|
Jnaneshvara's approach to bhakti is very peculiar in the history of bhakti system. Especially his contribution to Bhagavata dharma in Maharashtra is really great. Bahinaba' describes in her Abhanga Jnanadeve rachila paya (Jnanadeva laid the foundation). If we consider Bhagavata dharma as
a temple, Jnaneshvara laid the foundation of its structure. And this foundation is firm and profound. Jnaneshvara adds philosophical basis to Bhagavta dharma. Jnaneshvara's great contribution lays not only in his philosophical concept of bhakti (devotion) which is Advaitic but also in making Bhagavata Dharma a
movement, or a living force controlling the lives of the devotees. E. Zelliot credits bhakti movement with "securing the final triumph of Hinduism over Buddhism and Jainism, with bringing the vernaculars
into being as literary languages, with spreading the concepts of the great tradition of Brahamanical Hinduism to the common man." 1
Jnaneshvara says,
All human beings are naturally inclined to worship my divine being.
He says the bhakti is a natural instinct of the human beings, therefore, bhakti must be as old
as the human being; only, it must be evolved.
To consider the concept of bhakti according to Jnaneshvara, the following five questions are raised by Dr. S. R. Talaghatti. 2 These questions are helpful to understand the complicated
problems about bhakti. Therefore, I would like to quote these questions and add some minor questions' and then try to analyse all of them.
1. Is dvaita (duality) a necessary condition of bhakti? Is it possible to consider bhakti without accepting dvaita of God and bhakta (devotee)?
2. Is there any conflict between jnana and bhakti? In other words, are jnana and bhakti two different means to attain moksa? Some say that the faculty of jnana is intellect and of the
latter is emotion; so both are totally separate. That means there is no necessary and inevitable relation between jnana and bhakti: so bhakti exists without jnana.
3. Is bhakti a personal and private matter of bhakta with God? Is there any place for social implication in bhakti?
4. Is bhakti action-oriented? This means that bhakti implies something 'to do'. For example, we say 'to do puja', 'to do salutation', 'to do kirtana', 'to do namasmarana' and so on.
5. Is bhakti merely a means or an end? Some say that even multi (liberation) is also a means. Some say that bhakti is the fifth purusartha.
To these five questions raised by S.R. Talaghatti, I am adding the following ones:
6. What is the relation of gauni (secondary) or apara-bhakti to para-bhakti? Are these two gradual stages of development?
7. What is the mutual relation of the four kinds of bhakta, viz., arta, jijnasu, artharthi, and jnani? Can the former three bhaktas be said to be preparing stages of jnani-bhakta?
8. What is Jnaneshvara's approach to navavidha bhakti (nine forms of bhakti)? Jnaneshvara mentions the importance of namasmarana in his Abhanga and Haripatha, but what about the
other eight?
Before considering all these questions, I would like to mention a general and common problem for all these questions, that is about language.
Just as there is a triad of the knower (jnata), the known (jneya) and knowledge (jnana) involved in cognition, similarly, deva, bhakta, and bhakti is involved. The language in which
we talk about the subject of bhakti, is certainly that of dvaita (duality). All our transaction of knowledge goes on with the help of language. In the field of knowledge, there are jnana and ajnana, both are dependent on language. Jnaneshvara knows this fact fully. He mentions,
"Now the knowledge and ignorance whose very life pitiably depends upon the word" (A. 6-102). We are prone to decide the form of bhakti by 'bhakti-language'. 'Bhakti language'
means that language which we use while discussing about bhakti. If we are not alert enough, the language easily misleads us. And finally it leads us to the false knowledge. So we should
be always "alert about language". This is very important in the field of philosophy. Wittgenstein admits that to know the real form of the language by its logical analysis is the
work of philosophy. He says, "Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language." 3
Jnaneshvara is also quite aware of the defect of language as a 'trap'. In his Amrtanubhava, Jnaneshvara says, "discharging the debt of language is necessary for all". 4 Jnaneshvara
accepts language only as a reminder of Brahman, not more than this. He first praises the
importance of language as follows; "When a thing is lost to us or to others in forgetfulness, it is regained by the word that reminds it. If the word thus glorifies itself as a reminder, it has
no other merit beyond this." 5 Jnaneshvara's view of language is very similar to Wittgenstein's. According to Jnaneshvara, all misunderstanding about bhakti, such as dvaita in bhakti, and bhakti is actionoriented, etc. is caused by language.
