Question: As an uttama bhakta performs svarūpa-siddhā bhakti, would their actions other than svarūpa-siddhā bhakti be saṅga-siddhā bhakti?
Answer: I think you are mixing two different things. The purpose of Śrī Jīva Goswami’s classification of svarūpa-siddhā and saṅga-siddhā bhakti is not to define uttamā bhakti. He is analyzing actions on their own, without getting into the agent. The definition of svarūpa-siddhā bhakti and saṅga-siddhā bhakti are below:
svarūpa-siddhā
= ajñānādināpi tat-prādurbhāve bhaktitvāvyabhicāriṇī sākṣāt-tad-anugaty-ātmā tadīya-śravaṇa-kīrtanādi-rūpā
= hearing ( śravaṇa ) and singing ( kīrtana ) the glories of Bhagavān, which are of the essence of direct loving attendance ( anugati ) upon Bhagavān in their very constitution, and which, upon being taken up, are never divorced from bhakti’s essential nature even if performed without awareness.
saṅga-siddhā
= svato bhaktitvābhāve’pi tat-parikaratayā saṁsthāpanena
= practices of jñāna and karma , which although devoid of bhakti by themselves, become established as component parts of bhakti by being utilized as assistants to devotion.
Here, we see that the analysis is of the actions themselves. The agent is not mentioned in this definition. The point is that there are some actions which are intrinsically bhakti. This is independent of what intention the agent has for doing these actions.
Question: So can you do svarūpa-siddhā bhakti and not be an uttama bhakta?
Answer: Yes. In the Bhakti Sandarbha, Śrī Jīva Goswami describes four divisions of svarūpa-siddhā bhakti when one accounts for the nature of the agent. Depending on the nature of the mind of the agent, their svarūpa-siddhā bhakti takes the appellation of Tāmasī, Rājasī, Sāttvikī or Nirguṇā. I list the verses that Śrī Jīva Goswami cites in the Bhakti Sandarbha to support his classification below:
Svarūpa-siddhā Sakāmā Tāmasī-bhakti (Anuccheda 231)
abhisandhāya yo hiṁsāṁ dambhaṁ mātsaryam eva vā
saṁrambhī bhinna-dṛg bhāvaṁ mayi kuryāt sa tāmasaḥA practitioner who is prone to anger (saṁrambhī), whose vision is rooted in duality (bhinna-dṛk), and who renders devotion to Me with the intent to harm others, to uphold some pretense, or to bear malice, is influenced by tamas. (SB 3.29.8)
Svarūpa-siddhā Sakāmā Rājasī-bhakti (Anuccheda 232)
viṣayān abhisandhāya yaśa aiśvaryam eva vā
arcādāv arcayed yo māṁ pṛthag-bhāvaḥ sa rājasaḥA practitioner holding to a separate self-sense (pṛthag-bhāvaḥ), who worships Me in My deity form with a resolve to enjoy sense objects, fame, or opulence, is influenced by rajas. (SB 3.29.9)
Kaivalya-kāmā Sāttvikī-bhakti (Anuccheda 233)
karma-nirhāram uddiśya parasmin vā tad-arpaṇam
yajed yaṣṭavyam iti vā pṛthag-bhāvaḥ sa sāttvikaḥA practitioner holding to a separate self-sense (pṛthag-bhāvaḥ), who worships [My deity form (arcādau)] with the intent to become free from bondage to karma, to offer his karma to the Supreme, or because he considers it as a moral obligation, is influenced by sattva. (SB 3.29.10)
Svarūpa-siddhā Nirguṇā-bhakti (Anuccheda (234)
mad-guṇa-śruti-mātreṇa mayi sarva-guhāśaye
mano-gatir avicchinnā yathā gaṅgāmbhaso’mbudhau
lakṣaṇaṁ bhakti-yogasya nirguṇasya hy udāhṛtam
ahaituky avyavahitā yā bhaktiḥ puruṣottameBhakti in the form of an uninterrupted (avicchinnā), causeless (ahaitukī), nondual (avyavahitā) stream of consciousness (mano-gati) — impelled merely by hearing My qualities — toward Me, the Supreme Self (Puruṣottama) and the Indweller in the cave of the hearts of all beings, like the water of the Gaṅgā flowing irresistibly to the sea, is indeed declared as the definitive characteristic (lakṣaṇam) [i.e., the constitutional nature (svarūpa)] of nirguṇā-bhakti-yoga.
