tad evaṁ māyāśrayatva-māyā-mohitatvābhyāṁ sthite dvayor bhede tad-bhajanasyaivābhidheyatvam āyātam |
(Tattva Sandarbha: 44)
“Thus, in this way, given the distinction between the two [i.e., between Śrī Bhagavān and the jīva] existent because of [their respectively] being the shelter of māyā and deluded by māyā, solely worship (bhajana) of him [i.e., of Śrī Bhagavān] being the abhidheya is understood.”
atha krameṇa vistaratas tathaiva tātparyaṁ nirṇetuṁ sambandhābhidheya-prayojaneṣu ṣaḍbhiḥ sandarbhair nirṇeṣyamāṇeṣu prathamaṁ yasya vācya-vācakatā-sambandhīdaṁ śāstraṁ, tad eva dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavaḥ ity-ādi-padye sāmānyākāratas tāvad āha—vedyaṁ vāstavam atra vastv iti |
(Tattva Sandarbha: 50)
“Now, in regard to the subjects to be ascertained by the six sandarbhas, [namely,] the sambandha [i.e., the relation], abhidheya [i.e., the directive], and prayojana [i.e., the aim], to ascertain elaborately in sequence the intention (tātparya) [of the author] therein [i.e., in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam], he [i.e., Vedavyāsa] describes in general in the verse dharmaḥ projhhita-kaitavaḥ [i.e., SB 1.1.2] the first [i.e., the sambandhi-tattva], that the bearer of a referrer-referent relation (vācya-vācakatā-sambandhin) with which is this śāstra [i.e., he speaks of the principal subject of Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, the referent with whom Śrīmad Bhāgavatam bears the relationship of referrer (vācakatā)]: ‘Here [i.e., in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam] is the Reality (Vastu), the real object to be known.’”
iha sambandhi-tattvaṁ brahmānandād api prakṛṣṭo rucira-līlā-vaśiṣṭaḥ śrīmān ajita eva | sa ca pūrṇatvena mukhyatayā śrī-kṛṣṇa-saṁjña eveti śrī-bādarāyaṇa-samādhau vyaktībhaviṣyati | tathā prayojanākhyaḥ puruṣārthaś ca tādṛśa-tad-āsakti-janakaṁ tal-līlā-śravaṇādi-lakṣaṇaṁ tad-bhajanam evety āyātam |
(Tattva Sandarbha: 29)
“Here [i.e., in this text], the sambandhi-tattva [i.e., the subject, lit., ‘the entity bearing a relation (sambandha) [with the text],’ meaning, the entity related to through the text] is Śrīman Ajita [i.e., Śrī Bhagavān], who is possessed of relishable līlā and superior even to the bliss of Brahman. That he, furthermore, is known primarily as Śrī Kṛṣṇa by virtue of completeness [i.e., by virtue of the completeness he manifests only in his aspect known as Śrī Kṛṣṇa] will be clarified in [the forthcoming discussion of] Śrī Bādarāyaṇa’s samādhi. So also, the puruṣārtha [i.e., ‘object of a human being’], known as the prayojana [i.e., aim], and worship of him [i.e., the abhidheya], the characteristic of which is hearing and so forth of his līlā that produces such attachment (āsakti) to him [i.e., that leads to attainment of the prayojana, namely, prema for him] are understood.”
athaivaṁ sūcitānāṁ śrī-kṛṣṇa-tad-vācya-vācakatā-lakṣaṇa-sambandha-tad-bhajana-lakṣaṇa-vidheya-saparyāyābhidheya-tat-prema-lakṣaṇa-prayojanākhyānām arthānāṁ nirṇayāya tāvat pramāṇaṁ nirṇīyate |
(Tattva Sandarbha: 9)
“Now, to ascertain the [four] topics thus indicated [in the preceding verse, i.e., yasya Brahmeti …], namely, (1) Śrī Kṛṣṇa [i.e., the subject], (2) the sambandha [i.e., the ‘relation’ of the text] with him the characteristic of which is [that of] referrer (vācakatā) and referent (vācya), (3) the abhidheya [i.e., ‘directive,’ lit., ‘that which is to be stated’], synonymous the with vidheya [i.e., ‘practice,’ lit., ‘that which is to be done’], the characteristic of which is worship (bhajana) of him [i.e., Śrī Kṛṣṇa], and (4) the prayojana [i.e., aim, lit., ‘that motivated by which one acts’] the characteristic of which is prema for him, first pramāṇa [i.e., the means of knowing] is ascertained.”
