Aiśvarya – Anuśīlana.in

atha bhakta-niṣṭhām aiśvarya-jñānam

atha bhakta-niṣṭhām aiśvarya-jñānam | īśvaro’yam ity anusandhāne sati hṛt-kampā-janaka-sambhrameṇa svīya-bhāvasyātiśaithilyaṁ yat pratipādayati tad aiśvarya-jñānam, ata eva ‘yuvāṁ na naḥ sutau sākṣāt pradhāna-puruṣeśvarau’ ity ādi vasudevokteḥ, ‘sakheti matvā prasabhaṁ yad uktam’ ity arjunokteś ca | īśvaro’yam ity anusandhāne’pi hṛt-kampā-janaka-sambhrama-gandhasyānudgamāt svīya-bhāvasyātisthairyam eva yad utpādayati tan mādhurya-jñānam, yathā—‘vandinas tam upadeva-gaṇā ye vādya-gīta-balibhiḥ parivavruḥ | vatsalo vraja-gavāṁ yad aga-dhro vandyamāna-caraṇaḥ pathi vṛddhaiḥ ||’ iti ca yugala-gītokteḥ |
(Rāga-vartma-candrikā: 2.5)

“Now, awareness of Godhood (Aiśvarya-jñāna) present in bhaktas [will be discussed]. That [awareness] which produces a great slackening of one’s own bhāva [for Kṛṣṇa] by means of reverential excitement (sambhrama) productive of trembling of the heart when the thought is present, ‘He is Īśvara,’ is [called] ‘awareness of Godhood’ (Aiśvarya-jñāna), thus in accord with the statement of Vasudeva [in SB 10.85.15], ‘You two are not our sons; you two are directly the Īśvaras of material existence (pradhāna) and [all] embodied beings (puruṣa),’ and the statement of Arjuna [in BG 11.41–42], ‘O Acyuta, I beg you, the Immeasureable, for forgiveness for what was importunately said by me out of inattention or because of uninhibited affection—‘Hey Kṛṣṇa! Hey Yādava! Hey Sakhā!’—considering you a friend and not knowing this greatness of yours, and for your not being honored [by me] while sporting, resting, sitting, and eating alone or in the presence of others for the sake of jesting.’ That [awareness] which causes only great steadiness of one’s own bhāva [for Kṛṣṇa] as a result of the non-production of [even] a trace of reverential excitement (sambhrama) productive of trembling of the heart even in the presence of the thought, ‘He is Īśvara,’ is [called] ‘awareness of sweetness’ (mādhurya-jñāna), as per the statement by the gopīs in the Yugala-gīta [in SB 10.35.21–22], ‘Praisers, who are minor devas, worship him all around with music, songs, and tributes; [he is] affectionate to the cows of Vraja since he is the lifter of the mountain [viz., Govardhana], and his feet are being worshiped by the elders [i.e., the devatās] along the path.’”

Read on →

atra vidhi-mārgeṇa rādhā-kṛṣṇayor bhajane

atra vidhi-mārgeṇa rādhā-kṛṣṇayor bhajane mahāvaikuṇṭhastha-goloke khalv avivikta-svakīyā-parakīyā-bhāvam aiśvarya-jñānaṁ prāpnoti | madhura-bhāva-lobhitve sati vidhi-mārgeṇa bhajane dvārakāyāṁ śrī-rādhā-satyabhāmayor aikyāt satyabhāmā-parikaratvena svakīyā-bhāvam aiśvarya-jñāna-miśra-mādhurya-jñānaṁ prāpnoti | raga-mārgeṇa bhajane vraja-bhūmau śrī-rādhā-parikaratvena parakīyā-bhāvaṁ śuddha-mādhurya-jñānaṁ prāpnoti |
(Rāga-vartma-candrikā: 2.6)

