atha kānto’yam iti prītiḥ kānta-bhāvaḥ | eṣa eva priyatā-śabdena śrī-rasāmṛta-sindhau paribhāṣitā | priyāyā bhāvaḥ priyateti | laukika-rasikair atraiva rati-saṁjñā svīkriyate | eṣa eva kāma-tulyatvāt śrī-gopikāsu kāmādi-śabdenāpy abhihitaḥ | smarākhya-kāma-viśeṣas tv anyaḥ, vailakṣaṇyāt | kāma-sāmānyaṁ khalu spṛhā-sāmānyātmakam, prīti-sāmānyaṁ tu viṣayānukūlyātmakas tad-anugata-viṣaya-spṛhādi-mayo jñāna-viśeṣa iti lakṣitam | tato dvayoḥ sāmānya-prāya-ceṣṭatve’pi kāma-sāmānyasya ceṣṭā svīyānukūlya-tātparyā | tatra kutracid viṣayānukūlyaṁ ca sva-sukha-kārya-bhūtam eveti tatra gauṇa-vṛttir eva prīti-śabdaḥ | śuddha-prīti-mātrasya ceṣṭā tu priyānukūlya-tātparyaiva | tatra tad-anugatam eva cātma-sukham iti mukhya-vṛttir eva prīti-śabdaḥ | ata eva yathā-pūrvaṁ sukha-prīti-sāmānyayor ullāsātmakatayā sāmye’py ānukūlyāṁśena prīti-sāmānyasya vaiśiṣṭyaṁ darśitam | tathā kāma-prīti-sāmānyayor api spṛhā-viśeṣātmakatayā sāmye’pi tenaiva vaiśiṣṭyaṁ siddham | atra tu—‘yat te sujāta-caraṇāmburuhaṁ staneṣu bhītāḥ śanaiḥ priya dadhīmahi karkaśeṣu’ ity ādibhir atikramyāpi svānukūlyaṁ priyānukūlya-tātparyasyaiva darśitatvāt śuddha-prīti-viśeṣa-rūpatvam eva labhyate | atas tad-viśeṣatvaṁ ca spṛhā-viśeṣātmakatvāt siddham | tato’tra śrī-kṛṣṇa-viṣayatvena kubjādi-sambandhi-kāmavad aprākṛta-kāmatvasyāpy anabhyupagame sati prākṛta-kāmatvaṁ tu sutarām asiddham | tathā darśitaṁ ca— ‘vikrīḍitaṁ vraja-vadhūbhir idaṁ ca viṣṇoḥ, śraddhānvito yaḥ śṛṇuyād atha varṇayed vā | bhaktiṁ parāṁ bhagavati parilabhya kāmaṁ, hṛd-rogam āśv apahinoty acireṇa dhīraḥ’ || ity anena | yad vikrīḍitaṁ khalu nija-śravaṇa-dvārāpy anyeṣāṁ dūra-deśa-kāla-sthitānām api śīghram eva yaṁ kāmam apanayat paramaṁ premāṇaṁ vitanoti tat punas tat-kāmamayaṁ na syāt | api tu parama-prema-viśeṣamayam eva | na hi paṅkena paṅkaṁ kṣālyate | na tu svayam asnehaḥ snehayati | ata eva tasya bhāvasya śuddha-prema-mayatvaṁ nigadenaivoktvā śuddhatve hetutayā punas tena bhagavat-prasādaś ca darśitaḥ—‘bhagavān āhatā vīkṣya śuddha-bhāva-prasāditaḥ’ iti | tasyātmarāma-śiromaṇes tena ramaṇaṁ ca darśitam—‘kṛtvā tāvantam ātmānam’ ity-ādibhiḥ | vaśīkṛtatvaṁ ca svayaṁ darśitaṁ—‘na pāraye’haṁ niravadya-saṁyujām’ ity ādinā | tatra niravadyeti prīteḥ śuddhatvam | sva-sādhukṛtyam iti paramottamotkṛṣṭatvam | na pāraya iti svavaśīkāratvam | ataḥ śuddha-prema-jātiṣu tasya paramatvād eva śrīmad-uddhavenāpy evam uktam—‘vāñchanti yad bhava-bhiyo munayo vayaṁ ca’ iti | tasmāt sarvataḥ paramaiva kānta-bhāva-rūpā prītir iti sthitam |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 84)
