From Transcendent Vibration to Reverberating Name
The early Gauḍīya authorities, in reflecting on the ontological status of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa as a grantha-avatāra, an avatāra of Kṛṣṇa in the form of a text, built upon earlier formulations regarding the ontological status of the Vedas. Similarly, in developing a multileveled ontology of the nāman, name, they built upon and reimagined in significant ways the rich reflections on the nature of language, mantras, and nāmans found in an array of earlier traditions, including Vedic, Purāṇic, philosophical, yogic, tantric, and bhakti traditions.1 Gauḍīya constructions of nāman are particularly indebted to three theories of language—Vedic notions of mantra, Purāṇic formulations of mantra and nāman, and the Mīmāṃsaka philosophy of language—all of which take as their starting-point the axiomatic postulate that the paradigmatic language is the language of the Vedas. This language, which consists of four types of mantras—ṛcs (verses), yajuses (sacrificial formulae), sāmans (chants), and atharvans (incantations and imprecations)—is considered a natural language that is eternal and uncreated, not a conventional language created by human beings.
In Purāṇic cosmogonies this notion is represented by the mythological image of the Vedic mantras as the archetypal plan that the creator Brahmā recites at the beginning of each new kalpa in order to project the manifold forms of creation into concrete manifestation. Purāṇic cosmogonies regularly incorporate the following standardized description, quoted earlier in Chapter 3, of this archetypal plan of creation:
In the beginning he [Brahmā] formed, from the words (śabdas) of the Vedas alone, the names (nāmans), forms (rūpas), and functions (kṛtyas) of the gods and other beings. He also formed the names and appropriate offices of all the ṛṣis as heard (śruta) in the Vedas.2
This passage points to name, form, and function as the three fundamental aspects of created beings that have their source in the Vedic mantras. (1) The Vedic mantras contain the names (nāmans) of all beings. These names are considered to be the natural names—not conventional designations—of the forms that they signify in that each name is the sound correlate that contains within it the subtle essence and structure of the form. Therefore the same names are assigned to the various classes of beings at the beginning of each new cycle of creation. (2) The forms (rūpas) of creation are brought forth through recitation of the names contained in the Vedic mantras. The form is considered to be already inherent in its natural name and thus represents a more precipitated, consolidated expression of that name. Therefore Brahmā need only recite the words of the Vedas in order to generate the corresponding forms of creation. (3) The words of the Vedic mantras also determine the functions (kṛtyas) of all beings in that the special character and function of each type of being is held to be contained in its name. For example, when Brahmā utters the word “sarpa” a type of serpent emerges whose nature is to “creep” (root sṛp) on the ground.3
The exponents of Pūrva-Mīmāṃsā, as discussed in Chapter 3, provide philosophical justification for the mythological portrayal of the Vedas as a cosmic plan by establishing that there is an inherent connection (autpattika sambandha) between the Vedic word (śabda) and its meaning (artha), between the name (nāman) and the form (rūpa) that it signifies. However, the Mīmāṃsakas do not invoke the image of the Vedas as the archetypal plan of creation because they argue that the world is beginningless and has no creator. Śaṃkara, in his re-visioning of the Mīmāṃsaka philosophy of language, argues that the eternality of the Vedic language is not incompatible with the existence of a creator, and in this context he explicitly invokes prooftexts from Vedic texts as well as from the Purāṇas and other smṛti texts to establish the Vedas’ role as the eternal plan, containing the natural names of all forms, that the creator employs at the beginning of each kalpa in order to fashion anew the various worlds and classes of beings in accordance with a fixed pattern.
The earliest formulations regarding the Vedic language as a natural language are found in the Vedic texts themselves. In this chapter I will begin with a brief analysis of Vedic perspectives on mantras that provide the historical and conceptual foundation for the post-Vedic formulations of Purāṇic and Gauḍīya sources. I will then turn to a consideration of Purāṇic traditions and will focus more specifically on constructions of mantra and nāman in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa. Finally, I will provide an extended analysis of the contributions of the early Gauḍīya authorities, who appropriate and recast Vedic and Purāṇic formulations by ascribing divine names a central role in the multileveled ontology that is integral to the Gauḍīya discourse of embodiment. As we shall see, on the transcosmic level beyond the material realm of prakṛti, the name of Kṛṣṇa is celebrated as nondifferent from his essence (svarūpa) and absolute body (vigraha), while on the material level this singular transcendent name is represented as assuming manifold forms as nāma-avatāras, avatāras in the form of names, which function as mesocosmic sound-embodiments through which human beings can engage the divine presence on the gross material plane.
The term mantra is used in Vedic texts to refer to the versified portions of the four Vedic Saṃhitās, as distinct from the Brāhmaṇa and Upaniṣadic portions of the Veda: the ṛcs of the Ṛg-Veda Saṃhitā, yajuses of the Yajur-Veda Saṃhitās, sāmans of the Sāma-Veda Saṃhitā, and atharvans of the Atharva-Veda Saṃhitā.4 The earliest references to the Vedic mantras in Vedic texts generally focus on those mantras that are allotted a central role in the sacrificial rituals: ṛcs, yajuses, and sāmans, which are designated as the “threefold knowledge” (trayī vidyā) or the “threefold Veda” (traya veda) in the Brāhmaṇas and Upaniṣads. This emphasis on the “threefold knowledge” of the Ṛg-Veda, Yajur-Veda, and Sāma-Veda suggests that it took some time before the atharvans of the Atharva-Veda were accorded an equivalent status as forming part of the “four Vedas” (catur veda).5
In this section I will provide a brief analysis of three distinct constructions of Vedic mantras in different discursive environments that are important for understanding the formulations of mantra and nāman found in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa and Gauḍīya sources: (1) the epistemology of cognition of the Vedic mantras in the Ṛg-Veda Saṃhitā; (2) the cosmogonic function of the Vedic mantras in the Brāhmaṇas’ discourse of sacrifice; and (3) the soteriological function of root mantras such as Om in the Upaniṣads’ discourse of knowledge.
Cognition of the Vedic Mantras
Jan Gonda, on the basis of his analysis of the term mantra in Vedic texts, gives the following definition of the term:
[W]ord(s) believed to be of “superhuman origin,” received, fashioned and spoken by the “inspired” seers, poets and reciters in order to evoke divine power(s) and especially conceived as means of creating, conveying, concentrating and realizing intentional and efficient thought, and of coming into touch or identifying oneself with the essence of the divinity which is present in the mantra.6
Gonda’s characterization of mantras as words that are ascribed a “superhuman origin” and that are held to have been “received, fashioned and spoken by the ‘inspired’ seers” provides a useful starting-point for exploring the nature of mantras in the Ṛg-Veda Saṃhitā (c. 1500–1200 BCE). As I have argued elsewhere, the process of cognition of the Vedic mantras is represented by the ṛṣis (seers) themselves in the Ṛg-Veda as occurring in two phases: in the first phase the ṛṣi “receives” the mantra as a divinely inspired cognition, and in the second phase he “fashions” the mantra into well-articulated words that he “speaks,” utters forth, in the form of a recited hymn.7
In the first phase of the process of Vedic cognition, the ṛṣis of the Ṛg-Veda portray themselves as practicing meditative tapas8 and thereby establishing their awareness in the heart (hṛd or hṛdaya), the innermost core of consciousness, where they cognize with their “mind’s eye” the mantras emerging from the light-filled realm of the gods.9 “The ṛcs (verses) exist in the imperishable (akṣara), beyond space (vyoman), where all the gods abide.”10 The mantras exist in that transcendent, imperishable realm which is beyond vyoman, the subtle element of space that is the finest level of objective material existence. It is there, in the abode of the gods, that the ṛṣis “see” (root dṛś) and “hear” (root śru) the mantras as subtle vibrations of luminous speech arising within their own hearts as “inspired thoughts” (manīṣā or mati) or “visions” (dhī or dhīti).11 The ṛṣis repeatedly praise the gods as the inspirers of their cognitions, which they celebrate as divine (devī or daivya) and god-given (devatta).12 The mantras are held to have been generated (root jan) by the gods and hence are termed deva-kṛta, “made by the gods.”13
O Agni, powerful in nature, when praised unseal for the eulogist the cave, the inspired thought (manīṣā) with the vibration (vepas). Give us, O resplendent one who are very glorious, that mighty thought (manman) which, along with all the gods, you love. From you, O Agni, are generated the qualities of the seers (kavis), from you inspired thoughts (manīṣās), from you effectual recitations (ukthas). From you comes wealth adorned by heroic sons to the devout mortal who possesses true vision (dhī).14
The ṛṣis celebrate the mantras as not only inspired by the gods but also as invested with the living presence of the deities. The gods are said to have made their abode (okas) in the mantras15 and are at times directly identified with the mantras.16 Particular deities are associated more specifically with particular meters, rhythmic configurations of the mantras.17 When the ṛṣis cognize the mantras reverberating forth from the transcendent abode of the gods, they cognize the gods abiding in the mantras, their divine presence invested in the pulsating impulses of speech.
In the second phase of the process of Vedic cognition, the ṛṣis of the Ṛg-Veda represent themselves as fashioning (root takṣ) within the heart their divinely inspired cognitions and giving audible expression to the mantras in well-articulated words as recited hymns. “To him let us proclaim (root vac) this mantra well-fashioned from the heart (hṛd).”18 Having cognized the subtle vibrations of speech rising up within their consciousness as inspired thoughts, the ṛṣis give them vocalized expression on the gross level of speech in the form of recited hymns. “I offer to Agni, the son of power, a new and more powerful inspired hymn (dhīti), thought as realized in speech (vāco mati).”19
The ṛṣis of the Ṛg-Veda thus provide self-referential representations of the mechanisms through which śruti, “that which was heard” in the transcendent depths where the gods abide, was “recorded” through the vehicle of their speech and assumed a concrete form on earth as the recited texts of the Vedic mantras. The ṛṣis, in their role as the conduits through which the vibrating mantras find expression in vocalized speech, sometimes refer to themselves as vipras, from the root vip or vep, “to tremble, shake, vibrate.” Gonda suggests that the term “may originally have denoted a moved, inspired, ecstatic and ‘enthusiast’ seer as a bearer or pronouncer of the emotional and vibrating, metrical sacred words, a seer who converted his inspirations into powerful ‘carmina’ [song].”20
The ṛṣis, having converted the subtle reverberations of the mantras into recited hymns through the agency of their speech, are represented as “sending forth” (root sṛj or root ṛ) the hymns as sound offerings to the gods.21 The Ṛg-Veda repeatedly celebrates the theurgic efficacy of recitation of the Vedic mantras, which serves as a means of nourishing, invigorating, and magnifying the gods by enlivening their divine presence embodied in the mantras.22 The following verses are representative:
He [Indra] who grew (root vṛdh) through the ancient and present-day hymns (gīrs) of lauding ṛṣịs.23
Aśvins, do others than we surround you with lauds (stomas)? The (ṛṣi Vatsa, the son of Kaṇva, has magnified (root vṛdh) you with hymns (gīrs).24
O Soma, we who are skilled in speech (vaco-vid) magnify (root vṛdh) you with hymns (gīrs).25
In the Ṛg-Veda the theurgic efficacy of the Vedic mantras is at times extended beyond the divine realm to encompass the entire cosmos, particularly with reference to the mantras’ role in the primordial yajña, sacrifice, through which the creation is brought forth.26 In Ṛg-Veda 10.90, the Puruṣa-Sūkta, the ṛṣis are portrayed as assisting the gods in the performance of the primordial sacrifice of Puruṣa, which is represented as the paradigmatic cosmos-producing activity by means of which the human, natural, and divine orders are brought forth. From this primordial yajña, which provides the prototype for all future yajñas, the Vedic mantras—ṛcs, sāmans, and yajuses along with the meters—emerge as the sound offerings that are an essential component of the sacrificial ritual.27 In Ṛg-Veda 10.130 the sāmans and meters are explicitly allotted a role in the cosmogonic process as an integral part of the yajña through which the creation is “woven.” Moreover, the primordial yajña performed by the gods is depicted as a divine model that is cognized and reenacted, with lauds (stomas) and meters, by the ancient ṛṣis.28
Vedic Mantras in the Discourse of Sacrifice
The theurgic efficacy ascribed to recitation of the Vedic mantras in the Ṛg-Veda is elaborated at length in the discourse of sacrifice in the Brāhmaṇas (c 900–650 BCE), which emphasizes in particular the cosmogonic function of the mantras. The central figure in this discourse is the Puruṣa Prajāpati, who is celebrated as the supreme god and creator in the Brāhmaṇas and is represented as the primordial ṛṣi who “sees” (root dṛś) the Vedic mantras as well as the sacrificial rituals in which they are used. He then assumes the functions of the various priests in the primordial yajña, reciting the ṛcs, chanting the sāmans, and performing the sacrificial actions with the aid of the yajuses, in order to bring forth creation and structure an ordered cosmos.29 The brahmin priests are represented in the Brāhmaṇas as the earthly counterparts of Prajāpati, who reproduce the cosmogonic activities of the creator every time the sacrificial rituals are performed and the Vedic mantras are recited.30
Just as Prajāpati set the universe in motion by means of a particular yajña, so those who perform the yajña set the universe in motion.31 Just as Prajāpati brought forth all beings by means of the yajña,32 so those who reenact the primordial yajña are ascribed the power to produce beings. “Prajāpati indeed is that sacrifice (yajña) which is being performed here and from which these beings were produced, and in the same manner are they produced thereafter even to the present day.”33 The creative power of the yajña is linked in particular to the recitation of the Vedic mantras that is an integral part of the sacrificial ritual. For example, Jaiminīya Brāhmaṇa 1.94 depicts Prajāpati as bringing forth the gods, human beings, ancestors, and other beings through chanting the words of a particular sāman.34 The passage concludes, “Having become Prajāpati, he who knowing thus chants with this opening brings forth beings.”35 Prajāpati is represented as using particular Vedic mantras or sacrificial rituals not only to bring forth creation but also to establish an orderly cosmos through subduing his unruly creatures, providing them with rain and food, and so on. “He who knows thus” and replicates the activities of Prajāpati is correspondingly ascribed the power to obtain comparable ends.36
The Brāhmaṇas, in elaborating on the role of the Vedic mantras as the expressions of the divine speech of the creator Prajāpati, present the earliest formulations of the notion that the Vedas are the archetypal plan at the basis of creation. The realm of concrete phenomena is held to have been brought forth through recitation of the sound impulses contained in the Vedic mantras, and thus the Vedic words are considered the sound correlates of the realm of form, containing the subtle structures of all levels of existence. In this context the three Vedas—Ṛg-Veda, Yajur-Veda, and Sāma-Veda—are incorporated into the Brāhmaṇas’ discourse of sacrifice as part of a complex taxonomy that, building upon the speculations of the Puruṣa-Sūkta, posits a system of inherent connections (bandhus) among the orders of reality: sacrificial order (adhiyajña), human order (adhyātma), natural order (adhibhūta), and divine order (adhidaiva).37
This taxonomy establishes a series of homologies between the realm of sound, represented by the Vedic mantras that are integral to the sacrificial order, and the realm of form, represented by the human, natural, and divine orders. At the basis of this taxonomic system are the three vyāhṛtis, primordial utterances—bhūḥ, bhuvaḥ, and svaḥ—which are the seed-syllables of creation corresponding to the three worlds—earth, midregions, and heavens38—and which are identified, respectively, with the Ṛg-Veda, Yajur-Veda, and Sāma-Veda, constituting their essences (rasa or śukra).39 Prajāpati is represented as extracting the essences of the three Vedas in the form of the three vyāhṛtis, which are the primordial utterances through which he brings forth the three worlds.
