Compassion

karuṇā-nikuramba-komale

karuṇā-nikuramba-komale
madhuraiśvarya-viśeṣa-śālini |
jayati vraja-rāja-nandane
na hi cintā-kaṇikābhyudeti naḥ ||
(Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.21.45)

“Since the Son of Vraja’s king, who is tender by virtue of his abundance of compassion and replete with a special form of sweet (madhura) aiśvarya, remains triumphant, not even a trace of worry arises in us.”

Read on →

karuṇā-nikuramba-komale Read on →

bhajanti ye yathā devān devā api tathaiva tān

bhajanti ye yathā devān devā api tathaiva tān |
chāyeva karma-sacivāḥ sādhavo dīna-vatsalāḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.2.6; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.209; Bhakti Sandarbha: 183)

“As they [i.e., living beings] honor the devas, so too the devas, ministers of karma, honor them like a shadow [i.e., the devas merely reciprocate the worship they receive from livings beings in a fixed corresponding manner]. The sādhus [on the contrary] are affectionate to the distressed [i.e., the sādhus can favor living beings independent of one’s karmic circumstances].”

Read on →

bhajanti ye yathā devān devā api tathaiva tān Read on →

sat-saṅga-hetuś ca satāṁ svaira-cāritaiva, nānyaḥ

sat-saṅga-hetuś ca satāṁ svaira-cāritaiva, nānyaḥ | … satāṁ kṛpā ca duravasthā-darśana-mātrodbhavā, na svopāsanādy-apekṣā, yathā śrī-nāradasya nalakūvara-maṇigrīvayoḥ |
(Excerpt from Bhakti Sandarbha: 181, 183)

“The cause of sat-saṅga, furthermore, is the independent action of the sat, and not anything else. … The grace of the sat, furthermore, is produced only by [their] sight of plight [in a living being], and is not dependent on their own upāsanā [i.e., on receiving respect, service, and so forth that is offered to them], as was Śrī Nārada’s [grace] upon Nalakūvara and Maṇigrīva. … ”

Read on →

sat-saṅga-hetuś ca satāṁ svaira-cāritaiva, nānyaḥ Read on →

svayaṁ samuttīrya sudustaraṁ dyuman

svayaṁ samuttīrya sudustaraṁ dyuman
bhavārṇavaṁ bhīmam adabhra-sauhṛdāḥ |
bhavat-padāmbhoruha-nāvam atra te
nidhāya yātāḥ sad-anugraho bhavān ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.2.31; cited in Paramātma Sandarbha: 93; Bhakti Sandarbha: 180)

“O luminous One, after having fully crossed over the fearsome and difficult to traverse ocean of material existence and reached [the shore] themselves, they of abundant affection [alt., friendliness, i.e., the sat] have left the boat of your lotus feet here [for others of the future to take shelter in and so also reach the shore], since you are he whose grace is the sat [alt., he whose grace comes to those in the ocean of material existence only through the sat].”