sālokya-sārṣṭi-sāmīpya-sārūpyaikatvam apy uta
dīyamānaṁ na gṛhṇanti vinā mat-sevanaṁ janāḥ
sa eva bhakti-yogākhya ātyantika udāhṛtaḥ
yenātivrajya tri-guṇaṁ mad-bhāvāyopapadyateEven if granted by Me, [My own] people (janāḥ) do not accept mukti in the form of residence on the same planet as Me (sālokya), enjoyment of similar opulence (sārṣṭi), proximity to Me (sāmipya), endowment with a form identical to Mine (sārūpya), or oneness with Me (ekatvam), if such liberated states preclude the possibility of divine service to Me. This sevā alone [involving the nirguṇa flow of consciousness toward Me], known as bhakti-yoga, is determined as the ultimate state of liberation (ātyantika) by means of which one transcends the three guṇas of material nature and attains unadulterated love for Me. (SB 3.29.11–14)
Question: This is confusing. Isn’t bhakti always nirguṇā.
Answer: Yes she is. But the above classification is of the agent, not of bhakti.
Question: Is the classification of bhakti or bhakta?
Answer: When an agent chants the name of Bhagavān, then depending on the motive of that agent, that chanting comes to be called sattvik, rajasic, ramasic or nirguṇa. This does not mean that the name is under the gunas; the agent is.
Question: So can we say that one who does bhakti only for the sake of bhakti is nirguṇa.
Answer: Yes.
Question: But my original question remains. An uttama bhakta does not only chant Bhagavan’s name. He may also do other activities in a day. So what are these other actions called?
Answer: The problem in your logic is that you are working backward: from the action to the agent. That is not logical. The classification above is of actions: svarūpa-siddhā or saṅga-siddhā or āropa-siddhā.
Question: But you also gave a classification of these actions according to the agent above.
Answer: I did not work backward from action to agent. I worked forward- from agent to action. That is, depending on the motive of agent, that action was given a qualifier.
An uttama bhakta will regularly do svarūpa-siddhā bhakti. It does not follow, however, that if you see someone doing something other than svarūpa-siddhā bhakti, that person is not an uttama bhakta. The nitya siddhas of Vraja cook and clean and milk the cows and trade and do so many other activities. None of these actions, according to the classification above, are svarūpa-siddhā bhakti. But that does not mean those actions are not uttamā bhakti. Every action of an uttamā bhakta, whether sleeping or awake, is uttamā bhakti. So the two classifications are not related to each other.
Question: Doesn’t Śrī Jīva Goswami state that uttamā-bhakti involves svarūpa-siddhā bhakti exclusively?
Answer: yes, he does so in Anucchedas 59-61 of the Bhakti Sandarbha. But this has to be understood in its proper context. There, he is making the distinction between acts of karma and jnana yoga, and activities of bhakti. Ordinary actions like walking and talking etc do not carry the power of bhakti in them. In contrast, chanting is always bhakti, irrespective of whether it is done knowingly or unknowingly, and irrespective of who the agent is.
In fact, Śrī Jīva Goswami teaches a similar principle, as I outlined above, in Anuccheda 60 of the Bhakti Sandarbha – that when the mind is beyond duality, then bhakti becomes unceasing. And being unceasing is a fundamental quality of uttamā-bhakti. In other words, uttamā-bhakti is to be ascertained based not on the actions but on the disposition of the mind. This is precisely the teaching of the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu. See here for more details.
Question: How about a sādhaka? Is a sādhaka’s sādhanā uttamā-bhakti, given that a sādhaka has material desires?
