आज्ञायैवं गुणान्दोषान्मयादिष्टानपि स्वकान् ।
धर्मान्सन्त्यज्य यः सर्वान्मां भजेत स तु सत्तमः ॥
ājñāyaivaṁ guṇān doṣān mayādiṣṭān api svakān |
dharmān santyajya yaḥ sarvān māṁ bhajet sa ca sattamaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.11.32; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.62; Bhakti Sandarbha: 200; Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.8.62)
“[Śrī Kṛṣṇa to Uddhava:] Fully understanding qualities and faults in this manner, one who shall completely relinquish all one’s own dharmas even though [they are] instituted by me and worship me is also the best of the sat.”
Commentary
kiṁ ca, mayā veda-rūpeṇādiṣṭān api sva-dharmān santyajya yo māṁ bhajeta so’py evaṁ pūrvoktavat sattamaḥ | kim ajñānān nāstikyād vā? na, dharmācaraṇe sattva-śuddhy-ādīn guṇān, vipakṣe naraka-pātādīn doṣāṁś cājñāya jñātvāpi mad-dhyāna-vikṣepakatayā mad-bhaktyaiva sarvaṁ bhaviṣyatīti dṛḍha-niścayenaiva dharmān santyajya | yad vā, bhakti-dārḍhyena nivṛttādhikāratayā santyajya | athavā, viddhaikādaśy-upavāsa-kṛṣṇaikādaśy-anupavāsānivedya-śrāddhādayo ye bhakti-viruddhā dharmāḥ, tān santyajety arthaḥ |
(Bhāvārtha-dīpikā)
“Furthermore, one who shall completely relinquish one’s own dharmas even though they are instituted by me in the form of the Vedas and worship me is also similarly, like the aforementioned [i.e., like the sādhu possessed of the characteristics mentioned in the preceding verses, viz., SB 11.11.29–31], the best of the sat. [A doubt is raised: ‘Does the sādhu you are now saying the is the best of the sat relinquish all his own dharmas] ‘Because of ignorance? Or because of disbelief [in the śāstra that enjoins them]?’ No [the sādhu does not relinquish his own dharmas for either of those reasons; rather], although he understands (ājñāya) the qualities of observance of dharma, such as purification of the psyche (sattva), and the faults of the opposite [i.e., of neglecting dharma], such as falling into Naraka, he completely relinquishes [all his own] dharmas specifically because of the firm conviction [he has] that everything [i.e., everything auspicious and desirable] will come to be only through bhakti to me. Alternately, he completely relinquishes [all his own dharmas] by virtue of having eligibility (adhikāra) for resignation [from such dharmas] by virtue of his firmness in bhakti. Or, the meaning is that he completely relinquishes those dharmas which are contrary to bhakti, such as fasting on struck (viddhā) Ekādaśīs, neglecting to fast on Kṛṣṇā Ekādāśīs [i.e., Ekādaśīs during the waning fortnight of each month], and [performing] śrāddha without offering [the foods used during to ritual to Śrī Bhagavān].”
sā ca sarva-nairāpekṣyeṇa tad-eka-niṣṭhatā-rūpā ekāntitā caturdhā caturbhiḥ prakāraiḥ—eko dharmānādaraḥ, anyaś ca karma-jñānādy-aśeṣa-nirapekṣatā, aparo vighnākūlatve’pi rati-paratā, aparaś ca premaika-parateti | tatra dharmānādareṇaikāntitāṁ likhati—ājñāyaivam iti | mayā veda-rūpeṇādiṣṭān sva-dharmān santyajya samyak tyaktvā yo māṁ bhajeta, tv-arthe ca-kāraḥ, sa tu sattamaḥ, pūrvokta-sādhutaḥ śreṣṭha ity arthaḥ | kim ajñānān nāstikyād vā? na, dharmācaraṇe evam īdṛśān kṛpālutādi-sadṛśān sattva-śuddhy-ādīn guṇān, vipakṣe doṣāṁś ca ājñāya samyak jñātvāpi mad-bhaktyaiva sarvaṁ bhaviṣyatīti dṛḍha-niścayenaiva sarva-dharmān man-niṣṭhatā-vikṣepakatayā santyajyety arthaḥ |
(Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.62)
“That one-pointedness (ekāntitā) in the form of fixity solely upon him [i.e., Śrī Bhagavān] by virtue of indifference towards everything [else] is furthermore fourfold, that is, [existent] in four ways: (1) one is disregard for dharma, (2) another is complete indifference to karma, jñāna, and so forth, (3) another is absorption in rati even while being disturbed by obstructions, and (4) another is absorption solely in prema. In this regard, the author describes the one-pointedness (ekāntitā) of disregard for dharma: ājñāyaivam … [i.e., he cites SB 11.11.32]. One who shall completely relinquish (santyajya) one’s own dharmas instituted by me in the form of the Vedas and worship me is also the best of the sat. The word ‘also’ (ca) is in the sense of a distinction of superiority (tu). ‘Superior to the aforementioned sādhu’ [i.e., to the sādhu described in the preceding verses, viz., SB 11.11.29–31] is the meaning. [A doubt is raised: ‘Does the sādhu you are now saying the is the best of the sat relinquish all his own dharmas] ‘Because of ignorance? Or because of disbelief [in the śāstra that enjoins them]?’ No [the sādhu does not relinquish his own dharmas for either of those reasons; rather], although fully understanding (ājñāya) the qualities of observance of dharma, such as purification of the psyche (sattva) and those like sympatheticness and so on [as aforementioned], and the faults of the opposite, he completely relinquish all dharmas on account of [their] being distractions to fixity upon me specifically because of the firm conviction that everything [i.e., everything auspicious and desirable] will come to be only through bhakti to me. This is the meaning.”