Prajāpati indeed conquered this [universe] by means of the threefold Veda (traya veda).… He reflected, “Let me extract the essence (rasa) of the threefold Veda.”… Saying “bhūḥ,” he extracted the essence of the Ṛg-Veda. That became this earth.… Saying “bhuvaḥ,” he extracted the essence of the Yajur-Veda. That became the midregions.… Saying “svaḥ,” he extracted the essence of the Sāma-Veda. That became yonder heavens.40
In several passages Prajāpati is represented as extracting the three vyāhṛtis by pressing (root pīḍ) the threefold Veda, which is full of rasa, nectar. When he presses the three Vedas—Ṛg-Veda, Yajur-Veda, and Sāma-Veda—the three vyāhṛtis—bhūḥ, bhuvaḥ, and svaḥ—stream forth as their essences.41 The process culminates in Prajāpati pressing the three vyāhṛtis, from which he extracts the essence of the essences: the syllable (akṣara) Om.
He pressed (root pīḍ + abhi) the threefold Veda (trayī vidyā). From it being pressed the essence (rasa) streamed forth. That became these vyāhṛtis, bhūḥ, bhuvaḥ, svaḥ. He pressed these vyāhṛtis. From them being pressed the essence (rasa) streamed forth. That became this syllable (akṣara), Om.42
When the nectar of the threefold Veda has been fully pressed out, it yields the root mantra Om, which is celebrated in the Brāhmaṇas as the most concentrated essence of the threefold Veda that cannot be further pressed.43
Implicit in the taxonomic schema of the Brāhmaṇas, as well as in the more general Vedic conception of the creative power of the divine speech, is the notion that in the Vedic mantras an intrinsic relation exists between the name (nāman) and the form (rūpa) that it signifies.44 In this conception bhūḥ is not simply a conventional designation, it is the natural name of the earth, and thus it is the sound correlate that contains within it the subtle essence and structure of the earth. The primordial utterances bhūḥ, bhuvaḥ, and svaḥ are like potent seeds containing the tree of creation about to sprout. These three seed-syllables are in turn elaborated in the three Vedas, the detailed cosmic plan from which the entire creation unfolds.
Root Mantras in the Discourse of Knowledge
In the Upaniṣads (c 800 BCE–200 CE), the epistemological framework shifts from the discourse of sacrifice, yajña, to the discourse of knowledge, jñāna, and the creation-maintaining rituals of the Brāhmaṇas are displaced by meditation (dhyāna) and ascetic disciplines (tapas) aimed at realizing the ultimate reality, Brahman-Ātman, and attaining liberation (mokṣa) from the bondage of the relative creation. While the priestly exponents of the discourse of sacrifice emphasize the theurgic efficacy of recitation (adhyayana) of the Vedic mantras as a means of constructing and maintaining the cosmic order, the Upaniṣadic exponents of the discourse of knowledge emphasize the need to transcend the recited texts through meditation (dhyāna) and gain direct experiential realization of the transcendent reality of Veda as that undifferentiated knowledge which is the very fabric of the imperishable Brahman.45 Knowledge of the mundane Vedic texts is relegated to a subsidiary position as a lower form of knowledge (aparā vidyā) than that supreme knowledge (parā vidyā) by means of which the imperishable (akṣara) is apprehended.46
The Upaniṣadic sages’ discursive reshaping results in a twofold transformation of Vedic constructions of mantra. First, primary emphasis is given to root mantras, seed-syllables such as Om, which are represented as the most fundamental and powerful elements of the primordial Vedic language. Second, the use of these root mantras is shifted from a sacrificial to a meditative context, and the mantras themselves are transformed from efficacious ritual utterances into potent meditation devices that are ascribed a critical soteriological function in the discourse of jñāna, knowledge.
Om is identified in several Upaniṣadic passages with Brahman47 and is designated more specifically as Śabdabrahman, Brahman embodied in sound.48 A passage in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, recapitulating the Brāhmaṇas’ taxonomic schema, represents Om as the essence of the three vyāhṛtis, which in turn are the essences of the three Vedas. As the most concentrated essence of the Vedas, Om is celebrated as the primordial vibration that is the basis of all speech (vāc) and the basis of the entire creation.49 It is this quintessential mantra that, as the sound-form of Brahman, is to be used as a vehicle in meditation in order to attain the supreme Brahman that is beyond sound.
There are indeed two Brahmans to be meditated (root dhyā + abhi) upon: sound (śabda) and the soundless (aśabda). By sound alone is the soundless known. In this case the sound is Om. Ascending upward by means of it, one becomes established in the soundless. This is the goal (gati). This is immortality (amṛta). This is the state of union (sāyujyatva) and bliss (nirvṛtatva). As a spider ascending upward by means of its thread attains a place, in the same way the meditator, ascending upward by means of Om, attains freedom (svātantrya).… There are two Brahmans to be known: Śabdabrahman and that which is supreme (para). One who is immersed in Śabdabrahman attains the supreme Brahman.50
Upaniṣadic formulations of mantras as meditation devices are reimagined in distinctive ways in later yogic, tantric, and bhakti traditions, which advocate the practice of meditation techniques that use as vehicles specially designated mantras that are thought to possess intrinsic power. These mantras may be monosyllabic or multisyllabic and are not necessarily Vedic in origin, but they are generally modeled on the prototype of Om and are upheld as potent sound-vibrations by means of which the practitioner can directly experience that transcendent, imperishable reality which is the ultimate source and abode of the Veda.51
Embodying the Divine Presence in Sound: Mantra and Nāman in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa
The Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s formulations of mantra and nāman build on and re-vision a range of Vedic formulations, including Ṛg-Vedic representations of the epistemology of Vedic cognition, the Brāhmaṇas’ portrayals of the cosmogonic function and theurgic efficacy of the Vedic mantras, and Upaniṣadic constructions of the soteriological function of root mantras as meditation devices. The influence of tantric—and more specifically Pāñcarātra—perspectives on mantra is also evident in the Bhāgavata’s reflections on mantra meditation. I will briefly examine the Bhāgavata’s re-visioning of mantras before turning to an analysis of its constructions of the divine names, nāmans, of Kṛṣṇa.
In its re-visioning of mantras the Bhāgavata Purāṇa elaborates in certain contexts on the Brāhmaṇas’ formulations regarding the cosmogonic function of the Vedic mantras as the primordial utterances of the creator, while in other contexts it reimagines Upaniṣadic and Pāñcarātra formulations concerning the soteriological function of mantras as meditation devices.
Cosmogonic Function of the Vedic Mantras
The Bhāgavata Purāṇa represents the primordial utterances described in Vedic accounts—Om, the three vyāhṛtis, and the three Vedas—as different stages in the unfoldment of the divine speech of the creator principle, who is designated in the Bhāgavata and other Purāṇas by his post-Vedic appellation, Brahmā.
From the space in the supreme Brahmā’s heart, when his mind was absorbed in meditation, came forth a sound (nāda), which is perceived through restraining [sensory] activity.… From that [sound] arose the syllable Om, composed of three parts [a, u, m], of unmanifest origin, self-luminous, which is the emblem of the divine Brahman, the supreme Self (Ātman). It is he who hears, when the sense of hearing is nonactive and the sense of sight inoperative, this unmanifest sound (sphoṭa). The manifestation of this [Om], through which speech (vāc) is manifested, derives from the Self in the space [of the heart]. This [Om] is directly expressive of its own abode, Brahman, the supreme Self, and it is the secret essence of all mantras, the eternal seed (bīja) of the Vedas.
This [Om], O descendant of the Bhṛgus, consists of three sounds (varṇas), a and the rest, in which are contained three modes of being: the [three] constituents of prakṛti (guṇas), the [three] names (nāmans), the [three] objects (arthas), and the [three] states (vṛttis). From these [three sounds] the unborn Lord brought forth the traditional system of akṣaras (phones), distinguished as semi-vowels; sibilants; vowels, short and long; and consonants. With this [sound-system] the Lord, desiring to express the functions of the four classes of priests, [brought forth] from his four mouths the four Vedas together with the [three] vyāhṛtis and the syllable Om.52
The Bhāgavata represents the creator Brahmā as the “first seer” (ādi-kavi),53 who, like the ṛṣis of the Ṛg-Veda, establishes his awareness in the heart through meditation and serves as the conduit through which the subtle vibrations of transcendent sound find expression on the level of vocalized speech as the recited texts of the Vedic mantras. The process begins with Om, which, as in the Brāhmaṇas and Upaniṣads, is represented as the root mantra that is the most concentrated essence of the Vedic mantras, from which the three vyāhṛtis and the four Vedas progressively unfold. The passage points to four different stages in the process of manifestation. (1) Om emerges as an unmanifest, undifferentiated sound that can only be perceived in the depths of meditation when all sensory activity has been transcended. This unexpressed, transcendent sound contains the potentiality of all sound within it and is the sound-form of Brahman. It is the “secret essence of all mantras” and the “seed (bīja) of the Vedas,” containing the potentiality of the Vedic mantras in yet undifferentiated form. (2) This primordial totality of sound is differentiated into three sounds—a, u, m—which contain various sets of three entities. With respect to these triads, Śrīdhara Svāmin, in his commentary on this passage, explains the three guṇas as sattva (purity), rajas (activity), and tamas (inertia); the three names (nāmans) as Ṛg, Yajur, and Sāma; the three objects (arthas) as the three worlds, bhūḥ (earth), bhuvaḥ (midregions), and svaḥ (heavens); and the three states (vṛttis) as waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. If we accept Śrīdhara’s interpretation, the three constituent sounds of Om thus contain in seminal form the three Vedas along with the three vyāhṛtis, the seed-syllables that are the essences of the three Vedas and the basis of the three worlds. (3) These three sounds—a, u, m—then differentiate into the forty-eight varṇas or akṣaras (phones) that constitute the sound system of Sanskrit. (4) Finally, the forty-eight akṣaras of Sanskrit combine in various configurations to form the words of the four Vedas—Ṛg-Veda, Yajur-Veda, Sāma-Veda, and Atharva-Veda—to which Brahmā gives vocalized expression through the agency of his speech. He also brings forth from his four mouths the three vyāhṛtis together with Om—oṃ bhūr bhuvaḥ svaḥ—uttering the opening invocation of the three-lined gāyatrī mantra, which, as mentioned in Chapter 3, is celebrated as the seed expression of the four Vedas.
There is creative power in the divine speech that issues forth from the creator Brahmā, from the root mantra Om to its fully elaborated expression in the Vedic mantras. Om, as represented in this passage from the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, contains within it the potentiality of all sound, and this potentiality is actualized when the undifferentiated Om differentiates into particularized impulses of sound, which then precipitate to form the concrete phenomenal creation. While Om, as the sound-form of Brahman, is the source and foundation of the entire creation, the three vyāhṛtis—bhūḥ, bhuvaḥ, and svaḥ—are the seed-syllables from which the three worlds—earth, midregions, and heavens—are manifested. The four Vedas, as the most elaborated, differentiated expression of the sound potentiality contained in Om, are ascribed a pivotal cosmogonic role in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the basic sound impulses through which the creator Brahmā structures the manifold worlds and beings of the phenomenal creation.
