsa
and visiting South India, Mahāprabhu was already indignant due to the offenses
committed by Prakāśānanda in Kāśī.
Some argue that ‘Sarasvatī’ is one
of the ten titles (daśanāma) adopted by the eka-daṇḍi-sannyāsīs who belong to Śaṅkara’s
sampradāya, and that no Śrī Vaiṣṇava tri-daṇḍi-sannyāsī has ever adopted this name. Yet
from the Bhakti-ratnākara it is clear that even before he
became a renunciant, Prabodhānanda was already known as ‘Sarasvatī’ on account
of his scholarship. Nowhere is it mentioned that this was his sannyāsa title.
From the Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā
we know that the prominent gopīs
and mañjarīs appeared as companions
of Mahāprabhu. We would also like to hear an explanation as to why Tuṅgavidyā,
one of the aṣṭa-sakhīs in Vṛndāvana,
would appear as a māyāvādī who became
a leper for blaspheming the Lord, while all the other nitya-siddhas spent their lives serving and glorifying Him. Jagāi
and Mādhāi were insignificant rogues in a village, yet their deliverance was
sung far and wide by many contemporary Gauḍīya poets. How much greater an
accomplishment would the conversion of the greatest māyāvādī scholar and guru of Vārāṇasī be and his turning into a rasika poet – yet everyone is
silent about it! The simple explanation is that all contemporary authors knew
very well that Prakāśānanda and Prabodhānanda were two completely distinct
persons. The Madhya-līlā of the Caitanya-caritāmṛta ends with the
description of how Prakāśānanda underwent a change of heart, regretted his
offenses and surrendered at the feet of Lord Caitanya. Nowhere is it mentioned
that he became a rasika mahā-bhāgavata
and travelled to Vṛndāvana. Mahāprabhu returned to Purī, Tapana Miśra and
Candraśekhara went to Vṛndāvana, and in the meantime we do not know of any Gauḍīya
devotee that visited Vārāṇasī, thus there was no one to tell us what happened
to Prakāśānanda. If he had left for Vṛndāvana, it would seem that a large
contingent amongst his many thousands of disciples would have followed him
there. The arrival of such a great scholar in Vṛndāvana accompanied by
thousands of followers would certainly have been recorded in chronicles and
poems. However, we hear nothing of the sort. As he was already an old man in
poor health, most probably he spent the rest of his days in Vārāṇasī itself.
At this point,
any sober reader will have already concluded that there is absolutely no
possibility that Prabodhānanda and Prakāśānanda were one and the same, and that
this confusion was propagated by misinformed later authors. On the other hand,
the cause and the solution of their confusion may possibly be one and the same.
For a long time, the Rādhā-Vallabha Vaiṣṇavas have been aware that there are
two Prabodhānandas in this discussion. One of the earliest evidences is
Priyādāsa’s Bhakta-sumiranī,[7]
a list of devotees who lived in Vraja, where he mentions two persons with a
similar name:
śrī-prabodha
rasa-rāsa rasika vasa |
jyāye jiya de
prema-sudhā-rasa || 69 ||
śrī-prabodha
vimalānanda santa | 70 |
“Śrī Prabodha was the master
among the rasika devotees expert in
relishing all transcendental mellows and was therefore given the nectarean rasa of love for Kṛṣṇa. Śrī Prabodha
was a saint absorbed in pure bliss.”
śrī-prabodhānanda
raṅgīna |
gāi kuñja-keli
rasika pravīna || 118 ||
“Śrī Prabodhānanda was a very
learned rasika who sang the loving
pastimes performed in the groves of Vṛndāvana.”
By the
word play (Prabodha and vimalānanda) in
verse 70, it may be implied that he could also be called Prabodhānanda, and to
make it clear that there was a totally different person with the same name, the
author mentioned the other one many verses later.
