RTW 3.1

koṭi-janme brahma-jñāne yei 'mukti' naya

ei kahe—"nāmābhāse sei 'mukti' haya"

After many millions upon millions of births, when one is complete in absolute knowledge, one still may not attain liberation, yet this man says that one may attain it simply by the awakening of a glimpse of the holy name. (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Antya-līlā 3.194)

Śrīla Raghunātha dāsa Gosvāmī's father and uncle—Hiraṇya Majumdara and Govardhana Majumdara, respectively—were big landowners of the ancient village of Cāndapura at Saptagrāma. One of their employees, a brāhmaṇa by birth named Gopāla Cakravartī, locked the great Vaiṣṇava saint Śrīla Haridāsa Ṭhākura in a debate on the scriptures. The brāhmaṇa was a sheer empiricist, and the Vaiṣṇava saint was an absolute authority on the chanting of the holy names of God, Kṛṣṇa. The brāhmaṇa asked Śrīla Haridāsa at what stage of realization liberation is attained. Citing many appropriate verses from the scriptures, Śrīla Haridāsa explained that just as fear of nocturnal creatures like thieves, ghosts, and hobgoblins evaporates at dawn's first light, so all sins and offences are erased and liberation is attained in the clearing stage of chanting the holy name, called nāma-ābhāsa, which comes long before pure chanting. Only a liberated, highly evolved soul can utter the Lord's name purely and thus achieve the highest realization, untainted love of Godhead. The speculative philosopher brāhmaṇa, who was very much addicted to sophism, could not fathom the saint's instructions and so ended up offending him. The foolish brāhmaṇa tried to impose his own interpretations on the excellences of the holy name and concluded that Śrīla Haridāsa Ṭhākura was a mere sentimentalist. He insolently rebuked the saint in public and tried to ridicule his explanations and character.

Argumentative impersonalists fail to grasp that without first properly understanding the science of the Absolute Truth, one cannot possibly develop firm devotion to the Supreme Lord. Hence when a person is seen to be situated on the platform of pure devotional service, it is to be understood that his ignorance has been destroyed. We have discussed this point in some detail in the previous essay, "The Science of Devotion." The empirical philosophers generally put forward the idea that human life is meant for achieving perfect knowledge. To them, knowledge means the ability to discern reality from illusion. By eradicating illusion and establishing that truth and reality are nondifferent from Brahman, they want to merge into the existence of Brahman. This, then, is their definition of perfect knowledge, which they aspire to attain birth after birth. They declare that the highest stage of knowledge is reached when the knower, the knowledge, and the object of knowledge become one entity, which then finally merges into Brahman, attaining liberation. Lord Caitanya has described this state of liberation as bhava-mahādāvāgni-nirvāpanam, "extinguishing the flames of material existence." He cited many verses from the revealed scriptures proving that a pure devotee easily attains this state of liberation by chanting the holy names of God.

Unfortunately, the stubborn impersonalists cannot comprehend that the final spiritual destination, beyond even the four Vedic goals (religiosity, economic development, sense gratification, and liberation) is absolutely pure and transcendental love of Godhead. They mistake the devotees of the Lord for sentimentalists and consider them their philosophical opponents. Besides these out-and-out impersonalists, there is a certain group of devotees that has deviated from the path of pure devotion and fallen prey to pretension. These cheaters actually end up following the impersonalists' path of trying to merge with the Supreme Lord. Such materialistic sentimentalists are not counted among the devotees of the Lord. Like their impersonalist counterparts, they cannot understand the true position of the Supreme Lord's name, form, qualities, pastimes, associates, or paraphernalia, for they wrongly consider these transcendental subjects illusory. They act capriciously and confuse the mass of people.

These materialistic sentimentalists reject the spiritual conclusions of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and try and take shelter of impersonalism. Yet they miserably lack the scholarship and discipline of the impersonalists. They divorce themselves from the impersonalists' scriptural studies and philosophical discussions, regarding discussions on the scripture as dry speculation and their ignorant, sentimental outbursts as spontaneous devotional fervour.

Some of these pretenders very closely follow in the impersonalists' footsteps and so may be accepted as a deranged offshoot of the impersonalist line. But they are certainly not part of the Vaiṣṇava discipline followed by those in the line of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī. These pretenders diligently cultivate and exhibit certain mannerisms of devotees, and so the impersonalists reject them from their fold. Thus ostracized by both impersonalists and Vaiṣṇavas, they form a cult of demented sentimentalists. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī declares that such pretenders create an outrage in spiritual society. As the Brāhma-yamāla says,

śruti-smṛti-purāṇādi-

pañcarātra-vidhim vimā

aikāntikī harer bhaktir

utpatpayaiva kalpate

[Brs. 1.2.101]

Devotional service of the Lord that ignores the authorized Vedic literatures like the Upaniṣads, Purāṇas, and the Nārada-pañcarātra is simply an unnecessary disturbance in society.

To show mercy to such pretenders, impersonalists, empiricists, and fruitive workers, the Supreme Lord, Kṛṣṇa, has in the Bhagavad-gītā discussed jñāna-yoga, or yoga through knowledge. I therefore embark upon the same subject in this essay.