While he was contemplating, “How shall I bring forth the aggregate worlds as before?” the Vedas issued from the four mouths of the creator.… From his eastern and other mouths he brought forth in succession the Vedas known as Ṛg, Yajur, Sāma, and Atharva.…54
Like other Purāṇic cosmogonies, the Bhāgavata Purāṇa elaborates on the Vedic image of the Vedas as the archetypal plan of creation and represents the creator Brahmā, like Prajāpati in the Brāhmaṇas, as reciting the Vedic mantras at the beginning of each kalpa in order to project all worlds and beings into concrete manifestation. He simply utters the Vedic name for each world and class of beings, and the corresponding forms spontaneously manifest. Since Brahmā’s utterance of the Vedic words is held to be the means through which he manifests the manifold forms of creation according to the same fixed pattern in each kalpa, it is considered vital that his utterance of every syllable be absolutely precise and free from error. In this context the Bhāgavata interjects its distinctive Vaiṣṇava perspective into the creation narrative by emphasizing Brahmā’s subsidiary role as the demiurge who derives his creative powers from Kṛṣṇa, the supreme Bhagavān, who is the ultimate source of creation and of Brahmā himself. Thus, when proceeding with his cosmogonic activities, Brahmā is portrayed as beseeching Bhagavān not to allow his utterance of the Vedic words to fail.55
Soteriological Function of Mantra Meditation
While the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s re-visioning of mantras thus elaborates on the Brāhmaṇas’ formulations regarding the cosmogonic function of the Vedic mantras, it also at times draws on Upaniṣadic and Pāñcarātra constructions of the soteriological function of mantras as meditation devices. A number of passages in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa recommend meditation (dhyāna) utilizing mantras that incorporate the divine names of Kṛṣṇa as a means of attaining direct experiential realization of Bhagavān. I will discuss the Bhāgavata’s representations of mantra meditation in Chapter 6 and will examine in particular its appropriation of Pāñcarātra constructions of mantra. As we shall see, the Bhāgavata invokes the Pāñcarātra notion of mantra-mūrti, in which the mantra is considered the sonic form of the deity. This notion does not of course originate with Pāñcarātra traditions but has Vedic antecedents in the Ṛg-Vedic conception that mantras are invested with the living presence of the deities. Nevertheless, the Bhāgavata’s conception of mantra meditation as a means of enlivening the divine presence embodied in the mantra has clearly been influenced by Pāñcarātra as well as Vedic formulations.56
The priestly exponents of the discourse of sacrifice in the Brāhmaṇas, as discussed earlier, celebrate the theurgic efficacy of the Vedic mantras as śruti, the primordial sounds at the basis of creation that were “heard” by the Vedic ṛṣis reverberating forth from the transcendent and that continue to be heard in the ongoing recitations of the brahmin reciters who preserve the traditions of Vedic recitation (vedādhyayana) and Vedic yajñas as a means of maintaining the cosmic order. The Upaniṣadic exponents of the discourse of knowledge, in contrast, reduce the Vedic mantras to root mantras such as Om and celebrate the soteriological efficacy of these mantras as vehicles to be used in meditation (dhyāna) as means of realizing Brahman, that transcendent, imperishable reality which is the ultimate source and abode of the Veda. Both of these perspectives are reflected in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s formulations regarding the divine names, nāmans, of Kṛṣṇa, which the text emphasizes should be engaged through the external bodily practices of śravaṇa, hearing, and kīrtana, recitation or singing, and the internal meditative practices of smaraṇa, contemplative recollection, and dhyāna, meditation. However, in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s discourse of bhakti all four modes of engaging the divine names—hearing, singing, contemplative recollection, and meditation—are ascribed soteriological efficacy, and the Vedic emphasis on theurgic efficacy recedes in importance as the focus shifts from maintaining the cosmos to purifying and liberating Kṛṣṇa’s devotees.
Śravaṇa, kīrtana, and smaraṇa are given primacy of place in the Bhāgavata’s enumeration of the nine forms of bhakti in 7.5.23–24,57 and this triad of practices is repeatedly celebrated, along with the virtually identical triad śravaṇa, kīrtana, and dhyāna, as the foremost modes of devotional practice.58 The terms śravaṇa, kīrtana, smaraṇa, and dhyāna are used throughout the Bhāgavata Purāṇa to refer to hearing about, singing about, remembering, and meditating on Kṛṣṇa in all of his aspects—not only his names (nāmans) but also his qualities (guṇas) and playful activities (līlās, caritas, or karmans) as well as stories (kathās) about his exploits. With respect to these four modes of practice, I would suggest that the Bhāgavata gives precedence to śravaṇa and kīrtana, hearing and singing, as the principal modes of engaging the divine names in public and private devotional contexts, whereas it gives priority to smaraṇa and dhyāna, contemplative recollection and meditation, as the appropriate modes of engaging the divine names when they are used as mantras in meditative contexts. I will focus on the Bhāgavata’s formulations regarding nāma-kīrtana in this section and will provide an analysis of its formulations regarding the role of divine names in mantra meditation in Chapter 6.
Among all of these practices, the Bhāgavata Purāṇa singles out nāma-kīrtana—along with comparable practices of singing (root gā), reciting (root gṝ), or uttering (root grah, root vac, or root vad) the nāman—as the preeminent practice of bhakti-yoga. The Bhāgavata declares that Bhāgavata dharma—dharma pertaining to Bhagavān, which is secret, pure, and difficult to comprehend—is the supreme (para) dharma of all human beings, and this dharma involves engaging in bhakti-yoga through singing the divine names.59 In the following analysis I will focus on the Bhāgavata’s formulations regarding (1) nāma-kīrtana as the special dharma of Kali Yuga; (2) the purifying and liberating power of the divine names; and (3) nāma-kīrtana as both the means to and expression of Kṛṣṇa bhakti.
Nāma-Kīrtana as the Dharma of Kali Yuga
The Bhāgavata proclaims that nāma-kīrtana is the special dharma of Kali Yuga. Nāma-kīrtana is held to be the most efficacious means of salvation in Kali Yuga, for by singing the divine names a person gains liberation (mukti) from saṃsāra, the cycle of birth and death; attains perfect peace (paramā śānti); and realizes the supreme goal (uttamā gati) of human existence.60
Although Kali Yuga is a storehouse of faults, it has one great virtue: by kīrtana of Kṛṣṇa alone one is liberated from bondage (mukta-saṅga) and attains the supreme (para). That which is attained in Kṛta Yuga by meditation on Viṣṇu, in Tretā Yuga by offering sacrifices, and in Dvāpara Yuga by worship is attained in Kali Yuga by kīrtana of Hari.61
The Bhāgavata ultimately invests nāma-kīrtana with the status of yajña in Kali Yuga: “Wise people worship [in Kali Yuga] by means of sacrifices (yajñas) consisting mostly of saṃkīrtana.”62 Like the Vedic yajñas that serve as a means of enlivening the presence of the deities embodied in the Vedic mantras, nāma-kīrtana is extolled as a means of enlivening the presence of the supreme Godhead embodied in his name, which is considered the only effectual means of destroying the forces of ignorance that envelop human consciousness in Kali Yuga. Moreover, Kṛṣṇa himself, as the supreme Bhagavān, is celebrated as the source and abode of the Veda (veda-garbha), and therefore singing his names is represented as yielding the fruits of the Vedas—not only the fruits of Vedic recitation (vedādhyayana) and Vedic yajñas promised by priestly exponents of the discourse of sacrifice, but also the fruits of meditation (dhyāna) and ascetic disciplines (tapas) promised by the Upaniṣadic exponents of the discourse of knowledge. Even an outcaste dog-eater—who is reviled by brahmanical exponents of the Dharma-Śāstras as beyond the pale of the varṇāśrama-dharma system and is excluded from participation in Vedic yajñas—by reciting the divine name attains the status of a twice-born Āryan, or “noble one,” and not only becomes eligible to perform a Soma sacrifice, the highest in the hierarchy of Vedic yajñas, but also attains fruits comparable to those attained by reciting the Vedic mantras, offering sacrificial oblations, and performing rigorous austerities (tapas).
By only occasionally hearing (śravaṇa) and singing (anukīrtana) your name (nāmadheya), bowing down to you, or remembering (smaraṇa) you, even a dog-eater (śvāda) becomes immediately eligible to perform a Soma sacrifice.… O how glorious that even a dog-eater (śva-paca) becomes worthy of veneration because he has your name (nāman) on the tip of his tongue. Those noble ones who recite (root gṝ) your name (nāman) have thereby practiced austerities (tapas), offered sacrificial oblations, bathed [in sacred waters], and recited the Vedas.… I offer obeisance to you who are Brahman, the supreme Person,…to you who are Viṣṇu, the abode of the Veda (veda-garbha).63
Purifying and Liberating Power of the Name
In the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s discourse of bhakti, Bhāgavata dharma, which entails engaging in bhakti-yoga through singing the names of Bhagavān, thus supersedes varṇāśrama-dharma as the supreme dharma of humankind. The soteriological efficacy ascribed to this practice is held to derive from the purifying and liberating power of the divine names.
The Bhāgavata repeatedly emphasizes the purifying potency of the nāmans of Kṛṣṇa, which have the power to cleanse (root pū or root śudh) the heart and mind and destroy all sins (pāpas, pātakas, or aghas) when their potency is activated through singing or uttering them.64 Nāma-kīrtana is declared to be the most effective means of expiation (prāyaścitta or niṣkṛta), for whereas the expiatory procedures prescribed by brahmanical exponents of the Dharma-Śāstras, such as vows (vratas), austerities (tapas), and gift-giving (dāna), may temporarily counteract the negative effects of a particular sin, utterance of the divine names is the only remedy that can purify the mind completely of all negative tendencies and their residual karmic impressions.65
A thief; a wine-drinker; a friend-betrayer; a brahmin-slayer; a violator of his guru’s bed; a slayer of a woman, king, parent, or cow; and other types of sinners (pātakins)—for each of these sinners (aghavats) utterance of the name (nāma-vyāharaṇa) of Viṣṇu is the most effective means of expiation (su-niṣkṛta) because the Lord’s attention is thereby drawn towards him [the utterer]. A sinner (aghavat) is not purified to the same extent by vows and other means of expiation prescribed by exponents of the Vedas as by uttering (udāhṛta) the syllables of the name (nāma-padas) of Hari, which engenders the experience of the attributes (guṇas) of the glorious Lord. For the process of expiation (niṣkṛta) is not complete if the mind again seeks its evil ways. Thus for those who wish to destroy their accumulated karma, repeatedly extolling the attributes (guṇānuvāda) of Hari is the only [remedy], as it purifies the mind (sattva-bhāvana).66
The implication of this passage is that the purifying potency of the nāmans of Bhagavān derives from his living presence in his names, which as his sound-embodiments contain his essence and his attributes (guṇas). When the bhakta utters the divine names, Bhagavān manifests his presence before the utterer, who gains the ability to directly experience the Lord’s attributes contained in his names. Utterance of the divine names thus serves as a means of activating the divine presence and more specifically the divine attributes contained in the names, and thus by implication the expiatory potency of nāma-kīrtana—which alone is held to be completely efficacious in purifying the mind—derives from Bhagavān himself. This implication is made explicit in another passage in the Bhāgavata:
Established in the hearts of human beings, Bhagavān, the supreme Puruṣa, drives away all evils (doṣas) occasioned by Kali Yuga and arising from objects, places, and persons. When heard about (śruta), sung about (saṃkīrtita), meditated on (dhyāta), and worshiped or even honored, Bhagavān abides in the hearts of human beings and destroys their sins (aśubhas) from thousands of lifetimes.… By Vedic learning, austerities, breath-control, compassion, bathing in sacred places, vows, gift-giving, and muttering prayers, the mind cannot attain the same state of absolute purity (atyanta-śuddhi) as it does when the limitless Bhagavān is established in the heart.67
The Bhāgavata Purāṇa establishes a direct connection between the purifying power of nāma-kīrtana and its liberating power, for when the bhakta’s accumulated sins from thousands of lifetimes are destroyed along with their residual karmic impressions, the root cause of bondage is eliminated and he or she attains liberation (mukti) from saṃsāra.68 Moreover, the Bhāgavata emphasizes that even dog-eaters and other outcastes—who are condemned by the Dharma-Śāstras to an irredeemable state of congenital impurity—are purified by śravaṇa and kīrtana and are liberated from the negative effects of their past actions that led to their current birth in an outcaste family.69
Brahmanical exponents of the theurgic efficacy of the Vedic mantras have developed an intricate system of mnemonic techniques to ensure absolute accuracy in recitation of the Vedic mantras, for they insist that only by proper pronunciation of the primordial sounds of the mantras will the recitation be efficacious in maintaining the cosmic order. The Bhāgavata Purāṇa, in expounding the soteriological efficacy of the nāmans of Kṛṣṇa, insists, in contrast, that even if the divine name is pronounced incorrectly or uttered inadvertently it is efficacious in purifying the heart and mind of the utterer. The Bhāgavata emphasizes this point when relating the story of Ajāmila, a sinful brahmin who has become infatuated with a low-caste prostitute and fallen from the path of varṇāśrama-dharma. At the time of his death, when the messengers of Yama, the god of death, come to take him away, Ajāmila calls out to his son, who is named Nārāyaṇa, and as soon as he utters “Nārāyaṇa” the messengers of Viṣṇu appear and save him from the noose of Yama. The messengers of Viṣṇu then expound Bhāgavata dharma to the messengers of Yama, in which they explain that Ajāmila, by his unintentional utterance of the divine name when he pronounced the four syllables “Nā-rā-ya-ṇa,” was spontaneously purified and released from the negative effects of the sinful actions committed by him not only in the current lifetime but also in innumerable previous births. The divine name is declared to be inviolable and to maintain its purifying potency as an efficacious mantra irrespective of the inner state or intention of the utterer or the circumstances under which it is uttered.