dvitīye tv abhidheyā śrī-bhaktiḥ premā prayojanam |
viṣayo bhagavān atrety artha-traya-nirūpaṇam ||
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā on Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 1.2.1)
“(1) The abhidheya, beautiful bhakti, (2) the prayojana, prema, and (3) the subject, Bhagavān—here in this second chapter [of Śrīmad Bhāgavatam] there is a delineation of these three objects.”
vaireṇa yaṁ nṛpatayaḥ śiśupāla-pauṇḍra-
śālvādayo gati-vilāsa-vilokanādyaiḥ |
dhyāyanta ākṛta-dhiyaḥ śayanāsanādau
tat-sāmyam āpur anurakta-dhiyāṁ punaḥ kim ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.5.48)
“Kings such as Śiśupāla, Pauṇḍraka, and Śālva attained equality with he [i.e., Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa] whom they meditated upon out of enmity while lying down, sitting, and so forth, their minds imprinted with his movements, play, glances, and so forth. [So,] How much more [is this attainment of equality with him certain to happen in the the case] of those whose minds are attached [to him]?”
yadyapy akiñcanā bhaktir evābhidheyeti tat-kāraṇatvena tad-bhakta-saṅga evābhidheye sati … |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 202)
“Although unconditional (akiñcanā) bhakti is certainly the abhidheya [i.e., the principal direction of the śāstra, the means to attain the highest end], association with his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] bhaktas is certainly [also] the abhidheya because of its being the cause thereof [i.e., of unconditional (akiñcanā) bhakti].”
tad evaṁ bhagavad-arpita-dharmādi-sādhyatvāt tāṁ vinānyeṣām akiñcitkaratvāt, tasyāḥ svata eva samarthatvāt, sva-leśena svābhāsādināpi paramārtha-paryanta-prāpakatvāt, sarveṣāṁ varṇānāṁ nityatvāc ca, sākṣād bhakti-rūpaṁ tat-sāmmukhyam evātrābhidheyaṁ vastv iti sthitam | iyam eva kevalatvād ananyatākhyā | … tasyāś ca mahādurbodhatvaṁ mahādurlabhatvaṁ coktam … | … tad evaṁ tasyāḥ śravaṇādi-rūpāyāḥ sākṣād-bhakteḥ sarva-vighna-nivāraṇa-pūrvaka-sākṣād-bhagavat-prema-phaladatve sthite parama-durlabhatve ca saty anya-kāmanayā ca nābhidheyatvam | … tan-mātra-kāmanāyāṁ ca bhakter evākiñcanatvam akāmatvaṁ ca saṁjñāpitam | … tatheyam evaikāntitety ucyate |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 165)
“Thus, in this way, here [i.e., in this book], intentness (sāmmukhya) upon him [i.e., Bhagavān] in the form of direct bhakti [to him] has been established as the subject, the abhidheya [i.e., the principal directive of the śāstra, the means to the highest attainment], because of (1) [its] being the goal of [performing] dharma and so forth offered to Bhagavān, (2) all else [i.e., all other processes] being useless [i.e., ineffective] without it, (3) [its] being capable [i.e., effective] of its own accord [i.e., independently of all other processes], (4) [its] being with just a trace of itself, a semblance of itself, and so forth a cause of attaining even the supreme object, and (5) [its] being compulsory for all varṇas. Because of [its] being exclusive [i.e., not involving worship of any other devatās], it is called ananyatā [i.e., unalloyedness, lit., ‘having no other’]. … Its being most difficult to understand and most difficult to attain are also stated [in SB 6.3.19, SB 3.15.24, and elsewhere]. … Thus, in this way, with this direct bhakti in the form of hearing and so forth being established as first the remover of all obstacles and [then] the bestower of the goal of prema for Bhagavān himself, and [its also being established as] extremely difficult to attain, [its] not being the abhidheya when [performed] with another desire [i.e., any desire other than desire for itself] is [established] as well. … When one has desire only for that [i.e., for bhakti itself], bhakti’s akiñcanatva [i.e., unconditionality, lit. ‘being without anything’] and akāmatva [i.e., being without desire for anything else, lit., ‘desirelessness’] is made known. … It is thus [also] called ekāntitā [lit., ‘one-pointedness’].”