Going back to the questions raised earlier, the first one is directly related to the understanding of the nature of bhakti, namely that bhakti is the experience of advaita (non-duality). It seems that the prevalent view of bhakti is based on accepting dvaita of God
and bhakta: otherwise bhakti is not possible. But Jnaneshvara does not accept this view. He asserts that bhakti is very much there in advaita:
"In that way, although activism finds no place in non-dualistic spiritual principle, yet there is
the devotion that finds a place in it, and this can be realized through personal experience alone, it being inexpressible in mere words."
Not only advaita-bhakti is possible, but for true bhakti, dvaita cannot be even imagined. His clear view is that to imagine dvaita-bhakti is due to ignorance.
"In that way this devotion operates, taking the support of ignorance and shows me, the seer, as the object to be seen."
The root of all language of bhakti is grounded in dvaita, such as pujya-pujaka (worship- worshipper), upasya-upasaka (worship-worshipper), and so on. Thus dvaita is reflected in the
language itself. That is why we get misled, and people understand that bhakti should be based on dvaita. This difficulty of language creates a problem in understanding bhakti. By foresaid reason, it is difficult to understand advaita between God and bhakta. So, it is not
possible to get to the inner core of advaita-bhakti without renouncing the dualistic language.
According to Jnaneshvara, God and bhakta are not different, but one inseparable unity.
"You have by now heard, that the devotee who gets absorbed in me through knowledge- cumdevotion is one with me."
The removal of this ignorance, i.e., the belief that bhakti is based on dvaita, is called jnanabhakti according to Jnaneshvara.
"As that ignorance has vanished now, the state of seeing inherent in the seeing agent
merges into me, in this way the reflection merges itself into the original."
So, in this state, there is no room to consider three-fold cognition, viz., the seer (the
subject or agent), the seen (the object), and the process of seeing.
Jnaneshvara makes many statements in connection with the subject of advaita between God and bhakta. "The God himself becomes the devotee. The destination itself becomes the
path." (A. 9-35). "The non-dual one enters of his own accord the courtyard of duality." (A. 9-29). "Seeing Me as the Spirit, he becomes one with me." (J. 18-1174) "Name of the Hari is
only a means. To fix the position of non-duality is an art and to experience this is very rare". (Haripatha 2)
7
Now we should proceed to the next question. Are jnana and bhakti two different means or pathways to attain moksa? According to the prevalent opinion, jnana and bhakti are two
independent means to attain moksa. But Jnaneshvara's assertion is different. He uses the expression 'jnana bhakti", it means that jnana and bhakti are one and the same. As I have
once mentioned, "the devotee who gets absorbed in me through knowledge-cum-devotion is only myself." (J. 18-1130). It is difficult to understand the oneness of bhakti and jnana, because we have a firm belief that bhakti is derived from emotion, and jnana from intellect.
But in Jnaneshvara's view of bhakti, there is no separation between jnana and bhakti.. As a matter of fact, he calls bhakti as 'jnana-bhakti" only. Jnana and bhakti are not two distinct
states, but two names given to the same state of being. Bhakti and jnana are two different words, but according to Jnaneshvara, the state which these two words refer to, is one and
the same. This very condition can be said to be the "natural state of Atman". (J. 18-1205)
Jnaneshvara clearly mentions:
"Men of knowledge (samkhyas) call it 'recognition of the self', while the devotees of God Siva
call it 'the power (sakti)', and we call it the Supreme Devotion of the self."
We can understand Jnaneshvara's definition of bhakti from this ovi.. He clearly asserts that
we call the Ultimate Reality by many different names, but all are the same. Not only the same, but natural conditions of Atman itself. "In fact, this is my own innate state of Brahman, that is named bhakti." (J. 18-1113). Here the consciousness of the body
disappears, and all actions are performed with the internal conviction that everything is Atman. 8 Jnaneshvara accepts svasamvitti (self-illuminated knowledge), jnana, and advaita-bhakti synonymously. For Jnaneshvara, between jnana and bhakti, there is no
difference but they are one and the same. Again this oneness of jnana and bhakti is equivalent to the state of advaitabhakti.