madhyamaṁ miśra-sākṣād-bhakti-sādhakam āha—ājñāyaivam iti | ‘bhakti-dārḍhyena nivṛttādhikāratayā santyajya’ ity-antā ṭīkā grāhyā | tathā ca hāyaśīrṣa-pañcarātrokta-nārāyaṇa-vyūha-stave—‘ye tyakta-loka-dharmārthā viṣṇu-bhakti-vaśaṁ gatāḥ | dhyāyanti paramātmānaṁ tebhyo’pīha namo namaḥ ||’ iti | atra tv evaṁ vyākhyā—yadi ca svātmani tat-tad-guṇa-yogābhāvaḥ, tathāpy evaṁ pūrvokta-prakāreṇa guṇān kṛpālutvādīn doṣāṁs tad-viparītāṁś cājñāya heyopādeyatvena niścityāpi, yo mayā teṣu guṇeṣu madhye tatra ādiṣṭān api svakān nitya-naimittika-lakṣaṇān sarvān eva varṇāśrama-vihitān dharmān tad-upalakṣaṇaṁ jñānam api mad-ananya-bhakti-vighātakatayā santyajya māṁ bhajet, sa ca sattamaḥ | ca-kārāt pūrvokto’pi sattama ity uttarasya tat-tad-guṇābhāve’pi pūrva-sāmyaṁ bodhayati | tato yas tu tat-tad-guṇān labdhvā dharma-jñāna-parityāgena māṁ bhajati kevalaṁ, sa tu parama-sattama eveti vyakty-ananya-bhaktasya pūrvata ādhikyaṁ darśitam | atra ‘adveṣṭā sarva-bhūtānāṁ’ ity-ādi śrī-gītā-dvādaśādhyāya-prakaraṇam apy anusandheyam | sattama ity anena tad-avaratrāpi sattvam apy astīti darśitam | astu tāvat sadācārasya tad-bhaktasya sattvam, ananya-devatā-bhaktatva-mātreṇāpi durācārasyāpi sattvānya-paryāyaṁ sādhutvaṁ vidhīyate, ‘api cet sudurācāraḥ’ ity-ādau | atra ca sādhu-saṅga-prastāve yat tādṛśaṁ lakṣaṇaṁ notthāpitaṁ, tat khalu tādṛśa-saṅgasya bhakty-unmukhe’nupayuktatābhiprāyeṇa | yathoktaṁ śrī-prahlādena—‘saṅgena sādhu-bhaktānām’ iti | sādhur atra sadācāraḥ |
(Krama-sandarbha-ṭīkā; excerpt from Bhakti Sandarbha: 200)
“[Now,] He [i.e., Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa] describes the intermediate, the sādhaka of mixed direct bhakti: ājñāyaivam … [i.e., he speaks SB 11.11.32]. The latter [explanation in the commentary [of Śrī Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda], ‘He completely relinquishes [all his own dharmas] by virtue of having eligibility (adhikāra) for resignation [from such dharmas] by virtue of his firmness in bhakti’ is to be accepted [i.e., it is preferred to the other explanations that were offered]. Similarly also in the Nārāyaṇa-vyūha-stava stated in Hāyaśīrṣa Pañcarātra [it is said], ‘Obeisance and obeisance even unto those in this world who meditate on Paramātmā having come under the influence of bhakti to Viṣṇu and relinquished society, dharma, and wealth.’ In this regard [i.e., in regard to SB 11.11.32], the explanation is as follows: if there is furthermore an absence of a conjunction of those various qualities [i.e., the qualities aforementioned in SB 11.11.29–31] in his own self, still, fully understanding ‘in this way’ (evaṁ), that is, in accord with the aforementioned set [of qualities described in SB 11.11.29–31], the qualities such as sympatheticness and so on, and the faults, that is, the opposites of those [aforementioned qualities], meaning, although ascertaining [those aforementioned faults and qualities] as being [respectively] rejectable and acceptable, one who shall completely relinquish all his dharmas, that is, [all] the compulsory [alt., regular] (nitya) and incidental (naimittika) [duties] enjoined for his varṇa and āśrama, which are an indicator (upalakṣaṇa) of jñāna as well, as being