ES: Buddhi-yoga and and the wayward ways of the intellect - Conducive and degrading applications of buddhi

We are sometimes riddled by a buddhi, intellect or intelligence, that serves to merely confuse and detract us from the path of devotion proper. Introspection is, then, in place in identifying the unholy ways of this subtle covering of the self.

When the intelligence is unable to decipher anything clearly, it is overcome by tamas. When the intelligence is branching out in all directions, uncontrolled, it is overcome by rajas. When the intelligence is peaceful and illuminated, it is situated in sattva.

To be able to exercise discrimination and self-analysis over the status quo of the intelligence, one should be situated beyond: yo buddheH paratas tu saH. Buddhi is born of rajas; to ravel on the platform of the buddhi without rising to buddhi-yoga, one is in a precarious situation. When the buddhi is established in yoga, one becomes established in sattva.

The formula for the proper establishment of the buddhi in yoga, in connection with the supreme, is noted in Krishna's words in the Gita:

teSAM satata-yuktAnAM bhajatAM prIti-pUrvakam |
dadAmi buddhi-yogaM taM yena mAm upayAnti te || 10.10 ||

"Unto those, who are always engaged, who worship with love, I bestow the yoga of the intelligence by which they may approach me."

Note carefully the qualifiers that lead to a situation, in which buddhi-yoga proper is established: It is given for those, who are perpetually engaged, and who worship with love. The antaryami bestows knowledge and forgetfulness in accordance wiht the living entities' desires; when the desires are skewed, a skewed understanding shall arise, and the antaryami shall make that strong. Therefore, buddhi-yoga proper is only attained with the purification of the heart in the fire of well-entrenched practice.

This is also the theme in Visvanatha Cakravarti's Raga-vartma-candrika, as he explains the three-fold ways in which the aspirant comes to attain proper understanding:

udbhUte tAdRze lobhe zAstra-darziteSu tat-tad-bhAva-prApty-upAyeSu AcArya-caitya-vapuSA sva-gatiM vyanakti [bhA.pu. 11.29.6.] ity uddhavokteH keSucid guru-mukhAt keSucid abhijJa-mahodayAnurAgi-bhakta-mukhAt | abhijJAteSu keSucid bhakti-mRSTa-citta-vRttiSu svata eva sphuriteSu sollAsam evAtizayena pravRttiH syAt | yathA kAmArthinAM kAmopAyeSu || 1.9 ||

When such greed has arisen, as seen in the scripture, to give the means for attaining the corresponding bhava "you show their own paths as the acarya and the indwelling witness" (BhP 11.29.6); from Uddhava's statement it is known that some attain this from the mouth of a guru, and some from the mouth of an all-knowing, blessed anuragi-devotee. Some, whose course of consciousness has been polished with devotion, will have all this knowledge manifest of its own accord; at this time, they will be seen as very joyfully – and indeed eminently – progressing, as a person desiring fulfillment of sensual desires is engrossed in the means for attaining the desired."

The true and saintly jnana-vritti (course of knowledge) will only flow in one, whose heart is polished by devotion, and who has fully committed himself to acts of devotional pursuit; only then will the intellect truly function in the parameters of uttama-bhakti and bring about nothing but the devotional welfare of the devotee. That pending, one should maintain a fair amount of caution and introspection, question one's motivations and see the undue biases that arise in the understanding – biases that lead our intellect to act against devotion.

The sadhaka should not, then, mistake all application of the intellect as buddhi-yoga. Should the rogue intellect be engaged, for example, in minutely examining the shortcomings of others, or in an endless wrangle of scriptural arguments for the sake of establishing one's view as the supreme, or merely for showing the defects of another's views, it is to be known that the intellect has been terribly misapplied and can only serve to degrade the tarkika.

Q&A: Leaving a non-Vaishnava guru

Q: Should one leave a non-Vaishnava guru? What is the best procedure for doing it?

