RECONCILIATION OF RAMKRISHNA SWAMI'S ANALYSIS OF

SATYANARAYANA DASA BABAJI'S DEBATE ON LOVE

Response to Bhaktirasavedntaphdhvara crya r RKDS' (Hereafter referred to as RKDS)

essay entitled Analysis on the views of Mahnta Satyanryaadsa Bbj (Hereafter SND
Babaji) and Prof. Dr. Jen Brezenski Jagadnandadsa

INTRODUCTION

Upon viewing the video recorded public debate that took place at the Jiva Institute entitled Does
love in this world exist?, RKDS has written an analysis of the debate in order to accept and refute
several views of both SND Babaji and Jagadananda dasaji.

Whilst he agrees with much of the criticisms that SND Babaji made of Jagadananda dasaji's
presentation, RKDS has also presented his objections against several of Babaji's statements.

The purpose of this present essay is to harmonise the statements of both of these great Gaudiya
scholars, RKDS and SND Babaji and clear any misunderstandings that may have arisen. May the
Vaisnavas bless me to fulfil my endeavour.

ANALYSIS CONSIDERED

1st OBJECTION - RKDS on SND Babaji and sa-adi prema (prema with a beginning)

RKDS says:
SNDs stand on prema being sa-di or with beginning is wrong (if he has labelled prema as
sdi in an ultimate context of premas throughout existence) as prema is considered to be nitya-
siddha in Caitanya-caritmta and, also, in BRS / Bhaktirasmtasindhu. Nitya-siddha means
eternally in perfect existence. So, prema is an-di or beginningless even when it has not
descended into the heart of a sdhaka jva through the channel of nitya-siddha bhagavat-pradas.

Prema is beginnningless because it exists, eternally, in the bhagavat-pradas only and from them
only, an expanded fragment of such prema descends downwards into the heart of a sdhaka as
corroborated by rpda Baladeva Vidybhaa in his Siddhnta-ratnam aka Govinda-bhya-
phakam.

REPLY:
RKDS states that SND Babaji may have referred to bhagavata prema as sa-adi, that is to say with
an absolute beginning in time. However, for attentive listeners of the public debate video and those
familiar with SND Babaji's numerous writings on the topic will be aware that this is not Babaji's
view. RKDS' uncertainty (regarding Babaji's position) arises from the fact that at 41mins and 14secs
of the debate, SND Babaji says Prema is sa-adi but it is ananta (without an end), so it has a
beginning but no end. Taken separately one can understand the uncertainty of RKDS.

However, evidence from two different sections of the debate itself clarifies the misunderstanding:

SND Babaji (from 28mins 22secs onwards): Then you have svarupa sakti of the Lord, then you
have desires to serve Krsna, that is antaranga sakti. That is not in the soul also. That you have to
get....nitya-siddhasya bhvasya prkaya hdi sdhyat [The appearance of an eternally
perfected feeling within the heart is called the stage of the attainment of perfection.]. That nitya
siddha bhava, that is the antaranga sakti, that becomes manifest within the soul, which is not
there to begin with. Then you love, then the loving happens. And that starts with the diksa, that's
why diksa, the guru is necessary.

SND Babaji (from 1hr 12mins 35secs): by the grace of devotees of Krsna, anyone can get love
[prema]...nitya-siddhasya bhvasya prkaya hdi sdhyat [The appearance of an eternally
perfected feeling within the heart is called the stage of the attainment of perfection.].That nitya
siddha bhava which comes from the supreme planet, that can manifest here.

CONCLUSION: The uncertainty has been resolved. RKDSji appears to have missed these
statements in the debate otherwise there would have been no confusion as to what SND Babaji's
view is. In any case, the views of both RKDS and SND Babaji on this have now been harmonised.