obstructions to one-pointed (ananya) bhakti to me, even though they are instituted by me among those [aforementioned] qualities, and worship [me], is also the best of the sat. On account of the word ‘also’ (ca), even the aforementioned [sādhu, i.e., the sādhu spoken of in SB 11.11.29–31] is [also] the best of the sat. Thus, he [i.e., the speaker, Śrī Kṛṣṇa] conveys the latter’s [i.e., the sādhu described in SB 11.11.32’s] equality [in status] with the former [i.e., the sādhu spoken of in SB 11.11.29–31] even in the absence of those various [aforementioned] qualities [in the latter sādhu]. Consequently, one who, having acquired all those [aforementioned] qualities, worships me alone with relinquishment of [the aforementioned forms of] dharma and jñāna is, on the contrary, verily the absolute best of the sat (parama-sattamaḥ). In this way, the superiority to the former [sādhu] of the [latter] distinct, one-pointed (ananya) bhakta [i.e., sādhu] is shown [in SB 11.11.32]. In this regard, the section in the twelfth chapter of Śrī Gītā beginning [with the verse] adveṣṭā sarva-bhūtānāṁ [i.e., the section wherein the qualities of a bhakta are listed] is also to be examined. By this [mention of] ‘the best of the sat’ (sattamaḥ), it is shown that there is also sat-ness (sattva) [i.e., the quality of being a sādhu] at another level inferior to this [i.e., since a superlative level of sat-ness (sattamatva) is mentioned, it is implied that a standard level of sat-ness and a comparatively superior level of sat-ness (sattara) also exist]. [So,] Let alone the sat-ness (sattva) of a bhakta of his [i.e., Bhagavān] possessed of right conduct (sadācāra), sādhu-ness (sādhutva), which is a synonym for sat-ness (sattva), is enjoined [by Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa in Śrī Gītā (9.30)] even just by virtue of [one] being a bhakta of no other devatā [than Śrī Bhagavān himself]: ‘If even a person of extreme misconduct worships me exclusively, he should be regarded as a sādhu because he is rightly resolved.’ In this regard, furthermore, that a sādhu of such characteristic [i.e., the characteristic mentioned in BG 9.30] was not raised [i.e., mentioned] at the time of discussion of association (saṅga) with sādhus [earlier in Bhakti Sandarbha] was with of the intention that such a sādhu’s association has no utility for one who is intent (unmukha) upon bhakti, since it is said by Śrī Prahlāda [in SB 7.7.25], ‘[Bhakti to Īśvara whereby rati for him is attained is performed] By association with sādhu bhaktas,’ and here [the word] sādhu means one possessed of right conduct (sadācāra). Thus, in this way [i.e., by means of the statements in SB 11.11.29–32], a gradation amid bhaktas on the path of injunctions (vidhi-mārga) with awareness of Īśvara [i.e., amid vidhi-mārga-bhaktas possessed of aiśvarya-jñāna] is stated. Therein, the latter’s [i.e., the sādhu described in SB 11.11.32’s] superiority [to the sādhu described in SB 11.11.29–31] on account of being one-pointed (ananya) [upon Śrī Bhagavān, i.e., on account of following the path of pure (kevala) bhakti rather than a path of bhakti mixed with jñāna, karma, or something else] is shown.”