Read on →

svayaṁ samuttīrya sudustaraṁ dyuman Read on →

atha bhagavat-kṛpaiva tat-sāmmukhye prāthamikaṁ kāraṇam

atha bhagavat-kṛpaiva tat-sāmmukhye prāthamikaṁ kāraṇam iti ca gauṇam | sā hi saṁsāra-durantānanta-santāpa-santapteṣv api tad-vimukheṣu svatantrā na pravartate, tad-asambhavāt | kṛpā-rūpaś ceto-vikāro hi para-duḥkhasya sva-cetasi sparśe saty eva jāyate | tasya tu sadā paramānandaikarasatvenāpahata-kalmaṣatvena ca śrutau jīva-vilakṣaṇatva-sādhanāt tejo-mālinas timirāyogavat tac-cetasy api tamo-maya-duḥkha-sparśanāsambhavena tatra tasyā janmāsambhavaḥ | ata eva sarvadā virājamāne’pi kartum akartum anyathā kartuṁ samarthe tasmiṁs tad-vimukhānāṁ na saṁsāra-santāpa-śāntiḥ | ataḥ sat-kṛpaikāvaśiṣyate | santo’pi tadānīṁ yadyapi sāṁsārika-duḥkhair na spṛśyanta eva, tathāpi labdha-jāgarāḥ svapna-duḥkhavattve kadācit smareyur apīty atas teṣāṁ saṁsārike’pi kṛpā bhavati, yathā śrī-nāradasya nalakūvara-maṇigrīvayoḥ | tasmāt prastute’pi saṁsārika-duḥkhasya tad-dhetutvābhāvāt parameśvara-kṛpā tu sa evātra mama śaraṇam ity-ādi-dainyātmikā-bhakti-sambandhenaiva jāyate, yathā gajendrādau, vyatireke nāraky-ādau | bhaktir hi bhakta-koṭi-praviṣṭa-tad-ārdrībhāvayitṛ-tac-chakti-viśeṣa iti vivṛtaṁ vivariṣyate ca | dainya-sambandhena ca sādhikam ucchalitā bhavatīti tatra tad-ādhikyam | tasmād yā kṛpā tasya satsu vartate sā sat-saṅga-vāhanaiva vā sat-kṛpā-vāhanaiva vā satī jīvāntare saṅkramate, na svatantreti sthitam |
(Excerpt from Bhakti Sandarbha: 180)

“Now [i.e., in regard to the question, ‘How does intentness (sāmmukhya) upon Bhagavān come about?’ the following may be proposed], ‘Bhagavān’s grace alone is the primary cause of intentness (sāmmukhya) upon him.’ [In reply to this, it should be said:] [No.] That too is secondary. That does not proceed independently towards those oblivious (vimukha) to him, even those [among the oblivious who are] afflicted by the difficult to bear and unending afflictions of saṁsāra, because of the impossibility of that. The transformation of the heart in the form of grace occurs only when the suffering of another touches one’s own heart. Because of the impossibility of the touch of suffering, which consists of darkness (tamas) [alt., ignorance], upon his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] heart, [which is just] like the impossibility of a luminous object’s [becoming covered by] darkness, on account of the establishment in the Śruti of the jīva’s distinctness [from Bhagavān] by virtue of his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] always being solely of the highest bliss in affection [i.e., his being constituted of, and having a taste solely for, the highest bliss] and [his] being repellant of sin, its [i.e., grace’s] appearance there [i.e., in Bhagavān’s heart] is an impossibility [i.e., because Bhagavān’s very nature is that of the highest bliss and he is never subject to the influence of sin, he has never had any direct, personal experience of the suffering of saṁsāra, and he can never become subject to any experience of it; the suffering of jīvas in saṁsāra can thus never touch his heart and evoke his grace upon those undergoing it]. Therefore, even though he is ever-present [everywhere] and capable of doing, not doing, and doing otherwise [i.e., even though he is an independent conscious