Now we will consider the third question. This topic is directly related to my theme, that is "social implication of bhakti". Apparently bhakti seems to be a very personal affair, an
intimate relationship between God and bhakta. But Jnaneshvara's view is different. To understand his view, it is necessary to consider the conception of &oaf according to
Jnaneshvara. Jnaneshvara uses the words "Atman", "Brahman", "caitanya", "vastu'' (substance)", "samvitti (pure knowledge)", and "Israra", and so on to denote the Ultimate
Reality. Here I assume his conception of God as the following two: 1. God as Atman and 2. God as Universal Spirit.
Jnaneshvara uses many similes to propound the real character of Atman. "The glorious Atman is pure and perfect knowledge itself" (A. 6-87), "Atman that is self-luminous" (A. 6-13)
"Atman is self- evident" (A. 6-93). And in the first ovi of Jnaneshvari, he expresses the real nature of the Ultimate Reality, and salutes it:
"Om, the Primeval being, the very form of Supreme Self, the subject-matter of the Vedas, be
bowed to. All glory to it. Oh you, the form of self who can be known from self-experience alone, I hail you."
"In this way, he knows me as unique truly through his reflexive devotion as part and parcel of
his own self and also knows that he is that knowledge, viz., the realisation of the self."
The understanding of "God as Universal Spirit" (visvatmaka, Isvara) is a very important concept for understanding the real meaning of bhakti. "visvatmaka Isvara" means that
understanding of God as abiding in everything and every human being. This is the Advaitic realization of "seeing oneself in all and all in oneself". Upanisadic philosopher says, "Verily, all this is Brahman". And in the Gita, "Vasudeva is all". is stated.'¡ Jnaneshvara says:
"They also regard every being that they see of divine nature. Know that this is my Yoga of devotion". 10a
Jnaneshvara shows the gist of his philosophy of bhakti beautifully. He tells us to treat each
and everything regarding it as God, because every living being is filled with God-hood. So, the real bhakti is to worship every being as God. The service of mankind is therefore the
most important way to worship God.
Svami Vivekananda, who translated this Advaitic philosophy into practical principles, says,
"The highest form of worship that had been laid down for the bhakta was the worship of man." Really if there were to be any sort of worship, he (bhakta) would suggest getting a
poor man, or six, or twelve, as his circumstance would permit everyday to their homes, and serving them, thinking that they were Narayanas." 11 This humanistic conception is the
foundation of his practical goal of the service of mankind, especially the poor. (The concept of "daridra Narayana" i.e., "God in the firm of the poor.") And he adds, "Look upon every man,
woman and every one as god. You cannot help anyone, you can only serve". 12 This humility is the very core of bhakti. Svami Vivekananda shows us a harmonious reconciliation of the good of oneself with the welfare of the society.
Svami Vivekananda unites karma and bhakti together and brings it into practice. Jnaneshvara also says the same thing:
"If he (the seeker) worships such God pervading the hearts of all beings, by dedicating to
him, the flowers in the form of performance of the prescribed duties-such worship propitiates Him very highly."
Jnaneshvara says that the worship of God does not merely mean the idol worship, but
performing one's own prescribed duty without expecting any fault. As we have already seen, the conception of Universal God and to serve every being is closely related to the naiskarmya (exemption from action).
"Know that one's duty is an obligatory sacrifice. If one performs his duty, sin does not enter him."
"His inner experience getting saturated with the realization that this entire universe is full
with 'Vasudeva', he proves to be the king among the devotees, and one of great knowledge."
True bhakta must find God everywhere, within himself as well as without himself.