atha kevalāyā bhakteḥ pravartakaṁ sādhuṁ lakṣayati—ājñāya iti | yathā dharmān naiva santyajya sattama uktaḥ, evaṁ mayā veda-rūpeṇādiṣṭān api sarvān santyajya mad-bhaktāv eva śraddhā-viśeṣavattayā samyak-prakāreṇaiva tyaktvā yo māṁ bhajet, kim ajñānān nāstikyād vā? na, dharmācaraṇe sattva-śuddhy-ādīn guṇān, vipakṣe doṣāṁś ca ājñāya samyag eva jñātvāpi, bhaktyaiva me sarvaṁ bhaviṣyatīti dṛḍha-niścayenaiva dharmān santyajyeti svāmi-caraṇāḥ | ‘sa ca sattamaḥ’ iti pūrvādhikārī dharmān na santyajya bhajed ayaṁ tu santyajyaiveti bhedaḥ | tathā pūrvaḥ kṛpālutvādi sampūrṇa-guṇavān eva sattamaḥ, ayaṁ tu viśeṣaṇāntarānupādānāt tāvat saṅkhyaka-guṇavattvābhāve’pi sattamaḥ | na cāsya tāvad guṇābhāva evety āśaṅkanīyaṁ ‘bhaktiḥ pareśānubhavo viraktir anyatra caiṣa trika eka-kālaḥ’ iti, ‘yasyāsti bhaktir bhagavaty akiñcanā sarvair guṇais tatra samāsate surāḥ’ ity-ādi śravaṇād acireṇaiva sarva-doṣopaśama-pūrvaka-sarva-guṇodayasya tatrāvaśyambhāvitvāt | kiṁ ca pūrvo jita-ṣaḍ-guṇatvāt siddha-daśāvastha eva sattamaḥ, ayaṁ tu tādṛśatvāyukteḥ sādhaka-daśāvastho’pi sattamaḥ, ity asya pūrvata etāvān vyañjita utkarṣaḥ prathamata eva śuddha-bhakti-mattvāj jñeyaḥ |
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“Now, he [i.e., Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa] defines a sādhu performing pure (kevala) bhakti [i.e., bhakti unmixed with karma or jñāna]: ājñāya … [he speaks this verses, viz., SB 11.11.32]. As the best of the sat not completely relinquishing their dharmas was stated [as one of their characteristics in the preceding verses,], so one who shall completely relinquish them all [i.e., all his dharmas] even though they are instituted by me in the form of the Vedas, that is, relinquish them all verily in all respects by virtue of being possessed of a particular form of śraddhā specifically in bhakti to me, and worship me [is also the best of the sat]. [Śrī Śrīdhara] Svāmīpāda [has commented]: ‘[A doubt is raised: “Does the sādhu you are now saying the is the best of the sat relinquish all his own dharmas] “Because of ignorance? Or because of disbelief [in the śāstra that enjoins them]?” No [the sādhu does not relinquish his own dharmas for either of those reasons; rather], fully understanding (ājñāya) the qualities of observance of dharma, such as purification of the psyche (sattva), and the faults of the opposite, he completely relinquish [all his own] dharmas specifically because of the firm conviction that everything [i.e., everything auspicious and desirable] will come to be only through bhakti to me.’ In regard to [the statement], ‘He too is the best of the sat,’ the distinction [between the sādhu said to be the best of the sat in the preceding verses and the sādhus said to be the best of the sat in the present verse under discussion] is that the prior bearer of eligibility (adhikārī) shall worship [Bhagavān] without completely relinquishing his dharmas, whereas he [i.e., the sādhu described in the present verse] completely relinquishes [his dharmas and performs worship of Bhagavān]. Furthermore, the former [sādhu said to be] best of the sat was fully possessed of the qualities of sympatheticness and so forth, whereas he [i.e., the latter], is [said to be] the best of the sat even without being possessed of all the [previously] enumerated qualities on account of the non-mention [in regard to this latter sādhu] of the qualifiers (viśeṣaṇas) [listed in the preceding verses, viz., SB 11.11.29–31, to define the former best of the sat]. It is also [however] not to be suspected that he [i.e., the sādhus said to be the best of the sat in this latter verse, viz., SB 11.11.32] has a lack of all [the previously enumerated] qualities because of the inevitability of the appearance before long in him of all qualities preceded by the cessation of all faults on account of hearing [in SB 11.2.42], ‘Bhakti, experience of the Supreme Lord, and detachment from all else—this triad shall occur at one time for one who has taken shelter [of Bhagavān],’ and [in SB 5.18.12], ‘The suras along with all qualities reside in full within one who has unconditional bhakti to Bhagavān.’ Moreover, the former [sādhu] was [said in SB 11.11.31 to be] the best of the sat because of being victorious over the six properties [of worldly existence] only in the accomplished (siddha) stage, whereas he [i.e., the latter sādhu] is [said to be] the best of the sat even while in the sādhaka stage on account of the lack of conjunction of such nature [in him, i.e., his not having the quality of being victorious over the six properties of worldly existence]. Thus, it is to be understood that his superiority to the former is indicated to such an extent because of only the first being possessed of pure bhakti [i.e., the latter sādhu is considered the best of the sat even while still in the stage of being a sādhaka by virtue of his aforementioned characteristic of worshiping Bhagavān with such faith in the greatness of bhakti that he complete relinquishes all other dharmas; the former sādhu considered the best of the sat is such only by virtue of being possessed of pure bhakti, that is, having reached the stage of accomplishment (siddhi) in bhakti by means of practicing bhakti mixed with jñāna, karma, or another practice, unlike the latter sādhu who is a sādhaka of pure bhakti rather than bhakti mixed with jñāna, karma, or another process].”