Piṅgalā

rāgānugāyāṁ pravṛttir apīdṛśī

rāgānugāyāṁ pravṛttir apīdṛśī—santuṣṭā śraddadhaty etad yathā-lābhena jīvatī | viharāmy amunaivāham ātmanā ramaṇena vai || amunā iti bhāva-garbha-ramaṇena saha | ātmanā manasaiva tāvad viharāmi | ruci-pradhānasya mārgasyāsya manaḥ-pradhānatvāt tat-preyasī-rūpeṇāsiddhāyās tādṛśa-bhajane prāyo manasaiva yuktatvāt | anena śrīmat-pratimādau tādṛśīnām apy auddhatyaṁ parihṛtam | evaṁ pitṛtvādi-bhāveṣv apy anusandheyam ||

(Bhakti Sandarbha: 311)

“Engagement in rāgānugā [-bhakti, i.e., the mental, verbal, and bodily performance of rāgānugā-sādhana-bhakti] too is such [i.e., is described in another statement of Piṅgalā in SB 11.8.40], ‘Satisfied living in accord with attainment [i.e., remaining satisfied regardless of whatever is encountered] and possessed of śraddhā in this [i.e., in the resolve that I shall attain Bhagavān as my husband], I shall enjoy solely with him [i.e.. Bhagavān], my beloved, by means of the self.’ ‘With him’ (amunā) means with [my] beloved, present in the interiority of [my] bhāva. ’I shall enjoy [with him] “by means of the self”’ (ātmanā) signifies, to be specific, by means solely of the mind because of this path in which taste (ruci) is predominant [i.e., because of the path of rāgānugā-sādhana-bhakti] having a predominance of the mind because of generally only the mind being fit for such worship (bhajana) in the case of one who has not become established in the form of [one of] his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] beloveds [i.e., since it is not possible for a jīva to directly serve Bhagavān as one of his beloveds when one has not attained the spiritual form of one of Bhagavān’s beloveds in his eternal abode and one thus remains embodied in a material body bound by time and karma within saṁsāra, it is only possible for a jīva to offer such worship (bhajana) conducive to the attainment of the rāga of a rāgātmikā beloved of Bhagavān for which one has ruci by mentally taking shelter in Bhagavān with the bhāva of being his beloved and offering worship to him in the mind with a mentally conceived form of one of his beloved of Bhagavān in his eternal abode, and thus on the path of rāgānugā-sādhana-bhakti, which is based on a sādhaka having ruci for the rāga of one of Bhagavān’s rāgātmikā associates, one’s worship (bhajana), that is, practice of sādhana, is primarily performed in the mind, where one can don a mentally conceived form suited to serving Bhagavān with the rāga for which one has ruci and in that mentally conceived form engage in offering various forms of worship to him in accord with the specific nature of that rāga]. Hereby, the audaciousness of even such in relation to the sacred Deity or elsewhere is repudiated [i.e., the audaciousness of offering to an existential seat (adhiṣṭhāna) of Śrī Bhagavān outside the mind, such as a Deity, the worship a beloved offers Bhagavān, viz., engaging in acts such as dressing one’s gross body as one of Bhagavān beloveds, offering Bhagavān embraces and kisses, etc., is repudiated by Piṅgalā’s statement in SB 11.8.40 that she will enjoy with Bhagavān ‘by means of the self’ (ātmanā), that is, only by means of the mind, and not by means of the body]. Such is [also] to be determined in regard to the bhāvas of paternity and so forth [i.e., no sādhaka with ruci for any form of rāgātmikā-bhakti should engage outside the mind in dressing one’s body as rāgātmikā-bhaktas dress themselves in Bhagavān’s abode or in performing any of the activities that are specific to how such rāgātmikā-bhaktas personally relate to Bhagavān in his eternal abode unless they so happen to match the conventional manner in which one dresses one’s sādhaka-deha, that is, physical body].”