They declare that the utterance of a name (nāma-grahaṇa) of the Lord of Vaikuṇṭha destroys all sins (aghas), even if it is intended to designate someone else or is uttered in jest or disrespectfully or as a musical interjection. If a person unintentionally utters (root ah) “Hari” when he has fallen down, stumbled, broken [a bone], or been bitten, afflicted with pain, or beaten, he does not deserve the torments of hell.… The name (nāman) of the glorious Lord, when pronounced (saṃkīrtita) knowingly or unknowingly, burns up a person’s sins (aghas), as a fire burns up fuel. Just as the most potent medicine produces an effect even when taken by accident unknowingly, this mantra manifests its efficacy even when uttered (udāhṛta) by accident unknowingly.70
According to the Bhāgavata’s account, Ajāmila, having been released from the noose of Yama by his inadvertent utterance of the Lord’s name, retires to Gaṅgādvāra (Haridvāra) on the bank of the Gaṅgā River. There he casts off his material body (kalevara) and attains that supreme state of liberation (mukti) in which he realizes his eternal form (svarūpa) and ascends to the transcendent abode (dhāman) of Bhagavān.71
Enthralled with the Name
The ultimate fruit of nāma-kīrtana, according to the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, is bhakti, devotion, and realization of the supreme Bhagavān, who is the object of devotion. The Bhāgavata celebrates nāma-kīrtana as both the means to and expression of Kṛṣṇa bhakti.
Devotion to the divine names engenders the madness (unmāda) of devotion, melting the heart and leading to experiential realization of Bhagavān, whose presence is embodied in his names.
Hearing (root śru) about the most auspicious births and activities of the wielder of the discus and singing (root gā) his names (nāmans) designating his births and activities, which are celebrated throughout the world, he [the bhakta] should wander about free from attachment and shame. Dedicated to this way of life and having engendered passionate love (anurāga) by singing the names (nāma-kīrti) of his beloved Lord, his heart melting, he laughs loudly, weeps, roars, sings, and dances like a madman (unmādavat), beyond the ways of the world.… Just as when one is engaged in eating, satisfaction, nourishment, and relief from hunger arise simultaneously with each morsel of food, for a person who has taken refuge in the Lord, devotion (bhakti), experiential realization (anubhava) of the supreme Lord, and detachment (virakti) from everything else arise simultaneously.72
While nāma-kīrtana thus serves as a means of cultivating bhakti, the Bhāgavata emphasizes that as bhakti deepens and matures in the highest stages of realization, it in turn finds expression in spontaneous bodily manifestations that include ecstatic utterances of the divine names.
Having heard (root śam + ni) about his [the Lord’s] activities, incomparable qualities, and heroic exploits carried out by the forms he assumes for the purpose of līlā (līlā-tanus), he [the bhakta] sings loudly (root gā + ud) with an open throat, roars, and dances, his body hair bristling with exceeding delight and his voice stammering with tears. Like a person possessed by a spirit, he sometimes laughs and at other times weeps, meditates (root dhyā), or pays homage to people. Breathing deeply suddenly, he unabashedly exclaims (root vac), “O Hari! O Lord of the universe! O Nārāyaṇa!” his mind absorbed in the Self (Ātman). Liberated (mukta) from all bondage, his mind and body transformed to be like the Lord’s through contemplation of the divine nature, and his latent karmic seeds and impressions burnt up by means of the preeminent method of devotion (bhakti-prayoga), a person attains Adhokṣaja [Kṛṣṇa].73
In the final analysis the Bhāgavata Purāṇa celebrates nāma-kīrtana as both the preeminent method of realization and an ecstatic expression of the realized state. Nāma-kīrtana is cherished not only by those who seek liberation from the bondage of material existence but also by those who are established in the state of realization.74 Even the residents of Bhagavān’s transcendent abode in Vaikuṇṭha engage unceasingly in kīrtana, eternally enthralled with the divine names.75
From Nāma-Avatāra to Nāma-Saṃkīrtana: Gauḍīya Perspectives on the Name
The early Gauḍīya authorities, while building on the formulations of mantra and nāman found in Vedic texts and the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, go beyond these earlier formulations by developing a multileveled ontology that provides a theological foundation for their constructions of nāman. In his landmark essay on the theology of the name in the Gauḍīya tradition, Norvin Hein remarks:
In the line of those Vaiṣṇavas who use the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, there is a special understanding that the instrument through which the Divine Presence is mediated is the sung Name itself. The chanting of the names of God is a human activity, admittedly; but it is an occasion for a superhuman activity—the descent of God into the presence of His devotees. The voicing of a divine name brings realization of God’s presence because a name of God is not just a sound, referring to a reality that is something other than itself. In the common fund of Hindu thought, a metaphysical status and function pertains to a thing’s name. A name, in comparison with a thing’s phenomenal aspect, is…a subtler level of its reality and an approach to the essence of the thing named.… [F]or bhaktas like the Caitanyites…a true name of God is a genuine modality of God’s being or is God himself. That is why, in the reciting of sacred names, the mysterious Presence is often felt: God is there.76
Heins’s comment highlights two aspects of the name that are critical to the Gauḍīya theology of the name: the name as a “genuine modality of God’s being” that is ultimately identified with God himself, and the name as a “descent of God.” In the distinctive multileveled ontology that is articulated by the early Gauḍīya authorities as part of their discourse of embodiment, these two aspects of the name are correlated with different levels of reality and different levels of divine embodiment. On the transcosmic level beyond the material realm of prakṛti and beyond Brahman, in the transcendent Vraja-dhāman, Goloka-Vṛndāvana, where Kṛṣṇa revels eternally in his essential nature as svayaṃ Bhagavān, the name, nāman, is represented as nondifferent from his essence, svarūpa, and his absolute body, vigraha. On the material plane, Kṛṣṇa is represented as descending from his transcendent abode to the gross material realm in an array of different nāma-avatāras or varṇa-avatāras, avatāras in the form of names, which manifest as mesocosmic sound-embodiments through which human beings can engage the divine presence by means of such practices as nāma-kīrtana, singing the name, and nāma-śravaṇa, hearing the name.
The key components of the Gauḍīya theology of the name are encapsulated by Rūpa Gosvāmin in his Bhaktirasāmṛtasindhu and in his Kṛṣṇa Nāmāṣṭaka, a hymn that celebrates the name of Kṛṣṇa in eight verses. Jīva Gosvāmin elaborates on the ontology of the name and the central practices through which the name is engaged in his Bhagavat Sandarbha and Bhakti Sandarbha, respectively. Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja, in his hagiography of Caitanya’s life and teachings in the Caitanya Caritāmṛta, builds on Rūpa’s and Jīva’s reflections on the ontology of the name, while at the same time, as we shall see, he goes beyond the formulations of both Gosvāmins in providing an extended treatment of Caitanya’s role in promulgating the practice of nāma-kīrtana—and more specifically nāma-saṃkīrtana, communal singing of the divine names—as the highest form of sādhana-bhakti in Kali Yuga.77
The central role ascribed to the name in Gauḍīya theology and practice is thus held to derive from Caitanya himself, who celebrates the name in four verses of the Śikṣāṣṭaka, the eight verses traditionally ascribed to him:78
Saṃkīrtana of the name of Śrī Kṛṣṇa is completely victorious, purifying the mirror of the mind, extinguishing the great conflagration of material existence, spreading moonlight to the night-blossoming lotus of good fortune, enlivening the bride of knowledge (vidyā), expanding the ocean of bliss (ānanda), arousing the taste of complete ambrosial nectar (amṛta) at every step, and bathing the souls of all.79
You have manifested manifold names (nāmans) in which you have invested all of your inherent power (śakti), and no fixed time has been prescribed for remembering (smaraṇa) them. Such is your grace, O Bhagavān.…80
He who is more humble than even the grass, who is more forbearing than a tree, and who is free from pride while giving honor to others should continually practice kīrtana of the name of Hari.81
When, in taking up your name (nāman), will my eyes fill with streams of flowing tears, my voice choke with stammering speech, and my body (vapus) thrill with bristling body hair?82
These four verses attributed to Caitanya present in seminal form a number of the central themes that are emphasized in Gauḍīya discursive representations and practices pertaining to the name as formulated by Rūpa, Jīva, and Kṛṣṇadāsa: (1) the ontological status of the names of Kṛṣṇa as his sound-embodiments that contain his inherent essence and śakti; (2) the power of the name to purify and to bring liberation from the devouring fires of saṃsāric existence; (3) the capacity of the name to enliven the taste of ambrosial nectar, amṛta or rasa, and more specifically the nectar of prema-rasa; and (4) the pivotal role ascribed to the practice of nāma-saṃkīrtana as a means of activating the transformative power of the name and fashioning devotional bodies that thrill with the intoxicating madness of devotion.
The ontology of the name forms a critical component of the Gauḍīya discourse of divine embodiment. In this discourse, as discussed in Chapter 1, Kṛṣṇa is represented as maintaining the integrity of his vigraha, absolute body, while at the same time he multiplies himself and assumes limitless divine forms on the transcosmic, macrocosmic, and microcosmic planes. While he maintains the singularity of his vigraha in its svayaṃ-rūpa, essential form, as a cowherd boy in the transcendent Vraja-dhāman, Goloka-Vṛndāvana, Kṛṣṇa manifests multiple forms on the transcosmic plane as the four prābhava-vilāsas who reside in the transcendent realms of Mathurā and Dvārakā and as the twenty-four vaibhava-vilāsas and five classes of svāṃśa avatāras—puruṣa-avatāras, guṇa-avatāras, līlā-avatāras, manvantara-avatāras, and yuga-avatāras—who reside in their respective abodes in the transcendent domain of Paravyoman. Through the various classes of svāṃśa avatāras, he descends from the transcosmic plane in an array of corporeal forms—including divine bodies, human bodies, animal bodies, and various hybrid forms—to accomplish specific tasks appropriate to particular cycles of time in particular locales in the material realm of prakṛti. In the multileveled ontology of the name, the multiple manifestations of Kṛṣṇa’s name are represented as the sound correlates of his forms on the various planes of existence. Kṛṣṇa is represented as maintaining in the transcendent Vraja-dhāman the integrity of his pūrṇa nāman, his singular transcendent name in its complete fullness, which is identical on that level with his vigraha, absolute body, and his svarūpa, essential nature. This pūrṇa nāman, while remaining one, assumes manifold forms on the transcosmic plane, first, as the numerous names that designate different aspects of Gopāla Kṛṣṇa in the transcendent Vraja-dhāman; second, as the names of the four prābhava-vilāsas in the transcendent realms of Mathurā and Dvārakā; and, third, as the names of the twenty-four vaibhava-vilāsas and the various svāṃśa avatāras in the transcendent domain of Paravyoman. In this multileveled ontology of the name, the nāma-avatāras are ascribed a special function as the mesocosmic sound-embodiments through which Kṛṣṇa descends from the transcosmic plane and manifests through the vehicle of human speech as audible names on the gross material plane.
In developing this multileveled ontology, Rūpa Gosvāmin, Jīva Gosvāmin, and Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja engage in a range of reflections concerning the relationship of the ontology of the names of Kṛṣṇa to the ontology of Vedic language, the nature of the transcendent pūrṇa nāman, and the mechanisms through which the name manifests on earth as many nāma-avatāras.
Kṛṣṇa-Nāman as the Essence of the Vedas and the Essence of All Mantras
One of the starting-points for Gauḍīya reflections on the ontology of the name concerns the criteria by which one determines, first, which names, among the many names of Kṛṣṇa, are true nāma-avatāras that are self-manifesting expressions of his essential nature, as distinct from fabricated names that are products of conventional human language; and, second, which name, among the many nāma-avatāras, is the pūrṇa nāman, the most perfect and complete name that is identical with Kṛṣṇa’s essential nature and the essence (sāra) of all divine names and of all mantras.