“Then, the prīti [based on the attitude in relation to Śrī Bhagavān], ‘He is [my] beloved’ is [called] kānta-bhāva. This is technically defined with the word priyatā in Śrī Rasāmṛta-sindhu. The bhāva of a priyā [i.e., ladylove] is called priyatā [i.e., ‘fondness,’ lit., ‘ladylove-ness’]. The term rati is accepted [i.e., used] by secular rasikas in this regard [i.e., to define this bhāva]. Because of [its] resemblance to kāma [i.e., “love”], it is also referred to by words such as kāma in the case of the gopīs. It is different from the particular type of kāma known as smara [i.e., eros] because of dissimilarity [in nature between the two]. Kāma in general is defined as that constituted of desire (spṛhā) in general [i.e., general desire for an object of love], whereas prīti in general is a particular form of awareness constituted of favorability (ānukūlya) towards its object and full of desire (spṛhā) and so forth for its object following that [i.e., following in the wake of favorability towards its object (see PRS 61 and 78 for further discussion of the definition of prīti in general)]. Thus, although the two [i.e., kāma and prīti] are almost the same in terms of activity, the activities of kāma in general have the aim of favorability (ānukūlya) to oneself [i.e., the activities of kāma are focused on pleasing oneself]. Therein, sometimes there is also favorability (ānukūlya) to the object [of kāma], but that is only existent for the purpose of one’s own happiness [i.e., favorability to the object of kāma is proffered only as a means of attaining happiness for oneself]. Thus, in this regard [i.e., in reference to kāma in general], the word prīti is only in its secondary function [i.e., the word prīti describes kāma in general only in a secondary sense of its meaning, that is, kāma in general is not its primary sense]. The activities of pure prīti itself, however, have the aim only of favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved (priya). Therein, one’s own happiness is only following that [i.e., it occurs only in the wake of that favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved as a secondary, concomitant effect]. In this regard, the word prīti is in its primary function [i.e., the primary meaning of the word prīti is love the aim (tātparya) of which is solely favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved]. Therefore, as previously [was explained in PRS 61], although happiness (sukha) and prīti in general are equivalent in [their both] being constituted of elation (ullāsa), the speciality of prīti in general was shown by the aspect of favorability (ānukūlya) [i.e., prīti in general is constituted of favorability (ānukūlya) towards its object, whereas happiness (sukha) is not], so although kāma and prīti in general are equivalent because of [their both] being constituted of a particular form of desire (spṛhā), the speciality [of prīti in general] was established by that itself [i.e., by only prīti’s, and not kāma’s, being constituted principally and secondarily of favorability (ānukūlya) to its object].
