Japa

śarīrākāra-bhūtānāṁ bhūtānāṁ yad viśodhanam

śarīrākāra-bhūtānāṁ bhūtānāṁ yad viśodhanam |
avyaya-brahma-samparkād bhūta-śuddhir iyaṁ matā ||
bhūta-śuddhiṁ vinā kartur japa-homādikāḥ kriyāḥ |
bhavanti niṣphalāḥ sarvā yathā-vidhy apy anuṣṭhitāḥ ||
(Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 5.63–64)

“Purification of the elements which are existent in the form of the body by union with imperishable brahman—this is considered bhūta-śuddhi [lit., ‘purification of the elements’]. Without bhūta-śuddhi, an actor’s acts of japa, homa, and so forth, even all those performed according to rule, become fruitless.”

Read on →

atha jape mantrārthasya nānātve’pi puruṣārthānukūla evāsau cintyaḥ

atha jape mantrārthasya nānātve’pi puruṣārthānukūla evāsau cintyaḥ | yathā śrīmad-aṣṭākṣarādāv ātma-nivedana-lakṣaṇa-caturthy-ādy-abhāvavati mantre tad-anusandhāneneti | evam anye’pi pūjā-vidhayo yathāyathaṁ yojanīyāḥ, śuddha-bhakti-siddhy-arthaṁ sarvāsāṁ bhaktīnām eva śuddhatvāśuddhatva-rūpeṇa dvividho hi bhedaḥ sammata iti |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 296)

“Now, in regard to japa, although there is variety in the meaning of mantras, only that [meaning] which is favorable for [attaining] one’s object of life (puruṣārtha) is to be meditated on, as in the case of mantras such as the sacred eight-syllable one which do not have the fourth case indicative of offering of the self or otherwise; [one is to meditate on such mantras] with one’s aim upon that [i.e., on the meaning of the mantra that facilitates one’s attainment of one’s object of life (puruṣārtha)]. In others as well [i.e., in other aspects of the performance of worship], the rules of worship are to be applied as appropriate in like manner [i.e., they are to be applied in such a manner that one’s observance of them facilitates one’s attainment of one’s object of life]. For the sake of the establishment of pure bhakti, a twofold division of all acts of bhakti in the form of [their] being pure or being impure is accepted [by qualified authorities, i.e., any form of bhakti can be performed for the sake of attaining bhakti itself as one’s puruṣārtha (such an act of bhakti is categorized as being pure) or for the sake of attaining any of the four conventional puruṣāṛthas—dharma, artha, kāma, or mokṣa (such an act of bhakti is categorized as being impure)].”

Read on →

kāyena dūre vrajinaṁ tyajantī

kāyena dūre vrajinaṁ tyajantī
japantam antaḥkaraṇe hasantī |
samādhi-yoge ca bahir bhavantī
sandṛśyate kāpi mukunda-bhaktiḥ ||
(Unknown source; cited in Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.5.221)

“Extraordinary Mukunda-bhakti can be seen naturally avoiding from afar one engaged in karma, laughing at one engaged in japa within the mind, and leaving one fixed in samādhi.”

Read on →

bhagavad-bhakti-hīnasya jātiḥ śāstraṁ japas tapaḥ

bhagavad-bhakti-hīnasya jātiḥ śāstraṁ japas tapaḥ |
aprāṇasyaiva dehasya maṇḍanaṁ loka-rañjanam ||
śuciḥ sad-bhakti-dīptāgni-dagdha-durjāti-kalmaṣaḥ |
śvapāko’pi budhaiḥ ślāghyo na veda-jño’pi nāstikaḥ ||
(Hari-bhakti-sudhodaya: 3.11–12; cited in Mādhurya-kādambinī: 1.10; alluded to in Prārthanā: 21.2)

“The nobility, [knowledge of] śāstra, japa, and austerity of someone devoid of bhakti to Bhagavān are [like] decorations on a lifeless body [which are merely] pleasing to the world [i.e., to the public in general, but not to Bhagavān himself]. Even a purified dog-eater [i.e., an outcaste, however], the contamination of whose low-birth has been burned away by the blazing fire of pure bhakti, is praiseworthy by the wise; [whereas] even an unbelieving knower of the Veda is not [i.e., regardless of the level of one’s knowledge and the like (nobility, austerity, etc.), anyone devoid of bhakti is unworthy of praise from the wise, since their character and conduct are of no real significance to Bhagavān].”

Read on →

mauna-vrata-śruta-tapo-’dhyayana-sva-dharma

mauna-vrata-śruta-tapo-’dhyayana-sva-dharma-
vyākhyā-raho-japa-samādhaya āpavargyāḥ |
prāyaḥ paraṁ puruṣa te tv ajitendriyāṇāṁ
vārtā bhavanty uta na vātra tu dāmbhikānām ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 7.9.46; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha 168)

“O Puruṣa [i.e., O indwelling Regulator], the means to apavarga [i.e., mokṣa]—silence, rites, hearing [i.e. learning the Vedas], austerities, studying, [observing one’s] svadharma, explaining [i.e., teaching the Vedas to others], [residing in] solitude, japa, and samādhi [i.e., meditation]—generally here [i.e., in saṁsāra], however, become mere livelihoods of those of uncontrolled senses, and sometimes, however, not even that for the deceitful [since the fruitfulness of deceitfulness is uncertain].”

