Mādhurya

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 →

aho laukika-sad-bandhu-bhāvaṁ ca staumi yena hi

aho laukika-sad-bandhu-bhāvaṁ ca staumi yena hi |
gauravāder vilopena kṛṣṇe sat-prema tanyate ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.5.76)

“[Śrī Nārada along with Uddhava to Gopa Kumāra:] Aho! And certainly I praise that attitude (bhāva) [on the part of bhaktas] of [Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s being] an excellent worldly kinsman by which excellent prema for Kṛṣṇa is expanded as a result of the removal of reverence and so forth [in regard to him].”

Read on →

premodreka-parīpāka-mahimā kena varṇyatām

premodreka-parīpāka-mahimā kena varṇyatām |
yaḥ kuryāt parameśaṁ taṁ sad-bandhum iva laukikam ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.5.75)

“[Śrī Nārada along with Uddhava to Gopa Kumāra:] By whom can be described the greatness of the complete maturation of an abundance of prema which can make him, the Supreme Īśa, [act] like an excellent kinsmen (bandhu) of the world?

Read on →

aho bhagavato līlā-mādhurya-mahimādbhutaḥ

aho bhagavato līlā-mādhurya-mahimādbhutaḥ |
tad-eka-niṣṭhā-gāmbhīryaṁ sevakānāṁ ca tādṛśam ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.5.69)

“[Śrī Nārada along with Uddhava to Gopa Kumāra:] Aho! The wonder of the greatness of the mādhurya of Bhagavān’s līlā! [And] The depth of the one-pointed fixity upon him of his servants is like that as well!”

Read on →

atha parikarāṇām api bhāveṣu tāratamyaṁ vivecanīyaṁ

atha parikarāṇām api bhāveṣu tāratamyaṁ vivecanīyaṁ, yeṣāṁ bhagavattaivopajīvyā | tatra bhagavattā tāvat sāmānyato dvividhaiva—paramaiśvarya-rūpā parama-mādhurya-rūpā ceti | aiśvaryaṁ prabhutā | mādhuryaṁ nāma ca śīla-guṇa-rūpa-vayo-līlānāṁ sambandha-viśeṣāṇāṁ ca manoharatvaṁ, paramatvaṁ ca cāsamordhvatvam | atha bhaktādi-catur-vidhāḥ parikarāpi dvividhāḥ | paramaiśvaryānubhava-pradhānāḥ parama-mādhuryānubhava-pradhānāś ca | tatraiśvarya-mātrasya sādhvasa-sambhrama-gaurava-buddhi-janakatvaṁ mādhurya-mātrasya prīti-janakatvam iti sarvānubhava-siddham eva | tatas tatraiśvarya-mādhuryayoḥ paramatvam iti tābhyāṁ yathāsaṅkhyaṁ sādhvasādīnāṁ prīteś ca paramatvam eva syāt |
(Excerpt from Prīti Sandarbha: 97)

“Now, the gradation among the bhāvas of even the parikaras (associates) [of Śrī Bhagavān], whose sole sustenance is Bhagavattā [i.e., the Bhagavān aspect of Bhagavān—the myriad of characteristics what constitute the essential nature of Bhagavān, as opposed to the Brahman aspect (Brahmatva) of Bhagavān], is to be deliberated upon. In that regard, Bhagavattā is in general only of two types: that the form of which is paramount aiśvarya (paramaiśvarya) and that the form of which is paramount mādhurya (parama-mādhurya). Aiśvarya refers to powerfulness (prabhutā), and mādhurya refers to charmingness [lit., ‘being captivating to the mind’] of disposition, qualities, figure, age, and līlā, as well as of specific relations [i.e., of forms of relationship]. [The aforementioned] ‘Paramountness’ (paramatva) [of the aiśvarya and the mādhurya of Bhagavān’s Bhagavattā], furthermore, refers to [their] being unequaled and unsurpassed (asamordhvatva) [by any other feature of Śrī Bhagavān, much less by any feature of any other entity subordinate to him].
“Now, parikaras too, who are of four types beginning with bhaktas [i.e., those whose principal rati is dāsya and so forth], are also of two [general] types: those in whom experience of paramount aiśvarya is predominant (paramaiśvaryānubhava-pradhāna) and those in whom experience of paramount mādhurya is predominant (mādhuryānubhava-pradhāna). In this regard, only aiśvarya’s being productive of alarm (sādhavasa), reverential excitement (sambhrama), and a sense of superiority (gaurava-buddhi), and only mādhurya’s being productive of prīti, is certainly established by the experience of everyone. Thus, there is the paramountness (paramatva) of the aiśvarya and the mādhurya [of Śrī Bhagavān’s Bhagavattā] in this regard [i.e., such paramountness is also to be considered present in the nature of Śrī Bhagavān], and the definitive paramountness of alarm and so forth and of prīti [that bhaktas experience in response to Śrī Bhagavān’s Bhagavattā] shall come about respectively because of these two [i.e., because of the paramount aiśvarya and the paramount mādhurya in Śrī Bhagavān’s Bhagavattā].”