________________________________________________________________________________

2nd OBJECTION - RKDS on the co-existence of prema and kama within a single substratum

RKDS says:
But, SNDs analogy of darkness not able to co-exist with light (this comparison was, originally and
historically, given by Bhagavatpda dya akarcrya in his classical kara-bhyam
commentary on Brahma-stra/Vedntas initial introduction known as adhysa-bhyam as
timira-prakavad-virddha-svabhvayo to illustrate the concept of adhysa or super-
imposition employed by radical monists or Advaitins/akarites), concurrently (lust is compared to
darkness and love to light in Caitanya-caritmta), is not 100% applicable if the due importance to
r Vivantha Cakravartts (hereafter, referred to as VCT) statements found in his Srrtha-darin
commentary to the rmad-bhgavatam verse vikrita vraja-vadhbhir ida ca visoh is
given. There, VCT explains that in the proportion prema (a product of hldin) is obtained, in the
same proportion kma (a product of avidy) is dispelled. So, it is not that as soon as sunrise
happens, all darkness is vanished. Rather that till the time sun becomes fully illuminated, darkness
remains in smaller proportionate amount.

REPLY:

OPPOSING CONDITIONS (vtti-virodht)

SND Babaji is clear when he says that Prema and Kama can not exist together in the same
substratum simultaneously. Why? Because they (prema and kama) are in opposition to one another
(vrtti virodhat). He also states that someone whose heart has visaya, can not have prema..

He cites visayavista cittanam visnv-avesah suduratah varuni dig-gatam vastu vrajann aindrim kim
apnuyat - A person engrossed in sensuality is far, far away from God consciousness. How can
anyone ever find something lost in the west by going towards the east? - (Madhurya Kadambini
2.11 & elsewhere).

SND Babaji also cites tmendriya-prti-vch--tre bali 'kma' kendriya-prti-icch dhare

'prema' nma - The desire to gratify ones senses is called kama. The desire to gratify Krishnas
senses is called prema. - (CC Adi lila 4.165).

To demonstrate this, Babaji gives the example of light and darkness being unable to co-exist in the
same substratum. Whilst technically speaking RKDS is correct when he points out that a lesser
degree of light will not dissipate the darkness completely, Babaji's intended meaning and siddhanta
is correct (since he means the complete sun-like prema when he uses the term), albeit there may be
better options or wording he may choose in the future to ensure absolute clarity for the audience.
What Babaji had in mind with such an example is due to a verse that appears only a short while
after the one cited above from Sri Caitanya Caritamrta:

ataeva kma-preme bahuta antara kma--andha-tama, prema--nirmala bhskara

Thus there is a vast difference between kma and prema: kma is like blinding darkness, and
prema is like the shining sun. (CC Adi lila 4.171).

The meaning is that when the complete shining Sun is present (compared to prema), the darkness
(of kama) will end. Hence prema and kama can not co-exist in the same place. Prema is referred to
as bhskara here, literally light maker/producer which means the Sun and not just sunlight of
varying degrees (such as at early sunrise etc) since the appropriate terms would be sryu (light
ray of the Sun) etc. The differences will be made even clearer now.

PRIMARY & TECHNICAL MEANING OF PREMA

Now we will give evidence to show that SND Babaji's usage of the term prema is appropriate and
consistent with sabda pramana (sastra) and that lesser manifestations of bhakti can not be termed
prema in the technical sense.

samya-masita-svnto mamatvtiaykita bhva sa eva sndrtm budhai prem

nigadyate - When bhava becomes extremely condensed, it is called prema by the learned. It
softens the heart completely and produces extreme possessiveness of the Lord in the experiencer. -
Bhaktirasamrta sindhu 1.4.1

The tikakaras Sri Jiva Gosvami and Sri Visvanatha Cakravarti both state that Having explained
bhava, the author (Rupa Gosvami) now explains prema - atha bhvam apy uktv premam ha
samyag iti. And what do they say is the svarupa laksana (main characteristic) of prema? That it is
very condensed in nature (sndrtm). The other two mentioned above are its secondary
qualities.

So when RKDS states VCT explains that in the proportion prema (a product of hldin) is
obtained, in the same proportion kma (a product of avidy) is dispelled.[NOT actually present in
VCT's tika, explained later], the term prema can not be taken in its truest sense. Why? Because we
can not use the term prema in this fashion. Prema in its technical sense is extremely condensed
and compared to the fully present luminous Sun. There will be no darkness once it is present.
And this is precisely how SND Babaji is using the term. Some logical examples will also be
presented in the conclusion section below.

PREMA IS COMPARED TO THE COMPLETE SUN:

In BRS' definition of bhava (1.3.1) it is said, uddha-sattva-vietm prema-sryu-smya-bhk

|rucibhi citta-msya-kd asau bhva ucyate - That part of bhakti is called bhava, whose
essence is samvit and hladini sakti, which is one ray of the sun of prema which will soon rise in
the heart, and which softens the heart with desires to meet, serve and exchange love with
Bhagavan.

