The very first book of the Gauḍīya sampradāya is Śrī Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta. Therein, Sanātana Goswāmī says that each avatāra has a corresponding representation in Vaikuṇṭha.[1] Since Gaura appears as an avatāra (although himself being avatārī Śrī Kṛṣṇa), he must have a permanent abode in transcendence. The word avatāra is etymologically translated as “from up to down,” implying the idea of divine descent into a temporary realm, which is possible only if the avatāra is already present in the spiritual world.[2] Because Mahāprabhu is considered an avatāra by the Goswāmīs,[3] he must have his own abode in eternity. In this connection, Śrīla Jīva Goswāmī speaks about the eternality of Kṛṣṇa, his associates, and his abode by describing Kṛṣṇa as being worthy of worship—that is, an object of achievement[4]—and by explaining that anything that is not eternal cannot be the goal of one’s worship, since one attains whom one worships.[5] Again, our Goswāmīs accept Mahāprabhu as an object of worship, so he must have a permanent realm in eternity that corresponds with such worship.[6]
Still, some may persevere in their objection, asking why our Six Goswāmīs (having had the chance to do so) never spoke directly about Gaura in Vaikuṇṭha, making luscious descriptions of an eternal Bengal in the spiritual sky. In reply, we should first of all consider that the Goswāmīs did not actually speak much about Mahāprabhu in general. They concentrated mainly on Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa līlā in such a way that the reader would feel an obvious necessity for a Gaura līlā. We may then also ask why the Goswāmīs never spoke about other details, such as Gadādhara’s being Rādhā, or many other truths that were revealed in time by later (or even contemporary) authors.[7] Actually, the Goswāmīs composed only a few verses in praise of Mahāprabhu, but almost none of them wrote about his līlā (neither prakaṭa nor aprakaṭa).[8] So if we follow the logic of abhāva-pramāṇa, then we should not believe in Mahāprabhu’s Earthly līlā at all, because it was described in texts such as Caitanya-bhāgavata or Caitanya-caritāmṛta, which were not written by any of the Six Goswāmīs.[9] I think it is clear that such a proposal makes no sense at all.
In the face of these replies, some may still prefer to “make a choice” between someone such as Rūpa Goswāmī and someone such as Viśvanātha Cakravartīpāda and remain chaste to the former, who never wrote overtly about an aprakaṭa nitya Navadvīpa. But instead of forcing ourselves to choose between two equally divine personalities, we should learn how to accept both of them, understanding that there is ultimately no contradiction in the statements of the mahājanas. Although we may like to say “the Goswāmīs said it all” and take only whatever they said, the nature of revelation in the context of the paramparā is something dynamic. Thus, a natural development of a sampradāya’s core foundational truths could (and should) take place in the form of its future members. That being said, the overall principle here is that since Kṛṣṇa appears to different devotees in a suitable form that corresponds with their love for him, the same holds true for the qualities and līlās attached to that particular form—they correspond with a particular influence of bhakti, as the Bhāgavata itself declares:
O Lord! You, who are approached by being heard about, seen and directly served, enter and remain in the lotus of your devotee’s hearts infused with bhakti. Much praised Lord! You are so merciful to your devotees that you manifest yourself in the particular eternal form of transcendence in which they always think of you, bestowing to them spiritual bodies appropriate to the mood they cultivate during sādhana.[10]
Even if we do not find any explicit verse about a nitya Navadvīpa coming from the Goswāmīs,[11] that does not mean there is no such realm. Again, Gaura is Kṛṣṇa and there is an aprakaṭa Kṛṣṇa līlā. Therefore, there is an aprakaṭa Gaura līlā. If someone would oppose this statement by considering it mere tarka (mundane logic), we could then say that tarka is one thing. But another very different thing is the enlightened logic that naturally comes from love (su-medhasaḥ/śāstra-nipuṇa),[12] such as what the Goswāmīs exhibited, which caused them to see certain Bhāgavata verses in light of Gaura līlā. But if the objection still continues to the point of accepting the Goswāmīs’ between-the-lines reading but rejecting later mahājanas’ reading under the argument “the buck should stop somewhere,” we are then invited to re-think the very nature of the guru-paramparā, which implies that later members will be as bona fide as the Goswāmīs precisely because they are able to read between the Goswāmīs’ lines, just as the Goswāmīs read between the Bhāgavata’s lines to find Gaura there. To remain dynamic, ancient spiritual traditions are to be constantly updated by their members in the form of fresh revelations coming from the original siddhānta of their particular school of thought.[13]