A: The Vaishnava-shastras advice us to give up the mantra given by a guru who is a non-Vaishnava, seeking shelter of a Vaishnava-guru:

avaiSNavopadiSTena mantreNa nirayaM vrajet |
punaz ca vidhinA samyag grAhayed vaiSNavAd guroH || hbv 4.366

"From the mantra instructed by a non-Vaishnava, only grief will arise.
One should again accept a guru in accordance with injunctions, a Vaishnava-guru."

Padma-purana (6.226.1) has a similar shloka, stating avaiSNavopadiSTena mantreNa na parA gatiH - "The mantra instructed by a non-Vaishnava will not deliver the highest aim." One who has been captivated with the ideals of Vaishnavism should therefore adopt the path leading him to the desired destination, forsaking paths and allegiances that prove to be obstructions to the same.

The essence of the advice is to ensure that one becomes firmly established on the path leading onwards to the desired goal. To the best of my knowledge, our acharyas have not written specific instructions concerning the manner in which the former allegiances are to be closed. The reason being, there are countless non-Vaishnava traditions with distinct practices and cultures, and amidst them countless individual situations may arise.

A Vaishnava, by his nature, is not inclined to cause unnecessary grief to others. Sadness caused in the minds of others is a burden for the soul. Therefore, in situations such as this, if there are multiple avenues that'll essentially accomplish the same goal, ie. wholehearted adoption of the path proper towards the desired goal, one should take the course of action that is least likely to give grief to others. What exactly this is in the situation you describe, you'll have to assess yourself as you are yourself best aware of the situation and the individuals involved. Let us reflect on the general principles involved.

If you do choose to address the issue in person, do remember to observe the appropriate etiquette of respect towards a senior person you once revered in the capacity of a guru. In a meek state of mind, express your heart's burning desire and determination to follow your chosen path, note how the ways of Bhagavan are unforeseen, express your gratutide for all that has taken place and been given, and ask for his blessings to move onwards in your quest for paramartha. If the unfortunate situation should arise where the former guru's anger is displayed, never respond with anger, but always display the ideal character of a true Vaishnava.

If you suspect that a conflict situation would arise in a personal exchange, consider writing a letter as a matter of courtesy. I would personally opt for informing the guru via whatever medium is convenient instead of moving on "in secret". I am certain the former gurus would expect that you informed them of the change of situation. He has once accepted responsibility for overseeing your spiritual progress, why should you keep him under the impression that he must still bear the burden of responsibility? This is a common courtesy observed even in mere mundane dealings. You would not leave a job without informing your boss of the same, would you?

If the issue of your having accepted a new guru and a new path came to the former guru's attention without your having informed him, how would he think of Vaishnavas then? In contrast, if you had informed him of the change of situation in a manner befitting the good character of a Vaishnava, how would he think of Vaishnavas then, and how would he speak of Vaishnavas then? You would then bear the responsibility for that. Remember to consider the possible ramifications of your move beyond the immediate personal interests. The seemingly easiest way may not always be the best way in the grand scheme of spiritual life.

UP 3 - The deliverer of the worlds, The qualities of the self-controlled devotee

Commenting on sarvAm apImAM pRthivIM sa ziSyAt, the commentator notes:

sarvA pRthvIM ziSyAditi vAg-Adi-vega-sahanopayogena
saMvRddhayA bhaktyA sarvapAvanatvAt |

"With 'instructing the whole world' and so on, it is said that the quality of being able to deliver all is there, when devotion thrives through the means of controlling urges headed by speech."

He then cites a verse that illustrates vividly the nature of the devotee, who has controlled the urges and is deep in his devotional feeling.

vAg gadgadA dravate yasya cittaM
rudaty abhIkSNaM hasati kvacic ca |
vilajja udgAyati nRtyate ca
mad-bhakti-yukto bhuvanaM punAti || bhp 11.14.24

"He whose voice is choking, whose consciousness melts;
Who cries again and again, and at times laughs, too;
Without shame, he sings loudly and dances as well,
Endowed with devotion for me, he purifies the world."

One does not, then, attain the quality of being able to deliver one and all merely on the merit of self-control. Rather, this self-control provides a platform on which devotion can flourish, and through that, the quality of sarva-pAvanatva is attained.

