A Bhakti Shorter Catechism.
As a brief summary of the chief points of the Chaitanya bhakti-teaching, it may be of interest to conclude this section with a part of the famous dialogue between Chaitanya and the gifted Rāmānanda Rāy, the Vaishnava scholar-in-politics of his day.
It might well serve as a catechism of the fundamentals of the faith:
Question. Which knowledge is the highest of all?
Answer. There is no knowledge but devotion to Krishna.
Ques. What is the highest glory in all types of glory?
Ans. Being reputed to be Krishna's devotee.
Ques. What is counted wealth among human possessions?
Ans. He is immensely wealthy who has love for Rādhā-Krishna.
Ques. What is the heaviest of all sorrows?
Ans. There is no sorrow except separation from Krishna.
Ques. Who is considered liberated among those who are liberated?
Ans. He is the foremost of the liberated who practises devotion to Krishna.
Ques. Among songs what song is natural to creatures?
Ans. It is the song whose heart is the love-sports of Rādhā-Krishna.
Ques. What is the highest good of all creatures?
Ans. There is none except the society of those who are devoted to Krishna.
Ques. Whom do creatures incessantly remember?
Ans. The chief things to be remembered are Krishna's name, qualities and sports.
Ques. Among objects of meditation which should creatures meditate on?
Ans. The supreme meditation is on the lotus-feet of Rādhā- Krishna.
Ques. Where should creatures live leaving all behind?
Ans. It is the glorious land of Vrindāvan, where the rāsa-līlā is eternal.
Ques. What is the best of things to be beard by creatures?
Ans. The Rādhā-Krishna love sports are a delight to the ear.
Ques. What is chief among the objects of worship?
Ans. The name of the most adorable couple, Rādhā-Krishna.
Ethical and Social
The Vaishnava ethic springs from the same source as does its theology. It proceeds directly from bhakti.
Indeed, says the Vaishnava, true bhakti must of necessity flower in moral conduct. The good man, therefore, and the true bhakta are the same.
The ethical teaching of the Caritamṛta, however, impresses one by its meagreness. It does not seem to be a primary interest. The moral fruits of bhakti are taken for granted by the Vaishnava, and he is not particularly concerned with them further.
This fact is recognised by a modern biographer of Chaitanya and explained thus:
Lord Gaurāṅga never posed as a teacher, but only one among his fellows, seeking Krishna.
What he did was to grant bhakti, which so thoroughly purified the blessed being that it became hateful to him to break a moral law.
His followers never preached moral doctrines to their fellows, knowing full well that moral life must follow a religious life.
The deeper implications of this fact will be discussed in the final chapter. The chief ethical teachings of the sect are familiar and need not detain us long.
The Vaishnava Character
Mercy toward all creatures, jīva dayā, was strongly impressed on Bengal Vaishnavism, because of the sect's violent reaction from the grossness of the Śakta animal sacrifice, so prevalent in mediaeval Bengal.
It is an aspect of the ahiṁsā doctrine which was so congenial to the Vaishnava spirit and became a part of its ethical teaching.
The strict vegetarianism that marks the true Vaishnava is a logical expression of this teaching. All fish, flesh, and fowl is abjured, not even eggs being allowable to the faithful.
Humility is probably the most characteristic feature of the real Vaishnava bhakta. It was clearly taught by Chaitanya, although briefly enough. It is the message of the best of the Sanskrit Aṣṭaka, the 8 verses attributed to Chaitanya, which have been quoted already.
The same familiar analogy occurs in the Caritamṛta.
[The bhakta) although of high position considers himself inferior to grass, and acts patiently like the tree.
For the tree when cut says nothing, and never begs water even though parched to death, but gives away its wealth to him who asks, and shelters others, itself enduring the sun and rain.
The Vaishnava ought to be without pride even though of high rank; he must respect all creatures, knowing that Krishna is present in them.
Continued emphasis upon this trait in the sect led men who were Kulin to deprecate the honourable lineage of their families,
and caused the common use of the name Dās (servant) by Vaishnava writers of all castes as a means of checking pride of authorship, and as an incentive to the spirit of humility.
Linked with humility are tranquillity, freedom from worldly desires, and purity of heart - all the fruit of absorption in bhakti.
According to the Śāstras these signs are found in him in whose heart this emotion springs up. He is not affected by worldly afflictions... His time is not wasted [all acts] being referred to Krishna.
He has no fear of enjoyment, success, or sensual gratification. Even the best counts himself lowly, strong in faith that Krishna will be merciful.
We find the statement of the Vaishnava ideal of character well summed up in the following passage:
These are the signs of a Vaiṣṇava, indicated only, as everything cannot be said:
compassionate, free from spite, of the very nature of truth, spotless, charitable, gentle, pure, possessing nothing, doing good to all, peaceful, wholly surrendered to Krishna,
desireless, harmless, steadfast, victorious over the six passions, eating sparingly, restraining the self, honouring others without self-esteem, tender-hearted, grave, friendly, poetic, skilful and silent.
This is doubtless an idealisation, but it sets forth a clear type of character, an approximation to which has always been discernible in the best lives of the sect. The inspiration of the ideal is clearly the life of Chaitanya.
Concerning Chaitanya's social teaching there has been some misapprehension. This is not strange, for the facts are somewhat confusing and there is ground for divergence of opinion.
By emphasizing only that element in his teaching which appears to be anti-caste, certain modern writers, who desire to make him appear a great social reformer, have created a misconception.
For that is not the whole truth concerning Chaitanya's attitude, and both elements in his teaching and practice must be considered if we are to understand him aright.
Attitude towards Caste.