Read on →

rāgānugāyāṁ pravṛttir apīdṛśī Read on →

rāgātmikāyāṁ rucir yathā

rāgātmikāyāṁ rucir yathā—suhṛt preṣṭhatamo nātha ātmā cāyaṁ śarīriṇām | taṁ vikrīyātmanaivāhaṁ rame’nena yathā ramā || atra svābhāvika-sauhṛdyādi-dharmais tasminn eva svābhāvika-patitvaṁ sthāpayitvā, parasyaupādhika-patitvam ity abhipretam | anyatra patyāv ‘ekatvaṁ sā gatā yasmāc caru-mantrāhuti-vrataiḥ’ iti chāndogya-pariśiṣṭānusāreṇa kṛtrimam ekātmatvam | tasmin paramātmani tu svabhāvata evety ātma-śabdasyāpy abhiprāyaḥ | evaṁ yadyapi tasmin patitvam anāhāryam evāsti, tathāpi ātmanaiva mūlya-bhūtenaiva taṁ viśeṣataḥ krītvā yathānyāpi kanyā vivāhātmakena svātma-samarpaṇena kañcit patitvenopādatte, tathā bhāvenāśritya anena parama-manohara-rūpeṇa tena saha rame ramā lakṣmīr yathā | tad evaṁ tasyā rāge piṅgalāyāḥ sva-rucir dyotitā ||
(Excerpted from Bhakti Sandarbha: 310)

“Taste for rāgātmikā [-bhakti] is as follows [as illustrated by a statement of Piṅgalā in SB 11.8.35], ‘He [i.e., Acyuta, Śrī Bhagavān,] is the friend (suhṛt), the most beloved (preṣṭhatama), the Lord (nātha), and the Self (ātmā) of all embodied beings. I shall purchase him by means of my very self and [thereby] enjoy with him like Ramā [i.e., Lakṣmī].’ In this regard, having established inherent (svābhāvika) husbandhood (patitvam) [i.e., capability to act as a husband in relation to a jīva] in him [i.e., Bhagavān] by means of his qualities of inherent friendship [i.e., his capability to act as a friend in relation to a jīva] and so forth, the conditional (aupādhika) husbandhood of others [i.e., of jīvas in saṁsāra who act as the husband of another embodied jīva] is intended [i.e., is meant to be conveyed by Piṅgalā’s statement in SB 11.8.35]. According to the Chāndogya-pariśiṣṭa, ‘She [i.e., a wife] has attained oneness (ekatvam) [with her husband] by virtue of caru [i.e., a type of oblation], mantras, rites, and vows,’ unitedness (ekātmatva) with other husbands is artificial (kṛtrima) [i.e., the unitedness of the jīva in the body of a woman with another jīva in the body of a man is a unitedness non-inherent in either of them that is created by rituals and resolutions], whereas in relation to Paramātmā, it [i.e., a jīva’s unitedness] is existent altogether inherently (svabhāvataḥ). This is the intention of the word ‘Self’ (Ātmā) as well [in SB 11.8.35, i.e., this is the intent of Piṅgalā’s statement that Acyuta is the Self of all embodied beings]. Thus, although husbandhood (patitva) is indeed non-adventitious in him [i.e., although Bhagavān’s capacity to act as a husband in relation to a jīva is not something some created but rather is an inherent capability in him], still [Piṅgalā states that] specially purchasing him by means of my very self, that is, [with myself] as the price, as other unmarried ladies also accept someone as [their] husband by means of the offering of oneself that constitutes [i.e., is known as] marriage, so I, taking shelter [in Bhagavān] by means of bhāva, shall enjoy with him, he of supremely attractive figure, like Ramā, that is, Lakṣmī. In this way, Piṅgalā’s own taste for her [i.e., Lakṣmī’s] rāga is thus illustrated.”

Read on →

rāgātmikāyāṁ rucir yathā Read on →

paraṁ saukhyaṁ hi nairāśyaṁ

paraṁ saukhyaṁ hi nairāśyaṁ svairiṇy apy āha piṅgalā |
taj jānatīnāṁ naḥ kṛṣṇe tathāpy āśā duratyayā ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.47.47)

[The Vraja-gopīs:] “Although the prostitute Piṅgalā said that hopelessness is the greatest happiness [see SB 11.8.44], still, even though we know this, our hope for Kṛṣṇa is unassailable [i.e., impossible to give up].”

Read on →

paraṁ saukhyaṁ hi nairāśyaṁ Read on →

Type your query and press enter

Scroll to Top