paramātma-vaibhava-gaṇane ca taṭastha-śakti-rūpāṇāṁ cid-eka-rasānām api anādi-para-tattva-jñāna-saṁsargābhāvamaya-tad-vaimukhya-labdha-cchidrayā tan-māyayāvṛta-svarūpa-jñānānāṁ tayaiva sattva-rajas-tamo-maye jaḍe pradhāne racitātma-bhāvānāṁ jīvānāṁ saṁsāra-duḥkhaṁ ca jñāpitam | … tatas tad-arthaṁ parama-kāruṇikaṁ śāstram upadiśati | tatra ca ye kecit jīvā janmāntarāvṛtta-tad-arthānubhava-saṁskāravanto, ye ca tadaiva vā labdha-mahat-kṛpātiśaya-dṛṣṭi-prabhṛtayas, teṣāṁ tādṛśa-para-tattva-lakṣaṇa-vastūpadeśa-śravaṇārambha-mātreṇaiva tat-kālam eva yugapad eva tat-sāmmukhyaṁ tad-anubhavo’pi jāyate | … athānyeṣāṁ tac-chravaṇa-mātreṇa tādṛśatvaṁ bījāyamānam api kāmādi-vaiguṇyena bījam api doṣeṇa pratihataṁ tiṣṭhati | … tato mukhyena tātparyeṇa para-tattve paryavasite’pi teṣāṁ para-tattvādy-upadeśasya kim abhidheyaṁ prayojanaṁ cety apekṣāyāṁ tad-avāntara-tātparyeṇa tad-dvayam upadeṣṭavyam | tatrābhidheyaṁ tad-vaimukhya-virodhitvāt tat-sāmmukhyam eva | tac ca tad-upāsanā-lakṣaṇaṁ, yata eva taj-jñānam āvirbhavati | prayojanaṁ ca tad-anubhavaḥ | sa cāntar-bahiḥ-sākṣātkāra-lakṣaṇaḥ, yata eva svayaṁ kṛtsna-duḥkha-nivṛttir bhavati | … tad etad ubhayaṁ yadyapi pūrvatra siddhopadeśa evābhipretam asti, yathā “tava gṛhe nidhir asti” iti śrutvā kaścid daridras tad-arthaṁ prayatate labhate ca tam iti, tadvat, tathāpi tac-chaithilya-nirāsāya punas tad-upadeśaḥ | tad evaṁ tān praty anādi-siddha-taj-jñāna-saṁsargābhāvamaya-tad-vaimukhyādikaṁ duḥkha-hetuṁ vadan vyādhi-nidāna-vaiparītyamaya-cikitsā-nibhaṁ tat-sāmmukhyādikam upadiśati |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 1)
“Also further made known during the consideration of the potencies [i.e., the three śaktis] of Paramātmā [in the discussion thereof in Paramātma Sandarbha] was the suffering in saṁsāra of the jīvas, forms of [his] taṭastha-śakti, who, although solely consciousness (cit) in constitution, have their awareness of their true nature (svarūpa-jñāna) covered by the Para-tattva’s [i.e., the Supreme Entity’s] māyā on account of the acquired fault of obliviousness (vaimukhya) of that [Para-tattva] based on a beginningless absence of the existence of awareness of that [Para-tattva, i.e., a beginningless prior absence (prāg-abhāva) of awareness of the Para-tattva, which can be removed, that is, dispelled by becoming aware of the Para-tattva], and thereby are possessed of a fabricated sense of self (ātma-bhāva) within inert primordial matter (pradhāna) constituted of [the guṇas of] sattva, rajas, and tamas. … Therefore, the supremely compassionate śāstra teaches that object [i.e., the Para-tattva]. Furthermore in that regard, for some of those jīvas, that is, those possessed of a latent saṁskāra of experience of that object [i.e., the Para-tattva] from another birth, and those who alternately then [i.e., in that birth, alt., in this present birth] have received a glance and so forth of profuse grace from a great soul, just by their beginning to hear such teachings about the entity designated as the Para-tattva, intentness (sāmmukhyaṁ) upon that [i.e., the Para-tattva], and experience (anubhava) of that [i.e., the Para-tattva] as well, simultaneously arise at that very time [of hearing about the Para-tattva]. … Now, for others [i.e., those who have no saṁskāra of experience of the Para-tattva from a prior birth, and those who have not received the grace of a great soul capable of leading one to such experience], such [intentness upon and experience of the Para-tattva], even though capable of germinating like a seed [i.e., coming into being] just by hearing of