There is certain, clear evidence in the Caritamṛta which goes to show that Chaitanya had no quarrel with the varṇāśrama dharma (duties of the caste system), and that he accepted the traditional ideas of its authority in society.
This comes out in connection with those disciples of his who had been received from Islam:
Haridās, famed for his great sanctity, and the two brothers, Sanātana and Rūpa, evidently met with difficulty at Purī owing to the inveterate prejudice against them because of their origin.
Chaitanya himself felt no hesitation in embracing them, even when Sanātana’s body was covered with running sores, but he upheld as right the prejudice of others.
Haridās scrupulously kept away from the temple, and took great pains that the servitors of the temple should not come near him, all with Chaitanya's approval:
"I am a worthless low-caste," he said, “I have no right to go near the temple." Sanātana would not use the road by the temple gate, for fear of contaminating the sevāits.
Chaitanya's commendation of this action is instructive:
It is the nature of a bhakta to observe rank. The maintenance of dignity is the ornament of a sādhu. People ridicule when rank is broken, and both worlds are lost. My mind is pleased when propriety of conduct is maintained. If you do not act thus, who will?
The word marjyādā, which occurs four times in this passage (translated rank, dignity, etc.), clearly implies distinctions of caste, rank, etc. It is the dignity dependent upon these distinctions which Chaitanya commends Sanātana for observing.
We have here, then, an explicit statement of Chaitanya's own attitude toward these things.
It is to be noted, also, that there was some discrimination about eating with these two, even in the circle of Chaitanya's disciples:
They were provided for a little differently from the rest. Chaitanya himself arranged for separate quarters for Haridās and had the sacred prasāda sent to him. It is distinctly stated, also, that there were certain Brahmans whose cooking Chaitanya could not eat!
Over against these facts, which show Chaitanya as an upholder of the social order of caste, must be placed other evidence which seems to point to a wholly different conclusion:
The very presence of the converts from Islam is proof of an attitude decidedly at variance with traditional ideas.
His preaching of bhakti was undoubtedly revolutionary. He proclaimed a fellowship in worship that ran directly athwart the ideas of caste.
God is wholly independent; his grace does not follow the lines of the Vedas. God's grace does not care for caste and family.
And still more explicitly he stated his conviction thus:
There is no consideration of caste or family in the worship of Krishna.
He quoted with approval these lines from the Haribhaktivilāsa, which are put into the mouth of Krishna:
One cannot become my disciple merely by being a reader of the Vedas. Even a Chaṇḍāla is loved by me if he only has faith. I bestow love on my devotee and accept his love; just as I am worshipped by the world, my disciple is similarly adorable.
His commission to his followers in Bengal was that they should "give Krishna-bhakti down to the Chaṇḍālas and others," and he once described a Vaishnava as one who abandons the Varṇāśrama dharma and takes shelter in Krishna.
By-products of Bhakti:
From these and other quotations already considered, it will be clear that we are confronted in Chaitanya's teaching with a contradiction which makes his words and actions seen quite inconsistent.
This contradiction can only be understood as we realise that the reform of caste, as such, probably never entered Chaitanya's mind:
He was not concerned with social rules and regulations or their change. He was supremely concerned with religious worship. And this brought him into conflict with certain caste ideas.
His social heterodoxy lay in his experience of bhakti. The powerful emotions of that experience were too expansive to be confined within prescribed limits. They refused to be regulated.
Chaitanya saw that it was the nature of bhakti to create its own fellowship by a higher law than that of caste:
All who could and would respond to its appeal had a right to its fellowship. His sole concern with caste was that its restrictions should not interfere with this community of worship.
This was to Chaitanya’s mind entirely a matter of religion.
In so far as his bhakti-preaching broke down caste conventions it was social change undoubtedly, but the lowering of caste barriers was not its aim. This was purely an effect.
This fellowship in religious worship did not mean fellowship in eating or other domestic concerns. These were social matters to be governed by the traditional rules.
Such a sharp distinction between the religious and social spheres is rather difficult for the modern mind to appreciate, but that such was the point of view of Chaitanya seems clear.
This broadening out of the basis of religious privilege to include all castes was a great advance socially over the Brāhmanic teaching, which limited the higher reaches of religion to the privileged few.
It was a conception with revolutionary possibilities which brought the sect into sharp conflict with Orthodox society in the period after Chaitanya.
A generation or more later this teaching was still potent, leading Brahman and low-caste devotee to mingle in fellowship in the name of Chaitanya.
The definite note of impatience with ritualism and ecclesiasticism, which occurs now and again in the teaching, is also of social significance:
The emphasis upon kirtan and the power of the name naturally would tend to breed an independence of the priest and give men a new sense of freedom.
This note of release from priestly domination is sounded in the following passage:
Krishna's name alone removes all sin. The nine kinds of bhakti are perfected by the name. It does not depend upon initiation or priestly ceremonies. A mere utterance of the name saves everybody down to the Chāṇḍāla.
Chaitanya’s teaching and practice with regard to the gurus of the movement was also a direct challenge to Brahman supremacy:
His insistence that spiritual capacity may be found in Śūdra as well as in Brahman was a fine and true note, of democratic social flavour, as was his refusal to allow the function of guru to be monopolised by any one group.
Pre-eminent qualities of bhakti rather than caste position were the determining factor in his own choice of men, well-illustrated in the original Gosvāmīs, the six Vrindāvan Fathers.
For a century thereafter there continued to be non-Brahman Gurus in the sect with Brahman disciples.
Two generations later, in Narottama, one of the leaders of the 17th century revival, we find the note of heterodoxy still sounding,
declaring the universally recognised Śrāddha ceremony to be unnecessary in outward observance, and pilgrimages to shrines futile error and useless labour.