Real knowledge means to discriminate between truth and illusion. Jñāna-yoga is the process by which one becomes eternally fixed on the path of transcendental devotional service to the Supreme Lord, who is the source of the Supersoul and Brahman. Jñāna-yoga should never be interpreted to mean the ascending process of enquiry, the inductive method, through which one aims only at separating reality from illusion by gradually rejecting the unreal. It is impossible to attain perfect knowledge without serving the Supreme Lord, who is full with all opulences and potencies, whose bodily luster is the Brahman effulgence, and whose partial expansion is the Supersoul. The brāhmaṇa Gopāla Cakravartī believed that jñāna, perfect knowledge, is far superior to devotional service of the Lord. But as recorded in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta (Antya 3.201):

balāi-purohita tāre karilā bhartsana

"ghaṭa-paṭiyā mūrkha tumi bhakti kāṅhā jāna?"

The priest named Balarāma Ācārya chastised Gopāla Cakravartī. "You are a foolish logician," he said. "What do you know about the devotional service of the Lord?"

If one pretends to be a devotee of the Lord but does not understand the difference between dry speculative knowledge and knowledge of the Supreme Absolute Truth, then such a person's devotion borders on impersonalism and is rank with cheap sentimentalism, which is totally against the spiritual teachings of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī. Therefore jñāna-yoga is not speculation or empirical research; nor is it the sudden emotional outbursts of upstarts pretending to be devotees. By practicing genuine jñāna-yoga, even an empirical philosopher will develop a taste for hearing purely spiritual topics from the scriptures. Eventually he will come to understand the Supreme Lord's transcendental position and potency, and ultimately he will relish the Lord's form, which is eternal and full of knowledge and bliss. He will perceive the Lord as the embodiment of all transcendental mellows. And if the pretentious nondevotee sentimentalists, who like to imitate the empiricists, practice genuine jñāna-yoga, then they too will gain an accurate perspective on the Absolute Truth. They will become firmly established in the understanding that the Supreme Lord's form is spiritual and transcendental, and then they will begin to render unflinching devotional service.

In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta (Ādi 2.117), Śrīla Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja advises,

siddhānta baliyā citte nā kara alasa

ihā ha-ite kṛṣṇe lāge sudṛḍha mānasa

A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such [scriptural] conclusions, considering them controversial, for such discussions strengthen the mind. Thus one's mind becomes attached to Śrī Kṛṣṇa.

Through such discussion and inquiry, we become aware that we are jīvas, individual souls, upon which our bodies and minds are temporary and illusory impositions. The scriptures refer to the jīva, a product of the Lord's superior, spiritual energy, as the kṣetra-jña, or "knower of the field," while they refer to the temporary, material body and mind as the kṣetra, or "field." Just as the jīva is the kṣetra-jña in relation to his individual body and mind, so the Lord is the kṣetra-jña in relation to His vast universal form. As Lord Kṛṣṇa informs us in the Bhagavad-gītā (13.3), kṣetra-jñaṁ cāpi māṁ viddhi sarva-kṣetreṣu bhārata: "O scion of Bharata, you should understand that I am also the knower in all bodies."

Therefore the jīva and and the Supreme Lord are nondifferent in the sense that both are kṣetra-jña, "knowers of the field." But when we look at which kṣetra each of them is knowing, the difference between the jīva and the Supreme Lord is seen to be incalculably wide. The Supreme Lord is infinite, while the jīva is infinitesimal. As consciousness, the jīva pervades his body and mind, which he has acquired due to his karma, or fruitive activities. Similarly, the Supreme Lord pervades the entire creation—His universal body—with His consciousness. Though the jīva permeates his body as impersonal consciousness, he is always a person. Similarly, although in His impersonal, all-pervasive feature the Supreme Lord saturates the cosmic manifestation with His consciousness, in His personal feature He remains eternally in Goloka Vṛndāvana performing pastimes. This point is substantiated by the Brahma-saṁhitā (5.37): goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūto. "Although residing always in His abode called Goloka, the Lord is the all-pervading Brahman and the localized Paramātmā as well." And in the Bhagavad-gītā the Lord Himself explains the functions of the field and the knower of the field, and He says that He is present throughout the creation as the knower.

The dry speculators describe the field and its knower according to their own lopsided logic. They say that the body is like a container and that Brahman enters this container like the all-pervasive sky. Once this container is broken—that is, at the time of liberation—the jīva merges back into Brahman, symbolized by the sky. There are many loopholes in this argument. First of all, the jīva is spiritual energy, while the sky is matter. It is wrong to compare a spiritual subject to a material object. This is a typical example of how the impersonal speculators waste their time trying to equate spiritual substance with mundane things. Such empirical exercises can never be termed jñāna-yoga, the path of perfect knowledge. According to the impersonalists, the infinitesimal jīva merges into the infinite Brahman at the time of liberation. But such merging does not affect the infinite in any way. Unfortunately, the impersonalists are oblivious of the tremendous damage such liberation causes to the infinitesimal living entity.