Jīva provides the basis for determining which names of Kṛṣṇa are true nāma-avatāras by grounding the ontology of the divine names in the ontology of Vedic language. His arguments regarding the ontological status of the names of Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavat Sandarbha build upon his arguments in the Tattva Sandarbha regarding the transcendent authority of the Vedas, the ontology of Vedic language, and the preeminent status of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the sovereign of all śāstras. As discussed in Chapter 3, in order to establish the uncreated status (apauruṣeyatva), eternality (nityatva), and intrinsic authority (svataḥ-prāmāṇya) of the Vedas, Jīva makes use of the technical terminology and doctrines of the Mīmāṃsā philosophy of language, including the Mīmāṃsaka doctrine that there is an inherent (autpattika) and eternal (nitya) connection between the Vedic word (śabda) and its meaning (artha). In addition, he invokes prooftexts from Vedic texts as well as the Mahābhārata in order to establish that the eternal Vedic words (śabdas) serve as the archetypal plan through which the creator principle, Prajāpati or Brahmā, projects all beings into concrete manifestation according to the same fixed pattern in every cycle. According to this perspective, as discussed earlier, the language of the Vedas is a natural language—not a conventional language fabricated by human beings—in which each name in the Vedas contains within it the subtle essence and structure of the corresponding form. Having established the transcendent authority of the Vedas and the ontological status of the Vedic language, Jīva extends the Vedic canon beyond the circumscribed corpus of śruti texts by ascribing Vedic status to the two main categories of smṛti texts, Itihāsas and Purāṇas, and invoking the philosophical terminology of the Mīmāṃsakas as well as scriptural prooftexts to establish that the Itihāsas and Purāṇas are uncreated (apauruṣeya) and eternal (nitya) and therefore nondifferent from the Vedas. Finally, Jīva utilizes a series of arguments to establish the preeminent status of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the embodiment of Kṛṣṇa in the form of an uncreated (apauruṣeya) and eternal (nitya) text (grantha) that is the essence (sāra) of the Vedas, Itihāsas, and Purāṇas and the sovereign of all śāstras.83
Through his arguments in the Tattva Sandarbha, Jīva thus invests the entire brahmanical canon of śruti and smṛti texts with the transcendent authority of the eternal, uncreated Veda. He thereby provides the basis for his argument in the Bhagavat Sandarbha that only those names of Kṛṣṇa that are recorded in the śāstras—and especially those recorded in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the sovereign of all śāstras—are his sound-embodiments that contain his essence and śakti, and thus they alone are efficacious in generating direct experience of his divine presence:
It is only by means of those names (nāmans) that are celebrated in the śāstras that Bhagavān is immediately apprehended.… The self-manifesting nature (svataḥ-siddhatva) of these [names] must be recognized along with the fabricated nature of other [names].84
Jīva singles out the name “Kṛṣṇa,” Kṛṣṇa-nāman, as the most perfect and complete of Bhagavān’s many names, which is invested with the fullness of his śakti (śakti-pūrṇatā) and surpasses in its potency the names of all his vilāsas and avatāras.85 The Kṛṣṇa-nāman is the quintessential sound-embodiment that is the seed-expression of his quintessential text-embodiment, the Bhāgavata Purāṇa. Like the Bhāgavata, which is extolled as the “ripe fruit (phala) of the wish-fulfilling tree of Veda that is full of ambrosial nectar (amṛta),”86 the Kṛṣṇa-nāman is celebrated as the “sweetest of the sweet … the perfect fruit (phala) of the creeper of all the Vedas, its essential nature (svarūpa) consisting of consciousness (cit).”87 Jīva extends his arguments regarding the eternality (nityatva) of the Vedic words (śabdas) to the Kṛṣṇa-nāman and maintains that the varṇas or akṣaras, the phones or sound units that constitute the name, are eternal (nitya). He suggests, moreover, that the consummate status of the Kṛṣṇa-nāman, the sound-form of the supreme Bhagavān, surpasses even that of the syllable Om, the sound-form of Brahman, as the primordial vibration at the basis of all reality that is the most concentrated essence (sāra) of the Vedas.88
In the Kṛṣṇa Nāmāṣṭaka Rūpa also singles out the Kṛṣṇa-nāman as the most perfect of Kṛṣṇa’s names, which he celebrates in the eight verses of his hymn. According to Rūpa, the essential nature (svarūpa) of the Kṛṣṇa-nāman consists of consciousness (cit) and bliss (sukha), and its form (ākṛti) is made of transcendent sound (paramākṣara). It is this transcendent sound-body that is the “pūrṇa body of Kṛṣṇa” (Kṛṣṇa-pūrṇa-vapus), the body of the supreme Godhead in his complete fullness.89 Rūpa also connects the Kṛṣṇa-nāman to the Vedas, proclaiming that the lotus-feet of the name are “illumined by the splendor of the crown jewels of the entire śruti.”90 Moreover, Rūpa suggests that the nāman has manifold forms (aneka-svarūpa), including not only the Kṛṣṇa-nāman, the singular transcendent name, but also the many different names by which Gopāla Kṛṣṇa is venerated in the śāstras, such as Yaśodānandana (son of Yaśodā), Nandasūnu (son of Nanda), Gopīcandra (moon of the gopīs), and Vṛndāvanendra (king of Vṛndāvana).91
In the Caitanya Caritāmṛta Kṛṣṇadāsa also ascribes a special status to the Kṛṣṇa-nāman, or Kṛṣṇa-mantra, as the mahā-mantra that is the essence of all Vedic mantras (sarva-mantra-sāra) and the mahā-nāman that is the essence of all divine names.92 Kṛṣṇadāsa also follows Rūpa and Jīva in describing the Kṛṣṇa-nāman as made of consciousness (cit) and bliss (ānanda).93 In the final analysis, as I will discuss in the following section, all three Gauḍīya authorities concur that what distinguishes the Kṛṣṇa-nāman as the supreme name that is the source and essence of all divine names is its unique ontological status as the transcendent sound-body that is identical with Kṛṣṇa.
Identity of Nāman, Svarūpa, and Vigraha
In Gauḍīya representations of the internal dynamics of the Godhead in the transcendent Vraja-dhāman, Bhagavān, in his essential nature as the inexhaustible plenitude of sat, being, becomes cit, consciousness, and through awareness of his own Self bifurcates into subject (āśraya) and object (viṣaya) in order to enjoy ānanda, bliss. Through this self-referral dynamic Bhagavān revels within himself as both śaktimat and śakti, Kṛṣṇa and Rādhā, and savors the rasa, ambrosial nectar, of his own flowing bliss. The dynamism inherent in Kṛṣṇa’s enjoyment of his own bliss reverberates as a primordial vibration, which is his purṇa nāman, his transcendent name in its complete fullness. Because the name is nothing but the vibration of Kṛṣṇa’s own dynamic nature, his svarūpa-śakti, it is held to be nondifferent from him and full of sat-cit-ānanda, full of rasa, and full of śakti.
In his discussion of the name in the Bhaktirasāmṛtasindhu, Rūpa invokes an unidentified verse from the Padma Purāṇa, which is also cited by Jīva and Kṛṣṇadāsa, in order to ground the ontology of the name in the scriptural authority of the śāstras:
The name Kṛṣṇa is a wish-granting gem (cintāmaṇi), has a body (vigraha) consisting of consciousness (caitanya) and nectar (rasa), and is completely full (pūrṇa), pure (śuddha), and eternally free (nitya-mukta) due to the nondifference (abhinnatva) between the name (nāman) and the possessor of the name (nāmin).94
In his commentary on this verse, Jīva explains that the name is identical with Kṛṣṇa because the Kṛṣṇa-nāman, like the svarūpa of Kṛṣṇa, consists of sat-cit-ānanda, being, consciousness, and bliss. The one reality (tattva) consisting of sat-cit-ānanda and rasa appears (root bhū + āvir) as two, but the two are nondifferent.95 In the Bhagavat Sandarbha Jīva elaborates further on the identity between Kṛṣṇa and his name, asserting that the nāman is the svarūpa of Bhagavān (bhagavat-svarūpam eva nāma) and that there is ultimately no difference (abheda) between the nāman, name, and the nāmin, possessor of the name.96
In his discussion of the ontology of the name, Jīva suggests that the form (rūpa) of the nāman is made of bliss (ānanda) like the vigraha, the absolute body of Kṛṣṇa, although he does not elaborate on the relationship between the name and the vigraha.97 A connection between the nāman and the vigraha is also suggested by Rūpa’s image of the Kṛṣṇa-nāman as the “pūrṇa body (vapus) of Kṛṣṇa”98 and the Padma Purāṇa’s image of the nāman as having a “body (vigraha) consisting of consciousness and rasa.”99 Kṛṣṇadāsa makes this connection explicit and goes even further by asserting that the nāman and the vigraha, like the nāman and the svarūpa, are in the final analysis identical:
The name of Kṛṣṇa and the svarūpa of Kṛṣṇa are the same. The name, the vigraha, and the svarūpa, these three are one rūpa; there is no division among the three; the three are the cidānanda svarūpa. There is no division in Kṛṣṇa between the body and possessor of the body, nor between the name and the possessor of the name.100
At the conclusion of his assertion that there is no difference between the nāman, the vigraha, and the svarūpa of Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇadāsa notes that “the dharma of jīvas distinguishes between name and body and svarūpa.”101 This comment highlights a crucial difference between the nature of Kṛṣṇa, the supreme Godhead, and the nature of jīvas, individual living beings. In the Gauḍīya discourse of human embodiment, as discussed in Chapter 2, jīvas are represented as part of the jīva-śakti and as therefore “on the border” (taṭasthā) between the material realm of prakṛti governed by the māyā-śakti and the transcosmic domain of Bhagavān’s essential nature in which the svarūpa-śakti operates. In this perspective the jīva’s nāman, name, and deha, body or psychophysical complex, are both material (prākṛta) products of the realm of prakṛti, whereas the jīva’s svarūpa, essential nature, is a part (aṃśa) of Bhagavān and is nonmaterial (aprākṛta) and made of cit and ānanda. Moreover, on the material plane there is no intrinsic connection between the jīva’s body and the name that is assigned to that body through the conventions of human culture. The Gauḍīya discourse of divine embodiment, in contrast, maintains that in the case of the supreme Godhead there is no difference between name, body, and essence because the nāman, vigraha, and svarūpa are all nonmaterial (aprākṛta) and made of sat-cit-ānanda.
Name as Avatāra
In the Gauḍīya ontology of the name, the name is represented, on the one hand, as the eternal, nonmaterial, transcendent Kṛṣṇa-nāman that is identical with Kṛṣṇa in the transcendent Vraja-dhāman and that cannot be perceived with the ordinary material senses and, on the other hand, as the diverse array of divine names that manifest on the gross material plane and that can be engaged by human beings through material faculties such as speech, hearing, and the mind. The critical strategy that the Gauḍīyas use to connect the transcendent and manifest aspects of the name is to deploy the trope of descent, avatāra: like the one vigraha that descends from the transcosmic plane to the material realm in manifold corporeal forms as svāṃśa avatāras, the one nāman descends from the transcosmic plane to the material realm in manifold sonic forms as nāma-avatāras.
In reflecting on the ontology of the name in the Bhagavat Sandarbha, Jīva maintains that “like the other avatāras of the supreme Īśvara, this [name] is an avatāra in the form of sound (varṇa-rūpeṇāvatāra).”102 Kṛṣṇadāsa suggests that the nāma-avatāra is a special form of avatāra through which Kṛṣṇa descends into the material realm in Kali Yuga in order to save the world from the darkness of ignorance: “In the Kali age, the avatāra of Kṛṣṇa is in the form of the name [nāma-rūpe Kṛṣṇa-avatāra]; from the name there is the salvation of the whole world.”103
The primordial unspoken name reverberates forth from the transcendent in discrete nāma-avatāras that find vocalized expression on the gross material plane through the vehicle of human speech. In their discussions of the mechanisms through which the nāman manifests in the material realm, the early Gauḍīya authorities repeatedly emphasize that the name is “self-manifesting” (svataḥ-siddha or svaprakāśa). Although human speech may serve as the vehicle through which the process of self-manifestation occurs, it is not the source of the manifestation. Jīva suggests that even though the name, in its essential nature as the transcendent vibration of Kṛṣṇa’s svarūpa-śakti, is beyond prakṛti and therefore beyond the range of the material senses (prākṛtendriyas), by means of its self-manifesting nature (svataḥ-siddhatva) it appears in the realm of prakṛti and becomes accessible to the senses on the gross material plane through the vehicle of human speech.104
After invoking the verse from the Padma Purāṇa, quoted earlier, that represents the Kṛṣṇa-nāman as nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa, Rūpa remarks that the name, which in its essential nature is transcendent and beyond the grasp of the material senses, spontaneously “appears” or “bursts forth” (root sphur) on the tongues of those who are devoted to the supreme Godhead.
The name and other aspects of Śrī Kṛṣṇa cannot be grasped by the senses (indriyas). It spontaneously appears (root sphur) on its own (svayam) on the tongue of one whose face is turned towards devotional service (sevā).105
In the concluding verse of the Kṛṣṇa Nāmāṣṭaka, Rūpa beseeches the Kṛṣṇa-nāman to appear on his tongue so that he can revel perpetually in the waves of its ambrosial rasa: “O Kṛṣṇa-nāman, full of sweet syrupy waves of ambrosial nectar (sudhā),…ut of love for me appear (root sphur) on my tongue forever with your rasa.”106
Kṛṣṇadāsa also emphasizes the “self-manifesting” (svaprakāśa) nature of the Kṛṣṇa-nāman, which spontaneously appears in the mouth and bursts forth (root sphur) on the tongue, finding vocalized expression through human speech and destroying all sins (pāpas) through the mere touch (root spṛś) of it on the tongue. He portrays Caitanya discussing the distinguishing marks of a Vaiṣṇava in which he states that the best among the Vaiṣṇavas is one in whose mouth the Kṛṣṇa-nāman continually vibrates, while the foremost among the Vaiṣṇavas is one whose darśana causes the Kṛṣṇa-nāman to spontaneously manifest in the mouths of others.107 Kṛṣṇadāsa suggests, moreover, that the darśana of Caitanya himself had such an effect, causing the Kṛṣṇa-nāman to spontaneously burst forth on the tongue of a Rāma bhakta and take hold there, displacing the name of Rāma. He claims that Caitanya’s presence inspired even the tongues of nonbelieving Yavanas—foreigners who are deemed mlecchas, “barbarians”—to spontaneously utter the Kṛṣṇa-nāman.108
Transformative Power of the Name
According to the Gauḍīya ontology of the name, when the Kṛṣṇa-nāman, the transcendent vibration of the svarūpa-śakti that is nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa, self-manifests on the gross material plane in an array of nāma-avatāras, each of these mesocosmic sound-embodiments of Kṛṣṇa is invested with his svarūpa and śakti, his essence and power. In the second verse of the Śikṣāṣṭaka, as we have seen, Caitanya celebrates the manifold names in which Bhagavān invests his śakti.109 The divine names, infused with Kṛṣṇa’s śakti, are ascribed transformative power. In the first verse of the Śikṣāṣṭaka, Caitanya gives poetic expression to two aspects of this transformative power that are elaborated in the formulations of Rūpa Gosvāmin, Jīva Gosvāmin, and Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja: the power of the name to purify and to liberate from the bondage of material existence, and the power of the name to enliven and cultivate the ambrosial nectar of prema-rasa.110 The principal scriptural prooftext that grounds the early Gauḍīya authorities’ formulations concerning the transformative power of the name is the Padma Purāṇa verse, quoted earlier, that represents the Kṛṣṇa-nāman as pure (śuddha), eternally free (nitya-mukta), and having a body full of rasa.111 As we shall see, in the discourse of embodiment in which these formulations are embedded, the name’s functions as an instrument of purification and of liberation are subordinated to its principal function as an instrument of psychophysical transformation that serves as a means of fashioning devotional bodies through enlivening and cultivating prema-rasa.
Purifying and Liberating Power of the Name
The early Gauḍīya authorities, like the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, emphasize the purifying and liberating power of the names of Kṛṣṇa. They extol the power of the name to cleanse the heart and mind of every form of pāpa, a term that they use to designate sin and its karmic effects. They thereby establish a direct connection between the purifying power of the name and its liberating power, for the name’s capacity to liberate jīvas from saṃsāra, the endless cycle of birth and death, derives from its power to destroy the residual karmic impressions (saṃskāras) that are the root cause of bondage.