In the Rasik Ananya Māl (circa 1600 AD), a brief
hagiography of thirty-four notable Vaiṣṇavas of the Rādhā-vallabha sampradāya,
Bhagavat Mudita gives the most extensive known description about the
Prabodhānanda of that line as follows:
aba suni
śrī harivaṁśa pada, gahyau prabodhānanda | pāyau nitya-vihāra sukha, tajyau su
brahmānanda || prabodhānanda hute sannyāsī | jāke guru mata śūnya udāsī ||
dvitiya sarasvatī saba disi jītī | paṇḍita baḍe baḍe avinītī || kāśī se vṛndāvana
āye | eka māsa rahi ati sukha pāye || sabahī ṭhākura dvāre dekhe | aur sabai
ācāraja pekhe || saba ke mata nīke kari jāne | pai prabodha ke mana nahiṁ māne
|| paramānanda rasika kahuṁ mile | caracā karata duhuni mana khile ||
nita-vihāra kī caracā ṭhānī | so prabodha ke mana nahiṁ ānī || śruti-smṛti
itihāsa sunāye | sanaka-saṁhitā ke mata gāye || āgama bāvana bṛhad purāna |
inahiṁ ādi kahe bahut pramāna || tāmeṁ mānasarovara kahyau | nitya-vihāra
rasika jana lahyau || suni ke mānasarovara rīti | śraddhā bhaī karī kachu prīti
|| taba prabodha ke mana kachu āī | raina sarovara base ju jāī || vaisākhī
pūnyau kauṁ gayau | mana ekatra kiyau sukha layau || godhana dekhi parama sukha
pāyau | pāchaiṁ ṭhaura udāsa janāyau || gharī doya rāti jaba gaī | rītī bhūmi
bhayānaka bhaī || pāchaiṁ siṁha-siṁhanī dhāye | tinakī garajana sunata saṁkāye
|| pāchaiṁ nāga-nāginī dekhe | ḍaryau na viṣadhara bhayada alekhe || pāchaiṁ
pavana buhārī daī | bādara ulahyau baraṣā bhaī || śītala manda sugandha samīra
| ānanda bāḍhyau sakala śarīra || prabodhānanda kauṁ nidrā āī | susupta magana
tana-daśā bhulāī || kuñjavihārī yahai
vicārī | yaha hyāṁ kau nāhīṁ adhikārī || abahīṁ yāke bahut kacāī | rasika saṅga
binu bharama na jāī || mathurā kuṭī māñjha pahuñcāyau | mānasarovara rahana na
pāyau || prāta jagyau taba mana meṁ āī | nitya-vihāra sahī sukhadāī || paramānanda
vacana sata jānyau | apanau haṭha saba jhūṭhau mānyau || taba paramānanda ke
ghara āye | saravara ke viratānta sunāye || tumharau vacana bhayau paramāna |
nita-vihāra rasa kau kari dāna || taba paramānanda ke mana bhāye | yā rasa ke
dātā ju batāye || śrī harivaṁśa caraṇa jaba sevai | taba yā rasa ke jānai bhevai || suni prabodha vṛndāvana āye |
darasana kiyed parama sukha pāye || paramānanda prabodha hita kahī | so vinatī
hitajū mana gahī || ye sannyāsī hama haiṁ gehī | mana kari bhāva dharau ju sanehī
|| sevana kari paratīti baḍhāī | nita-vihāra kī śikṣā pāī || stuti aṣṭaka kari
suṭhi karī | citta-vṛtti hita-caranani dharī || suni karuṇā kari rīti batāī | abhilāṣā pujaī mana bhāī ||
nita-vihāra ānanda sunāyau | sukha-sāgara nainani darasāyau || dīpaka sauṁ lagi
dīpaka hoī | ekahi dharama na saṁsaya koī || sāvadhāna hvai dhyāna lagāyau |
śrī vṛndāvana śata darasāyau || dampati sukha sampati cita lāyau | śrī guru-iṣṭa-sādhu
mana bhāyau || rasika ananya dharma paripāṭī | jāni gahī hitajī kī ghāṭī || śrī
rādhāvallabha kī kari āsa | sudṛḍha bhayau vṛndāvana vāsa || nita-vihāra rasa
varṇana kiyau | rasika janani kau sīñcyau hiyau || nipaṭa rahasya keli kala gāī
| vṛndāvana niṣṭhā sudṛḍhāī || kuñja-rahasya grantha bahu kīne | arthani jānati rasika pravīne ||
śrī prabodhānanda kī, bānī veda pramāna | rasika ananyani kauṁ sukhada,
‘bhagavata mudita’ sujāna ||
“Prabodhānanda caught Hita Harivaṁśa’s feet, and after
hearing from him, he gave up the bliss of the impersonal Brahman and attained
the happiness of enjoying the eternal pastimes (nitya-vihāra)[8]
of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. Prabodhānanda was a mendicant sannyāsī belonging to
a line that followed an impersonalist philosophy. He was just like a second
Sarasvatī and conquered all directions with his knowledge. Because he was very
learned, he became very arrogant. He came from Kāśī to Vṛndāvana, where he
spent one month and obtained great happiness. He visited all temples and met
all local ācāryas. He became well acquainted with everyone’s philosophy,