Read on →

kṛṣṇaiśvaryādy-avijñānaṁ kṛtaṁ naiṣām avidyayā

kṛṣṇaiśvaryādy-avijñānaṁ kṛtaṁ naiṣām avidyayā |
kintu premottara-rasa-viśeṣeṇaiva tat kṛtam ||
(Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 4.4.15)

“Their [i.e., bhaktas’] absence of awareness of Kṛṣṇa’s aiśvarya and so forth is not caused by ignorance (avidyā). Rather, it is caused solely by a particular rasa overlaid with prema.”

Read on →

aiśvaryaṁ tu nara-līlātvasyānapekṣitatve sati īśvaratvāviṣkāraḥ

aiśvaryaṁ tu nara-līlātvasyānapekṣitatve sati īśvaratvāviṣkāraḥ | yathā mātā-pitarau prati aiśvaryaṁ darśayitvā—‘etad vāṁ darśitaṁ rūpaṁ prāg-janma-smaraṇāya me | nānyathā mad-bhavaṁ jñānaṁ martya-liṅgena jāyate’ ity uktam | yathārjunaṁ prati—‘paśya me yogam aiśvaram’ ity uktvā aiśvaryaṁ darśitam | vraje’pi brahmāṇaṁ prati mañju-mahimā-darśane paraḥ-sahasra-caturbhujatvādikam apīti ||
(Rāga-vartma-candrikā: 2.4)

“Manifestation [lit., ‘the uncovering’] of Īśvara-ness [i.e., the powerfulness inherent in Īśvara] while the nature of human līlā is being disregarded is [called] aiśvarya, as in the case when aiśvarya was shown to [Kṛṣṇa’s] mother and father [by him] and then it was stated [by him in SB 10.3.44], ‘This form [of mine] has been shown to you two for the sake of [your] remembrance of [my] previous births; otherwise, because of the mortal [i.e., human] figure [of this form in which I have now appeared], [your] awareness of my being [i.e., my identity] would not arise,’ as in the case when aiśvarya was shown [by Kṛṣṇa to Arjuna] after [his] saying to Arjuna, ‘See my Īśvaric yoga [i.e., see my extraordinary power to accomplish the impossible],’ and also even in Vraja [his showing] thousands of four-armed forms and so forth to Brahmā in the midst of the sight of his charming greatness [i.e., his mādhurya].”

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 →

yan martya-līlaupayikaṁ svayoga

yan martya-līlaupayikaṁ svayoga-
māyā-balaṁ darśayatā gṛhītam |
vismāpanaṁ svasya ca saubhagardheḥ
paraṁ padaṁ bhūṣaṇa-bhūṣaṇāṅgam ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 3.2.12; cited in the Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.5.108; Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 2.1.215; the Durgama-saṅgamanī-ṭīkā on Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.1.1, 2.5.108; Prīti Sandarbha: 80; Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.21.100)

“To show the power of his own yogamāyā, he [i.e., Śrī Kṛṣṇa] assumed [that form of his] which is suited to human [-like] līlā, which is astonishing even to himself, which is the apogee of the excellence of loveliness, and in which the limbs are the ornaments of the ornaments [upon them].”

Read on →

Scroll to Top