Rūpa emphasizes that the purifying power of the name, as the sound-embodiment of Kṛṣṇa, is an expression of the pure nature of the supreme Godhead, who in his luminous purity (śuci) is celebrated as viśuddha, completely pure and free of all faults, and as pāvana, the purifier who destroys all pāpas.112 He cites in this context an unidentified verse from the Padma Purāṇa that extols the purifying power of both Bhagavān and his name:
With mind illumined by faith, worship sincerely and continually him who is a treasurehouse of qualities, the foremost of those of highest renown, the purifier (pāvana) of the pure. When even the first light of the sun of the name (nāman) rises in the cave of the heart, it destroys the darkness of the great mound of sins (pātakas).113
Rūpa suggests that the “great mound of sins” that the name has the power to destroy includes the mound of residual karmic impressions (saṃskāras) that the jīva has accumulated from sinful actions in previous births as well as in the current lifetime.114 He also maintains that the name has the capacity to liberate the jīva from the bondage of saṃsāra.115
Jīva, like Rūpa, emphasizes the purifying (viśodhana) power of the name, which is efficacious in destroying pāpas and their karmic impressions (saṃskāras), including even the gravest of sins (mahā-pātakas).116 He also reflects on the liberating power of the name, which brings fulfillment to renunciants in their quest for mokṣa and yogins in their quest for kaivalya. He invokes the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s teaching that the name has the capacity to purify even dog-eaters (śvādas or śva-pacas) and other outcastes and to liberate them from the bondage of saṃsāra.117
Kṛṣṇadāsa reflects at some length on the purifying and liberating power of the name. In commenting on Caitanya’s glorification of the name as “purifying the mirror of the mind,” he suggests that the process through which the name purifies the mind involves the destruction of all pāpas.118 He claims, moreover, that a single utterance of the name of Kṛṣṇa is efficacious in destroying pāpas: “One taking of the name and all your sins [pāpas] and faults [doṣas] will go; and from another name you will gain the feet of Kṛṣṇa.”119 He explicitly connects the name’s role as an instrument of purification with its role as an instrument of liberation, for by destroying all pāpas the name is endowed with the power of mukti, eliminating the root cause of bondage that binds the jīva to saṃsāra: “From a hint of the name is the destruction of all sins [pāpas].… From a hint of the name is the destruction of saṃsāra.… In a hint of the name is mukti.”120
Kṛṣṇadāsa deploys a number of strategies in order to demonstrate the name’s transformative efficacy as an instrument of social formation that serves as a means of constituting the bhakta-saṅgha, the community of Caitanya’s followers, as a distinctive type of social body that defines itself over against the brahmanical socioreligious hierarchy constituted by the norms of varṇāśrama-dharma and the Vedic recitative tradition. In the brahmanical discourse of dharma elaborated in the Dharma-Śāstras, the differential norms of varṇāśrama-dharma distinguish five separate groups with respect to their degree of participation in varṇa-dharma, the duties of the four varṇas, or social classes,121 and āśrama-dharma, the duties of the four āśramas, or stages of life:122 (1) male members of the twice-born varṇas—brahmins, kṣatriyas, and vaiśyas—who are participants in both varṇa-dharma and āśrama-dharma; (2) male śūdras, who participate in varṇa-dharma but are excluded from the āśramas; (3) women, who are similarly excluded from the āśramas but participate in certain aspects of varṇa-dharma and also have their own distinct set of duties; (4) outcastes, who are beyond the pale of both the varṇa system and the āśrama system but whose status is nevertheless defined in relation to the broader social hierarchy; and (5) non-Āryans, to whom the regulations of dharma do not apply. Among these five groups, it is the exclusive purview of the first group—male members of the twice-born varṇas—to learn and recite the Vedas and to sponsor Vedic yajñas in which recitation of the Vedic mantras assumes a central role. Members of the other four groups—śūdras, women, outcastes, and non-Āryans—are excluded from learning or reciting the Vedic mantras and from sponsoring yajñas.123
Over against this socially circumscribed brahmanical model that restricts access to the Vedic mantras to those at the highest rungs of the socioreligious hierarchy, Kṛṣṇadāsa, expanding on the socially inclusive model of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, portrays Caitanya as forming a new type of social body constituted not by the differential norms of varṇāśrama-dharma but by the socially open practices of the bhakta-saṅgha in which the purifying and liberating power of the divine name is extended to all people, irrespective of gender, age, social class or caste, stage of life, or ethnicity: “Women, children, old men, even caṇḍālas [outcastes] and Yavanas [foreigners]—whoever once gains sight of you [Caitanya] takes the name of Kṛṣṇa, dances as if mad, and becomes a teacher and saves the world.”124 Kṛṣṇadāsa invokes examples from beyond the pale of the brahmanical system in order to demonstrate the invincible power of the name, which has the capacity to purify even the most impure outcastes, who are relegated to the margins of the brahmanical socioreligious hierarchy, and to liberate even Yavanas, who are outside of the brahmanical social body altogether.125 Kṛṣṇadāsa goes so far as to claim that the name’s liberating potency extends even beyond the limits of humankind and has the capacity to free all classes of jīvas, moving and nonmoving, within all the innumerable Brahmā-universes in the material realm.126
As part of his implicit challenge to brahmanical norms, Kṛṣṇadāsa, building on the formulations of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, establishes an alternative model of mantric efficacy based on the divine name that diverges from the dominant paradigm of Vedic recitation. In contrast to the norms of the Vedic recitative tradition, in which every sound and syllable of the Vedic mantras must be properly pronounced in order to be efficacious, Kṛṣṇadāsa, like the Bhāgavata, asserts that the divine name is efficacious even if it is incorrectly or inadvertently pronounced. He argues that the power of the name resides in the individual akṣaras (phones) that compose it, and the akṣaras retain their inherent potency even if they are separated from one another. He relates this point when recounting a conversation between Caitanya and Haridāsa Ṭhākura, a former Muslim who is portrayed in the Caitanya Caritāmṛta as a close companion of Caitanya and paradigmatic practitioner of nāma-kīrtana. Haridāsa insists that even Yavanas who inadvertently utter a semblance (ābhāsa) of the name will be freed by its liberating power, and he invokes in this context the Bhāgavata’s story of Ajāmila, who was liberated when, at the time of his death, he called out to his son and thereby inadvertently uttered the divine name “Nārāyaṇa.”
[A]ll the Yavanas will be easily freed. They say “Hārāma, hārāma,” and thus speak a semblance of the name. In profound prema, bhaktas say “hā rāma, hā rāma”; see the good fortune of the Yavanas, that they take the name. Even though the meaning is different, and though the intention of the name is other, still the power of the name is unconquerable. “Wounded by a boar’s tusk, a mleccha will again and again shout ‘hārāma!’ and thus gains release; what then of him who sings [the name] with faith?” [Nṛsiṃha Purāṇa]. Ajāmila called his son Nārāyaṇa, thus bringing the messenger of Viṣṇu, who freed him from his bonds. The two syllables of “rāma” are not separate; and the word “hā,” uttered in prema, is an ornament to them. This is the nature of all the syllables of the name, that even if they are separated they do not lose their own power.127
Prema-Rasa as the Fruit of the Name
The Kṛṣṇa-nāman, as the transcendent vibration of the svarūpa-śakti that is nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa, is held to be full of sat-cit-ānanda and full of rasa, and therefore when this transcendent name self-manifests on the gross material plane as a nāma-avatāra it is ascribed transformative power as the vehicle through which the ambrosial nectar of prema-rasa is enlivened and cultivated in the hearts of bhaktas. In this perspective destruction of pāpas and liberation from saṃsāra are preliminary fruits of the name’s transformative power that are secondary to the supreme fruit (phala) of the name: prema-rasa, pure transcendent enjoyment of supreme love for Kṛṣṇa. The name’s functions as an instrument of purification and of liberation are considered secondary to its principal function as an instrument of psychophysical transformation that serves as a means of cultivating prema-rasa and re-figuring the body of bondage as a body of devotion.
Invoking the trope of light, Rūpa suggests that when the sun of the name shines forth, its first rays may destroy the darkness of ignorance and the bondage of saṃsāra, but its ultimate purpose is to bring the luminous effulgence of bhakti.
O sun-like name of Bhagavān, even the first light of your rising destroys the devouring darkness of material existence, and you grant sight that is productive of bhakti even to those who are blind to the truth.…128
Jīva similarly insists that the principal fruit (phala) of the name is bhakti characterized by preman for Kṛṣṇa. All other results, including purification of pāpas and liberation from saṃsāra, are secondary to this supreme goal of human existence. Invoking prooftexts from the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, Jīva emphasizes that through engaging the names of Kṛṣṇa the bhakta gains experiential knowledge of his attributes (guṇas) and develops passionate love (anurāga) for him. This in turn causes the heart of the bhakta to melt and manifest a variety of emotions (bhāvas) that find expression in external bodily gestures such as laughing, weeping, and dancing. The ultimate fruit of the name, according to Jīva, is direct realization (anubhava) of Bhagavān in his essential nature as sat-cit-ānanda, culminating in a state of supreme peace (paramā śānti).129
In his discussion of the transformative power of the name, Kṛṣṇadāsa, like Rūpa and Jīva, maintains that destruction of pāpas and liberation from saṃsāra are “secondary results of the name” and are not the ultimate goal. He elaborates on the trope of light and suggests that while the first rays of the sun of the name may dispel the darkness of the mound of pāpas and bring the light of mukti, when the sun arises fully it brings the full sunshine of preman. Kṛṣṇadāsa relates this point in the context of recounting a debate between Haridāsa and a group of pandits regarding the greatness of the name.
Ṭhākura [Haridāsa] made kīrtana with three lakhs [300,000] of names; and among the paṇḍitas the question of the greatness of the name arose. And some said, “From the name is the destruction of sins [pāpas],” and others said: “From the name is the release [mokṣa] of jīvas.” And Haridāsa said, “These are not the two fruits of the name; in the fruit of the name is the arising of prema to the feet of Kṛṣṇa.… The destruction of sins [pāpas] and mukti are secondary results of the name.… It is as the rising of the sun. While the sun is still not risen, the darkness begins to be dispelled, as do fear and terror of thieves and ghosts and rākṣasas [demons]; and when the sun rises there are manifested auspicious things and the doing of that which is proper. So at the beginning of the rising of the name, sins [pāpas] and the rest are dispelled; and when it is risen there is the manifestation of prema at the feet of Kṛṣṇa. Mukti is an insignificant result, from a hint of the name.”130
Over against the traditional brahmanical formulation of the four puruṣārthas, the four ends of human life—kāma, artha, dharma, and mokṣa131—Kṛṣṇadāsa asserts that preman is the fifth end that is the supreme goal of human existence and the supreme fruit (phala) of the name:
The fifth end of man is the sea of the nectar of the joy of prema; and the joys of mokṣa and the rest are less than a single drop of it. The fruit [phala] of the Kṛṣṇa-name is prema, so it is said in all the śāstras.132
Kṛṣṇadāsa maintains, moreover, that while the name of Rāma has the power to grant mukti, the name of Kṛṣṇa alone has the power to grant the consummate gift of preman.133
In discussing the mechanisms through which the name awakens and cultivates prema-rasa, Kṛṣṇadāsa suggests a progressive process of development:
One Kṛṣṇa-name destroys all sins [pāpas]; it manifests bhakti, which is the source of prema. In the rise of prema is the transformation through prema, with sweat and trembling and gooseflesh, choking, and streams of tears.134
In this description we can isolate a number of different stages: (1) the name destroys pāpas; (2) through the elimination of pāpas, the name awakens bhakti, which Kṛṣṇadāsa describes elsewhere, using the rhetoric of bhakti-rasa theory, as the awakening of the sthāyi-bhāva of rati, love for Kṛṣṇa; (3) when bhakti or rati deepens, it finds fully mature expression in the bhakti-rasa of preman; (4) as preman deepens, it gradually transforms the psychophysical complex and is marked on the external body in a panoply of involuntary physical manifestations, which in the rhetoric of bhakti-rasa theory are termed sāttvika-bhāvas. The physical signs of preman mentioned by Kṛṣṇadāsa in the above passage—“sweat and trembling and gooseflesh, choking, and streams of tears”—correspond to five of the eight sāttvika-bhāvas enumerated in bhakti-rasa theory135 and recall the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s representations of the bhakta who is intoxicated with the madness of devotion.136 Caitanya himself, in the sixth verse of the Śikṣāṣṭaka cited earlier, mentions three of these physical signs—streams of tears, choking voice, and gooseflesh, or bristling body hair—as the transformative effects of the name to which he looks forward:
When, in taking up your name (nāman), will my eyes fill with streams of flowing tears, my voice choke with stammering speech, and my body (vapus) thrill with bristling body hair?137
AsI will explore more fully in a later section, the name is ascribed a central role in the process through which the bhakta’s material body is transformed into a devotional body marked with the signs of preman.
