ahaṁ sarveṣu bhūteṣu bhūtātmāvasthitaḥ sadā |
tam avajñāya māṁ martyaḥ kurute’rcā-viḍambanam ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 3.29.21; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 106)
[Kapiladeva:] “I am ever present in all beings as the Self [i.e., the Inner Regulator (Antaryāmī)] of all beings. By disrespecting him, that is, me, a mortal makes a mockery of ritual worship [alt., a mockery of my deity].”
bhaktir dūre’stu tasmin me nāparādhā bhavanti cet |
bahu manye tad ātmānaṁ nāham āgaḥsu rudravat ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 1.2.66)
“[Brahmādeva to Nārada:] Let alone bhakti, if I do not have any offenses to him [viz., Bhagavān], then I consider myself great [i.e., well]. I am not like Rudra in the case of offenses [i.e., Bhagavān does not forgive my offenses as he does Śiva’s].”
ye’nye’ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas
tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ |
āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ
patanty adho’nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.2.42; cited in Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.7.14; Bhakti Sandarbha: 111, 121; Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.22.30, 2.24.131, 141, 2.25.32)
“[The devas address Śrī Kṛṣṇa in the womb of Mother Devakī:] O Lotus-eyed One, others, who consider themselves fully liberated yet are of not fully purified intellect because of having forsaken bhāva for you, ascend with hardship to the highest position but fall down from there because of their having disregarded your feet.”
tad aśma-sāraṁ hṛdayaṁ batedaṁ
yad gṛhyamāṇair hari-nāma-dheyaiḥ |
na vikriyetātha yadā vikāro
netre jalaṁ gātra-ruheṣu harṣaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 2.3.24)
“That heart which cannot become transformed [i.e., melted] by Hari’s names being chanted, oh! That is iron! When transformation [i.e., melting of the heart] occurs, [however,] water in the eyes and horripilation in the pores appear.”
sadā droha-paro yas tu saj-janānāṁ mahī-tale |
jāyate pāvano dhanyo harer nāmānukīrtanāt ||
(Laghu-bhāgavata; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 11.340)
“[Even] One who is constantly malicious towards virtuous people becomes purified [alt., purifying] and fortunate as a result of continuous chanting of Hari’s name.”
sāṅketyaṁ pārihāsyaṁ vā stobhaṁ helanam eva vā |
vaikuṇṭha-nāma-grahaṇam aśeṣāgha-haraṁ viduḥ ||
patitaḥ skhalito bhagnaḥ sandaṣṭas tapta āhataḥ |
harir ity avaśenāha pumān nārhati yātanāḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 6.2.14–15)
“[The emissaries of Viṣnu to the emissaries of Yama:] Whether as a designation, a joke, an interposition, or indeed a disrespect [alt., or just an act of ease], know an utterance of the name of Vaikuṇṭha [i.e., of Śrī Bhagavān] to be a remover of all sins. Having fallen, slipped, been injured, been bitten, been burnt, or been beaten, a person who helplessly says ‘Hari’ does not deserve tribulations.”
na mayy ekānta-bhaktānāṁ guṇa-doṣodbhavā guṇāḥ |
sādhūnāṁ sama-cittānāṁ buddheḥ param upeyuṣām ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.20.36; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.210; Bhakti Sandarbha: 177, 312, 321; Durgama-saṅgamanī-ṭīkā on Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.2.293
“[Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa:] Bhaktas who are one-pointed upon me, are sādhu [i.e., free from attachment and aversion (rāga and dveṣa)], are equanimous, and have attained that which is beyond the intellect, have no qualities [i.e., merits, sins, or otherwise] produced by qualities and faults [i.e., produced by observance of injunctions and neglect of prohibitions].”
arcye viṣṇau śilā‑dhīr guruṣu nara‑matir vaiṣṇave jāti‑buddhir
viṣṇor vā vaiṣṇavānāṁ kali‑mala‑mathane pāda‑tīrthe’mbu‑buddhiḥ |
śrī-viṣṇor nāmni mantre sakala‑kaluṣa‑he śabda‑sāmānya‑buddhir
viṣṇau sarveśvareśe tad‑itara‑sama‑dhīr yasya vā nārakī saḥ ||
(Unknown source; attributed to a southerner in Padyāvalī: 114; cited in Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.26)
“One who has the notion of a stone in relation to a Deity of Viṣṇu [e.g., a Śālagrāma-śilā], the idea of a man in relation to gurus, the notion of a caste in relation to a Vaiṣṇava, the notion of water in relation to the sacred foot-wash of Viṣṇu or the Vaiṣṇavas, which is a destroyer of the contamination of Kali, the notion of an ordinary word in relation to the name of Śrī Viṣṇu, which is a vanquisher of all sin, or the notion of equality with those other than himself in relation to Viṣṇu, the Īśvara of all Īśvaras, is destined for Nāraka.”
satāṁ nindā nāmnaḥ paramam aparādhaṁ vitanute |
yataḥ khyātiṁ yātaṁ katham u sahate tad‑vigarhām ||
śivasya śrī‑viṣṇor ya iha guṇa‑nāmādi‑sakalaṁ |
dhiyā bhinnaṁ paśyet sa khalu hari‑nāmāhitakaraḥ ||
guror avajñā śruti‑śāstra‑nindanaṁ
tathārthavādo hari‑nāmni kalpanam |
nāmno balād yasya hi pāpa‑buddhir
na vidyate tasya yamair hi śuddhiḥ ||
dharma‑vrata‑tyāga‑hutādi‑sarva‑
śubha‑kriyā‑sāmyam api pramādaḥ |
aśraddadhāne vimukhe’py aśṛṇvati
yaś copadeśaḥ śiva‑nāmāparādhaḥ ||
śrutvāpi nāma‑māhātmyaṁ yaḥ prīti‑rahito’dhamaḥ |
ahaṁ‑mamādi‑paramo nāmni so’py aparādha‑kṛt ||
(Padma Purāṇa: 4.25.15–18; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 11.521–524; Bhakti Sandarbha: 265)
[Śrī Sanat-kumāra to Śrī Nārada:] (1) Defamation of the sat causes the greatest offense to the name. Oh! How can the name tolerate condemnation of those on whose account it has attained renown? (2) One here who shall see with the intellect all of Śiva’s qualities, names, and so forth to be distinct from Śrī Viṣṇu is certainly a committer of enmity towards Hari’s name. (3) Disrespect for the guru, and (4) defamation of the Śrutis and śāstras [are offenses to the name]. Also, (5) [assumption of mere] praise (arthavāda) and (6) fabrication in regard to Hari’s name [are offenses to the name]. (7) The purification of one who has the intention of sinning on the basis of the name’s power [to dispel sin, which is an offense to the name] certainly does not occur by means of regulations. (8) [Considering there to be] Equality [of the name] with all [types of] auspicious acts, such as dharma, rites, renunciation, and sacrifice, is also negligence [in regard to the name, i.e., an offense]. (9) Instructing one who is faithless, averse, or undesirous of hearing [about the name] is an offense to Śiva’s name [alt., to the auspicious name of Śrī Viṣṇu]. (10) Even after having heard about the greatness of the name, one who remains devoid love [for the name], vile, and [someone] for whom ‘I’, ‘mine’, and so forth are primary, is also an offender [of the name].”