Here, the same objection may take a new form, trying to distinguish between fresh revelations coming from the original siddhānta and the introduction of an entirely new sādhana not mentioned by the Goswāmīs. But the point here is that by speaking about an aprakaṭa nitya Navadvīpa, we are not promoting an entirely new sādhana. Rather, we are referring to the reality that is revealed as a byproduct of certain specific insights and that corresponds entirely with Vraja, so there is no need for a separate sādhana—as one goes deeper into Gaura līlā, one will emerge in Kṛṣṇa līlā.[14] And the opposite will be equally true as well, all of this supported by the Goswāmīs’ own words.[15]
On a similar note, we may find some objectors who say that Śrī Jīva Goswāmī, the tattva-ācārya of the Gauḍīya sampradāya, never mentioned the possibility of an aprakaṭa nitya Navadvīpa in his profuse writings. In response to this claim, we can share the following verse from Śrī Jīva’s Gopāla-campū, wherein he speaks of Goloka as Śvetadvīpa:
The planet being described is called Goloka because it is the abode of cows and cowherds. It is called Śvetadvīpa because it manifests in a pure form which cannot be equaled by anything else. Its supreme position is accepted by persons with knowledge. That supreme Goloka is the supreme Śvetadvīpa.[16]
Besides Ṭhākura Bhaktivinoda (who directly interprets this verse in connection to an aprakaṭa Navadvīpa), we also find figures such as Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura supporting this statement by saying that Navadvīpa is Śvetadvīpa,[17] Śvetadvīpa being another name for Goloka and Vṛndāvana dāsa’s text equating Navadvīpa with Śvetadvīpa. Furthermore, the authoritative Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā says, “All glories to the most wonderful abode of Navadvīpa, which those in full knowledge of rasa call Vṛndāvana, which people of knowledge call Goloka, which others call Śvetadvīpa, and still others call paravyoma, the spiritual sky.”[18] Finally, Gopāla-campū speaks about aprakaṭa Vṛndāvana as “having a variety of natures.”[19] Since there are a variety of natures to Goloka (and since Vṛndāvana itself has innumerable natures), this realm is not necessarily limited in form to that of the description previously given by Śrī Jīva.[20]
[1] Here is a brief summary of this section of the Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta (2.4.147–152) intertwined with some of Sanātana Goswāmī’s commentary: “In Vaikuṇṭha each devotee sees the Supreme Lord Śrī Nārāyaṇa in the form of the particular Lord he worships, with suitable complexion and other qualities. They see the Lord of Vaikuṇṭha to be the same as the form of their worshipable Deity endowed with particular color, limbs, and sub-limbs, and so on. As before, these devotees still see their own worshipable Lord, with all his unique features they found charming—endowed with extraordinary associates (such as Lakṣmaṇa and Sītā for Rāma) as well as pastimes and paraphernalia attractive to the devotees. Thus, they worship their favorite forms of the Lord in the places where he resides—his opulent cities and other abodes—and expand the ocean of happiness. They serve their Lord in special secret places in Vaikuṇṭha, similar to the cities of their Deity, such as Ayodhyā, and experience happiness. Though the Lord of Vaikuṇṭha, full of all powers, exists in Vaikuṇṭha surrounded by all his associates and sits on his great throne in his huge palace, he has the ability to show himself to the particular devotee with particular faith, attractively endowed with the desired associates and paraphernalia. One should not think that this is not real and just some appearance, since the Lord has all abilities and māyā is impossible in Vaikuṇṭha. By worshipping one among the many avatāra forms of the Lord, one attains that form. The person just described, who may serve two forms or more forms of the Lord—seeing them as one—also attains Vaikuṇṭha.”
[2] In this context, see Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta 397, wherein Rūpa Goswāmī quotes the Bṛhad-viṣṇu Purāṇa, saying, “the forms of Bhagavān and his avatāras are eternal—eternal form, eternal fragrance, eternal power, and eternal bliss.”
[3] Apart from Caitanya-caritāmṛta’s famous āśīrvāda-śloka (1.1.4), which was actually composed by Śrī Rūpa Goswāmī as the namaskāra-śloka for his Vidagdha-mādhava (1.2) and which refers to Gaura as avatīrṇaḥ kalau (he who has descended in the age of Kali), see also Tattva-sandarbha’s maṅgalācaraṇa and Laghu-bhāgavatamrita 1.2, wherein both Śrī Jīva and Śrī Rūpa quote the famous Bhāgavata verse about the yuga-avatāra for Kali (11.5.32) in the context of offering their praṇāma to Śrī Caitanya.
[4] See Jīva Gosvāmī, Śrī Bhagavat Sandarbha, trans. Satyanarayana Dasa, comment on anuccheda 60 (Vrindavan: Jiva Institute, 2014), 584.
[5] In this connection, Śrīla Narahari Cakravartī’s Bhakti-ratnākara (12.54) speaks of “something said by great sages in the past” (prācīnair uktam): “(The sages say that) Śrī Navadvīpa is to be meditated upon. This (form of) eternal Vṛndāvana shines on the bank of the Jāhnavī.” By considering Navadvīpa as worthy of meditation and identical to eternal Vṛndāvana, Narahari implies here that Navadvīpa is a worshipable and permanent goal to attain in transcendence.