that [i.e., by hearing the teaching of the śāstra about the Para-tattva], remains obstructed [from sprouting, i.e., manifesting] by the faults [in the minds of embodied jīvas] of the defects beginning with kāma. … Therefore, although by the primary intention (tātparya) [of śāstra] the Para-tattva is determined [i.e., although in the course of the first four sandarbhas the nature of the Para-tattva has been determined in this way], in expectation of [the questions], ‘What is the abhidheya [i.e., the principal directive, the means to attainment] and the prayojana [i.e., the objective, the goal to be attained] of that teaching [of the śāstra] about the Para-tattva and so forth for them [i.e., for the jīvas]?’ these two [i.e., the abhidheya and the prayojana] are necessary to be taught [also] by the secondary intention (tātparya) thereof [i.e., of the śāstra]. In that regard, the abhidheya is intentness (sāmmukhyam) upon that [i.e., the Para-tattva], because of [its] being negating of obliviousness (vaimukhya) of that [i.e., of the Para-tattva]. That [i.e., the abhidheya], further, is indicative of upāsanā [lit., ‘sitting near,’ i.e., engaging oneself in] that [i.e., the Para-tattva], on account of which awareness of that [i.e., the Para-tattva] appears. The prayojana is experience of that [i.e., the Para-tattva], and that [i.e., the prayojana], further is indicative of internal and external direct perception (sākṣātkāra) [of the Para-tattva], on account of which alone the complete cessation of suffering occurs of its own accord. … Therefore, although these two [i.e., the abhidheya and prayojana] are implied in the siddhopadeśa [i.e., implied instruction] in the former [i.e., in the earlier discussion in these sandarbhas of the nature of the Para-tattva], just as after hearing, ‘There is a treasure in your home,’ a poor person seeks that object and attains it [without having to be instructed to do so], still again teaching regarding them [i.e., the abhidheya and prayojana] is [given] to dispel laxity regarding [one’s endeavor to attain] them. Thus in this way śāstra tells them [i.e., the jīvas] about the cause of [their] suffering, that is, obliviousness and so forth of that [i.e., the Para-tattva] based on a beginninglessly existent absence of the existence of awareness of that [i.e., the Para-tattva], and teaches [them] intentness (sāmmukhya) upon that [i.e., the Para-tattva], which resembles a treatment consisting of negation of the cause of a disease.”
tad evaṁ tasyāḥ śravaṇādi-rūpāyāḥ sākṣād-bhakteḥ sarva-vighna-nivāraṇa-pūrvaka-sākṣād-bhagavat-prema-phaladatve sthite parama-durlabhatve ca saty anya-kāmanayā ca nābhidheyatvam | … tan-mātra-kāmanāyāṁ ca bhakter evākiñcanatvam akāmatvaṁ ca saṁjñāpitam | … tatheyam evaikāntitety ucyate … |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 165)
“Thus, when, in this way, direct (sākṣāt) bhakti in the form of hearing and so forth is established as first a remover of all obstacles and [then] a bestower of the goal of prema for Bhagavān himself, and as being supremely difficult [alt., rare] to attain, its not being the abhidheya [i.e., the means to attain the highest good enjoined by the śāstra for all beings] with another desire [i.e., when it is performed with a desire for anything other than prema for Bhagavān] is also [established]. … When [performed] out of desire only for that [i.e., for bhakti itself], bhakti is known as being akiñcanā [lit., ‘without anything’] and akāmā [lit., ‘without desire’]. … Similarly, it is called ekāntitā [lit., ‘one-pointed’].”
