Līlā

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 →

ete na vaikuṇṭha-nivāsi-pārṣadā

ete na vaikuṇṭha-nivāsi-pārṣadā
no vānarās te na ca yādavā api |
goloka-lokā bhavad-eka-jīvanā
naśyanty aśakyā bhagavan mayāvitum ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.7.238)

“[Śrī Baladeva appeals to Śrī Kṛṣṇa as he remains bound within the coils of the serpent Kālīya:] These are neither associates residing in Vaikuṇṭha, nor the forest monkeys, nor even the Yādavas. The people of Goloka, they whose life is you alone, are dying, and are unable to be saved by me, O Bhagavān!”

Read on →

saprema-bhakteḥ paramānukūlaṁ

saprema-bhakteḥ paramānukūlaṁ
dainyaṁ mahāpuṣṭi-karaṁ sadā vaḥ |
tasyāpi tat-prema-vibhāvane’laṁ
bhogākula-grāmya-vihāra-jātaṁ ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.5.74)

“[Śrī Nārada along with Uddhava to Gopa Kumāra:] The humility (dainya) of you all is always highly favorable for, and greatly nourishing of, bhakti [endowed] with prema, and the profusion of sport resembling [that of] a villager absorbed in enjoyment even on his [i.e., Śrī Bhagavān’s] part is well capable in regard to manifesting prema for him.”

Read on →

aho alaṁ kautukam etad īkṣyate

aho alaṁ kautukam etad īkṣyate
yathaiṣa vikrīḍati martya-loka-gaḥ |
tathaiva vaikuṇṭha-padopari sthito
nija-priyānāṁ paritoṣa-hetave ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.5.70)

“[Śrī Nārada along with Uddhava to Gopa Kumāra:] Aho! This great delight is seen: as he [i.e., Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa] sports situated in the mortal plane [i.e., in the Dvārakā on Earth], so exactly does he [sport here in the Dvārakā] situated above the domain of Vaikuṇṭha for the sake of the complete satisfaction of his dear ones.”

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 →

preyāṁs te’haṁ tvam api ca mama preyasīti pravādas

preyāṁs te’haṁ tvam api ca mama preyasīti pravādas
tvaṁ me prāṇā aham api tavāsmīti hanta pralāpaḥ |
tvaṁ me te syām aham iti yat tac ca no sādhu rādhe
vyāhāre nau na hi samucito yuṣmad-asmat-prayogaḥ ||
(Alaṅkāra-kaustubha: 5.27)

“‘[Śrī Kṛṣṇa:] [Our saying,] “I am your lover and you are my beloved” is [just] prattle. Oh! “You are my prāṇas and I am yours” is [just] chatter. O Rādhe! [Even] “You are mine and I am yours” is not correct, since usage [even] of [the words] “you” and “I” in our speech is not befitting.’

Read on →

na vidyate yasya ca janma karma vā

na vidyate yasya ca janma karma vā
na nāma-rūpe guṇa-doṣa eva vā |
tathāpi lokāpyaya-sambhavāya yaḥ
sva-māyayā tāny anukālam ṛcchati ||
tasmai namaḥ pareśāya brahmaṇe’nanta-śaktaye |
arūpāyoru-rūpāya nama āścarya-karmaṇe ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 8.3.8–9)

“Obeisance unto the Supreme Īśa, unto Brahman, unto he possessed of unending potency, unto he who has no birth or action, no name or form, and no faults in the form of [material] qualities whatsoever, and who by means of his own māyā still accepts these [i.e., births, actions, names, forms, and qualities] perpetually for the sake of the dissolution and the attainment of the people. Obeisance unto he who has no [material] form, unto he who has an excellent [spiritual] form, unto he of astonishing action.”

Read on →

sṛṣṭy-ādikaṁ harir naiva prayojanam apekṣya tu

sṛṣṭy-ādikaṁ harir naiva prayojanam apekṣya tu |
kurute kevalānandād yathā martyasya nartanam ||
pūrṇānandasya tasyeha prayojana-matiḥ kutaḥ |
muktā apy āpta-kāmāḥ syuḥ kim u tasyākhilātmanaḥ ||
(Nārāyaṇa-saṁhitā; cited in Bhagavat Sandarbha: 47; Paramātma Sandarbha: 93; Govinda-bhāṣya on Vedānta-sūtra: 2.1.32)

“Without reference to a motive whatsoever, Hari performs the emanation and so forth [of the universe] out of bliss alone like an inebriated person’s dancing [which occurs as a result of bliss and not for the sake of attaining bliss]. Where is the notion of a motive in this regard for he who is possessed of complete bliss? Even the liberated shall be possessed of fulfilled desires. So how much more so shall this be so for he who is the Self of all?”

Read on →

sarva-dharmopapatteś ca

sarva-dharmopapatteś ca |
(Vedānta-sūtra: 2.1.37)

“And because of the establishment of all attributes [in Brahman, Brahman rightly both remains impartial to jīvas in general and favors his bhaktas specifically].

Read on →

upapadyate cābhyupalabhyate ca

upapadyate cābhyupalabhyate ca |
(Vedānta-sūtra: 2.1.36)

“That [i.e., partiality on the part of Brahman in the form of favoring bhaktas] is also established, and is also observable.”

Read on →

Scroll to Top