agent capable of any and all forms of action], there is no end to the afflictions of saṁsāra for those who are oblivious of him [i.e., he takes no action to terminate the suffering in saṁsāra of those oblivious of him, since there is no scope for grace specifically for them to arise in his heart which would inspire him to take such action]. Therefore, only the grace of the sat remains [i.e., the grace of the sat, by the elimination of all other possibilities, is determined to alone be the primary cause of jīvas in saṁsāra attaining intentness (sāmmukhya) upon Bhagavān]. Although the sat too are not touched by sāṁsārika suffering then [i.e., while in the midst of saṁsāra], still those who have awakened [after sleeping] may also sometimes remember a dream’s having been filled with suffering, and thus their [i.e., the sat’s] grace comes upon even a saṁsārika [i.e., a worldly person in general], just as Śrī Nārada’s did upon Nalakūvara and Maṇigrīva [i.e., the sat’s grace can come upon a worldly person should the sat see a person’s suffering and happen to be thereby reminded of their own past suffering in such a manner that their grace upon the person they observe to be suffering in saṁsāra so happens to be evoked]. Therefore, because of the absence of the suffering of a saṁsārika being a cause thereof [i.e., of grace] even in this analysis [i.e., even in the case of grace coming from the sat], the grace of Parameśvara [i.e., Bhagavān], rather, arises only in relation to bhakti constituted of humility (dainya), such as [praying as follows], ‘He [i.e., Bhagavān] is my only shelter here [i.e., in this world],’ as in the case of Gajendra and others [who prayed to Bhagavān for his shelter in this manner], and in contrast to the denizens of Naraka and others [who do not pray to Bhagavān, and thus do not receive his grace]. Bhakti is a particular śakti of his [i.e., of Bhagavān’s] which is a melter of him [i.e., of Bhagavān, and specifically, of Bhagavān’s heart] upon having entered the class of [his] bhakta [i.e., bhakti is a śakti that belongs to Bhagavān and manifests the capacity to melt Bhagavān’s heart upon it entering the hearts of bhaktas, who, as a separate class, do not by nature possess bhakti but upon receiving bhakti become inspired to perform acts of bhakti that result in Bhagavān’s heart becoming melted]. This has been described [in Paramātma Sandarbha (93)] and will be described [further in Prīti Sandarbha]. Furthermore, in connection with humility (dainya), it [i.e., bhakti] becomes abundantly enkindled. Thus, there is an abundance of that [i.e., of bhakti] therein [i.e., in a bhakta who responds to distress with humility (dainya) as a result of past association with the sat]. Therefore [i.e., because Bhagavān‘s grace manifests directly only in response to bhakti and never directly towards jīvas devoid of bhakti], his grace, which dwells in the sat, being either conveyed solely by association with the sat, or conveyed solely by the grace of the sat, is transmitted to another jīva [from the sat who are carrying it]. Thus it is established that this is not independent [i.e., Bhagavān’s grace is not transmitted to jīvas in saṁsāra directly, that is, independently of the sat, but rather is transmitted to jīvas in saṁsāra only through the sat].”