but Prabodha’s mind did not accept any of them. Somewhere he met a rasika
devotee called Paramānanda,[9]
and while discussing with each other, both of them became very pleased at
heart. They had a discussion about nitya-vihāra, but Prabodha was not
convinced. Paramānanda presented many evidences from the śruti, smṛti,
itihāsas, āgamas, Sanaka-saṁhitā and Vāmana Mahāpurāṇa. He
also mentioned that rasika devotees realized nitya-vihāra in the
Mānasarovara. Hearing about the Mānasarovasa method, Prabodha developed some
faith and appreciation for that concept. Then something entered Prabodha’s
heart. Going to the lake during the full moon of the month Vaiśākha
(April-May), he spent the night there with a concentrated mind and felt joy. He
became very happy after seeing Govardhana. However, later he felt dejected for
not attaining his purpose. Around midnight, the place was desolate and became
scary. Then lions started running around, and hearing their roars, he became
frightened. He then saw poisonous snakes, but they failed to scare him. The
wind began blowing and clouds showered.
A gentle, fresh and aromatic breeze filled his whole body with joy.
Prabodhānanda then fell asleep, and while absorbed in deep sleep, he forgot all
bodily discomfort. Lord Kṛṣṇa, Who enjoys pastimes in the groves of Vraja,
thought, ‘He is not qualified to be in this place. He is still very much inept.
Without the association of rasika devotees, his confusion cannot be
dispelled. He may have reached a hut in Mathurā but has not attained a
residence at the Mānasarovara.’ When Prabodha woke up in the morning, his mind
was convinced that the concept of nitya-vihāra actually gives one
transcendental bliss. He understood that Paramānanda’s words were true and
therefore he accepted that his obstinacy was totally wrong. He then went to
Paramānanda’s house and told him about the incidents at the Mānasarovara. ‘Your
words proved correct. Kindly impart to me the taste of nitya-vihāra.
Paramānanda became very pleased at heart and then told him who can give this taste,
‘When you serve the feet of Śrī Hita Harivaṁśa, then you will understand the
mysteries of nitya-vihāra rasa.’ Hearing this, Prabodha went to Vṛndāvana
and upon having Harivaṁśa’s darśana, he became very happy. Paramānanda
had spoken well of Prabodha to Harivaṁśa, and the latter was captivated by his
modesty. He thought, ‘He is a sannyāsī and I am a householder, yet he is
so affectionate that my mind is captivated.’ Prabodha served him and their
affection grew. He was then taught about nitya-vihāra. He composed eight
beautiful verses glorifying Harivaṁśa and fixed his mind on his feet. When he
heard those verses, Harivaṁśa showed his mercy to him and imparted to him
knowledge about the mode of worship in nitya-vihāra, thus fulfilling his
heart’s desire. He told him about the bliss of nitya-vihāra and showed
that ocean of happiness before his eyes. It was just like a candle lighting
another candle. In this way Prabodha had no more doubts about that mode of
worship. He started to carefully practice meditation and wrote a collection of
verses entitled ‘Vṛndāvana-śatakam.’ His heart was always absorbed in
the treasure-like happiness of the Divine Couple, and his mind found pleasure
in his guru, worshipable deities and saintly persons. He thus understood the exclusive
mode of worship performed by rasika devotees as taught by Harivaṁśa.
Aspiring for Śrī Rādhā-Vallabha, he decided to live in Vṛndāvana permanently.
He described the nitya-vihāra rasa and thus showered mercy on the rasika
devotees. He continuously sang the Lord’s secret amorous pastimes and was
staunchly devoted to Vṛndāvana. He composed many books on the mysteries of the
pastimes in the groves of Vṛndāvana, which are known only to the expert rasika
devotees. The wise Bhagavat Mudita says that Prabodhānanda’s words are just
like Vedic evidence and give great happiness to the surrendered rasika
devotees.”
