In Search of the Roots of Baul Doctrine

It is not possible for me to say from where the word Baul originated. However, according to researchers it appeared long before the birth of Sri Chaitanya Deva. "Charjapad", the by-product, merges in the course of time into the stream of history. Along with it is the Indian connection and the proximity of Sufi doctrine. At present Lalon Saiji stands at the head of this school. He claims to belong to neither the Hindu nor the Muslim race or lineage. As a humanist he is not on the side of the great Prophet either; before the diversity and vastness of the world no place remains for sectarianism.

The turmoil of fabrications and invented tales that is now being woven around the life of Lalon Saiji - of all that nonsense the poet once said:-

The songs have been distorted and lost, and along with them the doctrine has been distorted; the path and the original beauty have been spoiled.

In the view of Dr Abu'l Ahsan Chowdhury, the phrase "a race of its own kind" is not correct. Because the song at first says "I know not what my roots are", and if the same song ends with "a race of its own kind", then two mutually contradictory words cannot be accepted as spoken by the same bard. Moreover, joining the opinion of Panju Shah's son, the late Morhum Khandkar Rafiuddin Saheb, in the book Bhab Sangita, page 71, that song - the phrase 'a race of its own kind' appears nowhere in it.

Apart from Saiji, this question bears subtle testimony to the thought of other philosophers too, but the subsequent words of the song are not very consistent in the light of a discerning eye. Besides, there are some songs which, although they carry Saiji's bhanita (self-reference), cannot be called his compositions. How many songs of Saiji are his own compositions - settling the question that has arisen over this is a kind of impossibility; yet I have heard from the mouth of Kokil Sai Babaji, the guru of my Baul doctrine, that in his time there were about eleven sadhus in Cheuria, and even more beyond that. The song notebooks are carried off, one person after another, and no one returns them.

As for the question Saiji raised about his religious doctrine, I think he answered it himself.

Elsewhere he says:-

But the divine-knowing sadhus, the great philosophers, have their own, or independent, religion of a kind. Those are extremely difficult for us to understand. Yet of them all that can be said is: the religion of man, humanism - in an extended sense, natural humanism (Natural Humanism). That is why no other religious or great teaching should be excluded; hence it would not be proper to find fault from any other standpoint.

Songs can be divided into many streams and sub-streams; among them the sadhan songs fall into four classes - sthul, pravarta, sadhak and siddha. Because of terminological complexity, and being beyond my competence, I am discussing only the comprehensible side. Muslim devotees have been attracted by focusing precisely on these songs. And Hindu devotees have been attracted by focusing on the songs related to the Radha-Krishna Gaudiya doctrine; although most of those are terminological. Another important side is the songs of philosophical doctrine, which too have drawn the attention of devotees who are genuine seekers of truth, freed from the bondage of conditioned intellect. In my view, those songs have been lost to a great extent. Owing to the nature of the surroundings, preservation and conservation, whatever little can be found - its analysis and identification would be imaginative, philosophical, unverified; from the social standpoint, it would be slanderous.

But these philosophical doctrines are not in the arena of politics or economics; they are independent. Although he held an independent stream of divine philosophy, he did not build an independent school of doctrine of his own, perhaps because of his household circumstances. Ample proof is found in the songs of the Baul that the Bengali nation was fully capable of utopian thought and later, in the nihilistic and mid-period fragmented consciousness, of being free from the bondage of conditioned intellect.

The mystics are, in order, Aul, Baul, Sai, Darvesh, Nera, Neri, Sahajiya, Kartabhaja, and there are some more guru-following branches and sub-branches. Because the conduct and behaviour of all these groups are the same, the folk of this doctrine perform sadhu-sang together, and no kind of intolerance is seen within these groups in the name of religious faith. Beyond humanity, sectarianism teaches nothing; they oppose no other culture, nor the culture of the group; rather they learn from the culture of the group.

