Bhakti and Embodiment
Page 6
Embodiment of the Divine in Place. In Vedic yajñas a sacrificial arena is temporarily cordoned off and particular deities are invoked to become present at the seat of sacrifice and to receive the oblations offered into the sacrificial fire, after which the deities are invited to depart and the sacrificial arena is destroyed. In contrast to the temporary constructions of sacred space and translocal notions of divinity associated with Vedic traditions, bhakti traditions foster locative discourses and practices centering on sacred sites, or tīrthas (from the root tṝ, “to cross over”), that function as “crossing-places” in which deities become embodied in particular locales. As the counterpart of the notion of avatāra, the concept of tīrtha encompasses the multiple places on earth to which deities descend from their divine abodes, assuming localized forms in particular geographic features such as rivers, mountains, forests, rock outcroppings, and caves, or infusing their divine presence in the landscape of an entire region. Tīrthas, as centers of concentrated divine presence associated with particular deities, are variously represented as manifestations of the deity, parts of the deity’s body, special abodes (dhāmans) of the deity, or sites of the deity’s divine play (līlā). Bhakti communities develop a variety of means to visibly mark such places as sacred—in particular, through building architectural structures such as temples and shrines to mark the sites of divine presence and then investing these built structures with the status of tīrthas. In addition, tīrtha-yātrā, pilgrimage to tīrthas, is ascribed primacy of place in the emerging complex of bhakti practices as a ritual alternative to Vedic yajñas that is in principle open to people at all levels of the socioreligious hierarchy.73
Embodiment of the Divine in Image. In contrast to the aniconic orientation of the Vedic tradition,74 in bhakti traditions the notion of avatāra, divine descent in time, and the notion of tīrtha, divine instantiation in place, converge in conceptions of image-incarnations in which ritual images (mūrtis or arcās) are revered as localized embodiments of the deity.75
Embodiment of the Divine in Name. Vedic conceptions of language, in which the names (nāmans) contained in the Vedic mantras are held to be the sound correlates that contain the subtle essence and structure of the forms (rūpas) that they signify, are extended and recast in bhakti formulations concerning divine names (nāmans) in which the name is extolled as the sonic form of the deity.76
Embodiment of the Divine in Text. Vedic constructions of scripture, in which the body of the creator Prajāpati or the body of Brahman-Ātman is held to be constituted by the Vedic mantras, are appropriated and reinterpreted in bhakti traditions with reference to their own sacred texts.77 In certain bhakti reformulations the deity is celebrated as becoming embodied in a variety of different kinds of sacred texts, ranging from Sanskritic smṛti texts that emulate the paradigmatic Veda to vernacular hymns that are revered as text-embodiments of the deity. Moreover, the notion of divine embodiment is extended beyond oral texts to include written texts as well, in which the concrete book is viewed as an incarnate form of the deity that is to be worshiped accordingly.
Embodiment of the Divine in Human Form. Bhakti traditions foster a variety of notions in which the deity assumes corporeal form in a human body. In such conceptions certain human beings—in particular, realized gurus, poet-saints, and exalted bhaktas—are revered as localized embodiments of the deity. The deity is also held to descend and become temporarily instantiated in particular human bodies through a variety of embodied practices, including ritual possession, dance, and dramatic performances.
This constellation of notions pertaining to divine bodies—along with the associated practices through which devotional bodies are constituted in relation to these modes of divine embodiment—is configured in a variety of ways in early bhakti traditions. A number of these notions and practices are found in incipient form in the Mahābhārata (c. 200 BCE–100 CE)—the first Sanskritic work to allot a significant place to bhakti—and are further crystallized and expanded in the Harivaṃśa (c. 200 CE), the appendix to the Mahābhārata, and in the early Purāṇas that derive from the Gupta Period (c. 320–550 CE). Certain epic and Purāṇic traditions pertaining to these various modes of divine embodiment are in turn selectively appropriated and reimagined in the earliest full-fledged bhakti movements for which we have textual witness in the form of devotional poetry: the Tamil Vaiṣṇava poet-saints known as the Āḻvārs and their Tamil Śaiva counterparts, the Nāyaṉārs and Māṇikkavācakar, who flourished in the Tamil-speaking areas of South India between the sixth and ninth centuries CE.