[6] While one may object that devas such as Indra are also described in some parts of śāstra as worthy of worship, they are prescribed as objects of worship only for material gain. Nowhere is their worship prescribed for attaining mukti or any final destination in Vaikuṇṭha.
[7] While Gadādhara’s identity in Kṛṣṇa līlā was first revealed by Svarūpa Dāmodara (a contemporary of the Goswāmīs) in his Gadādharāṣṭakam (verses 1, 3, 6, and 9) and later by Kavi-karṇapūra in his Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā (153), the Goswāmīs did not say a word about it in their own works.
[8] Apart from some praṇāma-mantras dedicated to Mahāprabhu (as referred to in note 3), the few main references where the Goswāmīs briefly spoke about Mahāprabhu’s līlā are to be found in Rūpa and Raghunātha dāsa Goswāmīs’ Caitanyāṣṭakams as well as Raghunātha dāsa Goswāmī’s Śri Gaurāṅga-stava-kalpataru, all of which quite cryptically mention some of the līlās of Śri Caitanya.
[9] If Caitanya-bhāgavata and Caitanya-caritāmṛta were included in the context of their representing a main objection against the existence of a nitya Navadvīpa (since if there is a nitya Navadvīpa, it would have been natural to describe it in the two main hagiographies of Śri Caitanya), we could also make the same case regarding the possibility of an aprakaṭa Vṛndāvana in connection to Kṛṣṇa’s main “hagiography” (the Bhāgavata), where, at least overtly, we do not hear about a Goloka Vṛndāvana in the spiritual realm, but we do indeed hear about a Vaikuṇṭha realm when, for example, Kṛṣṇa and his associates leave this planet.
[10] Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 3.9.11.
[11] Although there may be no overt statements by the Goswāmīs about the eternality of Gaura līlā, they indeed spoke about it indirectly and thus allowed for such a possibility. One well-known example is Śrīla Rūpa Goswāmī’s statement in his Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta (Pūrva 391): “Even today if one of his (Kṛṣṇa’s) dear devotees intensely desires to see one of his particular pastimes, the merciful Lord immediately exhibits that pastime for him.”
[12] Although Mahābhārata (Vana-pārva 313.117) does indeed speak about the futility of dry mundane logic, it speaks in this same verse about the way to access the heart of ultimate dharma: diving deep into the heart of a sādhu.
[13] Śrīla A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda describes this spirit in one of his letters (June 14, 1970): “If my previous ācārya has written something, so he (the present ācārya) will not touch those points, but he will write something which can develop further. That is ācārya, not that chewing the chewed: somebody has written something and he is also writing the same thing. No. If he at all writes, he will write something which will beautify, or glorify, or magnify the former idea.”
[14] Caitanya-candrāmṛta 88.
[15] In his purport to Bhāgavata 10.32.22, Śrīla Sanātana Goswāmī has implied that the zenith of Kṛṣṇa līlā takes Kṛṣṇa to the point of desiring the experience of Rādhā’s bhāva—Gaura līlā.
[16] Gopāla-campū 1.1.22.
[17] Caitanya-bhāgavata 2.23.290.
[18] Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā 18. An interesting connection between Vaikuṇṭha and Navadvīpa (and the eternality of the latter by its being considered superior to the former) in this connection also is made by Prabhodānanda Saraswatī in his Caitanya-candrāmṛta (verse 62): “His complexion as fair as molten gold, and his form filled with the splendid and blissful nectar of pure transcendental love, the Supreme Godhead has mercifully appeared in the town of Navadvīpa. In Navadvīpa every home celebrates great festivals in honor of Bhakti-devī, the goddess of devotion. Navadvīpa is sweeter than Vaikuṇṭha. My heart finds its happiness in the transcendental abode of Navadvīpa.”
[19] Gopāla-campū 1.1.19.
[20] In Śrīla Narahari Cakravartī’s Bhakti-ratnākara (12.329–332), the personified Puṣkara Tīrtha speaks about nitya Navadvīpa’s nature and connection to Vraja: “Eternal Navadvīpa Dhāma is filled with prema-bhakti. By the grace of Nadīyā, one knows the nature of Navadvīpa. The residence of Gauracandra, who performed the rāsa-līlā and other pastimes in Vṛndāvana, is eternally in Navadvīpa. Śyāma of Vṛndāvana has a golden complexion in Navadvīpa. Prabhu’s play continues in a hidden form in Navadvīpa. His play is sometimes unmanifest and sometimes manifest. In this Kali yuga, there will be an ocean of joy [when he manifests his līlā].”