About the questions raised concerning sadhan doctrine, I am discussing a little in general terms. Professor Dr Upendranath Bhattacharya, in his book "Banglar Baul O Baulgan", has said about the sadhana of the four moons that the Baul sadhaks drink a mixture of excreta, urine, menstrual fluid and semen, and that this is supposedly the sadhana of the four moons. It is not Dr Bhattacharya alone; many others, ignorant of the true doctrine, say this. Such a notion is highly objectionable where genuine Lalon-follower Bauls are concerned. By presenting portions of those sadhana songs of the four moons, I am trying to put an end to all those misconceptions - I do not know how factual and credible they will be. If the songs are explained without being arranged sequentially, mistakes are more likely; along with that, knowledge of the terminology is needed. Truth cannot be created; it must be sought.

Here one may note that the gem chamber and the seat of the moon within the moon have been kept surrounded. I mention portions of one more sadhan song.

From this it may readily be inferred that inside the four moons there is yet another distinct entity. Now another portion of a song.

From this it is easily understood that what is said about the sadhana of the four moons - despised and made scandalous in the eyes of the people - is not true at all. I present portions of one more sadhan song.

That is, through the sequential sadhana of the four moons the sadhaks gain the power of restraint. It guards against downfall and controls the semen, making the control of procreation easy. In the mystics' view, those who have no control over semen and procreation cannot escape much unrest and suffering. It also carries the welfare of householders. One can choose one's own household. Where the inevitable is neglected, unrest is inevitable there. The sadhana of the four moons is natural, systematic and mathematical; there is nothing demonic in it. In this context, what is easily known is not easily accepted, and what is easily accepted is not easily known. Without the methodological side, its correct evaluation is impossible. The greatest difficulty is terminological complexity.

For my part, interpreting the meaning enclosed in these terms is not possible at all; but is there any world scholar who can interpret it? People like me who pretend to know without knowing number in the thousands.

In that book Professor Bhattacharya spoke of two and a half dozen moons - he spoke of the moons, not of sadhana. Twenty fingers on hands and feet are twenty moons; the eyes and ears are four moons; and the navel the root, half a moon. These statements too are unacceptable. They differ from the natural, systematic and mathematical stream of movement; none of these is the doctrine of the body - it is beyond the body, and that is the doctrine of the cosmos (Cosmology).

1. The sadhana of two and a half dozen moons, taken up in the body, producing the five qualities in the vein,
2. Purifying the body, one goes to the cosmos, above the realm of the unbroken.
3. What divine play lies beyond the cosmos - with what can it be compared,
4. The connoisseur can know it; to the unrefined it is wondrous.
5. Bring under rule the female, the male and the neuter,
6. The essence that is above the cosmos, therein it is revealed.

It seems that in the sadhana of two and a half dozen moons the joy and welfare of life continue; most probably neither physician nor judge is needed. It lacks the rigidity of the six chakras and the impossibility of occultism. According to the mystics' custom, except for a devotee matured in a moral science of truth and restraint and rich in devotion, their devotional knowledge cannot be known by anyone outside, for fear of creating obstacles in bhajan and of becoming one's own enemy.

Many think that once written and spoken publicly, much can be changed. In reality that is not possible in any way, and if given to the unworthy, bitter fruits result - this has been tested many times and proven many times. If any supremely beneficial doctrine, without being realized, becomes a matter of the book, it appears as a subject of research, and through it horizons of human misfortune may be created.

Both aspects of this doctrine have been known with great difficulty. One is the path of fulfilment through devotion and steadfastness within truth and restraint - it is safe and bears fruit in time; the other is the path of attainment by adopting a self-interested method through the inherent information of the law of life and nature - it bears fruit quickly but carries danger too.

This is not taught at first; here the question of qualification arises. Since this knowledge is not easily transmitted, its place is with extraordinary scholars and with humble authority, whose number is altogether limited. Even today it remains confined within the guru's circle.

For a long time past, the attempt to destroy this path of doctrine has been greater than the attempt to protect it. Perhaps because of the incapacity to understand, the yardstick of literature and philosophy, or else their nature. Again it may be that isolated incidents are taken to be the whole. What the fertile brain and powerful centre say, the ordinary person believes, without examining.

In conclusion I would say:

Kabiraj Sri Monoranjan Basu
4/ Dari Magura (Saha Para)
02/02/1998