Fashioning Devotional Bodies and Social Bodies with the Name
The transformative power of the name is activated by engaging the various nāma-avatāras of Kṛṣṇa through the practices of sādhana-bhakti. As discussed in Chapter 2, the path of sādhana-bhakti involves fashioning a devotional body by means of two forms of devotional discipline: vaidhī-bhakti and rāgānugā-bhakti. In vaidhī-bhakti the bhakta performs external practices with the sādhaka-rūpa, the material psychophysical complex, that engage Kṛṣṇa through śravaṇa, kīrtana, and other modes of bodily practice in order to reconstitute the karmically bound biological body as a body of devotion. In rāgānugā-bhakti, an advanced form of sādhana-bhakti, the bhakta continues to perform external practices such as śravaṇa and kīrtana with the sādhaka-rūpa while also engaging in internal meditative practices such as dhyāna and smaraṇa in order to attain a siddha-rūpa, a perfected devotional body that is an eternal (nitya), nonmaterial (aprākṛta) body of bliss (ānanda).138
The name is engaged through a variety of perceptual, cognitive, and corporeal modalities in the practices of sādhana-bhakti, as delineated by Rūpa Gosvāmin in the Bhaktirasāmṛtasindhu and elaborated by Jīva Gosvāmin in the Bhakti Sandarbha. Nāma-kīrtana or nāma-saṃkīrtana, singing the name, and nāma-śravaṇa, hearing the name, are the principal modes of reception through which the ambrosial rasa of the name is savored. As I will discuss in Chapter 6, the name is also internalized through meditative practices such as nāma-smaraṇa, contemplative recollection of the name, and mantra dhyāna or japa, silent repetition in meditation of a mantra that incorporates the name(s) of Kṛṣṇa. In addition, the letters of the divine name (nāmākṣaras) are inscribed on the forehead and body as a means of embodying Kṛṣṇa in the bhakta’s own flesh.139
Among the sixty-four practices of vaidhī-bhakti, Rūpa ascribes a special status to nāma-saṃkīrtana as one of the five most important practices for cultivating prema-rasa and manifesting Kṛṣṇa himself on the gross material plane.140 Jīva’s discussion of vaidhī-bhakti centers on the nine forms of bhakti celebrated in Bhāgavata Purāṇa 7.5.23–24,141 mentioned earlier, and he suggests that nāma-kīrtana is the preeminent (parama) sādhana that is particularly efficacious in Kali Yuga.142 In their roles as founding theologians charged with perpetuating the bhakti movement inspired by Caitanya, Rūpa and Jīva are concerned to establish a comprehensive system of sādhana-bhakti comprising a network of diverse forms of practice through which bhaktas can engage Kṛṣṇa, and in this context they allot nāma-saṃkīrtana or nāma-kīrtana an important but not singular role. Kṛṣṇadāsa, in contrast, in constructing his hagiographic narrative in the Caitanya Caritāmṛta, follows Caitanya’s example, as expressed in the Śikṣāṣṭaka and as portrayed by earlier hagiographies, and assigns primacy of place to nāma-saṃkīrtana as the principal form of sādhana established by Caitanya himself. In the remainder of my analysis, I will focus on Kṛṣṇadāsa’s representations of nāma-saṃkīrtana as the highest form of sādhana-bhakti in Kali Yuga.
Nāma-Saṃkīrtana as the Dharma of Kali Yuga
In Kṛṣṇadāsa’s hagiographic narrative Caitanya is represented as giving precedence to nāma-saṃkīrtana as the most glorious (śreṣṭha) form of sādhana-bhakti that reigns supreme among the nine forms of bhakti.143 He is portrayed as prescribing nāma-saṃkīrtana as the highest form of sādhana for both householders and renunciants and as the highest form of bhakti-dharma that distinguishes the best among the Vaiṣṇavas.144 Kṛṣṇadāsa is concerned in particular to establish the unrivaled status of nāma-saṃkīrtana as the dharma of the current age of Kali Yuga in which two avatāras of Kṛṣṇa converge around a single practice: Kṛṣṇa descends as a yuga-avatāra in the form of Caitanya, and he descends as a nāma-avatāra in the form of the name, and in his human embodiment he celebrates his sound-embodiment by propagating nāma-saṃkīrtana as the yuga-dharma of Kali Yuga.145
Caitanya has appeared to propagate this dharma; for the dharma of the Kali age is the Kṛṣṇa nāma-saṃkīrtana. For he who worships with the sacrifice [yajña] of saṃkīrtana is wise; all others are destroyed by the Kali age.146
Kṛṣṇadāsa invokes the canonical authority of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa to ground his claims that the yuga-dharma of Kali Yuga is nāma-saṃkīrtana and that Caitanya is the yuga-avatāra who establishes it. With respect to the first claim, he cites as a prooftext Bhāgavata 12.3.51-52, quoted earlier:
Although Kali Yuga is a storehouse of faults, it has one great virtue: by kīrtana of Kṛṣṇa alone one is liberated from bondage (mukta-saṅga) and attains the supreme (para). That which is attained in Kṛta Yuga by meditation on Viṣṇu, in Tretā Yuga by offering sacrifices, and in Dvāpara Yuga by worship is attained in Kali Yuga by kīrtana of Hari.147
With respect to his second claim regarding the identity of the Kali Yuga avatāra, Kṛṣṇadāsa interprets the following description of this avatāra in Bhāgavata 11.5.32 as a reference to Caitanya:
Wise people worship, by means of sacrifices (yajñas) consisting mostly of saṃkīrtana, him who is black in color (kṛṣṇa-varṇa) though not black (akṛṣṇa) by virtue of his luster, with his limbs, ornaments, weapons, and associates.
As discussed in Chapter 1, Kṛṣṇadāsa interprets this verse as referring to Caitanya, who is “not black” but is rather light-colored due to his radiant golden (gaura) complexion. He emphasizes Caitanya’s unique status as the Kali Yuga avatāra in whom Kṛṣṇa appears as Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa together in a single body, and thus outwardly he is not black in that he assumes the golden color of Rādhā, while inwardly he is black in that he retains his essential nature as Kṛṣṇa.148
In discussing Caitanya’s role as the yuga-avatāra of Kali Yuga who establishes nāma-saṃkīrtana as the dharma of this age, Kṛṣṇadāsa expands on the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s image of saṃkīrtana as yajña. He emphasizes that the “yajña of saṃkīrtana” supersedes the Vedic yajña as the preeminent practice of Kali Yuga, for the “yajña of the Kṛṣṇa-name” is the essence (sāra) of all yajñas and one Kṛṣṇa-name is worth more than ten million (one crore) aśvamedha sacrifices.149 Moreover, in contrast to the circumscribed social world of Vedic yajñas, which, as mentioned earlier, is closed to everyone but male members of the twice-born varṇas, Caitanya is represented as creating an open social body with permeable boundaries in which the yajña of nāma-saṃkīrtana is extended in principle to all people. “Women, children, old men, even caṇḍālas [outcastes] and Yavanas [foreigners]” are invited to take up the name of Kṛṣṇa and join the bhakta-saṅgha.150 “He carried the saṃkīrtana even to the caṇḍālas, and in this way wove and threaded a garland of nāma and prema to be worn throughout the world.”151 Caitanya is represented as insisting, in accordance with the teaching of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, that “there is no consideration of caste [jāti], family [kula], and such, in Kṛṣṇa-worship” and therefore an outcaste dog-eater (śva-paca) whose mind and heart are devoted to Kṛṣṇa is more fit for the yajña of nāma-saṃkīrtana than a proud brahmin of pure family who has turned away from Bhagavān.152
Kṛṣṇadāsa’s hagiographic narrative presents nāma-saṃkīrtana as an instrument of social formation through which Caitanya attracts followers and fashions a social body comprising Kṛṣṇa bhaktas whose distinguishing mark is the name. For example, in his account of Caitanya’s pilgrimage to South India, Kṛṣṇadāsa portrays Caitanya as singing and dancing in a state of enraptured prema-rasa as he travels from village to village, attracting hundreds upon hundreds of people to follow his distinctive Vaiṣṇava path and become mahā-bhāgavatas, great devotees of Bhagavān, connected by the practice of nāma-saṃkīrtana.153 He is represented as attracting non-Vaiṣṇava advocates of contending paths, including followers of the jñāna-mārga, yoga-mārga, and karma-mārga, and Vaiṣṇava exponents of rival schools, including Rāma bhaktas as well as followers of the Śrīvaiṣṇava Sampradāya established by Rāmānuja and the Brahma Sampradāya founded by Madhva.
As before, while he was travelling on the path, anyone who saw him, and to whatever village he went, the people of that village all became Vaiṣṇavas, and said “Kṛṣṇa Hari!” And they, having made Vaiṣṇavas of people of other villages, saved them. There were many kinds of people in the southern country; some were jñānīs, and some were karmīs, and there were innumerable followers of false doctrine. All those people, affected by the sight of Prabhu [Caitanya], left their own persuasions and became Vaiṣṇavas. Among the Vaiṣṇavas [that were there], all were worshippers of Rāma; some were tattvavādīs [followers of Madhva], and some Śrī-Vaiṣṇavas. All those Vaiṣṇavas, at the sight of Mahāprabhu, worshiped Kṛṣṇa, and took his name.154
In summary, Kṛṣṇadāsa asserts that Kṛṣṇa descends to the material realm in Kali Yuga and becomes embodied in human form as Caitanya and in sound form as the name in order to create an ever-expanding community of bhaktas interwoven by the garland of Kṛṣṇa-nāman and thereby to liberate all jīvas, moving and nonmoving, through the singular power of nāma-saṃkīrtana.155
There is only the name of Hari, the name of Hari, the name of Hari; in Kali Yuga there is no other way, no other way, no other way.156
Devotional Bodies on Display
As we have seen, Kṛṣṇadāsa’s hagiographic narrative presents nāma-saṃkīrtana as an instrument of social formation through which Caitanya attracts followers and creates a bhakta-saṅgha, community of Kṛṣṇa bhaktas, that define themselves through their shared practice of nāma-saṃkīrtana. I would suggest, moreover, that the public performance of nāma-saṃkīrtana, as a public spectacle of bodies on display, is ascribed a critical role in shaping the social body of the bhakta-saṅgha through inscribing the socioreligious taxonomies of the community in the bodies of the individual performers while at the same time establishing the boundaries that differentiate the bhakta-saṅgha from the hierarchy of publics who witness the performance. As we shall see, the public performance of nāma-saṃkīrtana is represented not only as an instrument of social formation but also as an instrument of psychophysical transformation through which the material bodies of the performers are transformed into “devotionally informed bodies” that have internalized the socioreligious taxonomies of the bhakta-saṅgha.157
In order to illustrate the discursive strategies through which Kṛṣṇadāsa represents the mechanisms of social formation and psychophysical transformation involved in the public performance of nāma-saṃkīrtana, I will cite his account of a nāma-saṃkīrtana performance by Caitanya and his followers at the Jagannātha temple in Purī, Orissa, and then will provide an extended analysis of the account.
Then Prabhu [Caitanya] went, with all of them [the Vaiṣṇavas], to the temple of Jagannātha, and there began the kīrtana. Seeing the sandhyā-dhūpa [incense offering], they began the saṃkīrtana, and the temple servant brought and gave garlands and sandalwood to them all. Four groups sang saṃkīrtana on all four sides while Prabhu Śacīnandana [Caitanya, the son of Śacī] danced in the center. Eight mṛdaṅga drums played, and thirty-two karatāla cymbals; the sound of “Hari” arose, and the Vaiṣṇavas said, “Excellent!” That most auspicious sound of kīrtana which arose filled the fourteen worlds and pervaded the universe. The people who dwelt at Puruṣottama came to see, and when they saw the kīrtana the Oḍiyā people were dumbfounded.
Then Prabhu circumambulated the temple; and as he circumambulated it he danced. Before and behind him sang the four groups, and when he fell down, Nityānanda Rāya supported him. His tears and gooseflesh and trembling and sweat and shouting—seeing these manifestations of prema the people were struck with wonder. Tears flowed from his eyes like a stream from a fountain and the people all around him were wet. Prabhu danced about [the temple] for some time; stopping in back of the temple he performed kīrtana. In all four directions the four groups sang in loud voices, and amongst them Gaura Rāya [Caitanya] danced like Śiva. Having danced for a long time, Prabhu became quiet, and commanded the four mahāntas to dance. Advaita Ācārya danced in one group, and in another one Nityānanda Rāya. Paṇḍita Vakreśvara danced in another one, and Śrīvāsa within the next. Mahāprabhu remained watching in their midst, and there one of his divine powers [aiśvarya] became manifest. Many people danced and sang all around, and all saw that “Prabhu is looking at me.” Prabhu wanted to see the dance of all four, and because of that desire he manifested his divine power [aiśvarya]. Each one thought that he was looking only at him, absorbed in his gaze [darśana]; how he could look in all directions cannot be known. It was as when Kṛṣṇa was in the center, at the pulinabhojana [riverside meal], and all around his companions said—“He is looking towards me.” Whoever came nearby while dancing, Mahāprabhu gave him a deep embrace. Seeing this great dance, great prema, great saṃkīrtana, the people of Nīlācala [Purī] floated in the joy of prema. Gajapati Rājā [King Pratāparudra], having heard the kīrtana, climbed to the roof of his palace with his people and watched. Seeing the saṃkīrtana, the rājā was astonished, and his desire to meet Prabhu grew infinitely. When the kīrtana was finished, Prabhu watched the offering of flowers, and then with all the Vaiṣṇavas came to his dwelling place. The temple servant brought and gave them much prasāda; dividing it, Īśvara distributed it to all. He bade farewell to them all, telling them to go to bed; such was the līlā of Śacī’s son. As many days as they were all with Mahāprabhu, they performed the delight of kīrtana. So the kīrtana-vilāsa [divine play of kīrtana] has been related; and he who hears it becomes the servant of Caitanya.158
In his account of this public performance of nāma-saṃkīrtana, in which Caitanya and his followers circumambulate the Jagannātha temple, Kṛṣṇadāsa deploys a number of discursive strategies to recast this performance as a cosmic event with resounding power that reverberates throughout creation. The key strategy involves re-presenting the choreography of the performance as a moving maṇḍala that reflects more specifically the architectonics of the lotus-maṇḍala that is used as a meditation device in the advanced meditative practices of rāgānugā-bhakti.159 An extensive description of the lotus-maṇḍala is given in the Vṛndāvana Māhātmya of the Padma Purāṇa, which I will discuss more fully in Chapter 5. The Māhātmya represents Vṛndāvana, which is also called Gokula or Vraja, as a thousand-petaled lotus-maṇḍala arranged in seven concentric rings and portrays Kṛṣṇa seated together with Rādhā on a gem-laden throne on an octagonal yoga-pīṭha in the pericarp (karṇikā or varāṭaka), the seed-vessel at the center of the lotus.160 Kṛṣṇa and Rādhā are encircled by the eight most beloved gopīs, Kṛṣṇa’s cowmaiden lovers, who are seated in the eight corners of the octagonal yoga-pīṭha and are surrounded by two additional rings of gopīs. The gopīs are encircled by four gopas who are close friends of Kṛṣṇa and who are the guardians of the four directions, and they in turn are surrounded by myriads of gopas.161 Although Kṛṣṇadāsa does not explicitly make reference to the yoga-pīṭha in his account of the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance at Jagannātha temple, I would suggest that he re-presents the choreography to evoke the structure of the yoga-pīṭha at the center of the lotus-maṇḍala. Kṛṣṇadāsa refers to the yoga-pīṭha elsewhere in the Caitanya Caritāmṛta, where he describes Kṛṣṇa seated along with Rādhā “on the yoga-pīṭha in Vṛndāvana … on a throne all made of jewels” and surrounded by Rādhā’s sakhīs, gopī companions.162
Kṛṣṇadāsa’s evocation of the image of the lotus-maṇḍala, with its concentric rings, serves as a means of marking the socioreligious hierarchies involved in the performance. The maṇḍala incorporates and circumscribes the bhakta-saṅgha as a distinct social body composed of the kīrtanīyās, nāma-saṃkīrtana performers, that is set apart from the hierarchy of publics who witness the performance. The concentric rings of the maṇḍala demarcate the internal divisions within the social body of the bhakta-saṅgha and establish the hierarchy of performers. Caitanya sings and dances in the center of the moving maṇḍala. As the Kali Yuga avatāra who is revered as Kṛṣṇa and Rādhā together in a single body, his presence marks the site of the yoga-pīṭha. The four mahāntas—Nityānanda, Advaita Ācārya, Śrīvāsa Paṇḍita, and Vakreśvara Paṇḍita—surround Caitanya in the four directions, singing and dancing as the heads of the four groups of kīrtanīyās. As the close companions of Caitanya who are the leaders of the bhakta-saṅgha, the four mahāntas take their place in the inner circle as the gopas who are the guardians of the four directions in the maṇḍala. The four groups of kīrtanīyās in turn surround the four mahāntas in the four directions. As “the Vaiṣṇavas” who are members of the bhakta-saṅgha, these anonymous kīrtanīyās form the outer circle as representatives of the myriads of gopas who encircle the four guardian gopas in the maṇḍala.