An exploration of the connections between bhakti and embodiment can thus serve to illuminate a number of the transformations that characterize the historical shift from Vedic traditions to post-Vedic bhakti traditions. Moreover, I would suggest that such an investigation is critical to our understanding of the myriad forms that bhakti has historically assumed up to the present time, for embodiment is integral to the oral-aural and performative dimensions of devotional practices through which bhaktas engage the deity in his or her various embodied forms: tīrtha-yātrā, pilgrimage to the sacred places in which the deity’s presence is held to be instantiated; pūjā, ritual offerings to the image-incarnations of the deity in temples and shrines; nāma-kīrtana, singing the divine names as a means of engaging the sonic forms of the deity; paṭhana, recitation of the scriptures and devotional hymns that are revered as text-embodiments of the deity; līlā-kīrtana, singing and recounting the stories of the divine play of the deity in various bodily forms; and rāsa-līlā and nṛtya, dramatic and dance performances in which the performers are revered as living forms (svarūpas), or temporary instantiations, of the deity. All of these practices are embodied practices—practices through which the bodies of bhaktas engage the embodied forms of the deity. Karen Pechilis Prentiss, in her study of Tamil Śaiva bhakti from the seventh to fourteenth centuries CE, has argued that bhakti functions as a “theology of embodiment” for Tamil Śaivas and for bhakti traditions generally.78 More recently, Christian Novetzke, building on Pechilis Prentiss’s insights, has emphasized that embodiment has not only assumed a critical role in the sociocultural construction of particular bhakti communities but, more broadly, constitutes the “very epicenter” of what he terms the “publics of bhakti.”
Just as the public sphere requires literacy, the publics of bhakti in South Asia require “embodiment,” the human as medium. This very useful notion of “embodiment” does not simply exist as a trope of literature, but is deeply engaged in the performance of the discourse of bhakti. By “discourse” I mean the manifestation of bhakti not only in performance through song or literacy, but also through all those actions and bodily displays that make up bhakti in the broadest sense, such as … pilgrimage, pūjā, darśan, the wearing of signs on the body, and so on. Embodiment, then, is not so much a technique of bhakti as its very epicenter: bhakti needs bodies.79
I would suggest that an investigation of embodiment as the “very epicenter” of bhakti can illuminate correlations among the array of ontologies, devotional modes, goals, and practices found in bhakti traditions. In this context I would posit, as a heuristic device, a spectrum of bhakti traditions characterized by varying degrees of embodiment, with highly embodied traditions at one end of the spectrum and less embodied traditions at the other end. Highly embodied bhakti traditions tend to be correlated with ontologies that celebrate the manifold forms of the Godhead, modes of bhakti that favor more passionate and ecstatic expressions of devotion, and formulations of the goal of life that emphasize the state of union-in-difference in which the bhakta savors the embrace of the deity in eternal relationship. Exemplars of highly embodied traditions include the Āḻvārs Nammāḻvār and Āṇṭāḷ (c. ninth century CE), the Bhāgavata Purāṇa (c. ninth to tenth century CE), and Caitanya (1486–1533 CE) and his Gauḍīya followers. Less embodied bhakti traditions tend to be correlated with ontologies that emphasize the formlessness of the Godhead in its essential nature, modes of bhak
ti that favor more contemplative forms of devotion, and formulations of the goal of life that emphasize the state of undifferentiated unity without duality in which the bhakta merges with the deity. Among the exemplars of less embodied traditions, I would single out Kabīr (c. 1398–1448 CE) in particular.80
In the following chapters I will interrogate a number of categories and practices that are critical to our understanding of the role of embodiment in bhakti traditions, focusing in particular on the highly embodied discourses of Kṛṣṇa bhakti expressed in seminal form in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa and richly elaborated in the Gauḍīya tradition, which can serve as case studies to illustrate how issues of embodiment are grappled with in specific discursive frameworks.