In BRS 1.3.10 Sri Jiva also comments: ata eva prema-sryu-smya-bhg ity atra bhva-
premos tratamyam uktam iti bhva - Thus, the difference between bhava and prema, as
stated in the definition of bhava, is illustrated: bhava is like a ray of the sun of prema.

Here we clearly see that bhava is termed sryu (particle of sunlight) and prema as srya (the
Sun) itself.

In BRS 1.3.2 it is also stated premas tu prathamvasth bhva ity abhidhyate - The first state
of prema is called bhava.

KAMA IS DESTROYED WHEN PREMA IS PRESENT

Another concern is that where RKDS has advised us to look for the proportionate prema
comment of VCT, we have been unable to find it. The vikrita vraja-vadhbhir ida ca visoh
verse of the Bhagavata contains no such comment as far as we can ascertain.

In VCT's tika to the Bhagavata sloka (10.33.39) in question it instead says: par prema-laka
prpyeti ktv-pratyayena hd-rogavaty apy adhikrii prathamata eva prema praveas tatas tat-
prabhvenaivcirato hd-roga-na iti premya jna-yoga iva na durbala para-tantra ceti
bhva | - Even if one has the heart disease of material lust, they become imbued with prema;
then, by its effect the disease of the heart is destroyed. Thus it is understood here that this prema
is independent; it is not weak like jnana-yoga.

dhra paita iti hd-roga saty api katha prem bhaved ity anstikya lakaena mrkhatvena
rahita ity artha | ataeva raddhnvita iti strvivsina nmpardhina prempi
ngkarotti bhva || - One who faithfully hears and glorifies Krsna's rasa dance is described as
learned, for he does not foolishly doubt, How can Krsna-prema appear if material lust is present?
Krsna prema will definitely appear in that person who is devoid of foolishness, and who accepts the
statements of the sastra with full faith. However, Krsna-prema will not appear within those who
have no faith in Krsna or who offend Krsna's holy name.

In VCT's tika above it clearly states that due to the influence (prabhava) of prema entering (pravesa)
that kama/material lust (hrd-roga) becomes destroyed (nasa). Kama may certainly be present
beforehand, but when prema (in its technical sense as SND Babaji has used it) arrives, kama
becomes completely destroyed, never to be present again. In Babaji's own words from the debate.
when we get prema, kama goes away and doesn't come back again. Once kama is over, there is a
pradvamsa abhava (Subsequent Non-Existence) of kama. Therefore SND Babaji's core thesis that
prema and kama can not exist simultaneously within the same substratum is fully defended.

LOGICAL EXAMPLES

We shall give some examples to show that RKDS' implied meaning that even when only lesser
stages of Bhakti are present they should be referred to as proportionate prema is not entirely correct.

Examples of drops of water and an ocean

(A) (1) A drop (or several drops) of water can not be known as the ocean (or proportionate ocean).

(2) Why? Because an ocean is a vast body of water that separates landmasses geographically
(greater even than lakes and seas which are at least partially enclosed by land).

(3) Therefore, wherever there is a vast body of water (as defined in 2), that is known as an
ocean.

(4) Drops of water can not be known as an ocean, because they themselves lack such qualities
waves, tide, vastness, great depth, ability to support large aquatics etc.
 (5) Therefore, a drop (or several such) can not be known as an Ocean.

Similarly, when ONLY lesser manifestations of bhakti are present within the heart and not prema as
defined in BRS as 'extremely condensed' (sandratma) etc, then it can not be known as prema, just as
how smaller constituents are not known as the whole.

THE LARGEST MEMBER OF A SET CAN REPRESENT THE WHOLE

In Sanskrit the phrase adhikyena vyapadesa bhavanti refers to the law that the largest member of
a set can represent the whole set. For example, a herd of cows with just a few buffaloes in it is still
referred to as a herd of cows and the four fingers combined with the thumb are still called five
fingers. Similarly, when prema IS present fully within the heart, the presence of the lesser
manifestations such as asakti and bhava [since they all remain, see BRS1.4.1 tikas] can be
termed as prema, so long as the largest member known as prema is present, but without the
largest member, this is against the law of adhikyena vyapadesa bhavanti.

