"Chaitanya's Three Discrete Characteristics"

    

    “Chaitanya's enthusiastic movement had three discrete characteristics: its expression was through the vernacular languages, not through Sanskrit; it rejected the role of the Brahmin (priest) as ritual intermediary between man and God, in some ways and times going further and rejecting caste entirely; and it propagated enthusiastic religion, with singing and dancing as a part of the search for immediate and ecstatic communion with the divine. The technique for mystic communion consisted basically of devotees sitting in a circle and singing devotional songs, or kirtanas, to the accompaniment of musical instruments and dancing.

    "The doctrines of the new sect were codified by six of Chaitanya’s followers who were scholars and theologians, called the six Gosvamis. They produced over 219 different works in Sanskrit tying every teaching of the Bengal school into the orthodox traditions of Indian religion. They created a great corpus of canonical works."

    Chaitanya was also influenced by the all-pervasive Tantric tradition of Bengal. The Gosvamis themselves were greatly influenced by the Tantras, perhaps even by the more antinomian left-handed Tantrism of the Sahajiyas. Thus, for example, the long-existing Sahajiya tradition provided the Vaishnavites with their ecstatic, mystic theory of the dual incarnation of Chaitanya as Radha and Krishna.

    La Barre has pointed out, Aberle’s classification of revitalization movements is inadequate. It is based on the stingy, economic concept of “relative deprivation”. Again, Barbara Lex has commented that “scant attention has been addressed to the pleasurable emotions that are educed by participating in such movements”. She adds, “one need not invoke the strains produced by clashing cultures or the boredom of modem civilized life to understand the attractiveness of transcendent ecstasy, whatever means are employed to that end, by human beings in any society at any time.” In this connection, one may also refer to Bharati’s remark that the mystical experience is a “peak experience, in one category perhaps with totally consummated erotic experiences.”

    One reason why the ecstatic element in revitalization movements has been underplayed could be the JudaeoChristian orientation of most observers, who have been Western. As Bharati points out, the Judaeo-Chnstian tradition has tended to shortchange ecstasy. Then, another reason could be that, as Bharati again remarks, academics fear ecstasy because of the “endless circumlocutions” that are part of the academic life.

    The same scholar has identified the need for ecstasy as the raison d'etre of the Krishna Consciousness and other pseudo-Eastern cults that are in vogue in the West. He has brought out the nexus between mysticism, ecstasy and autonomy: most people are conformists who fear autonomy in themselves and others, and ecstasy tends to generate autonomy. Further, he suggests that mystic experimentation could have great therapeutic value in the West, where many people who are at odds with society are labelled paranoid-schizophrenic and shut up in mental hospitals. This line of thinking echoes the writings of people like R.D. Laing and Thomas Szasz, who deny that there is any such thing as mental disease.

    In India, on the other hand, many so-called “paranoid schizophrenic” people have been, and still are, venerated as mystics. Mysticism generates charisma for the Indian, because in Indian culture the numinous is intuited in every phenomenon. The Indian world-view is overwhelmingly religious, and monks and mystics are the culture-heroes. The impersonal monistic theology of Advaita has had the greatest prestige, compared to the personalistic and dualistic theism. Advaita is very like Mahayana Buddhism, which is atheistic but has a very high numinous content, unlike a theology like Calvin’s which is highly theistic but has hardly any numinous content.

A look at traditional Indian exegesis will further elucidate the ecstatic core of the mystical experience. The canonical Hindu scriptures have, more than two thousand years ago, defined the mystical experience as ananda, i.e. “bliss”. Also, the world is lila or “divine play”. Norbeck, in his writings on “rites of reversal”, has remarked on the interesting role of play in religion.

    To return to my main argument: yoga, which is a technique of mystic union, has been, as Bharati said, the one distinctive Indian contribution to the world. It generates an “inurement against the vicissitudes of life”. Further, Indian lore pays a lot of “overt positive attention to the madness of mystic language” and behaviour, in other words to their autonomic and hedonistic aspects.

    The above is of course in crass contrast to Western traditions. For one thing, Christian mystics have had few foci for meditation other than the masochistic martyr-figure of the crucified Christ, as pointed out by the Trappist monk Thomas Merton. For another, Christian mystics who reported their experiences in direct, monistic and ecstatic language were persecuted: Meister Eckhart died in a dungeon, and Bruno at the stake.

    I shall rest my argument here, presuming that I have successfully brought out the ecstatic, hedonistic elements in religious behaviour, as exemplified by Chaitanya’s revivalist movement and its interface with the Tantric tradition of Bengal.