Answer: A sādhaka may have material desires, but by definition, an uttama sādhaka wants uttamā-bhakti. It is the singular goal; only then that person is an uttama sādhaka. All actions of an uttama sādhaka are considered uttamā-bhakti. Again, here we are going from the agent to the action, and not vice versa as you are trying to do. In this case, the agent is ‘pure’ in the sense of their motive. They only want bhakti. They may have other desires, but those are being cleansed by bhakti, and this is called anartha nivṛtti.
Question: The above classification suggests that there are sattvik, rajasic, tamasic or nirguna devotees. Is that correct?
Answer: Of course. Uttama bhaktas are extremely rare. Mostly, people fall into sattvik, rajasic or tamasic categories even though they may be chanting many rounds of the names every day, they may do ekadasi vrata etc.. Among them, those who try to attract followers are rajasic (see verses above), those who want to hurt others or build up their reputation are tamasic, and those who want to ‘go back home to God’ – i.e. want mukti, or want to get rid of karma, may be sattvik. I feel the sattvik devotees are few in number. But those who do bhakti solely for bhakti are extremely rare – maybe one in a million devotees. This is in part because people have been deprived of proper knowledge of bhakti. Bhakti has become confused with commercial activities.
Radhe Radhe, Could it be said that: 1. Bhakti-mātra-kāmā-āropa-siddha-bhakti, 2. Bhakti-mātra-kāma-karma-mishra-sanga-siddha-bhakti, 3. Bhakti-mātra-kāma-karma-jñāna-mishra-sanga-siddha-bhakti 4. Bhakti-mātra-kāma-jñāna-mishra-sanga-siddha-bhakti 5. Bhakti-mātra-kāma-nirguna-svarūpa-siddha-bhakti all can come under Uttama-bhakti as per this article? DhanyavAdaH!
(Please publish this message and ignore the last one)
Why? I dont think so.
These classifications of bhakti matra kama aropa siddha bhakti etc.. have to do with the regular practice. The methods that constitute one’s sadhana. Clearly mishrit bhakti practices are not part of uttama bhakti.
Radhe Radhe,
Thank you for your response.
So only “Bhakti-mātra-kāma-nirguna-svarūpa-siddha-bhakti” is uttama-bhakti even though the others fall in the category of “akaiTava”?
In Bhakti sandarbha 234, which seems to give a definition of uttamā bhakti, it says:
atha yasyā evotkarṣa-jñānārtham ete bhakti-bhedā nirūpitāḥ, sā bhakti-mātra-kāmatvān niṣkāmā nirguṇā **kevalā** svarūpa-siddhā nirūpyate |
In Babaji’s English translation, “kevalā” has been rendered “unmixed with any other process”
Sooner, it says:
avyavahitā svarūpa-siddhatvena sākṣād-rūpā, na tv āropa-siddhatvena vyavadhānātmikā
(Translation by Babaji: Consequently, it is independent of any mediating factor, unlike āropa-siddha-bhakti, in which bhakti is merely attributed to the actions that are not bhakti by nature)
Is there any reference, that explicitly calls out uttama bhakti as not svarupa-siddha which the passage in Anuccheda 234 seems to be pointing to?
Aside from that, in B.R.S. 1.1.11, in the explanation of “jñāna-karmādi-anāvRtam” phrase, the commentaries allow some practices that are not svarupa siddha bhakti are still included in the practice of uttama bhakti.
If the description in Anuccheda 234, which seems to describe Uttama bhakti as “kevalA” is taken, then there would be avyApti since in SB 10.46.9-13 (https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/46/9-13/) , Uddhava describes the Uttama-bhaktas of Vraja(Gopas, Gopis and others) engage in laukika and vaidika dharma.
DhanyavadaH
So only “Bhakti-mātra-kāma-nirguna-svarūpa-siddha-bhakti” is uttama-bhakti even though the others fall in the category of “akaiTava”?