Kiśorīśaraṇa Ali gives Saṁvat 1594 (1538 AD)[10]
as the year when Prabodha came to Vṛndāvana as an impersonalist sannyāsī
and was converted by Harivaṁśa. This was four years after the disappearance of
Lord Caitanya, so it is not possible that this could be the same person who
wrote the Caitanya-candrāmṛta and who was the guru of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa
Gosvāmī.
In the Bhakta-nāmāvalī, verse 29, Dhruvadāsa
(16th – 17th century AD), who is said to be a disciple of
Hita Harivaṁśa, states:
jugala prema
rasa abdhi meṁ paryau prabodha mana jāi |
vṛndāvana rasa
mādhurī gāī adhika laḍāi ||
“Prabodha’s mind was always absorbed in the ocean of the
transcendental loving mellows of the Divine Couple. With great affection, he
sang the sweetness of the rasas of Vṛndāvana.”
On the basis of these and many more verses written by other
authors coming down in the line of Hita Harivaṁśa in the 17th , 18th
and 19th centuries, in the appendix of his edition of the Rādhā-sudhā-nidhi, Kiśorīśaraṇa Ali
makes an extensive analysis of the available information on both Prabodhānandas
and summarizes the distinctions of the Rādhā-vallabhī Prabodhānanda as follows:
1) He was a disciple of Śrī Hita
Harivaṁśa and even before surrendering to him, without any doubt his name was
Prabodhānanda;
2) Before meeting Śrī Hita, he was
certainly a monist sannyāsī;
3) He definitely came from Kāśī to
Vṛndāvana and was originally from Bengal;
4) On the basis of ancient
evidences, he arrived in Vṛndāvana between 1538 and 1539 AD;
5) After surrendering to Śrī Hita,
he spent the rest of his life within the boundaries of Śrī Vṛndāvana;
6) He definitely surrendered to
Śrī Hita in Vṛndāvana;
7) He was exclusively devoted to
Śrī Vṛndāvana, the personal abode of Śrī Vṛndāvaneśvarī;
8) He rejects one who leaves Vṛndāvana,
one who incites to leave Vṛndāvana, and even a guru who creates hindrances to
continuous residence there; not only this, he turns his face away even from
Lord Hari Himself if He happens to be outside of Vṛndāvana;
9) He is the author of Vṛndāvana-śatakam, which propagates the
glories of Śrī Vṛndāvana Dhāma;
10) Abiding by the order of his
Gurudeva, he remained in the sannyāsī
dress;
11) He was a rasika exclusively devoted to the rasa of Vṛndāvana;
12) He considered the earthly
manifestation of Śrī Vṛndāvana as the ultimate goal, superior even to Goloka;
13) He was absorbed in the mood of
the Sakhīs and exclusively chanted the mantra consisting in the name of Śrī
Rādhā;
14) He meditated on his Gurudeva
in the form of a Sakhī servant of Śrī Rādhā and followed in his footsteps.
The above evidence and analysis seem to confirm that there
were indeed two Prabodhānandas: the Gauḍīya one, guru of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī,
and the Rādhā-vallabhī one, disciple of Hita Harivaṁśa. The latter is
well-known as the author of the Hita-harivaṁśa-candrāṣṭakam, the eight
verses in praise of Hita Harivaṁśa, which can be seen engraved on the inner
walls of the Sevākuñja in Vṛndāvana. This also solves the controversy
pertaining to the supposed relationship between Harivaṁśa and the Gauḍīya
Prabodhānanda, which was probably no more than another confusion.
Another controversy spread by the Bengali Bhakta-māla (20.133) and the Prema-vilāsa (18th chapter) attributed to Nityānanda Dāsa, a
disciple of Jāhnavā Devī, is the claim that Hita Harivaṁśa was a disciple of
Gopāla Bhaṭṭa. Both texts narrate that once the latter saw Harivaṁśa chewing
betel prasāda on an ekādaśī day, scolded him and requested
him to abide by the scriptural injunctions.