The Bhāgavata Purāṇa
The Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the consummate textual monument to Vaiṣṇava bhakti, is generally held to have originated between the ninth and tenth centuries CE81 in South India.82 The Bhāgavata establishes itself as an authoritative, encompassing scripture by integrating the religiocultural traditions of South India and North India and reconciling the claims of Vaiṣṇava bhakti with brahmanical orthodoxy. More specifically, it adopts the canonical form of a Purāṇa and incorporates the South Indian devotional traditions of the Āḻvārs within a brahmanical Sanskritic framework that reflects North Indian ideologies.83
Friedhelm Hardy, in his landmark study of the early history of Kṛṣṇa devotion in South India, has argued persuasively that the Bhāgavata Purāṇa is “an attempt to render in Sanskrit (and that means inter alia to make available for the whole of India) the religion of the Āḻvārs.”84 Regarding the Bhāgavata’s role in Sanskritizing the Tamil bhakti of the Āḻvārs and contributing to the synthesis of North Indian and South Indian traditions, he remarks:
The period from about the sixth to about the tenth century in the Tamil South is characterized by a very fertile and multifarious encounter between two cultures, Tamil and Sanskritic Hindu. The BhP [Bhāgavata Purāṇa] is an attempt to harmonize the various complexes involved in this encounter and to resolve the tensions it had given rise to.… Northern culture orientated itself by a social system (the brahmins as the foremost varṇa [social class]) and an ideology (the Vedānta, viz. the systematization of the teaching of the Upaniṣads), while Southern culture was characterized by an emotional religion (of the Āḻvārs) and by great aesthetic sensibility (the old caṅkam poetry, and the akattiṇai). The BhP tries to integrate all four complexes, and it uses the symbol of the Vedas to achieve this, while adopting the purāṇic literary form.85
As an “opus universale attempting to encompass everything,”86 the Bhāgavata Purāṇa was successful in achieving canonical status within both orthodox brahmanical traditions and Vaiṣṇava bhakti traditions—as the most popular and influential of the eighteen Purāṇas in the brahmanical canon and as one of the most important scriptures in the Vaiṣṇava canon. Through its Sanskritization of Kṛṣṇa bhakti, the Bhāgavata Purāṇa provided the foundation for the development of Kṛṣṇa devotional movements in North India.87 The five classical Vaiṣṇava sampradāyas recognize the authority of this paradigmatic bhakti text, and each school has accordingly produced commentaries to demonstrate the Bhāgavata’s support of its particular views: the Śrīvaiṣṇava Sampradāya established by Rāmānuja (1017–1137 CE); the Brahma Sampradāya founded by Madhva (1238–1317 CE); the Sanakādi Sampradāya established by Nimbārka (fourteenth century? CE); the Vallabha Sampradāya, or Puṣṭi Mārga, founded by Vallabha (1479–1531 CE); and the Gauḍīya Sampradāya inspired by Caitanya (1486–1533 CE).88
The Gauḍīya Sampradāya
Among those Vaiṣṇava schools that ground their theology in the canonical authority of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, my study will focus on the Gauḍīya Sampradāya inspired by Caitanya in the sixteenth century in the northeastern region of India that is now known as Bengal. Caitanya himself did not leave a legacy of devotional poetry or other literary expression beyond eight verses, termed Śikṣāṣṭaka, that are traditionally ascribed to him.89 He is represented in hagiographic narratives as charging a group of his disciples, who came to be known as the “six Gosvāmins of Vṛndāvana,” with a twofold task: first, as discussed earlier, to recover and restore the lost līlā-sthalas in the area of Vraja where Kṛṣṇa is held to have engaged in his playful exploits during his sojourn on earth; and, second, to develop a formal system of theology and practice to perpetuate the bhakti movement inspired by him. The six Gosvāmins—Sanātana Gosvāmin, Rūpa Gosvāmin, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmin, Raghunāthadāsa Gosvāmin, Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmin, and Jīva Gosvāmin—are credited with transforming the landscape of Vraja into a pilgrimage network of tīrthas.90 They are also credited with formulating a bhakti-śāstra, formal discourse of bhakti, together with the associated regimen of sādhana-bhakti that define the distinctive tradition-identity of the Gauḍīya Sampradāya.91 It is my contention that the critical feature that distinguishes this Gauḍīya discourse of bhakti from contending discourses in the Indian landscape is its function as a discourse of embodiment.
In the Caitanya Caritāmṛta, the authoritative hagiography of Caitanya’s life and teachings by Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja, Caitanya is represented as instructing Rūpa Gosvāmin (c. 1470–1557 CE) and Sanātana Gosvāmin (c. 1465–1555 CE)92 to go from Bengal to Vraja, establish temples and shrines to visibly mark the sites of Kṛṣṇa’s līlā activities as tīrthas, and compose treatises based on the śāstras (scriptures) to propagate Kṛṣṇa bhakti.
Then Prabhu [Caitanya] sent Rūpa and Sanātana to Vraja; at the order of Prabhu, the two brothers went there. They travelled and preached bhakti in all the pilgrimage places [tīrthas]; they propagated the service of Madanagopāla [Kṛṣṇa]. Bringing many śāstras, they prepared the best of books on bhakti, and rescued the ignorant and low people. At the order of Prabhu they expounded all the śāstras, and propagated the very profound bhakti of Vraja.93
Rūpa and his elder brother Sanātana were descendants of a lineage of Karnataka brahmins who had left South India and settled in Bengal. Prior to meeting Caitanya, they received a classical Sanskrit education and subsequently served as officials in the Muslim court of Alauddin Husain Shah (r. 1494–1519 CE). After meeting Caitanya in 1514 and receiving instruction from him, the two brothers eventually left Bengal and settled permanently in Vraja—Rūpa in 1516 and Sanātana in 1517—and established two of the most important temples in Vṛndāvana. Rūpa established the Govindadeva temple to house the svayam-prakaṭa mūrti of Govindadeva, mentioned earlier, that is held to have revealed itself to him in 1533 or 1534. Sanātana oversaw the establishment of the Madanamohana temple to house the mūrti of Kṛṣṇa as Madanamohana, the enchanter of the god of love, that he had recovered from the wife of a Chaube brahmin. Rūpa’s pivotal contributions to bhakti-śāstra and sādhana-bhakti are his two works on devotional aesthetics, Bhaktirasāmṛtasindhu and Ujjvalanīlamaṇi, and his theological work, Laghubhāgavatāmṛta.94 In addition, he composed numerous other works, including dramas celebrating Kṛṣṇa’s līlā activities, dramaturgical treatises, and devotional poetry. Sanātana Gosvāmin’s most important works are his Bṛhadbhāgavatāmṛta, in which he presents a narrative exposition of the Gauḍīya hierarchy of models of bhakti, and Vaiṣṇavatoṣaṇī, his commentary on the tenth book of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa.