**I think you are trying to go reverse- from an action to the agent. All actions of an uttama bhakta are uttama bhakti.
In Bhakti sandarbha 234, which seems to give a definition of uttamā bhakti, it says:
atha yasyā evotkarṣa-jñānārtham ete bhakti-bhedā nirūpitāḥ, sā bhakti-mātra-kāmatvān niṣkāmā nirguṇā **kevalā** svarūpa-siddhā nirūpyate
** That is incorrect. He is not defining uttama bhakti. He is defining what he says he is defining – kevalā svarūpa-siddhā bhakti
Is there any reference, that explicitly calls out uttama bhakti as not svarupa-siddha which the passage in Anuccheda 234 seems to be pointing to?
** As it is not talking about uttama bhakti, but *actions with intrinsic sakti*, I dont see where you are going to find a reference like this. To understand uttama bhakti, you have to look at the definition of it in BRS and Sri Jiva’s commentary on it.
Aside from that, in B.R.S. 1.1.11, in the explanation of “jñāna-karmādi-anāvRtam” phrase, the commentaries allow some practices that are not svarupa siddha bhakti are still included in the practice of uttama bhakti.
** The commentators allow *all actions* in uttama bhakti, as understood by the sil dhatu of anusilanam. That includes sleeping etc.
If the description in Anuccheda 234, which seems to describe Uttama bhakti as “kevalA” is taken, then there would be avyApti since in SB 10.46.9-13 (https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/46/9-13/) , Uddhava describes the Uttama-bhaktas of Vraja(Gopas, Gopis and others) engage in laukika and vaidika dharma.
** I dont know what you mean
One might also point to the instance of Arjuna in Gita, who was given the upadesha of uttama/akinchana bhakti in BG 18.66 and still remaining a householder, performing his laukika karmas like the dharmayuddha and other vaidika karmas.
Previously in the commentary to Bhagavad Gita 9.27(as per VCT commentary), Arjuna was not considered capable of doing “kevalā ananya bhakti”:
“nanu ca ārto jijñāsur arthārthī jñānī ity ārabhya etāvatīṣu tvad-uktāsu bhaktiṣu madhye khalv ahaṁ kāṁ bhaktiṁ karavai ? ity apekṣāyāṁ bho arjuna sāmprataṁ tāvat tava karma-jñānādīnāṁ tyaktum aśakyatvāt sarvotkṛṣṭāyāṁ **kevalāyām** **ananya-bhaktau** nādhikāro nāpi nikṛṣṭāyāṁ sakāma-bhaktau |
I suppose “kevalA” means the same thing that it meant in Anuccheda 234. So, how could Arjuna in 18.66 perform Kevala-ananya-uttama bhakti while simultaneously doing things that are not “svarupa-siddha-bhakti”(like fighting the war). Do the word “kevalA” and the phrase “avyavahitā svarūpa-siddhatvena sākṣād-rūpā, na tv āropa-siddhatvena vyavadhānātmikā” in Anuccheda 234, be understood differently then?
I have said in the article that an uttama bhakta does uttama Bhakti. Arjuna’s breathing is also uttama Bhakti . The classification does not apply here as mentioned in the article.
Once Arjuna surrenders, he does not maintain independence. He acts for Bhagavan. That is kevala or ananya Bhakti .
Pranams,
Nice insights in the article,if uttama bhakti is not kevala svarupa siddha bhakti(nirguna bhakti),what is the true abhinaya.. BRS 1.1.11 or Anuccheda 234?
Radhe shyam
Uttama bhakti sadhana involves kevala Svarupa siddha Bhakti.
But uttama bhakti shoud not be confused with actions. Bhakti is a favorable disposition toward Krsna. Uttama is Bhakti qualified with no desires other than Bhakti and lacking faith in karma and jnana marga and their methods.
Yes,going back to the 1st question of article why can’t I call actions of Gopis such as cleaning house, milking cows as sanga siddha since they assist in remembering Krishna or any direct bhakti action (svarupa siddha)?
Because Gopis are uttama bhaktas. We are missing the point of Sri Jiva Goswamis categorization. He is trying to analyze actions of karma, jnana when mixed with Bhakti.
Gopis’ existence is for Krsna alone. Their every action is for Him.
Uttama Bhakti should not be confused with actions. Bhakti is a favorable disposition.