When the same incident happened again, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa asked why he was
violating the regulative principles, to which Harivaṁśa admitted to offending
him for not following his order, but he could not refuse Śrī Rādhā’s prasāda. Prema-vilāsa goes so far as to say that Harivaṁśa was then deprived
of the service to Śrī Rādhā-Ramaṇa and thus installed his own deity, Śrī
Rādhā-Vallabha, Whom he worshipped until one day when some dacoits chopped off
his head and threw it in the Yamunā. Gopāla Bhaṭṭa was bathing in the Yamunā at
that time and was shocked to see the decapitated head shedding tears and crying
“Rādhe, Rādhe!” Harivaṁśa’s head then floated close to Gopāla Bhaṭṭa and asked
for forgiveness. He then took pity on him and put his foot on Harivaṁśa’s head,
who then attained liberation.
We have already seen above how the Bengali Bhakta-māla is not considered a reliable
text. This fantastic and ludicrous narration almost precludes the need to pass any
comment on the so-called Prema-vilāsa.
B. B. Majumdar, in the Caitanya Cariter
Upadān (14th chapter), makes a detailed assessment of the
authenticity of the Prema-vilāsa, and
on the basis of the oldest manuscripts and their contents, he concludes that the
text written by Nityānanda Dāsa originally consisted of only sixteen chapters,
each of which was largely interpolated in course of time, besides which there
was an addition of another eight chapters or more at the end. Each manuscript
seems to have a different number of verses in each chapter, and the beginning
and end of the chapters also do not match. Many of the narrations are based on
dreams and “voices in the sky,” supposedly seen and heard by different devotees
and include many statements unheard of, such as Lord Nityānanda receiving dīkṣā from Īśvara Purī.[11]
The book was first printed by Rāma Nārāyaṇa Vidyāratna in the early 1900s with
only eighteen chapters. In 1911 AD, he published a second edition with twenty
chapters. Yaśodānandana Tālukadāra printed another edition in 1913 AD with
twenty-six “and a half” chapters. In the beginning of the text, the author
declares that he received an order from Jāhnavā Devī to write down the exploits
of Śrīnivāsācārya, Narottama Dāsa Ṭhākura and Śyāmānanda Prabhu, which is the
central theme of the entire book up to the sixteenth chapter, after which the
topics stray quite far from the original narrative, as we may observe from the
supposed incident mentioned above.
Hita Harivaṁśa was a prominent religious leader in Vṛndāvana
in the 16th century. He had many disciples and established the Śrī
Rādhā-Vallabha temple, one of the main temples of Vṛndāvana along with those of
Govinda, Madana-mohana and Gopīnātha. It is one of the most visited temples up
to the present day. If he had indeed been murdered, there would certainly be
clear records documenting this. Particularly we would expect that at least the
Gauḍīyas would be eager to show the world the destination of those who offend
their gurus. It is more than suspicious that the first time this tale appeared
was several centuries later within a text which the Gauḍīyas themselves
repudiate as spurious.
In the Bhramocchedana,[12]
while addressing this guru-disciple controversy, Gopāla Prasāda Śarmā describes
an odd incident. According to him, Rādhā-caraṇa Gosvāmī Vidyāvāgīśa, a
respectable scholar of the Rādhā-Ramaṇa parivāra and former mayor of Vṛndāvana,
had mentioned in a book called Caitanya-carita-sāra that Hita Harivaṁśa
was a disciple of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī. The indignant Rādhā-vallabhīs then
strongly protested and the case was taken to the local police. On the 5th
October, 1888, Vidyāvāgīśa supposedly admitted that he had no evidence to
support his claim and thus had to pay a five-rupee fine and apologize publicly.
It is said that a notice was then printed and distributed all over Vṛndāvana.
Although the tone of the narration sounds legitimate, and although it was even
quoted by scholars like Dr. Vijayendra Snātaka,[13]
I could not find a single trace to corroborate it, despite enquiring far and
wide in Vṛndāvana and despite Snātaka’s claim that the said printed notice is
still preserved. I approached many of the senior and learned Rādhā-vallabhīs in
Vṛndāvana, but they could not present a copy of that notice, nor did they seem
to be aware of the incident. Furthermore, Vidyāvāgīśa’s descendants had never
heard of it either. In a biographical thesis[14]
on Vidyāvāgīśa written by Dr. Kedāradatta Tatrāḍī, there is not a single word
about it. Moreover, there is no work entitled Caitanya-carita-sāra among
the innumerable publications written by Vidyāvāgīśa, nor a single copy of this
book in his personal library. In the absence of any corroborating evidence, we
may suspect this to be yet another attempt to taint another’s reputation.