Read on →

vidyā-tapaḥ-prāṇa-nirodha-maitrī

vidyā-tapaḥ-prāṇa-nirodha-maitrī-
tīrthābhiṣeka-vrata-dāna-japyaiḥ |
nātyanta-śuddhiṁ labhate’ntar-ātmā
yathā hṛdi-sthe bhagavaty anante ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 12.3.48)

“The inner self does not attain such great purification by learning [i.e., worship of the devatās], austerity, prāṇāyāma, good will, bathing at tīrthas, rites, charity, or japa as [its does] when Bhagavān Ananta is situated in the heart.”

Read on →

karma, tapa, yoga, jñāna

karma, tapa, yoga, jñāna, vidhi-bhakti, japa, dhyāna,
ihā haite mādhurya durlabha |
kevala ye rāga-mārge, bhaje kṛṣṇe anurāge,
tāre kṛṣṇa-mādhurya sulabha ||
(Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.21.119)

“Karma [i.e., observing the duties of one’s varṇa and āśrama], tapa (austerity), yoga, jñāna [i.e., deliberation on the meaning of the Upaniṣads], vidhi-bhakti [i.e., devotion motivated by śāstric injunctions], japa (repetition of a mantra), dhyāna (meditation)—through these [Kṛṣṇa’s] mādhurya is difficult to attain. Only for one who worships Kṛṣṇa with anurāga (loving attachment) according to the path of rāga is Kṛṣṇa’s mādhurya easy to attain.”

Read on →

na hi śabda-jñānino brahma-vittvaṁ

na hi śabda-jñānino brahma-vittvaṁ, kintu tad-anubhāvina eva | na ca madhu madhuram iti śābdī-pratītim upetas tan-mādhurya-vid bhavati | … tathā ca śābda-jñānād anyaivopāsanā | bhakty-anubhava-pada-vācyā vidyā puruṣārtha-hetuḥ | … śābda-jñānaṁ tu vairāgyam iva tat-parikara-bhūtam | … nanu kāya-vāṅ-mano-vyāpāra-rūpā bhaktiḥ | tatra mānasasya dhyānasyānubhavatvaṁ bhavet | kāya-vāg-vyāpāra-rūpasyārcana-japādes tattvaṁ katham iti ced, ucyate–hlādinī-sāra-samaveta-saṁvid-rūpā bhaktiḥ ‘sac-cid-ānandaika-rase bhakti-yoge tiṣṭhati’ iti śruteḥ | itarathā bhagavad-vaśīkāra-hetur asau na syāt | tathābhūtāyās tasyā bhakta-kāyādi-vṛtti-tādātmyenāvirbhūtāyā kriyākāratvaṁ cit-sukha-mūrteḥ kuntalādi-pratīkatvavad avaseyam | ‘śrutes tu śabda-mūlatvāt’ iti nyāyenālaukike’cintye’rthe tarkas tu nirākṛtaḥ |
(Govinda-bhāṣya on Vedānta-sūtra 3.4.12)

“It is not that knowers of the words [i.e., the words of śāstra] are [actual] knowers of Brahman, but rather that only those who have experience of it [i.e., of Brahman] are. It is not that one who possess semantic knowledge based on the statement, ‘Honey is sweet’ becomes a knower of its sweetness [i.e., as only coming to know through language that a substance known as honey is sweet is different from actually experiencing its sweetness, so mere theoretical knowledge of Brahman is distinct from actual experience of Brahman]. … Furthermore, upāsanā [i.e., the process to realize Brahman] is certainly distinct from [mere] knowledge derived from words. Knowledge (vidyā) the referent of which is experience (anubhava) [of Brahman] brought about by bhakti, is the cause of [attaining] the goal of human life (puruṣātha). … Knowledge derived from words, like vairāgya, is an assisting element [of Brahma-vidyā, i.e., it is not Brahma-vidyā itself].” … [An objection is raised:] ‘Well, bhakti is of the nature of operation of the body, speech, and mind. Therein, meditation in the mind could be [considered to be] of the nature of awareness (anubhava), but how could arcana, japa, and so forth, which are of the nature of operation of the body and speech, be of that nature [i.e., be of the nature of awareness (anubhava)]? If [this question is raised, then to that], it is to be said that bhakti is of the nature of awareness (saṁvit) combined with the essence of bliss (hlādinī), as per the Śruti [i.e., GTU 2.78], ‘[He who is of the nature of condensed awareness and condensed bliss, i.e., Śrī Bhagavān] Dwells in bhakti-yoga, which is of the nature of eternal being, consciousness, and bliss.’ Otherwise [i.e., were this not the case], it [i.e., bhakti], would not be a cause of captivation of Bhagavān. Existent as such and manifested with a sameness in nature (tādātmya) [i.e., an acquired, non-ontological, functional oneness] with the functions of a bhakta’s body and so forth [i.e., speech], its [i.e., bhakti’s] being possessed of a form as action [i.e., its being so also manifested as the acts of japa, arcana, and so forth] is to be understood, like hair and so forth’s being a part of the embodiment of consciousness and bliss [i.e., just as the hair and nails of Śrī Bhagavān are understood to be part of his body even though they are perceived to change more so that other parts of his body, to lack the sensitivity found in other parts of his body, to be able to be removed from his body without him loosing his essence, and so on, so bhakti which is essentially of the nature of awareness is to be understood to also manifest in the form of actions performed by the body and speech]. In accord with the principle [stated in VS 2.1.27], ‘It is because of Śruti [i.e., because of the statements in the śāstra] on account of śabda’s [i.e., śabda-pramāṇa’s] being the source [of valid knowledge of Brahman]’ (śrutes tu śabda-mūlatvāt), argument (tarka) is verily annulled in regard to an otherworldly and inconceivable object [e.g., bhakti].”

Read on →

Scroll to Top