Prīti – Page 4 – Anuśīlana.in

atha kānto’yam iti prītiḥ kānta-bhāvaḥ

atha kānto’yam iti prītiḥ kānta-bhāvaḥ | eṣa eva priyatā-śabdena śrī-rasāmṛta-sindhau paribhāṣitā | priyāyā bhāvaḥ priyateti | laukika-rasikair atraiva rati-saṁjñā svīkriyate | eṣa eva kāma-tulyatvāt śrī-gopikāsu kāmādi-śabdenāpy abhihitaḥ | smarākhya-kāma-viśeṣas tv anyaḥ, vailakṣaṇyāt | kāma-sāmānyaṁ khalu spṛhā-sāmānyātmakam, prīti-sāmānyaṁ tu viṣayānukūlyātmakas tad-anugata-viṣaya-spṛhādi-mayo jñāna-viśeṣa iti lakṣitam | tato dvayoḥ sāmānya-prāya-ceṣṭatve’pi kāma-sāmānyasya ceṣṭā svīyānukūlya-tātparyā | tatra kutracid viṣayānukūlyaṁ ca sva-sukha-kārya-bhūtam eveti tatra gauṇa-vṛttir eva prīti-śabdaḥ | śuddha-prīti-mātrasya ceṣṭā tu priyānukūlya-tātparyaiva | tatra tad-anugatam eva cātma-sukham iti mukhya-vṛttir eva prīti-śabdaḥ | ata eva yathā-pūrvaṁ sukha-prīti-sāmānyayor ullāsātmakatayā sāmye’py ānukūlyāṁśena prīti-sāmānyasya vaiśiṣṭyaṁ darśitam | tathā kāma-prīti-sāmānyayor api spṛhā-viśeṣātmakatayā sāmye’pi tenaiva vaiśiṣṭyaṁ siddham | atra tu—‘yat te sujāta-caraṇāmburuhaṁ staneṣu bhītāḥ śanaiḥ priya dadhīmahi karkaśeṣu’ ity ādibhir atikramyāpi svānukūlyaṁ priyānukūlya-tātparyasyaiva darśitatvāt śuddha-prīti-viśeṣa-rūpatvam eva labhyate | atas tad-viśeṣatvaṁ ca spṛhā-viśeṣātmakatvāt siddham | tato’tra śrī-kṛṣṇa-viṣayatvena kubjādi-sambandhi-kāmavad aprākṛta-kāmatvasyāpy anabhyupagame sati prākṛta-kāmatvaṁ tu sutarām asiddham | tathā darśitaṁ ca— ‘vikrīḍitaṁ vraja-vadhūbhir idaṁ ca viṣṇoḥ, śraddhānvito yaḥ śṛṇuyād atha varṇayed vā | bhaktiṁ parāṁ bhagavati parilabhya kāmaṁ, hṛd-rogam āśv apahinoty acireṇa dhīraḥ’ || ity anena | yad vikrīḍitaṁ khalu nija-śravaṇa-dvārāpy anyeṣāṁ dūra-deśa-kāla-sthitānām api śīghram eva yaṁ kāmam apanayat paramaṁ premāṇaṁ vitanoti tat punas tat-kāmamayaṁ na syāt | api tu parama-prema-viśeṣamayam eva | na hi paṅkena paṅkaṁ kṣālyate | na tu svayam asnehaḥ snehayati | ata eva tasya bhāvasya śuddha-prema-mayatvaṁ nigadenaivoktvā śuddhatve hetutayā punas tena bhagavat-prasādaś ca darśitaḥ—‘bhagavān āhatā vīkṣya śuddha-bhāva-prasāditaḥ’ iti | tasyātmarāma-śiromaṇes tena ramaṇaṁ ca darśitam—‘kṛtvā tāvantam ātmānam’ ity-ādibhiḥ | vaśīkṛtatvaṁ ca svayaṁ darśitaṁ—‘na pāraye’haṁ niravadya-saṁyujām’ ity ādinā | tatra niravadyeti prīteḥ śuddhatvam | sva-sādhukṛtyam iti paramottamotkṛṣṭatvam | na pāraya iti svavaśīkāratvam | ataḥ śuddha-prema-jātiṣu tasya paramatvād eva śrīmad-uddhavenāpy evam uktam—‘vāñchanti yad bhava-bhiyo munayo vayaṁ ca’ iti | tasmāt sarvataḥ paramaiva kānta-bhāva-rūpā prītir iti sthitam |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 84)