“In this regard, from worship of Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa by means of the path of injunction (vidhi) one attains in the Goloka situated in Mahāvaikuṇṭha awareness of [Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s] Godhood (Aiśvarya-jñāna) and a bhāva that is indiscriminate between svakīyā and parakīyā [i.e., a bhāva that possesses no specificity as to whether Kṛṣṇa’s beloveds are ‘his own’ (svakīyā), meaning, his wives, or ‘another’s’ (parakīyā), meaning, the wives of others]. When one [i.e., a sādhaka] is desirous of madhura-bhāva, from worship by means of the path of injunction (vidhi) one attains awareness of [Kṛṣṇa’s] sweetness (mādhurya) mixed with awareness of [his] Godhood (Aiśvarya-jñāna) and svakīyā-bhāva [i.e., the perception that Kṛṣṇa’s beloveds are his own wives] by virtue of [one’s then] being a companion of Satyabhāmā on account of the oneness between Śrī Rādhā and Satyabhāmā in Dvārakā. From worship by means of the path of attachment (rāga) one attains pure awareness of [Kṛṣṇa’s] sweetness (mādhurya) [i.e., awareness that is free from awareness of his Godhood (Aiśvarya)] and parakīyā-bhāva [i.e., the perception that Kṛṣṇa’s beloveds are ‘another’s’] by virtue of [one’s then] being a companion of Śrī Rādhā in the land of Vraja.”

Read on →

gopyas tapaḥ kim acaran yad amuṣya rūpaṁ

gopyas tapaḥ kim acaran yad amuṣya rūpaṁ
lāvaṇya-sāram asamorddhvam ananya-siddham |
dṛgbhiḥ pibanty anusavābhinavaṁ durāpam
ekānta-dhāma yaśasaḥ śriya aiśvarasya ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.44.14; cited in Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.7.135; Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha: 101, 183; Prīti Sandarbha: 99, 111; Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.21.112)

“What austerity did the gopīs perform as a result of which they drink through their eyes his form which is the essence of loveliness, unequalled and unsurpassed, not accomplished otherwise, new at every moment, difficult to attain, and the ultimate reservoir of fame, splendor, and mastery?”

Read on →

vyavahāro’sya teṣāṁ ca so’nyonyaṁ prema-vardhanaḥ

vyavahāro’sya teṣāṁ ca so’nyonyaṁ prema-vardhanaḥ |
vaikuṇṭhe paramaiśvarya-pade na kila sambhavet ||
tādṛśī sāpy ayodhyeyaṁ dvārakāpi tato’dhikā |
ataḥ sa lokaḥ kṛṣṇena dūrataḥ parikalpitaḥ ||
sukha-krīḍā-viśeṣo’sau tatratyānāṁ ca tasya ca |
mādhuryāntyāvadhiṁ prāptaḥ sidhyet tatrocitāspade ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.5.85–87)

“That dealing of he and of them [i.e., that dealing resembling that of worldly kinsmen (laukika-bandhu) between Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa and his bhaktas in Goloka which was discussed in BB 2.5.81–83] which is increasing of the prema of one another [i.e., of the prema of them both for one another mutually] is certainly not possible in Vaikuṇṭha, the domain of paramount aiśvarya. Even that [domain experienced by you known as] Ayodhyā, and even Dvārakā beyond that [because of its exceedingly paramount aiśvarya], is similar [i.e., is similar to Vaikuṇṭha in that paramount aiśvarya is greatly prominent in those two domains and thus they are not suitable places for such dealings which resemble that of worldly kinsmen and which increase the prema of Śrī Kṛṣṇa and his bhaktas for one another superlatively]. Therefore, that plane (loka) [viz., Goloka] has been established far away [from Vaikuṇṭha, Ayodhyā, and Dvārakā] by Kṛṣṇa. That special form of bliss and play of he and of they there [i.e., of Śrī Kṛṣṇa and his associates there in Goloka], possessed of the ultimate limit of mādhurya, can be accomplished [only] in that appropriate abode [viz., Goloka, i.e., only in that abode most appropriate for the flourishing of the prema of Śrī Kṛṣṇa and his associates for one another].”

