Śāstra-pramāṇa

sarva-prapañcātītānāṁ teṣāṁ vaikuṇṭha-vāsinām

sarva-prapañcātītānāṁ teṣāṁ vaikuṇṭha-vāsinām |
tasya vaikuṇṭha-lokasya tasya tan-nāyakasya ca ||
tāni māhātmya-jātāni prapañcāntargataiḥ kila |
dṛṣṭāntair nopayujyante na śakyante ca bhāṣitum ||
tathāpi bhavato brahman prapañcāntargatasya hi |
prapañca-parivārāntardṛṣṭi-garbhita-cetasaḥ ||
tad-dṛṣṭānta-kulenaiva tat tat syād bodhitaṁ sukham |
tathety ucyeta yat kiñcit tad-āgaḥ kṣamatāṁ hariḥ ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.4.40–43)

“The greatnesses of the residents of Vaikuṇṭha beyond the entire phenomenal world, of Vaikuṇṭhaloka, and of its master [i.e., Vaikuṇṭhanātha, who like Vaikuṇṭhaloka and its residents is so also beyond the entire phenomenal world] are certainly not fit, and not able, to be described with examples from within the phenomenal world. Still, O brāhmaṇa, for you who are within the phenomenal world and the inner vision [i.e., awareness] of whose mind is filled with the coverings of the phenomenal world, those [greatnesses] can be easily made known only through such examples [i.e., examples drawn from the phenomenal world]. ‘It may be said to be such.’ May Hari forgive the offense of whatever may be said as such [i.e., whatever may be said of those greatnesses by means of stating examples drawn from the phenomenal world, such as, ‘He [i.e., Bhagavān] is like an emperor’].”

Read on →

śāstrera siddhānta ei vijñera anubhava

śāstrera siddhānta ei vijñera anubhava |
mūḍha-loka nāhi jāne bhāvera vaibhava ||
(Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 1.6.104)

“This is the śāstra’s siddhānta and the experience of the wise. Ignorant people do not understand the greatness of bhāva.”

Read on →

tāre kahe—kene kara kutarkānumāna?

tāre kahe—kene kara kutarkānumāna? |
śāstra-viruddhārtha kabhu nā haya pramāṇa ||
(Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 1.2.73)

“To that, it is said, ‘Why do you make an inference based on fallacious reasoning? A meaning that is contrary to śāstra is never authentic [i.e., a valid means of knowing the object of knowledge].”

Read on →

pitṛ-deva-manuṣyāṇāṁ vedaś cakṣus taveśvara

pitṛ-deva-manuṣyāṇāṁ vedaś cakṣus taveśvara |
śreyas tv anupalabdhe’rthe sādhya-sādhanayor api ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.20.4; cited in Tattva Sandarbha: 11)

“O Lord, regarding an imperceptible object, as well as the goal and the means [pertaining to it], your Veda is the best eye for the forefathers, the devas, and human beings.”

Read on →

anabhyāse viṣaṁ śāstram ajīrṇe bhojanaṁ viṣam

anabhyāse viṣaṁ śāstram ajīrṇe bhojanaṁ viṣam |
daridrasya viṣaṁ goṣṭhī vṛddhasya taruṇī viṣam ||
(Cāṇakya-nīti: 4.15)

“Without regular practice, śāstra is poison [because it can lead to delusion]. When undigested, food is poison [because it causes disease]. For a poor person, congregating is poison [because one cannot properly host others], and for an elderly man, a young woman is poison [because he cannot fulfill all her needs].”

Read on →

vartitavyaṁ śam-icchadbhir bhaktavan na tu kṛṣṇavat

vartitavyaṁ śam-icchadbhir bhaktavan na tu kṛṣṇavat |
ity evaṁ bhakti-śāstrāṇāṁ tātparyasya vinirṇayaḥ ||
rāmādivad vartitavyaṁ na kvacid rāvaṇādivat |
ity eṣa mukti-dharmādi-parāṇāṁ naya īryate ||
(Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi: 3.24–5)

“The bhakti-śāstra is to be followed as a bhakta, and not rather as Kṛṣṇa, by those who desire auspiciousness. This is the proper determination of the intent of the bhakti-śāstras. ‘One should act like Rāma and others [i.e., those of high character], and never like Rāvaṇa and others [i.e., those of condemnable character].’ This is said to be the proper conduct of those who seek mukti, dharma, and so on [but it is not the guideline for those who follow bhakti-śāstra].”

Read on →

lakṣaṇa-pramāṇābhyāṁ vastu-siddhiḥ

lakṣaṇa-pramāṇābhyāṁ vastu-siddhiḥ, na tu kevala-pratijñā-mātreṇa |
(Unknown Source)

“Determination of an object arises from characteristics (lakṣaṇa) and a means of valid cognition (pramāṇa), not merely by an assertion.”

Read on →

virodho vākyayor yatra nāprāmāṇyaṁ tad iṣyate

virodho vākyayor yatra nāprāmāṇyaṁ tad iṣyate |
yathāviruddhatā ca syāt tathārthaḥ kalpyate tayoḥ ||
(Kūrma Puraṇa: 1.5.327; cited in Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta: 1.5.327)

“When there is a contradiction between statements [in śāstra], that is not [to be] considered [an instance of] inauthenticity [i.e., one statement should not be considered inauthentic and only the other one authentic]. A meaning of both [statements, rather,] whereby no contradiction arises should be formulated.”

Read on →

tad etad vyākhyātam abhidheyam

tad etad vyākhyātam abhidheyam | atrānyo’pi viśeṣaḥ śāstra-mahājana-dṛṣṭyānusandheyaḥ |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 340)

“Thus, this abhidheya has been explained. In this regard, other additional detail is to be investigated by consulting the śāstra and great persons (mahājanas).”

Read on →

Scroll to Top