“Then, the prīti [based on the attitude in relation to Śrī Bhagavān], ‘He is [my] beloved’ is [called] kānta-bhāva. This is technically defined with the word priyatā in Śrī Rasāmṛta-sindhu. The bhāva of a priyā [i.e., ladylove] is called priyatā [i.e., ‘fondness,’ lit., ‘ladylove-ness’]. The term rati is accepted [i.e., used] by secular rasikas in this regard [i.e., to define this bhāva]. Because of [its] resemblance to kāma [i.e., “love”], it is also referred to by words such as kāma in the case of the gopīs. It is different from the particular type of kāma known as smara [i.e., eros] because of dissimilarity [in nature between the two]. Kāma in general is defined as that constituted of desire (spṛhā) in general [i.e., general desire for an object of love], whereas prīti in general is a particular form of awareness constituted of favorability (ānukūlya) towards its object and full of desire (spṛhā) and so forth for its object following that [i.e., following in the wake of favorability towards its object (see PRS 61 and 78 for further discussion of the definition of prīti in general)]. Thus, although the two [i.e., kāma and prīti] are almost the same in terms of activity, the activities of kāma in general have the aim of favorability (ānukūlya) to oneself [i.e., the activities of kāma are focused on pleasing oneself]. Therein, sometimes there is also favorability (ānukūlya) to the object [of kāma], but that is only existent for the purpose of one’s own happiness [i.e., favorability to the object of kāma is proffered only as a means of attaining happiness for oneself]. Thus, in this regard [i.e., in reference to kāma in general], the word prīti is only in its secondary function [i.e., the word prīti describes kāma in general only in a secondary sense of its meaning, that is, kāma in general is not its primary sense]. The activities of pure prīti itself, however, have the aim only of favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved (priya). Therein, one’s own happiness is only following that [i.e., it occurs only in the wake of that favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved as a secondary, concomitant effect]. In this regard, the word prīti is in its primary function [i.e., the primary meaning of the word prīti is love the aim (tātparya) of which is solely favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved]. Therefore, as previously [was explained in PRS 61], although happiness (sukha) and prīti in general are equivalent in [their both] being constituted of elation (ullāsa), the speciality of prīti in general was shown by the aspect of favorability (ānukūlya) [i.e., prīti in general is constituted of favorability (ānukūlya) towards its object, whereas happiness (sukha) is not], so although kāma and prīti in general are equivalent because of [their both] being constituted of a particular form of desire (spṛhā), the speciality [of prīti in general] was established by that itself [i.e., by only prīti’s, and not kāma’s, being constituted principally and secondarily of favorability (ānukūlya) to its object]. “Verily in this regard, because of the aim of favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved definitively eclipsing even favorability to oneself being shown by [the statement of the gopīs in SB 10.31.19], ‘O Beloved! Fearful, we gently hold your tender lotus feet on our hard breasts … [You roam with them throughout the forest. Have they not been cut by pebbles and so forth? Our hearts tremble. You are our very life],’ a special form of pure prīti is definitively understood [to exist in the gopīs]. Thus, the speciality of that [i.e., of pure prīti in general, and of the special form of pure prīti found in the gopīs in particular] because of [its] being constituted of a special form of desire [i.e., a desire for favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved that is not motivated by a desire for favorability (ānukūlya) to oneself, that is, the pursuit of experiencing personal happiness (sukha) for oneself, and rather is motivated solely by a desire for favorability (ānukūlya) to the beloved whereby one even neglects favorability (ānukūlya) to oneself] is also established. Then, in this regard, because of non-recognition of [the pure prīti existent in the gopīs] being supramundane (aprākṛta) kāma like the kāma belonging to Kubjā and others [which is such] on account of Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s being the object [of the kāma], [its, i.e., the gopīs’ prīti] being mundane (prākṛta) kāma is completely unfounded [i.e., kāma means the desire to please one’s own senses (see CC 1.4.165) and can be classified as mundane (prākṛta) or supramundane (aprākṛta) depending on the nature of its object, that is, whether its object is mundane (prākṛta) or supramundane (aprākṛta) in nature; since the gopīs’ prīti is not constituted of the desire to please one’s own senses or activity aimed at this effect (viz., svīya-ānukūlya), and rather is constituted of the desire to please the senses of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, its object, and activity to that effect (viz., priya-ānukūlya), it should not be considered even supramundane (aprākṛta) kāma, as is found in Kubjā and others, much less mundane (prākṛta) kāma, as is found people in saṁsāra]. “Thus, this is also shown [in SB 10.33.40]: ‘One endowed with śraddhā who shall hear about and then describe Viṣṇu’s extraordinary play with the ladies of Vraja attains pure bhakti to Bhagavān, quickly casts off the heart disease of kāma, and without delay becomes steadfast.’ That extraordinary play which, even by means of hearing about it, quickly removes the kāma even of others who are situated in distant places and times [from where and when it took place] and bestows [upon them] the highest prema cannot on the contrary be constituted of that [sort of] kāma [i.e., the sort of kāma which it removes], and rather, must be constituted of a particular form of the highest prema [since only such prema could have the power to dispel kāma]. Mud is certainly not washed off with mud, and that which is itself devoid of oil does not anoint [i.e., the play between Śrī Kṛṣṇa and the gopīs described in the Rāsa-pañcādhyāyī cannot be constituted of mundane (prākṛta) kāma because if it were, it would not purify those who hear of it of mundane (prākṛta) kāma, and it cannot be devoid of pure prīti because if it were, it would not be able to impart pure prīti to those who hear of it]. “Therefore, having now described this bhāva’s being constituted of pure prema with a definitive pronouncement, furthermore Bhagavān’s satisfaction because of it by virtue of the cause of [its] purity is also shown [in SB 10.22.18], ‘Bhagavān, seeing them [i.e., the gopīs in the Yamunā] struck [with embarrassment], and satisfied by their pure bhāva ….’ The amorous sporting of he [i.e., Bhagavān] who is the crest-jewel of ātmarāmas because of that [i.e., because of his satisfaction with the gopīs’ pure prīti] is also shown [in SB 10.33.20], ‘Expanding himself into as many gopa girls as there were, he, Bhagavān, although an ātmarāma, playfully [i.e., amorously] enjoyed with them.’ “Himself also being captivated [by the gopīs’ pure prīti] is also shown by [his statement to the gopīs in SB 10.32.22], ‘I am not capable even with the lifespan of a deva of the extraordinary act of virtue of you all, whose union [with me] is irreproachable, and who have completely severed the unrelenting fetters of family life and served me. May that [act of virtue of yours] by [your own] virtue be your compensation [for your virtuous service to me].’ Therein, ‘irreproachable’ (niravadya) indicates the purity of [the gopīs’] prīti. [The gopīs’] ‘Extraordinary act of virtue’ (sva-sādhukṛtyam) indicates the highest, topmost excellence [of their prīti], and ‘I am not capable’ (na pāraye) indicates his [i.e., Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s] own captivation [because of their prīti]. Thus, because of its [i.e., the gopīs’ prīti] definitive supremacy among [all] types of pure prema, even the following is stated by Śrīmad Uddhava [in SB 10.47.58], ‘[The bhāva of the gopīs] Which those afraid of material existence, sages, and we too desire.’ Therefore, it is determined that prīti in the form of kānta-bhāva is supreme in all respects.”