Read on →

aho laukika-sad-bandhu-bhāvaṁ ca staumi yena hi

aho laukika-sad-bandhu-bhāvaṁ ca staumi yena hi |
gauravāder vilopena kṛṣṇe sat-prema tanyate ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.5.76)

“[Śrī Nārada along with Uddhava to Gopa Kumāra:] Aho! And certainly I praise that attitude (bhāva) [on the part of bhaktas] of [Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s being] an excellent worldly kinsman by which excellent prema for Kṛṣṇa is expanded as a result of the removal of reverence and so forth [in regard to him].”

Read on →

atha parikarāṇām api bhāveṣu tāratamyaṁ vivecanīyaṁ

atha parikarāṇām api bhāveṣu tāratamyaṁ vivecanīyaṁ, yeṣāṁ bhagavattaivopajīvyā | tatra bhagavattā tāvat sāmānyato dvividhaiva—paramaiśvarya-rūpā parama-mādhurya-rūpā ceti | aiśvaryaṁ prabhutā | mādhuryaṁ nāma ca śīla-guṇa-rūpa-vayo-līlānāṁ sambandha-viśeṣāṇāṁ ca manoharatvaṁ, paramatvaṁ ca cāsamordhvatvam | atha bhaktādi-catur-vidhāḥ parikarāpi dvividhāḥ | paramaiśvaryānubhava-pradhānāḥ parama-mādhuryānubhava-pradhānāś ca | tatraiśvarya-mātrasya sādhvasa-sambhrama-gaurava-buddhi-janakatvaṁ mādhurya-mātrasya prīti-janakatvam iti sarvānubhava-siddham eva | tatas tatraiśvarya-mādhuryayoḥ paramatvam iti tābhyāṁ yathāsaṅkhyaṁ sādhvasādīnāṁ prīteś ca paramatvam eva syāt |
(Excerpt from Prīti Sandarbha: 97)

“Now, the gradation among the bhāvas of even the parikaras (companions) [of Śrī Bhagavān], whose sole sustenance is Bhagavattā [i.e., the myriad of characteristics that constitute the essential nature of Bhagavān, as opposed to the Brahman aspect (Brahmatva) of Bhagavān], is to be deliberated upon. In that regard, Bhagavattā is in general only of two types: that the form of which is paramount aiśvarya (paramaiśvarya) and that the form of which is paramount mādhurya (parama-mādhurya). Aiśvarya refers to powerfulness (prabhutā) [alt., Godhood], and mādhurya refers to charmingness [lit., ‘being captivating to the mind’] of disposition, qualities, figure, age, and līlā, as well as of specific relations [i.e., forms of relationship]. [The aforementioned] ‘Paramountness’ (paramatva) [of the aiśvarya and the mādhurya of Bhagavān’s Bhagavattā], furthermore, refers to [their] being unequaled and unsurpassed (asamordhvatva) [by any other feature of Śrī Bhagavān, much less by any feature of any other entity subordinate to him].

“Now, parikaras too, who are of four types beginning with bhaktas [i.e., those whose principal rati is dāsya and so forth], are also of two [general] types: those in whom experience of paramount aiśvarya is predominant (paramaiśvaryānubhava-pradhāna) and those in whom experience of paramount mādhurya is predominant (mādhuryānubhava-pradhāna). In this regard, only aiśvarya’s being productive of alarm (sādhavasa), reverential excitement (sambhrama), and a sense of superiority (gaurava-buddhi), and only mādhurya’s being productive of prīti, is certainly established by the experience of everyone. Thus, there is the paramountness (paramatva) of the aiśvarya and the mādhurya [of Śrī Bhagavān’s Bhagavattā] in this regard [i.e., such paramountness is also to be considered present in the nature of Śrī Bhagavān], and the definitive paramountness of alarm and so forth and of prīti [that bhaktas experience in response to Śrī Bhagavān’s Bhagavattā] shall come about respectively because of these two [i.e., because of the paramount aiśvarya and the paramount mādhurya in Śrī Bhagavān’s Bhagavattā].”