Read on →

atha bhagavat-kṛpaiva tat-sāmmukhye prāthamikaṁ kāraṇam Read on →

parānandane pravṛttir dvidhā jāyate—parato nijābhīṣṭa-sampattyai

parānandane pravṛttir dvidhā jāyate—parato nijābhīṣṭa-sampattyai, kvacit tad-abhīṣṭa-mātra-sampattyai ca | tatra prathamo nātrāpy ayuktaḥ svātmārtha-mātratayā kutrāpi pakṣapātābhāvāt | atrottara-pakṣe para-sukhasya para-duḥkhasya cānubhavenaiva parānukūlyenaiva pravṛttīcchā jāyate, na tu yat-kiñcij-jñāna-mātreṇa, cittasya para-duḥkhāsparśe kṛpā-rūpa-vikārāsambhavāt | yathā kaṇṭaka-viddhāṅgo jantor necchati tāṁ vyathām | jīva-sāmyaṁ gato liṅgair na tathāviddha-kaṇṭakaḥ || iti nyāyāt | tataś ca sadā paramānandaika-rūpe’pahata-kalmaṣe bhagavati prākṛtasya sukhābhidha-duḥkhasya prasiddha-duḥkhasya ca sūrye pecaka-cakṣur jyotiṣa iva tamasa iva cātyantābhāvāt tat-tad-anubhavo nāsty eva | yat tu bhagavati duḥkha-sambandhaṁ parijihīrṣanto’pi kecid evaṁ vadanti—tasmin duḥkhānubhava-jñānam asty eva | tac ca parakīyatvenaiva bhāsate, na tu svīyatveneti | tad api ghaṭṭakuṭyāṁ prabhātam | duḥkhānubhavo nāma hy antaḥkaraṇe duḥkha-sparśaḥ, sa ca svasmād bhavatu, parasmād veti, duḥkha-sambandhāviśeṣāt | asarvajñatā-doṣaś ca sūrya-dṛṣṭāntenaiva parihṛtaḥ pratyuta guṇatvenaiva darśitaś ca | kvacid gajendrādīnām api prākṛta eva duḥkhe “sa eva mama śaraṇam” ity-ādinā tathaiva bhaktir udbhūtaiveti | kvacid yamalārjunādiṣu śrī-nāradādi-bhaktānāṁ bhaktiḥ sphuṭaiveti ca sarvathā dainyātmaka-bhakta-bhakty-anubhava eva taṁ karuṇayati, na tu prākṛtaṁ duḥkhaṁ, yogye kāraṇe saty ayogyasya kalpanānaucityāt, duḥkha-sad-bhāvasyaiva kāraṇatve sarva-saṁsārocchitteḥ | atha tasya paramparā-kāraṇatvam asty eva cet—astu, na kāpi hānir iti | tasmād ubhayathā bhaktānandane tad-bhakty-anubhava eva bhagavantaṁ pravartayatīti siddham | kvacid gajendrādīnām api prākṛta eva duḥkhe “sa eva mama śaraṇam” ity-ādinā tathaiva bhaktir udbhūtaiveti | kvacid yamalārjunādiṣu śrī-nāradādi-bhaktānāṁ bhaktiḥ sphuṭaiveti ca sarvathā dainyātmaka-bhakta-bhakty-anubhava eva taṁ karuṇayati, na tu prākṛtaṁ duḥkhaṁ, yogye kāraṇe saty ayogyasya kalpanānaucityāt, duḥkha-sad-bhāvasyaiva kāraṇatve sarva-saṁsārocchitteḥ | atha tasya paramparā-kāraṇatvam asty eva cet—astu, na kāpi hānir iti | tasmād ubhayathā bhaktānandane tad-bhakty-anubhava eva bhagavantaṁ pravartayatīti siddham |
(Excerpt from Paramātma Sandarbha: 93)