Kṛṣṇadāsa’s account of the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance explicitly invokes the līlā episode related in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa about the pulina-bhojana, riverside meal, in which Kṛṣṇa enjoys a picnic with the gopas on the bank of the Yamunā River. Kṛṣṇa is portrayed as sitting in the center while his cowherd friends surround him in concentric rings like the petals encircling the pericarp (karṇikā) of a lotus.163 Just as each of the gopas encircling Kṛṣṇa thinks that Kṛṣṇa is looking only at him, so each of the dancing kīrtanīyās encircling Caitanya thinks that Caitanya is looking only at him. The kīrtanīyās in the moving maṇḍala thus assume the role of gopas who are the exemplars of sakhya-rasa, the devotional mode of friendship.
The image of the dancing kīrtanīyās encircling Caitanya also recalls the image of the rāsa-līlā, circle dance, recounted in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa in which the gopīs array themselves in a circle around Kṛṣṇa. When the circle dance commences, Kṛṣṇa multiplies himself by means of his inconceivable power and assumes a separate form for each gopī so that each gopī thinks that Kṛṣṇa is dancing with her alone.164 The allusion to the rāsa-līlā suggests that the kīrtanīyās assume the role not only of gopas, Kṛṣṇa’s cowherd friends, but also of gopīs, Kṛṣṇa’s cowmaiden lovers, who are the paradigms of mādhurya-rasa, the devotional mode of erotic love, which is celebrated as the most intimate and sublime expression of preman.165
The configuration of the moving maṇḍala, with the inner and outer circles of kīrtanīyās surrounding Caitanya in the center, thus defines the boundaries of the social body of the bhakta-saṅgha as Caitanya’s own bhakta-gaṇa, troop of devotees, who join with him in ecstatic singing and dancing in the līlā of nāma-saṃkīrtana.166 By delimiting the social body, the moving maṇḍala distinguishes the bhakta-saṅgha from the hierarchy of publics who encircle the maṇḍala and witness from a distance the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance as passive observers.
First in the hierarchy of publics who witness the performance are the Vaiṣṇava priests and other temple servants at the Jagannātha temple who are alluded to in the account. The priests provide a ritual frame for the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance by offering incense to the mūrti (ritual image) of Lord Jagannātha prior to the performance and offering flowers to the mūrti after the saṃkīrtana is finished. The connection between the priests and the kīrtanīyās is mediated through the temple servant (paḍichā) who gives the performers flower garlands and sandalwood paste at the beginning of the performance and brings them prasāda at its conclusion. Although the temple priests are not included in the moving maṇḍala of nāma-saṃkīrtana performers, they are first in the hierarchy of publics who witness the performance, for as the servants of Lord Jagannātha, Kṛṣṇa’s embodied form as an arcā-avatāra, or image-avatāra, they exemplify dāsya-rasa, the devotional mode of service.
Second in the hierarchy of publics are King Pratāparudra, the last great Gajapati Mahārājā of Orissa (r. 1497–1540 CE), and his associates who watch the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance from the roof of the palace. Kṛṣṇadāsa’s account of this particular nāma-saṃkīrtana performance occurs at a point in his hagiography when King Pratāparudra has not yet met Caitanya—although he is eager to do so—and thus he remains outside of the moving maṇḍala as a passive witness to the performance. At this point the king, like the Jagannātha temple priests, is an exemplar of dāsya-rasa, for in his role as Mahārājā he is the protector of the Jagannātha temple. Later in the hagiography, when the king is accepted by Caitanya as a disciple, his incorporation into the bhakta-saṅgha is marked by his inclusion in the troop of gopa-garbed bhaktas who join with Caitanya in dance at the festival of Nanda.167
Third in the hierarchy of publics are the “people of Nīlācala [Purī],” the anonymous “people” (jana or loka) who reside in Purī and witness the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance from a distance. Finally, Kṛṣṇadāsa’s account suggests that the reverberating power of the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance extends beyond even the anonymous people of Purī to the most encompassing of publics: the denizens of the fourteen worlds that constitute the Brahmā-universe. Elsewhere in the Caitanya Caritāmṛta he elaborates on this notion, claiming that through the cumulative effect of Caitanya’s propagation of nāma-saṃkīrtana the entire cosmos reverberates with saṃkīrtana and all beings, moving and nonmoving, in all of the innumerable Brahmā-universes dance in the ecstasy of preman.168
Kṛṣṇadāsa’s evocation of the image of the moving maṇḍala thus serves as a means of delimiting the social body of the bhakta-saṅgha and distinguishing it from the hierarchy of publics who witness the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance. The socioreligious hierarchies delineated in Kṛṣṇadāsa’s account are further emphasized through a second discursive strategy in which he establishes a stark contrast between the multiple modes of reception through which the kīrtanīyās engage in the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance and the more limited modes of engagement on the part of the various publics.
The kīrtanīyās, through their performance of nāma-saṃkīrtana with Caitanya at the Jagannātha temple, transform their material bodies into devotional bodies through engaging three different modes of divine embodiment with the mind, senses, and organs of action: Kṛṣṇa’s sound-embodiment as a nāma-avatāra, his human embodiment as a yuga-avatāra, and his image-embodiment as an arcā-avatāra. The kīrtanīyās engage the nāma-avatāra through saṃkīrtana, singing, and śravaṇa, hearing, giving vocalized expression through the vehicle of their speech to the vibrating sound-embodiments of Kṛṣṇa. Their tongues and ears pulsate with the reverberations of the divine name, which overflow from the speech into the limbs, inspiring them to whirl and dance in ecstatic celebration of the Kṛṣṇa-nāman. As they savor the ambrosial rasa of the nāman, they revel in the intoxicating streams of preman. The kīrtanīyās engage the yuga-avatāra through darśana, seeing, and sparśana, touching. They behold the manifestation of divine power (aiśvarya) through which Caitanya casts his gaze in all directions simultaneously so that each dancer is absorbed in his darśana and both sees and is seen by him individually. The dancers are enveloped by Caitanya’s deep embraces as well as by his encompassing gaze. While the primary focus of the kīrtanīyās during the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance is on engaging Kṛṣṇa’s embodied forms as nāma-avatāra and yuga-avatāra, they also engage his arcā-avatāra at the beginning and end of the performance. They receive darśana of the mūrti of Lord Jagannātha and partake of his blessings through smelling the sweet fragrance of the incense and flowers offered to him, adorning their own bodies with the flower garlands and sandalwood paste touched by his form, and relishing the food (prasāda) offered to him.
In contrast to the kīrtanīyās, who actively engage in the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance with all their mental and physical faculties, the various publics are represented in Kṛṣṇadāsa’s account as observers who passively witness the performance. Although they hear the auspicious sounds of nāma-saṃkīrtana that reverberate throughout the fourteen worlds, the principal emphasis in the account is on their gazing at the spectacle from a distance. King Pratāparudra, accompanied by his associates, watches the performance from his palace roof and is astonished by what he sees. The people of Purī float in the bliss of preman as a result of “seeing this great dance, great prema, great saṃkīrtana.” But the gaze of the king and of the people is one-sided. They do not participate in the reciprocal gaze of Caitanya’s darśana, which is a privilege reserved for the kīrtanīyās who are members of the bhakta-saṅgha.
Bodies Thrilling with the Name
According to the Gauḍīya ontology of the name, as we have seen, Kṛṣṇa revels eternally in the transcendent Vraja-dhāman, Goloka-Vṛndāvana, in his own blissful nature as svayaṃ Bhagavān and through this self-referral dynamic reverberates as a primordial vibration, which is his transcendent Kṛṣṇa-nāman that is nondifferent from him, full of sat-cit-ānanda and full of rasa. The transcendent name self-manifests on the gross material plane in an array of nāma-avatāras that serve as means of enlivening and cultivating prema-rasa in the hearts of bhaktas. Kṛṣṇadāsa emphasizes the critical role of nāma-saṃkīrtana in harnessing the name and unleashing its transformative powers:
From saṃkīrtana comes the destruction of pāpa and…the purification of the mind, and the sprouting of all sādhana-bhakti. [In it] is the sprouting of Kṛṣṇa-prema, the taste of the nectar of prema, the attainment of Kṛṣṇa, immersion in the ocean of the nectar.…169
In discussing the mechanisms through which the practice of nāma-saṃkīrtana awakens the sthāyi-bhāva of rati, love for Kṛṣṇa, and causes it to deepen into the bhakti-rasa of preman, Kṛṣṇadāsa suggests that the vibrating name stimulates the bliss that is latent in the heart of the bhakta, which begins to flow in rivulets of bliss. As the nāma-saṃkīrtana performance intensifies and gains momentum, the advanced sādhaka becomes increasingly absorbed in the blissful waves of the name’s ambrosial rasa. The entire psychophysical complex gradually becomes saturated with the streams of prema-rasa, which erupt in torrents of bliss that thrill the mind and senses and organs of action with the intoxicating madness of devotion. The consciousness of the sādhaka, drunk with preman, floats in the ocean of Kṛṣṇa’s ānanda, while his transformed material body manifests an array of involuntary physical symptoms, termed sāttvika-bhāvas in the rhetoric of bhakti-rasa theory, that are considered the externalized signs of his internal ecstatic state.
In Kṛṣṇadāsa’s hagiographic narrative, Caitanya, as the Kali Yuga avatāra who embodies Kṛṣṇa and Rādhā together in one body, is simultaneously the supreme object (viṣaya) of devotion in his essential nature as Kṛṣṇa and the supreme vessel (āśraya) of devotion in his identity as Rādhā. In his bhāva as Rādhā, Caitanya is celebrated as the perfect embodiment of bhakta-bhāva and of prema-rasa. In his accounts of nāma-saṃkīrtana performances, Kṛṣṇadāsa thus regularly portrays Caitanya as the paradigmatic mahā-bhāgavata170 who manifests all eight sāttvika-bhāvas as the involuntary bodily manifestations of his internal enraptured state of prema-rasa: stupefaction, perspiration, bristling of body hair, faltering voice, trembling, change of color, tears, and loss of consciousness.171
In the…dance Prabhu was wonderfully transformed; there arose the eight sāttvika bhāvas at the same time. His body hair stood on end, with gooseflesh, he was like a śimulī tree covered with thorns. And seeing the trembling of each of his teeth, the people were afraid that all his teeth would loosen and fall out. All over his body sweat flowed, and with it blood came forth; and in a choked voice he uttered “jaja gaga jaja gaga.” His tears flowed like a stream of water from a fountain, and drenched the people standing all around him. The lustre of his body seemed sometimes pale golden, and sometimes like the color of the dawn, and sometimes like the color of the jasmine. Sometimes Prabhu was motionless, and sometimes he fell to the earth; his hands and feet were like dried sticks, and would not move. Sometimes, fallen to the earth, he was devoid of breath.… Sometimes the tears of his eyes flowed and the mucus of his nose ran, and there was froth on his mouth, like streams of nectar falling from the moon.172
By repeatedly invoking the rhetoric of the sāttvika-bhāvas in virtually every account of Caitanya’s nāma-saṃkīrtana performances, Kṛṣṇadāsa presents Caitanya’s perfected devotional body thrilling with the name as the consummate paradigm of the realized bhakta.