“Verily in this regard, because of the aim of favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved definitively eclipsing even favorability to oneself being shown by [the statement of the gopīs in SB 10.31.19], ‘O Beloved! Fearful, we gently hold your tender lotus feet on our hard breasts … [You roam with them throughout the forest. Have they not been cut by pebbles and so forth? Our hearts tremble. You are our very life],’ a special form of pure prīti is definitively understood [to exist in the gopīs]. Thus, the speciality of that [i.e., of pure prīti in general, and of the special form of pure prīti found in the gopīs in particular] because of [its] being constituted of a special form of desire [i.e., a desire for favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved that is not motivated by a desire for favorability (ānukūlya) to oneself, that is, the pursuit of experiencing personal happiness (sukha) for oneself, and rather is motivated solely by a desire for favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved whereby one even neglects favorability (ānukūlya) to oneself] is also established. Then, in this regard, because of non-recognition of [the pure prīti existent in the gopīs] being supramundane (aprākṛta) kāma like the kāma belonging to Kubjā and others [which is such] on account of Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s being the object [of the kāma], [its, i.e., the gopīs’ prīti] being mundane (prākṛta) kāma is completely unfounded [i.e., kāma means the desire to please one’s own senses (see CC 1.4.165) and can be classified as mundane (prākṛta) or supramundane (aprākṛta) depending on the nature of its object, that is, whether its object is mundane (prākṛta) or supramundane (aprākṛta) in nature; since the gopīs’ prīti is not constituted of the desire to please one’s own senses or activity aimed at this effect (viz., svīya-ānukūlya), and rather is constituted of the desire to please the senses of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, its object, and activity to that effect (viz., priya-ānukūlya), it should not be considered even supramundane (aprākṛta) kāma, as is found in Kubjā and others, much less mundane (prākṛta) kāma, as is found people in saṁsāra].
“Thus, this is also shown [in SB 10.33.40]: ‘One endowed with śraddhā who shall hear about and then describe Viṣṇu’s extraordinary play with the ladies of Vraja attains pure bhakti to Bhagavān, quickly casts off the heart disease of kāma, and without delay becomes steadfast.’ That extraordinary play which, even by means of hearing about it, quickly removes the kāma even of others who are situated in distant places and times [from where and when it took place] and bestows [upon them] the highest prema cannot on the contrary be constituted of that [sort of] kāma [i.e., the sort of kāma which it removes], and rather, must be constituted of a particular form of the highest prema [since only such prema could have the power to dispel kāma]. Mud is certainly not washed off with mud, and that which is itself devoid of oil does not anoint [i.e., the play between Śrī Kṛṣṇa and the gopīs described in the Rāsa-pañcādhyāyī cannot be constituted of mundane (prākṛta) kāma because if it were, it would not purify those who hear of it of mundane (prākṛta) kāma, and it cannot be devoid of pure prīti because if it were, it would not be able to impart pure prīti to those who hear of it].
“Therefore, having now described this bhāva’s being constituted of pure prema with a definitive pronouncement, furthermore Bhagavān’s satisfaction because of it by virtue of the cause of [its] purity is also shown [in SB 10.22.18], ‘Bhagavān, seeing them [i.e., the gopīs in the Yamunā] struck [with embarrassment], and satisfied by their pure bhāva ….’ The amorous sporting of he [i.e., Bhagavān] who is the crest-jewel of ātmarāmas because of that [i.e., because of his satisfaction with the gopīs’ pure prīti] is also shown [in SB 10.33.20], ‘Expanding himself into as many gopa girls as there were, he, Bhagavān, although an ātmarāma, playfully [i.e., amorously] enjoyed with them.’
“Himself also being captivated [by the gopīs’ pure prīti] is also shown by [his statement to the gopīs in SB 10.32.22], ‘I am not capable even with the lifespan of a deva of the extraordinary act of virtue of you all, whose union [with me] is irreproachable, and who have completely severed the unrelenting fetters of family life and served me. May that [act of virtue of yours] by [your own] virtue be your compensation [for your virtuous service to me].’ Therein, ‘irreproachable’ (niravadya) indicates the purity of [the gopīs’] prīti. [The gopīs’] ‘Extraordinary act of virtue’ (sva-sādhukṛtyam) indicates the highest, topmost excellence [of their prīti], and ‘I am not capable’ (na pāraye) indicates his [i.e., Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s] own captivation [because of their prīti]. Thus, because of its [i.e., the gopīs’ prīti] definitive supremacy among [all] types of pure prema, even the following is stated by Śrīmad Uddhava [in SB 10.47.58], ‘[The bhāva of the gopīs] Which those afraid of material existence, sages, and we too desire.’ Therefore, it is determined that prīti in the form of kānta-bhāva is supreme in all respects.”
Read on →