“An action pleasing to another comes about in two ways: for the sake of procuring a desired object of one’s own from the other, and sometimes, only for the sake of procuring a desired object for the other. Therein, the first is inapplicable here [i.e., in regard to the query as to whether Bhagavān exhibits partiality towards anyone in the world] as well because of the absence of partiality in any case on account of [such an action] being solely for the sake of one’s self [i.e., there is no partiality in such an action because its objective is entirely for oneself and thus not for any other particular person in preference to a third party]. Here in the latter case, the desire for an action with favorability solely towards another [i.e., an action free from any self-interest performed solely in the interest of another] comes about only by [having had] experience of another’s happiness and another’s suffering, and not rather, just by some general awareness [of it], because of the impossibility of the transformation of the heart in the form of grace without the touch of another’s suffering [upon the heart], as per the following reasoning [described in SB 10.10.14]: ‘As one whose body has been pricked by a thorn does not desire that pain for a living being [i.e., does not want that another living being should suffer such pain] upon having understood through indications [e.g., contraction of the face, etc.] the likeness of living beings [in regard to their sensitivity to pleasure and pain], so one who has never been pricked by a thorn does not [i.e., one who has never suffered that pain does not have the ability to desire that others do not suffer it because one has no experience of that pain in the first place].’ And therefore, because of the complete absence of the material suffering called pleasure (sukha) and the suffering which is well-known [to simply be suffering] in Bhagavān, who is solely supreme bliss in form [i.e., nature] and repellant of sin eternally—like [the complete absence] an owl’s eye’s sight, or darkness, in the presence of the sun—there is no experience of these [i.e., of material suffering and so-called pleasure in Bhagavān] whatsoever. Be that as it may, even some who wish to deny [the existence of] a relation with suffering in Bhagavān speak as follows: ‘There is certainly awareness of the experience of suffering in him, yet that manifests only as another’s [experience], and not rather as his own [i.e., Bhagavān does have awareness of the experience of material suffering, but that experience is another’s and not his own direct experience].’ This too [however] is daybreak at the toll-station [i.e., it is an unsuccessful attempt to evade a problem that has resulted only in more labor for oneself]. Experience of suffering most certainly means the touch of suffering upon the antaḥkaraṇa (psyche), and that may be from one’s own [suffering] or from another’s, because of the non-distinction in regard to the relation with suffering [i.e., regardless of whether the suffering is one’s own or another’s, if it touches the heart, then the heart is touched by suffering, and thus an experience of suffering has occurred]. And simply by the example of the sun [given earlier that darkness cannot exist in the presence of the sun], non-omniscience is negated as a fault and rather is shown to indeed be a quality [i.e., Bhagavān not being completely omniscient on account of his having no direct personal experience of material suffering is not a fault in him but rather is a quality, just as it is a quality of the sun to be completely free from darkness, since possessing darkness, that is, experience of material suffering, is not a desirable or endearing quality]. Thus, there may be some general awareness of suffering in him, but there is no experience of suffering whatsoever, since even in the presence of [Bhagavān,] he who is the crest-jewel of the supremely compassionate and capable of doing, not doing, and doing otherwise [i.e., capable any and all forms of action as an independent conscious agent] jīvas certainly experience the suffering of saṁsāra even today. Thus, in this regard, negation of cruelty also occurs [i.e., no fault of cruelty can be posited to exist in Bhagavān on account of the jīvas suffering in saṁsāra because Bhagavān has no experience of that suffering and thus cannot be held responsible for not feeling compelled by a sense of compassion to alleviate it]. The happiness of bhaktas, however, is indeed, in form [i.e., in nature], bhakti to him [i.e., the happiness bhaktas feel is caused by, and is part of, their bhakti to Bhagavān], and their suffering occurs only because of obstacles in attaining Bhagavān, and therein [i.e., in the process of encountering such obstacles] greater meltedness of the heart specifically in relation to Bhagavān comes about, and that is bhakti itself [i.e., the suffering felt by bhaktas is ultimately to be considered caused by and part of their bhakti to Bhagavān as well]. Since sometimes bhakti, by means [of resolutions] such as, ‘He alone is my shelter,’ similarly arises in the midst of the entirely material suffering of Gajendra and others, and since sometimes the bhakti of bhaktas such as Nārada becomes manifest in relation to [i.e., as an indirect result of interacting with] the twin arjuna trees and others, in all cases [it is] only experience of the bhakti of bhaktas, constituted of humility (dainya), [that] sorrows him [i.e., evokes his compassion], and not, rather, material suffering, because of the inappropriateness of conceiving of an inapt [cause] when an apt cause is present, since extirpation of the entirety of saṁsāra would occur if merely the existence of suffering were a cause [of Bhagavān’s compassion]. Now, if [one argues], ‘It certainly has indirect causation [i.e., material suffering is certainly, even in the aforementioned examples, an indirect cause of Bhagavān’s grace],’ [then] let it be. There is no harm. Therefore, in both cases [i.e., in the case of material suffering not being considered a cause at all, and in the case of its being considered an indirect cause], it is established that only experience of bhakti to him [i.e., only observing the bhakti bhaktas express towards him] motivates Bhagavān to please [his] bhaktas [i.e., the primary cause of Bhagavān acting to please his bhaktas is never material suffering and, rather, only, their bhakti to him].”

Read on →

parānandane pravṛttir dvidhā jāyate—parato nijābhīṣṭa-sampattyai Read on →

prācīnānāṁ bhajanam atulaṁ duṣkaraṁ śṛṇvato me

prācīnānāṁ bhajanam atulaṁ duṣkaraṁ śṛṇvato me
nairāśyena jvalati hṛdayaṁ bhakti-leśālasasya |
viṣvadrīcīm aghahara tavākarṇya kāruṇya-vīcīm
āśā-bindūkṣitam idam upaity antare hanta śaityam ||
(Stava-mālā: 1.16.2)

“Upon hearing of the unparalleled and difficult to perform bhajana of the ancients [i.e., Śuka, Ambarīṣa, and others], my heart burns with despair, as I am indolent about even a small amount of bhakti. Hanta! O Destroyer of Agha, upon hearing [however] of the waves of your compassion extending everywhere [i.e., from Brahmā down to even the most lowly], my heart feels within it a coolness moist with drops of hope.”

Read on →

prācīnānāṁ bhajanam atulaṁ duṣkaraṁ śṛṇvato me Read on →

Scroll to Top