Chair: Monika Boehm-Tettelbach, University of Heidelberg

This panel will explore organizational strategies of medieval North Indian devotional communities, as apparent in the rhetorics of their hagiographies. It will concentrate in particular on the issues of the formation of elites and the inclusion or exclusion of "the subaltern." With regard to the latter, the panel seeks to question the assumption that saguna Vaisnava communities are all-Brahminical and elitist in contrast to the nirguna communities, which are often understood to champion the case of the "underdog," in particular that of outcastes.

The panel will be concerned with identifying how authority is construed in hagiographies that are consciously seeking to establish devotional communities, as well as in the work of one "independent" who was not concerned with sectarian formation. Case studies will be presented of hagiographical writings of one "nirguna" group, namely the Dadupanth (Monika Boehm-Tettelbach) and the hagiographies of the two major Krishna devotional communities, namely the Gaudiya Sampradaya "founded" by Caitanya (Tony K. Stewart) and Pusti Marga Sampradaya "founded" by Vallabha (Vasudha Dalmia). In addition, there will be a presentation on the works of Hariram Vyas (Heidi Pauwels), who, like Caitanya and Vallabha, belonged to the first generation of "pioneers" in Braj, but did not come to be regarded as the founder of a Sampradaya. Thus, we present three cases of succeeded attempts at "sectarian" community formation (one "nirguna" and two "saguna"), and one negative example (of an "ecumenical" figure).

Vasudha Dalmia, University of California, Berkeley

The later opulence of the Pustimarg and the elaborate ritual practised in the temples of the Sampradaya have come a long way from the original immediacy of religious experience as depicted in the Caurasi vaisnavan ki varta, the hagiographic compendium describing the formation of the first community around Vallabha. In trying to distinguish the main features of the community as it constitutes itself, it will be the aim of this paper to lay the groundwork for establishing typologies which permits comparison with the other great devotional traditions of the period.

Tony K. Stewart, North Carolina State University

The Gaudiya Vaisnava tradition has been considered by historians as an organized religious, often "reform," movement. Nearly every scholastic appraisal points to the charisma of Krishna Caitanya (1486–1533) as the inspiration for its origin, and the genius of its theologians, the Six Gosvamins of Vrndavana, as its "organizers." Yet close scrutiny of the early history makes clear that after Caitanya this tradition had no centralized authority: Caitanya left no spiritual heir, so there was no single guru lineage; the theology was not systematic, but composed by corporate delegation of responsibility; since it had no official sanctioning body, there could be no canon in either Bengali or Sanskrit; and there was no geographic center, contributions were made by devotees throughout Bengal, Orissa, and Braj. What, we might reasonably ask, can be the organizing principle of such a decentered community? How can and do these Vaisnavas function as a coherent religious group without overt centralized leadership? Clues to this distinctive organizational character are found first in the hagiographical literature devoted to Caitanya in the sixteenth century, and find some kind of resolution nearly a century later in the final biography, the Caitanya Caritamrta of Krsnadasa Kaviraja. What Krishnadasa proposed was not only novel, but was delivered through a carefully crafted "rhetoric of consensus" that not only strove for the consent of the devotee, but actually depended on his or her participation to construct (and thereby confirm) the "rightness" of it, a flexible and open-ended structure that has proved resilient for centuries.

Heidi Pauwels, University of Washington, Seattle

While most papers in the panel are about "constructing communities" demarcated by sectarian borders, and establishing identity by exclusion, this paper presents a negative example, in that it focuses on the more inclusive community of holy men as "imagined" by an independent, who did not come to be regarded as the founder-father of a Sampradaya.

The case in point is that of Hariram Vyas, who was a sixteenth-century Krishna bhakta, belonging to the first generations of "pioneers" in Braj. Apart from songs celebrating the divine love of Radha and Krishna, Vyas also created "hagiographical poetry," that is, songs in praise of holy men. In these songs, Vyas praises holy men from different eras, areas, and sects, including several so-called niguna bhaktas. While being a Brahmin himself, Vyas criticized his own community and celebrated low-castes in his poetry. In short, the community Vyas imagined seems to be a surprisingly inclusive one. His case contradicts the validity of the common understanding of nirguna bhakti and saguna bhakti as mutually exclusive, and the equation of the former with a movement for egalitarianism and the latter with Brahminical elitism.

Monika Boehm-Tettelbach, University of Heidelberg

Food transfer and feasts figure prominently in the accounts of the lives of Sants. In Dadupanthi hagiography, however, the topic of food and feast is particularly conspicuously present. In my contribution, I wish to analyze the impact of food transfer in both the hagiographical texts and in the history of the Dadupanth as it emerges from historical records, with an emphasis on the period between the beginnings of the sect in the end of the sixteenth century and the eighteenth century but with a cursory overview of the history down to the present.