In this context, I will refer to the following sentences from the PJ. by B.P. Bhahirat; "The
relation of the Ultimate Reality or God with our finite selves is one of deep sympathy and love. God is regarded as the embodiment of love. Hence to know Him is to love Him, and this
love is the inspiration of noble deeds and the highest social service." 13
The fourth question is whether bhakti is action-oriented or not. It seems that bhakti implies
'to do' something. In bhakti-language we say 'to do puja, 'to do vandana' and so on. But real state of bhakti is not "to do" something, but "to be" something. Bhakti is not an action, but
can be better understood as anubhuti (experience) only. Jnaneshvara mentions:
"In that way one following the path of activism gets one with my essence and abides there
worshipping me passively without any manifest action, in the way a gold ornament does, with regard to gold."
"In that way, although activism finds no place in non-dualistic scriptural Principle, yet there is
the devotion that finds a place in it, and this can be realised through personal experience alone, it being inexpressible in mere words." As we have already seen that bhakti means the experience of advaita is stated by Jnaneshvara:
"Since he has become one with Me, his 'doing' amounts to, 'not doing' and that is a special characteristic of my worship."
"In such a state, all the terms (such as) 'action' or 'doing agent' get eliminated, oh Son of
Pandu, and he becomes only myself-getting one with my essence."
Once advaita-bhakti is experienced, there is no place for action. Because action presupposes dvaitic conception. So we can say that bhakti is not action-oriented, but some kind of a
state of being.
"Since I am all-pervasive, all movements (of the devotee who has merged in myself) stop and
this absence of movement becomes his pilgrimage to my non-dual state."
"In short, whatever he talks is (singing) my own praise, whatever he looks at, is my own
vision, whatever movements he makes are my own movements, I who transcend dualism."
"Whatever he does is all my own worship, whatever he contemplates upon, is repeating in a muttering tone (japa) my own name, and his abiding m peace is enrapt concentration of
meditation upon my own self (samadhi)."
In this state, bhakta worships God wholly without doing any action. "Bhakti is not an act of
devotion but the very nature of God." 14
"There is no action or inaction, and everything goes on as the experience of the Atman."
The fifth question is: Is bhakti merely a means to attain moksa or an End in itself? In Hindu philosophy, dharma, artha, kama, and moksa are known as values (purusarthas) for human
life. Here moksa is the supreme goal of life. The other three will be secondary goals. Jnaneshvara says that bhakti is the fifth purusartha and higher than moksa.
"This is the fifth and the principal quality of the Ksatriya, just as devotion is the head of the four principal objects of life (purusartha)."
According to Jnaneshvara, bhakti is the goal and the final fulfilment of life. Before this, even moksa is nothing. But generally bhakti is said to be a means for moksa. People practise bhakti, because bhakti can lead them to moksa. That is not true, because there may be
some sort of minor intention, or secondary purpose, that is devotion for the sake of desire (sakama bhakti). Even expecting moksa is also included in this. Bhakti is considered as an
end by Jnaneshvara.
"The enjoyment of the objects of senses becomes sweeter than the bliss of final
emancipation, and in the home of loving devotion the devotee and his God experience their sweet union".
"It is not mere object of sensual enjoyment as a materialist thinks, but is the expression of
divine Love which is also the very source of his life." 15 Bhaktas even do not want to attain moksa, because for them bhakti is the supreme end. So they want to get birth again and
again and devote themselves to God forever.
As we have seen, the concept of bhakti according to Jnaneshvara is grounded in Advaitic view. So, experiencing Advaita is the essence of bhakti. In short, Advaita-bhakti is equivalent
to jnana-bhakti, and both are treated as para-bhakti or sadhya-bhakti.
The remaining minor questions will be discussed all together. What is the relation of gauni- bhakti to para-bhakti? Narada says; "The secondary devotion (gauni-bhakti) is of three kinds
according to the difference in the mental disposition (of the devotee) or according to the type of discontentment (in the devotees)" (NBS. 56) According to the difference in the
mental disposition means the three gunas (sattva, rajas and tamas). Swami Chinmayananda says:
"The tamasic seeker can never rise high, but the ta-magic, striving hard through his devotion, will get slowly transformed into the rajasic type. The rajasic individual can, through
his more intensive devotion, rise much higher, and as a result of his strong bhakti, he will eventually come to the sattvic stage. The sattvic seeker can easily go to the highest ...". 16 The secondary devotion is of three kinds due to the type of discontentment means, so
called arta, jijnasu and artharthi. According to Swami Chinmayananda: 'Arta means one in whom there is a discontentnent with all that material life can give. Jijnasu is one who feels
the Presence of an Ultimate Reality, but intellectually he is discontented because he cannot understand this great truth. The artharthi is also discontented with his present condition
and, therefore, longs to find his fulfilment among his desired worldly objects of pleasure." 17 All these three types are discontented with their own states and some of them who attain bhakti for its own sake, would go to higher stages with God's grace, they are jnanis.