Some fertile
brains speculate that after being rejected by Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī, Hita
Harivaṁśa took shelter of Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, and for this reason the
latter was repudiated by the Gauḍīya community, who shunned his name, which
explains why it is not found in the
Caitanya-caritāmṛta. In the Bhakti-ratnākara,
Narahari Cakravartī has been kind enough to demystify the silence of Kavirāja
Gosvāmī:
śrī-gopāla-bhaṭṭa
hṛṣṭa haiyā ājñā dila |
granthe
nija-prasaṅga varṇite niṣedhila || 1.222 ||
kene niṣedhila,
ihā ke bujhite pāre ||
nirantara
atidīna māne āpanāre || 1.223 ||
kavirāja tāṁra
ājñā nāre laṅghibāre |
nāma-mātra likhe
anya na kare pracāre || 1.224 ||
“Śrīla Gopāla Bhaṭṭa was also
pleased to give Kṛṣṇadāsa an order to write the book but forbade Kṛṣṇadāsa to
write about him (Gopāla Bhaṭṭa). Who can understand why he forbade him? He
always considered himself very low. Śrīla Kavirāja Gosvāmī would not violate
his order, therefore he only mentioned his name without describing his
glories.”
Out of
humility, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa and Prabodhānanda insisted that they should not be
glorified in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta.
This explanation is quite plausible, and since Narahari was coming from the
spiritual lineage of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, it is probable that this is the version he
heard from his predecessors. If the above claim is true and Prabodhānanda was
therefore not glorified by Kavirāja Gosvāmī, then for what reason was Gopāla
Bhaṭṭa not glorified either? His name was merely mentioned six times in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta in unavoidable
contexts, such as when naming the six Gosvāmīs of Vṛndāvana, but he was not the
subject of any narration in the whole book, despite the fact that each of the
other five Gosvāmīs had their life stories outlined. Moreover, if Prakāśānanda
and Prabodhānanda were the same person, Kavirāja Gosvāmī would have violated
his request not to write about him, and the highlight on his life in Vārāṇasī
would be totally inconsistent due to the omission about his previous and later
life in Śrīraṅgam and Vṛndāvana. Otherwise we may wonder how it is possible
that those in the line of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa were unaware of such an important fact
about his guru Prabodhānanda. And also, why Narahari would speak such nonsense?
By not informing the readers that Prakāśānanda later became Prabodhānanda,
Kavirāja’s narration would be faulty and he would be accountable for hundreds
of years of confusion.
Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī was an incarnation of Tuṅgavidyā, was
born in a pure Śrī Vaiṣṇava family, became the guru of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa and
attained the personal association of Lord Caitanya. Although he did not have
the slightest blemish, the Gauḍīyas themselves mercilessly turned him into a māyāvādī leper called Prakāśānanda and
continue to depict him as such without hesitation or embarrassment. If they can
be so ruthless to Prabodhānanda, what would they not speak about Śrī Hita
Harivaṁśa, given that the animosity between the Rādhā-Vallabhīs and the Gauḍīyas
began from their very primordial days and continues up to the present? In the
absence of strong and unambiguous evidence, the myth that Prabodhānanda was
Prakāśānanda is no less a hoax than the myth that Harivaṁśa was a rejected
disciple of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī.
There are yet two other
controversies regarding Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī. A rumour says that he
worshipped Lord Caitanya in the mood of the Gaurāṅga-nāgarīs,[15]
which seems to have been originated from his use of the expression
‘gaura-nāgara’ in the Caitanya-candrāmṛta
(132). Vṛndāvanadāsa Ṭhākura rebuked such expression in the Caitanya-bhāgavata,
1.15.30:
ataeva yata mahā-mahima sakale ‘gaurāṅga-nāgara’ hena stava
nāhi bale
“Therefore, great personalities do not praise Lord Caitanya
by calling him ‘Gaurāṅga-nāgara,’ the lover of damsels.”
