vaiṣṇava-mātrāṇāṁ ca yathāyogyam ārādhanaṁ yathā itihāsa-samuccaye ‘tasmād viṣṇu-prasādāya vaiṣṇavān paritoṣayet | prasāda-sumukho viṣṇus tenaiva syān na saṁśayaḥ ||’ iti | vyatirekeṇāpi pādmottara-khaṇḍe ‘arcayitvā tu govindaṁ tadīyān nārcayet tu yaḥ | na sa bhāgavato jñeyaḥ kevalaṁ dāmbhikaḥ smṛtaḥ ||’ iti | tatra ‘sarvatrāskhalitādeśaḥ sapta-dvīpaika-daṇḍa-dhṛk | anyatra brāhmaṇa-kulād anyatrācyuta-gotrataḥ ||’ iti śrī-pṛthu-caritānusāreṇa yat kiñcij jātāv apy uttamatvam eva mantavyam, ‘yasya yal lakṣaṇaṁ proktaṁ puṁso varṇābhivyañjakam | yad anyatrāpi dṛśyeta tat tenaiva vinirdiśet ||’ iti nāradokti-dṛṣṭāntena vā | yathoktaṁ pādme ‘kim atra bahunoktena brāhmaṇā ye’py avaiṣṇavāḥ | na draṣṭavyā na spraṣṭavyā na vaktavyāḥ kadācana ||’ tatra māgha-māhātmye ca ‘śvapākam iva nekṣeta loke vipram avaiṣṇavam | vaiṣṇavo varṇa-bāhyo’pi punāti bhuvana-trayam || na śūdrā bhagavad-bhaktās te tu bhāgavatā matāḥ | sarva-varṇeṣu te śūdrā ye na bhaktā janārdane ||’ itihāsa-samuccaye ‘smṛtaḥ sambhāṣito vāpi pūjito vā dvijottama | punāti bhagavad-bhaktaś cāṇḍālo’pi yadṛcchayā ||’ anyathā doṣa-śravaṇaṁ ca tatraiva ‘śūdraṁ vā bhagavad-bhaktaṁ niṣādaṁ śvapacaṁ tathā | vīkṣate jāti-sāmānyāt sa yāti narakaṁ dhruvam ||’ iti | bhakti-vaiśiṣṭyena tu vaiśiṣṭyam api dṛśyate yathā gāruḍe ‘tad-bhakta-jana-vātsalyaṁ pūjāyāṁ cānumodanam | tat-kathā-śravaṇe prītiḥ svara-netrādi-vikriyā || viṣṇoś ca kāraṇaṁ nṛtyaṁ tad-arthe dambha-varjanam | svayam abhyarcanaṁ caiva yo viṣṇuṁ nopajīvati || bhaktir aṣṭa-vidhā hy eṣā yasmin mlecche’pi vartate | sa viprendro muni-śreṣṭhaḥ sa jñānī sa ca paṇḍitaḥ | tasmai deyaṁ tato grāhyaṁ sa ca pūjyo yathā hariḥ ||’ iti | ata evāha bhagavān ‘na me bhaktaś catur-vedī mad-bhaktaḥ śvapacaḥ priyaḥ | tasmai deyaṁ tato grāhyaṁ sa ca pūjyo yathā hy aham ||’ iti | ata eva jñāta-bhakti-mahimnā satā durvāsasāpi śrīmad-ambarīṣasya pāda-grahaṇam apy ācaritam, kintu ambarīṣasyānabhīṣṭam eva tad iti tatraiva vyaktatvāt | śrī-bhagavatā śrīmad-uddhavādibhiś ca brāhmaṇa-mātrasya vandanāc ca | itara-vaiṣṇavais tu tat sarvathā na mantavyaṁ ‘vipraṁ kṛtāgasam api naiva druhyata māmakāḥ | ghnantaṁ bahu śapantaṁ vā namaskuruta nityaśaḥ ||’ iti bhagavad-ādeśa-bhaṅga-prasaṅgāc ca | śvapākam iva nekṣeta ity-ādikaṁ tu tad-darśanāsakti-niṣedha-paratvena samādheyam | dṛśyate ca yudhiṣṭhira-draupady-ādīnām aśvatthāmni tathā vyavahāraḥ | vaiṣṇava-pūjakais tu vaiṣṇavānām ācāro’pi na vicāraṇīyaḥ ‘api cet sudurācāraḥ’ ity-ādeḥ, yathoktaṁ gāruḍe ‘viṣṇu-bhakti-samāyukto mithyācāro’py anāśramī | punāti sakalān lokān sahasrāṁśur ivoditaḥ ||’ iti | tad etad udāhṛtam eva—‘aho bata śvapaco’to garīyān yaj jihvāgre vartate nāma tubhyam’ ity-ādau | atra śvapaca-śabdo yaugikārtha-puraskāreṇaiva vartate | tato durjātitvena durācāratvenāpi nāvamantavyas tad-bhakta-janaḥ, svāvamantṛtvena tu sutarām | ata evoktaṁ gāruḍe ‘rukṣākṣaraṁ tu śṛṇvan vai tathā bhāgavateritam | praṇāma-pūrvaṁ taṁ kṣāntyā yo vaded vaiṣṇavo hi saḥ ||’ iti |
(Excerpt from Bhakti Sandarbha: 247)
“Also, worship as appropriate of Vaiṣṇavas in general is [described] as follows in Itihāsa-samuccaya (25.27), ‘Therefore, one should satisfy the Vaiṣṇavas for the sake of [attaining] Viṣṇu’s favor (prasāda). Certainly by this [i.e., by satisfying the Vaiṣṇavas] Viṣṇu shall become of gladden face. There is no doubt.’ Also by way of negative concomitance (vyatireka) [this same principle is taught] in the Uttara-khaṇḍa of Padma Purāṇa (253.177), ‘One who after having worshiped Govinda shall not worship those who ware his own, however, is not to be consider a bhāgavata [i.e., a genuine bhakta of Govinda]. He is regarded as merely a charlatan.’ In this regard, exaltedness (uttamatva) [on the part of a Vaiṣṇava] is verily to be honored even in any sort of caste [i.e., regardless which caste a Vaiṣṇava is born into], in accord with the conduct of Śrī Pṛthu [described in SB 4.21.12], ‘He [viz., Mahārāja Pṛthu], the sole bearer of the stick [i.e., ruler] over the seven islands, was of unchecked order everywhere apart from the brāhmaṇa community and apart from those of Acyuta’s line (gotra) [i.e., the Vaiṣṇavas, meaning, he did not rule over brāhmaṇas and Vaiṣṇavas but rather honored them and did so in regard to all of the Vaiṣṇavas regardless of where and in which caste they were born],’ or, in accord with the illustration stated by Śrī Nārada [in SB 7.11.35], ‘If a characteristic which is said to be an indicator of a person’s varṇa should be observed even elsewhere [i.e., even in a person born in a different varṇa], one should designate him [i.e., the person in whom the characteristic was observed] specifically with that [i.e., with the varṇa of that characteristic which was observed],’ as is stated [also] in Padma Purāṇa, ‘What [is the use] of numerous statements in this regard? Non-Vaiṣṇavas, although [i.e., even if they are] brāhmaṇas, are never to be looked at, never to be touched, and never to be spoken to.’ Also in this regard, [it is said] in the Māgha-māhātmya [of Padma Purāṇa], ‘Like a dog-cooker [is not to be looked at], one should not look at a non-Vaiṣṇava brāhmaṇa in this world. Even a Vaiṣṇava outside the varṇas [i.e., who does not belong to any of the four varṇas] purifies the three worlds. Bhaktas of Bhagavān are not śūdras. Rather, they are accepted as Bhāgavatas [i.e., to belong to Śrī Bhagavān and not to any caste]. Among all the varṇas, they are śūdras who are not bhaktas of Janārdana.’ In Itihāsa-samuccaya (31.55) [it is similarly said], ‘Remembered, conversed with, or worshiped, O best of the twice-born, a bhakta of Bhagavān, although a cāṇḍala, purifies [someone] automatically.’ Furthermore, otherwise [i.e., neglecting to honor all Vaiṣṇavas irrespective of their caste], a fault is heard of there [in the same text] specifically, ‘One who sees a bhakta of Bhagavān to be a śūdra, tribesman (niṣāda), or dog-cooker [i.e., outcaste] because of commonality in caste (jāti) certainly goes to Naraka.’ Pre-eminence [i.e., recognition of certain Vaiṣṇavas as being pre-eminent even among Vaiṣṇavas] too is observed in accord with a pre-eminence in [their] bhakti, as [is described in a statement of Śrī Bhagavān] in Garuḍa Purāṇa, ‘(1) Affection for my bhaktas, (2) approval of [my] worship, (3) fondness for hearing discussion of me, (4) transformations of the voice, eyes, and so forth [i.e., experiencing sāttvika-bhāvas as a result of emotions related to me], (5) dancing for the sake of Viṣṇu, (6) forsaking deceit [alt., arrogance, or, pretension] for his sake, (7) performing ritual worship [of him] oneself, and (8) not subsisting upon Viṣṇu [i.e., using acts of bhakti to Viṣṇu to earn a livelihood]—even a mleccha [i.e., person of the lowest caste] in whom these eight types of bhakti are present is the best of brāhmaṇas and greatest of sages. He is a knower (jñānī), and he is wise (paṇḍita). Give [charity, etc.] to him and accept [prasāda, etc.] from him since he is also worshipable as Hari is.’ Thus, Bhagavān says, ‘A caturvedī [i.e., a brāhmaṇa versed in the four Vedas] who is not my bhakta is not dear to me; [even] a dog-cooker who is my bhakta [however] is [dear to me]. Give [charity, etc.] to him and accept [prasāda, etc.] from him since he is also worshipable as I am.’