Read on →

kṛṣṇaiśvaryādy-avijñānaṁ kṛtaṁ naiṣām avidyayā

kṛṣṇaiśvaryādy-avijñānaṁ kṛtaṁ naiṣām avidyayā |
kintu premottara-rasa-viśeṣeṇaiva tat kṛtam ||
(Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 4.4.15)

“Their [i.e., bhaktas’] absence of awareness of Kṛṣṇa’s aiśvarya and so forth is not caused by ignorance (avidyā). Rather, it is caused solely by a particular rasa overlaid with prema.”

Read on →

aiśvaryaṁ tu nara-līlātvasyānapekṣitatve sati īśvaratvāviṣkāraḥ

aiśvaryaṁ tu nara-līlātvasyānapekṣitatve sati īśvaratvāviṣkāraḥ | yathā mātā-pitarau prati aiśvaryaṁ darśayitvā—‘etad vāṁ darśitaṁ rūpaṁ prāg-janma-smaraṇāya me | nānyathā mad-bhavaṁ jñānaṁ martya-liṅgena jāyate’ ity uktam | yathārjunaṁ prati—‘paśya me yogam aiśvaram’ ity uktvā aiśvaryaṁ darśitam | vraje’pi brahmāṇaṁ prati mañju-mahimā-darśane paraḥ-sahasra-caturbhujatvādikam apīti ||
(Rāga-vartma-candrikā: 2.4)

“Manifestation [lit., ‘the uncovering’] of Īśvara-ness [i.e., the powerfulness inherent in Īśvara] while the nature of human līlā is being disregarded is [called] aiśvarya, as in the case when aiśvarya was shown to [Kṛṣṇa’s] mother and father [by him] and then it was stated [by him in SB 10.3.44], ‘This form [of mine] has been shown to you two for the sake of [your] remembrance of [my] previous births; otherwise, because of the mortal [i.e., human] figure [of this form in which I have now appeared], [your] awareness of my being [i.e., my identity] would not arise,’ as in the case when aiśvarya was shown [by Kṛṣṇa to Arjuna] after [his] saying to Arjuna, ‘See my Īśvaric yoga [i.e., see my extraordinary power to accomplish the impossible],’ and also even in Vraja [his showing] thousands of four-armed forms and so forth to Brahmā in the midst of the sight of his charming greatness [i.e., his mādhurya].”

Read on →

atra sārvajñatvaṁ mahaiśvaryam eva na tu mādhuryam

atra sārvajñatvaṁ mahaiśvaryam eva na tu mādhuryam | mādhuryaṁ khalu tad eva yad aiśvarya-vinābhūta-kevala-nara-līlātvena maugdhyam iti sthūla-dhiyo bruvate ||2||
mādhuryādikaṁ nirūpyate | mahaiśvaryasya dyotane vādyotane ca nara-līlātvānatikramo mādhuryam | yathā pūtanā-prāṇa-hāritve’pi stana-cūṣaṇa-lakṣaṇa-nara-bala-līlātvam eva | mahākaṭhora-śakaṭa-sphoṭane’py ati-sukumāra-caraṇa-traimāsikyottāna-śāyi-bāla-līlātvam | mahādīrgha-dāmāśakya-bandhatve’pi mātṛ-bhīti-vaiklavyam | brahma-baladevādi-mohane’pi sārvajñatve’pi vatsa-cāraṇa-līlātvam | tathā aiśvarya-sattva eva tasyādyotane dadhi-payaś-cauryaṁ gopa-strī-lāmpaṭyādikam | aiśvarya-rahita-kevala-nara-līlātvena maugdhyam eva mādhuryam ity ukteḥ krīḍā-capala-prākṛta-nara-bālakeṣv api maugdhyaṁ mādhuryam iti tathā na nirvācyam ||3||
(Rāga-vartma-candrikā: 2.2–3)