If an opponent raises the objection and points to a part of their body such as an arm and exclaims
this is my body [referring to the whole], I would say it is more accurate to state this is my arm
but if they still insist on referring to the arm as simply the body, it is only because the full body is
also fully present, being connected to the arm. If the arm or other limbs were to be severed from the
body, then one would not refer to a severed arm as the body, it would be simply regarded as the
particular limb and so on. Therefore, the presence of the whole or larger member is still required.

CONCLUSION:

Therefore, if even bhava itself is only termed a ray of and the first stage (prathamvasth) of
prema, RKDS' remarks regarding the acquisition of proportionate degrees of prema in stages before
bhava are not sufficient to refute SND Babaji's intended use of the term prema, because the latter
uses the term to mean prema in its complete Sun-like sense. The statement of RKDS to which I
refer to is:

VCT mentions that there are six types of anihit-bhajana-kriys like vydha-vikalp, taraga-
ragi and ghana-taral etc. which are none but the mixed proportions of the influence of kma
and prema - From RKDS' analysis essay.

Since the stages such as vydha-vikalp etc are well before the first ray of prema, namely bhava, to
term them as mixed proportions of kama and prema is incorrect given the definitions of the
purvacaryas above regarding the svarupa laksana (primary characterisic) of prema.

If SND Babaji in his core thesis were using prema in a different and perhaps more general sense,
then RKDS' point could stand.

To conclude, we have stated Babaji's core thesis that prema and kama can not exist simultaneously
in the same substratum (heart of the sadhaka). Thereafter, we have clarified Babaji's usage of the
technical term prema and demonstrated briefly how it is justified by citing relevant purvacaryas.
And then finally, we have shown that when prema descends into the heart of the fortunate recipient,
that even if lust is present as VCT's tika to Bhagavata 10.33.39 declares, kama is then fully
eradicated by prema's descent. Thus defending SND Babaji's viewpoint in allegiance to the
purvacaryas.
________________________________________________________________________________

OTHER OBJECTIONS

(3) RKDS says: SNDs one another point is not fully matching with VCTs views expressed in
Mdhurya-kdambin by the latter. SND says that there are only two stages viz., under the influence
of prema and/or under the influence of kma.

REPLY: As demonstrated earlier, SND Babaji is using prema as per BRS 1.4.1. So the mentioning
of these 2 stages does not deny other in-between stages. It is just that Babaji's usage of prema is
again referring to the sun-like prema and RKDS is referring to lesser manifestations of Bhakti as
proportionate prema. Both terminologies and methods of explaining have their utility and are not in
opposition to one another as the intended meanings are indeed the same. SND Babaji indeed
explains the various stages [and not just 2] leading to Prema in his mp3 lectures of Madhurya
Kadambini and they are in accordance with what RKDS is also faithfully presenting.

(4) RKDS says: Hence, it is to be accepted that both avidy and prema (till its sandhi-kla or
conjunction stage with bhva/rati) can co-exist till certain proportionate extents.

REPLY: Can we also refer to a few drops of water as being the proportionate ocean? Especially
when only a few drops and not the ocean are physically present? See pages 3, 4 & 5.

(5) RKDS says: If SND considers sdhana-bhakti to be on the stage of premas influence, that is
correct. But, even on that stage, the influence of kma or avidy doesnt subside fully.

SNDs point that klea-ghn (the quality of removing all avidy-associated anarthas as seen from
the stage of sdhana-bhakti fully developing on the stage of bhva-prema sandhi-kla or the
conjunction of bhva and prema stages) seen on sdhana-bhakti stage proves that no avidy
remains from sdhana-bhakti onward is not fully accurate. Because, VCT explains in Mdhurya-
kdambin that only at the stage of the conjunction of bhva and prema, the tyantik-type (the
super-ultimate type) of anartha/avidy-nivtti occurs. Thence, even the seed of
avidy/anartha/klea can never grow again, as it has been fully burnt out once and for all. Eka-
dea-vypin, bahu-dea-vypin, pryik, pr and tyantik these are the 5 types of
anartha/avidy-nivttis explained Mdhurya-kdambin by VCT. So, it is incorrect to assert that the
influence of avidy is, fully, terminated on the sdhaka from the stage of sdhana-bhakti. It fully
terminates only during the conjunction of bhva/rati and prema.