Think about it this way
– aropa siddha Bhakti is karma whose results are offered to Krsna. What is the goal? If it is akaitava, goal is Bhakti.
But this person still has sraddha in the methods of karma and offering results as a means or sadhana to achieve that Bhakti – otherwise they would do pure Bhakti – hearing Krsna katha- and not karma. So they don’t meet the definition of uttama sadhana bhakti .
Now uttama bhakti involves not only methods of pure bhakti- hearing and chanting – but also the uttama bhakta earns a living etc. these other activities are not aropa siddha or sanga siddha – they are uttama Bhakti only because the sole goal of this bhakta is uttama Bhakti. These other acts support their sadhaana, but they are included in uttama bhakti. These sadhakas by definition do not have faith in other methods. So the classification of sanga siddha etc does not apply.
The Bhakti kama versions of aropa and sanga siddha Bhakti fulfill the criteria of anyabhilasita sunyam but not jnana karmadyanavrtam
Sorry it’s Abhidheya..
1.But,sanga siddha has nothing to with faith as per the def,why we should we not call uttama bhkata’s actions that help him to svarupa siddha as sangasiddha.
2.Following it up then why not karma performed with intention to please krishna along with svarupa siddha be uttama bhakti,since it is just a favourable disposition?
.
1. I am not talking about sanga siddha Bhakti anymore. We are talking about Bhakti matra kama sanga siddha Bhakti- this tells you that their goal is only Bhakti. But they do sanga siddha which is a jnapaka of the fact that they have faith in those limbs. Remember this is not an incidental act. This is their *sadhana*
2. You are not reading my replies carefully enough. Uttama Bhakti is not a favorable disposition. Bhakti is. Uttama means no sraddha in jnana or karma and no desire other than Bhakti.
1.”But they do sanga siddha which is a jnapaka of the fact that they have faith in those limbs. Remember this is not an incidental act. This is their *sadhana*”
I dont see any reference to faith in def of sanga siddha be it of any type
2.Uttama means no sraddha in jnana or karma and no desire other than Bhakti. ” –
But King bharata performed sacrifices elaborately.. I think Viswanath chakravaty thakur comment this is uttama bhakti when he did not do merely for loksangraha or with lack of sraddha. he performed it with full sraddha right?(SB-5.7.6).
1. There isn’t. Look up the meaning of the word jnapaka
2. I think you need to study the definition of uttama Bhakti carefully. Peruse the many articles on this topic on this site.
Can you write an article on SB 5.7.6/Bharata Maharaj,I will go through other articles on your page.
Thank you for your time.
Sure as I get time
Lastly,
“But they do sanga siddha which is a jnapaka of the fact that they have faith in those limbs. Remember this is not an incidental act. This is their *sadhana”
Uttama bhakta also does karma for maintenance of his body as you explained above,but this is not jnapaka/indicator of the fact that he had faith in that karma..
This is exactly bhakti matra kama sanga siddha right?
You are confusing two things. Working a job is not a sadhana.
The uttama bhakta does not have faith in jnana and karma marga. The word karma has a technical meaning here- nitya naimittika and kamya karma prescribed in Vedas.
Karma does not mean job here!
It may not be karma misra or jnana misra,but still it is sanga siddha,you are doing job and it is assisting,so your job is sanga siddha is my point.
You have a kama that is to maintain your body,today we do some job to get our food.This is uttama bhakti
In previous Yugas people do farming for which you need rain, for which you do yajna prescribed in sastras(kamya karma)..This is also uttama bhakti and sanga siddha too..
Well you can believe what you want. It is not what Sri Jiva Goswami has in mind.
https://bhaktitattva.com/2023/04/23/sri-jiva-goswamis-commentary-on-the-definition-of-uttama-bhakti-part-iii/
Thank you. This article contains a detailed look at Sri Jiva Goswamis explanation of the jnana karmadyanavrtam part of the definition of uttama Bhakti.
Parts 1 and 2 of this article are also useful to study.
Also this one
https://bhaktitattva.com/2023/03/26/aropa-siddha-saṅga-siddha-and-svarupa-siddha-bhakti/