“‘In this regard, omniscience (sārvajñatva) is only [an instance of] great aiśvarya and not, rather, mādhurya; mādhurya verily is simplicity [i.e., charming unknowing] (maugdhya) on account of the nature of pure human līlā isolated from aiśvarya.’ This the dull-witted say [i.e., the idea that omniscience (sārvajñatva) is invariably an aspect of aiśvarya and is non-existent within mādhurya is erroneous, and the reason for that will now be explained]. Mādhurya and so forth [i.e., aiśvarya] are now to be described [to provide an apt understanding of the nature of both]. Non-contravention of the nature of human līlā in the midst of manifestation or non-manifestation of great aiśvarya is [called] mādhurya, as in (1) the nature of the līlā of a human baby in the form of suckling Pūtanā’s breast even while being the remover of her prāṇas [i.e., mādhurya is shown in the case of Śrī Kṛṣṇa retaining the appearance of a normal human child while sucking the breast of Pūtanā yet also liberating her by drawing the prāṇas out of her body], (2) the nature of the līlā of a three-month old baby with exceedingly tender feet lying on a bed even while breaking apart a very hard cart [i.e., mādhurya is shown in the case of Śrī Kṛṣṇa breaking the cart under which he was placed with his tender baby foot], (3) the bewilderment [he felt and exhibited] in fear of [his] mother even while being unable to be bound by very long ropes [i.e., mādhurya is shown in the case of Śrī Kṛṣṇa crying in fear of punishment from his mother even while defying her attempts to bind him with rope], (4) the nature of the līlā of herding calves even in the midst of [his] omniscience even amid of the perplexity of Brahmā, Baladeva, and others [i.e., mādhurya is shown in the case of Śrī Kṛṣṇa acting like a playful and confused cowherd boy even while self-manifesting himself in the forms of the calves and friends he appeared to be searching for after they were abducted by Brahmā and thus bewildering Brahmā, Baladeva, and all other living beings], (5) and [his] theft of milk and yoghurt, lustfulness for cowherd women, and so on during non-manifestation of [his] aiśvarya indeed amid its presence [in him, i.e., mādhurya is shown in the case of Śrī Kṛṣṇa stealing milk and yoghurt, pursuing gopīs amorously, and other such acts during which there was no overt manifestation of the aiśvarya inherently and invariably present in him]. On account of the [errant] statement [posited above] that mādhurya is specifically simplicity [i.e., charming unknowing] (maugdhya) on account of [only that being of] the nature of pure human līlā free from aiśvarya, the simplicity existent even among mundane human children thoughtlessly at play is [also to be regarded as] mādhurya [as a result of such an erroneous definition]. Thus, such is unfit to be said [i.e., mādhurya is not an utter absence of any manifestation of aiśvarya but rather non-contravention of the general nature of human līlā irrespective of whether any manifestation of great aiśvarya is co-occurent with it or not because if mādhurya were not defined this in this way and rather as only a state of being limited in awareness like a human being then excessive pervasion [i.e., breadth] of the definition would occur since it would include even common human children engaged in care-free play].”

Read on →

sa yad ajayā tv ajām anuśayīta guṇāṁś ca juṣan

sa yad ajayā tv ajām anuśayīta guṇāṁś ca juṣan
bhajati sarūpatāṁ tad anu mṛtyum apeta-bhagaḥ |
tvam uta jahāsi tām ahir iva tvacam ātta-bhago
mahasi mahīyase’ṣṭa-guṇite’parimeya-bhagaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.87.38; cited in Bhagavat Sandarbha: 24; Paramātma Sandarbha: 39)

“Since he [i.e., the jīva], however, can lie down with the unborn [i.e., ignorance (avidyā) on account of the unborn (ajayā) [i.e., māyā], he partakes of the qualities [of the unborn] and thereafter of likeness [to those qualities of the unborn], becomes deprived of fortune (apeta-bhagaḥ), and undergoes death [i.e., saṁsāra]. You, on the contrary, shun her [i.e., the unborn, i.e., māyā], like a serpent [its] skin, and, being possessed of fortune, are exalted in [your own] eightfold greatness, being of immeasurable fortune.”

Read on →