For this
reason, some assume that Prabodhānanda was excommunicated by the Gauḍīyas, who
therefore avoided his name and works. This is another highly speculative
slander that contradicts the respect offered to Prabodhānanda by stalwart ācāryas like Gopāla Bhaṭṭa, Jīva Gosvāmī
and Sanātana Gosvāmī. As mentioned above, the Bhakti-ratnākara explains the factual reason why his name was not
often mentioned. First of all, there is no evidence that Vṛndāvana dāsa was
speaking about Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī. Secondly, the meanings of the word
‘nāgara’ in Sanskrit and vernacular are different. While in Bengali this word
is primarily used in the sense of ‘lover’ and ‘paramour,’ in Sanskrit it is
not. In his Bengali translation to the said verse, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta
Sarasvatī explains that the word ‘nāgara’ means ‘parama-rasika,’ transcendental
enjoyer of rasa. It particularly depicts Kṛṣṇa, Who has now appeared in
a golden (gaura) form.[16]
There is also an old dispute over the authorship of the Rādhā-rasa-sudhā-nidhi, Vṛndāvana-mahimāmṛta
and Saṅgīta-Mādhava, which the
Rādhā-vallabhīs claim to have been written by their ācāryas. Recently they have filed a judicial case against the Gauḍīyas
who claim that the Rādhā-rasa-sudhā-nidhi was authored by the Gauḍīya
Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī instead of Hita Harivaṁśa, whom they believe to
be the real author. This problem will be solved only when all extant ancient
manuscripts are collected and properly analysed.
[1] Also called Daivakīnandana. He was a
disciple of Puruṣottama, a disciple of Nityānanda Prabhu.
[2] This is not the author of Caitanya-bhāgavata. In the Karṇānanda, Yadunandana dāsa mentions
two devotees with this name – one was a son and the other was a disciple of Śrīnivāsācarya
(17th century AD).
[3] He was a pujārī in the Govindadeva Mandira in the 17th
century. His guru was Haridāsa Paṇḍita, sevādhikārī
of the temple and a disciple of Anantācārya, a disciple of Gadādhara Paṇḍita.
Vide Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Ādi-līlā, 8.54-65.
[4] He was a disciple of Śrī Rāmaśaraṇa
Caṭṭarāja, who was the son of Śrī Kṛṣṇadāsa Caṭṭarāja and a disciple of Śrī Rāmacaraṇa
Cakravartī, both disciples of Śrīnivāsācārya, who was a disciple of Śrīla Gopāla
Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī.
[5] He was a disciple of Manohara dāsa.
[6] He lived in the first half of the 18th
century and belonged to the disciplic succession coming down from Gopāla Bhaṭṭa
Gosvāmī and Śrīnivāsācārya.
[7] At the Janmasthāna Śodha Pīṭha,
Mathurā, there is a manuscript copy dated 1775 Saṁvat (1718 AD).
[8] Nitya-vihāra is a prominent
concept in the Rādhā-Vallabha sampradāya, according to which Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa
are continuously enjoying amorous pastimes in union, without any scope for
separation (viraha).
[9] He was a disciple of Hita Harivaṁśa.
[10] Hindī Bhakti Kāvya meṁ Rasa-bhakti Dhārā
aur uska Vāṇī Sāhitya, Vṛndāvana, 1998.
[11] Vide the 7th chapter.
[12] A Hindi book published by Mūlacanda
Lāla Gosvāmī in Kolkata, 1920, pages 43-50.
[13] Rādhā-Vallabha Sampradāya: Siddhānta
aur Sāhitya, New Delhi, 1958, third chapter, page 104.
[14] Śrī Gosvāmī Rādhā-caraṇa jī:
Vyaktitva tathā kṛtitva, Vṛndāvana, 1995
[15] “The girlfriends of Gaurāṅga,” an apasampradāya in which the worshippers
consider themselves gopīs and see
Caitanya Mahāprabhu as Kṛṣṇa in Vṛndāvana in the form of a paramour (nāgara)
enjoyer of the gopīs.
[16] For more on this topic, vide Bhaktisidhānta
Sarasvatī Ṭhākura’s commentaries on the Caitanya-bhāgavata, Ādi-khaṇḍa
15.17-32, and the Bengali magazine Gauḍīya, second year, volume II,
pages 6-9.