Jnaneshvara also says:
"This fourth kind of devotion is so named, since its ways differ from the ways followed by those in distress called arta, or those eager to know, called jijnasu, or those desiring the
fulfilment of some cherished object, called artharthi."
"Practically this is neither the third nor the fourth or yet neither the first nor the last; in fact this is my own innate state."
In NBS No.57; "Than each succeeding one, each preceding one becomes the nobler." In these three kinds of bhakti, each preceding one serves for the succeeding one. It may be
considered that arta is sattvic in nature, jijnasu is rajasic in nature, and artharthi is tamasic in nature. From this description, we can understand that gauni-bhakti is necessary and
preparatory stage of para-bhakti, because we cannot attain para-bhakti within a day. It can be attained gradually.
The last question is about 'navavidha bhakti". In the Bhagavata school, for practising bhakti, navavidha bhakti is mentioned. 18 In the Jnaneshvari there is no specific reference to navavidha bhakti. But Jnaneshvara mentions the importance of some of them, such as kirtana:
"Such devotees dance with the joy of devotion to God while singing My praise, and make all
the talk of penance empty, since not a trace of sin is left in them."
"They are so enrapt in singing My praise, that they forget the place and the time, when
absorbed in the supreme bliss. There is constant and unbroken stringing together of the names of God."
From these ovis, we can understand that Jnaneshvara considers kirtana as a very helpful means to experience the unity with God (advaita).
Another kind of bhakti emphasised by Jnaneshvara is namasmarana (remembrance of God's name)... In his Haripatha he praises Harinama, with the refrain, "Hari mukhe mhana, hard
mukhe mhana." "Invoke, invoke the name of Hari." S. G. Tulpule says: "The goal to be achieved is identification with the Brahman, or the Reality, and the way is the way of
namayoga which means "union by the Name". It is the Name, and not the image or attributes of God, that is to be meditated upon." 19 Generally navavidha bhakti is understood as sadhana bhakti. But in the case of Jnaneshvara, kirtana, namasmarana are considered to be
helpful means to attain sadhya bhakti.
The above discussion, I hope, would bring out the nature of Jnaneshvara's approach to Bhakti.
Notes
- E. Zelliot: "The Medieval Bhakti Movement in History" in Hinduism: New Essays in the History of Religions, ed. by B. L. Smith, p. 143.
- S. R. Talaghatti: "Jnaneshvara-darsanatil Bhakti-sankalpana." Sanskriti-sugandha, pp. 250-51.
- L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations.
- A. 3-1. Tr. by Bahirat in PJ.
- ibid., A. 5-67, 68.
- Haripatha. Tr. by C. Vaudeville quoted from her article "The Cult of the Divine Name in
the Haripath of Dnyandev."
- In the A., there are many descriptions of omnipresence of Atman. cf. A., X- 14, 15.
"Everything is luminous, and there is no secret to be revealed, since the whole universe is completely filled with the one eternal perfect Atman, who is neither hidden nor manifest."
- "Sarvam khalvidam Brahma" (Chard. U. 3-14-1).
- "Vasudevah sarvam iti. " (G. VII- 19).
- a. J. 10-118. Tr. by Yardi..
- Swami Vivekananda: The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda Vol. 3, p. 39.
- ibid., p. 392.
- B.P. Bahirat. op.cit., p. 147.
- ibid., p. 94.
- ibid., p. 95.
- Swami Chinmayananda, op. cit., p. 111.
- ibid.,p. 112.
- Cf. the chapter of "Bhakti in the BP."
- C. Vaudeville: op.cit., p. 399.
top
|