In any perspective (whether that of BRS or of Bhakti-sandarbha), the bottom-line point coming out
is that avidy/anartha remain present, though, inactive or mrcchita till the time when prema is not
fully acquired.

REPLY:

Babaji does not literally mean, nor did he even say that all avidya is fully destroyed in the various
stages of sadhana bhakti as can be seen from his madhurya kadambini lectures and such. If the time
constraints, topic and questions allowed in the public debate, this would have been made very clear.

PRESENCE OF AVIDYA BUT NOT ACTIVE INFLUENCE OF AVIDYA

What he means is that for someone who is practising sadhana quite seriously with stability
(naisthiki bhakti/nistha stage onwards) and who has really earned the title of sadhaka, then anarthas
such as avidya although present, do not affect them seriously or hamper their relish of bhajana.
This is abundantly clear because Babaji says at 56mins People have not understood my inference.
I always use the word avidyagrasta person - a person who is under the influence of avidya.

This key phrase exonerates Babaji completely, because he does not deny the presence of avidya
here, only its influence in the sense of preventing the sadhaka to relish and progress steadily in
bhajana.

Technically speaking in Madhurya Kadambini, avidya is placed under the category of duskrtottha
anarthas (anarthas arising from sin) as per MK 2.3. These anarthas are said to be identical to the 5
Klesas mentioned in MK 3.1 such as raga, dvesa, avidya etc.

In MK 3.18 it is explained how the influence of duskrtottha anarthas such as avidya are almost
complete after the stage of bhajana kriya, complete at the stage of nistha and absolute at the stage of
asakti. This is the same for anarthas arising from pious activities, sukrtottha anarthas such as being
engrossed in sensual habits according to later acaryas (although not specifically mentioned by
VCT).

Nisthayam jatayam purna the above mentioned anarthas, avidya-adi will not affect a sadhaka's
steady progression from nistha henceforward. This is what Babaji means. There is always the slim
possibility of such anarthas reappearing however, until full eradication at the stage of asakti
asatkav evatyantiki.

The example of a patient taking effective medication to cure a disease can be given [corresponding
to sadhana bhakti]. As the patient goes on with the treatment, gradually upon completion of the
course [attaining nistha], the disease will no longer affect them and the influence of the disease will
be therefore nullified [Nisthayam jatayam purna]. Then the patient can gradually improve their
health [attain ruci, asakti etc] Even so, a relapse may occur due to dormant strands of the illness still
remaining if proper care is not taken. Only with proper care taken after treatment will full
eradication of all dormant strands be accomplished [asatkav evatyantiki].

________________________________________________________________________________

LAST WORDS

I believe there is actually very little disagreement between Ramkrishna Swami (RKDS) and
Satyanarayana dasa Babaji (SND). These misunderstandings are due to their use of language and
emphasis only but both of their intended meanings match.

Both Acaryas are representing the proper conclusions of the Gaudiya sampradaya and have done an
invaluable service in clarifying the prevalent misconceptions in those persons coming from other
Gaudiya (Neo-Gaudiya as RKDS refers) institutions. Both Acaryas here are mahattara and even if
SND Babaji is more snigdha towards me this has not caused me to become biased towards SND
Babaji in this essay. If Babaji had spoken something that was indefensible, then I would not put
effort in to support such a clear misconception. Just as one does not try to build castles in the sky.

As Babaji said lovingly to Jagadananda dasaji in the debate, He's actually saying what I'm saying.
This can be applied to RKDS also, because their central disagreement of whether kama and prema
can exist in the same adhikarana (place/substratum) is actually non-existent. That is because when
Babaji refers to prema, he is primarily referring to the state of prema after bhava and secondarily he
means steady sadhana bhakti wherein there is a non-influence [although dormant presence that may
reappear] of anarthas/avidya. Whereas RKDS is using the term prema in a different sense, and he is
using the term prema [or proportionate prema] to refer to all stages from initial sadhana bhakti to
prema bhakti.

I hope that this small attempt of mine to harmonise the words of my vast superiors is taken well and
that they will be at least pleased with my efforts and if not in absolute full agreement with me, they
will see the utility of my essay in bridging the gaps between them.

Jaya Gora Gadadhara Narahari

Jaya Yugala Kisora

radhacharan das