- The first verse says that one who can control the six urges can "instruct the whole world". You mentioned that this is a poeticism of Srila Rupa Goswami, which can otherwise be understood to mean that one who has renounced the six urges gains tremendous power with which to perform bhajan. Where does the concept come from?

This understanding is drawn from the following statement of Radha Raman Goswami's: sarvA pRthvIM ziSyAditi vAg-Adi-vega-sahanopayogena saMvRddhayA bhaktyA sarvapAvanatvAt | - "With the statement 'The whole world as disciple' and so forth, it is said that the quality of sarva-pAvanatva, being able to deliver all, comes when devotion is fortified by the means of controlling the urges headed by speech." The word saMvRddha means "increased", "thriving", "prospering" and so forth, by the upayoga or "application" of vega-sahana, "controlling the urges".

The GVS edition of Upadeshamrita, unfortunately, is not a very accurate representation of Radha Raman Goswami's original tika. It elaborates unnecessarily, it misses important nuances. It is, regardless, helpful for reference.

Aside the above pramana, this is a natural and logical understanding. When one is no longer distracted by other things, his bhakti gains a power of focus. Moreover, the giving up of the unworthy for the sake of the Lord invokes his mercy, which is what the power of all devotional practice is made of.

- Also, can you understand this verse to have two meanings? First, as you've discussed, as a list of prerequisites for entrance into powerful bhajan and second, as a list of qualities an aspirant should look for in selecting a Guru?

Yes, these are certainly two possible readings of the verse. They are not really two separate meanings as such; each individual who gains the quality of sarva-pAvanatva, a quality appearing when devotion is fortified with self-control, is a de facto guru on the virtue of his spiritual accomplishment, regardless of whether he "officially" acts in such a capacity. As in Devakinandana Dasa's famous Vaishnava Vandana, mahAprabhura gaNa saba patita pAvana, "All the devotees of Mahaprabhu are the saviors of the fallen," and brahmANDa tArite zakti dhare jane jane, "Each and every one of them carries the power to deliver the universe."

- If the second reading is also valid, and part of what Rupa Goswami wants to instruct, how essential is it that one select a Guru with such qualities? Are other qualifications, such as knowledge and realization of sastra (as per SB 11.3.21) not more important? Are the two inseperably connected? It seems as though one can be very admirably renounced without being strongly fixed in the devotional conclusions of our line.

The aspect of brahmaNy upazamAzrayam of the abovementioned verse corresponds best with the themes of this verse; having given up all material pursuits and surrendered to the Lord, the devotee has rejected all pursuits for sense-objects, knowing them to be contrary to devotion.

Knowledge, in the sense of knowledge of the content of the scriptures, and realization, in the sense of yukti or logic in understanding and cross-referencing scriptures, amounts to paNDitya, scolarship. Therefore it is said that the guru is zabde pare ca niSNAtam, "deeply familiar with the scriptures and the supreme": His knowledge and his practice has born the fruit of personal encounters with the Lord, a deep, vivid relationship of loving interaction has been forged. If the knowledge of the scripture, no matter how eloquently presented, is not accompanied with realization in the sense of all that brahmaNy upazamAzrayam implies, the "qualification" is but an empty shell.

This eloquent, empty shell is often mistaken for a sign of great advancement. I have seen this even in my own case, hearing people say that "you must be very advanced to write like this", while I am painfully aware that I am not very advanced, and at the time of hearing such statements even my daily devotional routine wasn't very exemplary. I'm sure we can also think of some other examples, even from the recent history of our samaj, of people writing the most eloquent of philosophies and rasa-laden presentations, while their practice and heart's condition was something rather different.

Therefore, do not be fooled by words alone. Spend time with the guru, observe his behavior. The rule of Hari-bhakti-vilasa is that the guru and the disciple should spend a year together, examining each other, before diksha is to take place. Hardly anyone pays attention to this. Yet, the disciple should, for his own welfare, ensure that the guru truly practices what he preaches, and thereby possesses the potency to truly infuse the divine truths into your heart. If this potency is not there, the heart of the disciple will not be transformed in the desired manner.