भुक्तिं मुक्तिं हरिर्दद्यादर्चितोऽन्यत्र सेविनाम् ।
भक्तिं तु न ददात्येव यतो वश्यकरी हरेः ॥
सा त्वञ्जसा हरेर्भक्तिर्लभ्यते कार्त्तिके नरैः ।
मथुरायां सकृदपि श्रीदामोदरसेवनात् ॥
bhuktiṁ muktiṁ harir dadyād arcito’nyatra sevinām |
bhaktiṁ tu na dadāty eva yato vaśyakarī hareḥ ||
sā tv añjasā harer bhaktir labhyate kārttike naraiḥ |
mathurāyāṁ sakṛd api śrī-dāmodara-sevanāt ||
(Padma Purāṇa; cited in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.2.222–223)
“Hari shall bestow enjoyment (bhukti) or liberation (mukti) upon his servants when worshipped elsewhere [i.e., outside of Mathurā], but he does not bestow bhakti [upon them] because it is captivating of Hari. That bhakti to Hari, however, is easily attained by people as a result of service to Śrī Dāmodara even once in Mathurā during Kārtika.”
Commentary
yato vaśyakarīti | vaśya-karītvam atra sukha-dānenaiva jñeyam, na tu duḥkha-dānena | ato bhakty-adāne na tad atra prayojakaṁ, kintu tena lakṣitaṁ paramotkṛṣṭatvam eva | tathāvidhā ca sā nāyogye sahasā dātuṁ yogyeti, yāvad ayogyatā tāvad bhagavatā na dīyata eva | yogyatā ca sarvānya-sva-hita-nirapekṣatvam eva | tasmād yogyatāyām eva satyāṁ dātavyatve’pi yadi mathurā-kārttikayoḥ saṅgame pūjanaṁ ghaṭate, tadā yogyatā-virahitenāpi vastu-prabhāvāt sahasaiva prāpyate eveti bhāvaḥ ||
(Durgama-saṅgamanī-ṭīkā)
“Regarding, ‘Because it is captivating …’ (yato vaśyakarī), [bhakti’s] being captivating is to be understood to be only because of [its] causing pleasure [for Hari], and not rather, because of [its supposedly] causing suffering [for him]. Therefore, in the case of the non-bestowal of bhakti [mentioned] here, that is not the cause [i.e., it is not that he does not give bhakti because his doing so becomes a cause of suffering for him]. Rather, only the paramount excellence [of bhakti] is distinguished by this [mention of Hari not giving bhakti because bhakti captivates and thus instead granting enjoyment (bhukti) or liberation (mukti) to worshipers]. Being such [i.e., since bhakti is captivating of Hari], furthermore, it is not fit to be rashly given to one who is unfit [for it]. Therefore, it should certainly not be given by Bhagavān [to anyone] so long as there is unfitness for it [in a potential recipient of it]. Fitness [for it], furthermore, is verily indifference towards all other interests [alt., benefits, or, means of wellbeing] for oneself [i.e., one is fit to be given bhakti when one considers bhakti and bhakti alone to be one’s sole interest and wellbeing]. Therefore, even in the case of [bhakti’s] being fit to be granted only when fitness [for it] is present [in someone], if worship [of Bhagavān] occurs in conjunction with Kārtika in Mathurā, then it is quickly attainable by the influence of the object [i.e., by the influence of Mathurā during Kārtika] even in the absence of that fitness. This is the purport.”