“Therefore, even holding [the kṣatriya] Śrīmad Ambarīṣa’s feet was enacted even by [the highly learned and revered ascetic brāhmaṇa sage] Durvāsā upon his becoming aware of the greatness of bhakti [after this was explained to him by Bhagavān Viṣṇu], yet that was certainly not desired by Ambarīṣa because of [Ambarīṣa’s distinterest towards that] being evident there itself [i.e., in the narration of this incident in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam]. Furthermore, because of obeisance [being offered] to brāhmaṇas in general by Śrī Bhagavān [himself personally] and by Śrīmad Uddhava and others [i.e., and other great bhaktas and companions of Śrī Bhagavān], that [i.e., having one’s feet held or in any other manner being bowed to or shown great formal reverence by a brāhmaṇa] is under no circumstance to be desired [alt., expected] by other Vaiṣṇavas. This is also so because of an incidence of breaking Bhagavān’s order [if desiring or expecting honor from brāhmaṇas should occur], as [is stated by Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa himself in SB 10.64.41], ‘O you all who are my own, never harm even a brāhmaṇa who has committed an offense. Be he beating or cursing [you] profusely, always offer obeisance [to him].’ [The aforecited statement from Padma Purāṇa], ‘Like a dog-cooker [is not to be looked at], one should not look at a non-Vaiṣṇava brāhmaṇa in this world,’ is to be reconciled [with the aforecited order of Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa given in SB 10.64.41 to always offer obeisance to brāhmaṇas regardless of their behavior, meaning, regardless of whether they are Vaiṣṇavas or not] as being related to a prohibition on attachment to the sight of them [i.e., the instruction in the aforecited verse from Padma Purāṇa to not look at a non-Vaiṣṇava brāhmaṇa should be understood to refer to fostering no attachment to seeing non-Vaiṣṇava brāhmaṇas, and thus Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s order in SB 10.64.41 to always offer obeisance to them stands, meaning, in practice one should always show respect to a brāhmaṇa regardless of his behavior or whether he is a Vaiṣṇava or not yet one should not foster attachment to seeing non-Vaiṣṇava brāhmaṇas]. Such conduct is also observed on the part of Yudhiṣṭhira, Draupadī, and others in regard to Aśvatthāmā [i.e., the Pāṇḍavas and Draupadī offered respect to Aśvathāmā, who was the son of Droṇa, a brāhmaṇa, despite the fact that Aśvathāmā killed their sons and fired a brahmāstra at Uttarā in an attempt to kill their future grandson Parīkṣit]. Even the conduct of Vaiṣṇavas, however, is not to be judged by worshipers of Vaiṣṇavas, as per [Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s teaching in BG 9.30], ‘Even if possessed of extreme misconduct, he who worships me being devoted to no other [devatā] is to be regarded as verily virtuous (sādhu), since he is rightly resolved,’ and as stated in Garuḍa Purāṇa, ‘One fully endowed with Viṣṇu-bhakti, although [i.e., even if] possessed of deceitful behavior and devoid of any āśrama [i.e., designated role in the social order], purifies all people like the risen sun.’ This, this [verse, viz., SB 3.33.7] was cited specifically [earlier in BSK 128], ‘Aho bata [i.e., how astonishing]! A dog-cooker on the tip of whose tongue your name is present is thus highly honorable. Those who take your name have undergone austerity, conducted sacrifices, bathed [in all tīrthas], become noble, and studied the Veda.’ Here [in SB 3.33.7], the word ‘dog-cooker’ (śvapaca) is present with emphasis specifically on the etymological meaning [of the word, i.e., the word is used to refer literally to people who cook and eat dog meat]. Consequently, a person who is his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] bhakta is not to be disrespected on account of being of low caste or even on account of being possessed of misconduct, and therefore certainly [is] not [to be disrespected] on account of being disrespectful towards oneself. Therefore, it is said in Garuḍa Purāṇa, ‘One who after hearing harsh words uttered by a Bhāgavata can offer obeisance and speak with forbearance [respectfully to that Bhāgavata] is certainly a Vaiṣṇava.’”
Read on →