According to hagiographic accounts, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmin (c. 1501–1586 CE)95 was raised in South India as the son of a Śrīvaiṣṇava brahmin priest at the Śrīraṅgam temple. After meeting Caitanya during his tour of South India, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa became his disciple and eventually moved to Vṛndāvana to assist Rūpa and Sanātana in reestablishing the tīrthas of Vraja. He is credited with establishing the worship of the svayam-prakaṭa mūrti of Rādhāramaṇa, mentioned earlier, that is held to have spontaneously appeared to him in 1542 out of a śālagrāma stone. The most important work ascribed to Gopāla Bhaṭṭa is the Haribhaktivilā
sa, an extensive compendium of Vaiṣṇava ritual procedures.96
Raghunāthadāsa Gosvāmin (c. 1494–1584 CE),97 the son of a wealthy Bengali landowner, stayed with Caitanya and his followers in Purī until Caitanya’s death in 1533, after which he went to Vraja to assist Rūpa and Sanātana in the restoration of the tīrthas. He is credited with establishing Rādhā-kuṇḍa as a major center of pilgrimage for the Bengali followers of Caitanya. Raghunāthadāsa’s literary contributions are primarily in the areas of devotional poetry and drama.
Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmin (c. 1505–1579 CE) was the son of Tapana Miśra, a brahmin disciple with whom Caitanya stayed in Vārāṇasī. He is represented in hagiographic accounts as residing with Caitanya for two eight-month periods in Purī, after which Caitanya instructed him to join Rūpa and Sanātana in Vṛndāvana. Although he did not leave any literary works, he was renowned for his expertise in Bhāgavata-paṭhana, recitation of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa.
Jīva Gosvāmin (c. 1516–1608 CE),98 the youngest of the six Gosvāmins, joined his uncles Rūpa and Sanātana in Vṛndāvana by 1541 and eventually succeeded them as the preeminent authority of the Gauḍīya Sampradāya in both theological matters and institutional leadership. The most prolific of the six Gosvāmins, he composed over twenty-five works, including original works as well as influential commentaries, in the areas of theology, philosophy, poetry, poetics, and grammar. His most significant contribution is the monumental Bhāgavata Sandarbha, which comprises six Sandarbhas—Tattva Sandarbha, Bhagavat Sandarbha, Paramātma Sandarbha, Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha, Bhakti Sandarbha, and Prīti Sandarbha—and provides the first systematic exposition of the theology of the Gauḍīya Sampradāya.99
The Gauḍīya discourse of embodiment, along with the associated regimen of sādhana-bhakti, is elaborated by Rūpa Gosvāmin and Jīva Gosvāmin, the principal architects of the Gauḍīya theological edifice, in their most important works: Rūpa’s Bhaktirasāmṛtasindhu,100 Ujjvalanīlamaṇi, and Laghubhāgavatāmṛta,101 and Jīva’s six-volume Bhāgavata Sandarbha.102 The key elements of this discourse are encapsulated and expanded on by Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja (c. 1517–1620 CE), the Gosvāmins’ acclaimed disciple, in his Bengali compendium Caitanya Caritāmṛta.103 The Gauḍīya discourse of embodiment, as mentioned earlier, provides a striking example of the multileveled models of embodiment and systems of bodily practices that are integral to many bhakti traditions This discourse includes a robust discourse of divine embodiment pertaining to the manifold forms of Kṛṣṇa and an equally robust discourse of human embodiment pertaining to the devotional bodies of Kṛṣṇa bhaktas. While the early Gauḍīya authorities ground their discursive representations and practices pertaining to both divine bodies and human bodies in the canonical authority of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, at the same time they invest the Bhāgavata’s teachings with new valences by reframing Kṛṣṇa devotion as what I term an “embodied aesthetics of bhakti.”