Read on →

atha bhaktābhimāna-viśeṣa-hetavo guṇās tat-kṛtāḥ prīter bhaktānāṁ

atha bhaktābhimāna-viśeṣa-hetavo guṇās tat-kṛtāḥ prīter bhaktānāṁ ca bhedās tāratamyaṁ ca yathā—saiva khalu prītir bhagavat-svabhāva-viśeṣāvirbhāva-yogam upalabhya kañcid anugrāhyatvenābhimānayati kañcid anukampitvena kañcin mitratvena, kañcit priyātvena ca | bhagavat-svabhāva-viśeṣāvirbhāva-hetuś ca yasya bhagavat-priya-viśeṣasya saṅgādinā labdhā prītis tasya prīter eva guṇa-viśeṣo boddhavyaḥ | nitya-parikarāṇāṁ nityam eva tad dvayam |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 84)

“Now, the qualities [of prīti] the causes of which are the particular identities (abhimānas) of bhaktas, and the divisions and gradation of prīti and bhaktas made by them [i.e., by these qualities of prīti which give rise to particular identities], are [explained] as follows: prīti itself alone, upon acquiring connection with the manifestation of a particular nature (svabhāva) [i.e., persona] of Bhagavān [e.g., Śrī Kṛṣṇa, Śrī Rāma, Śrī Viṣṇu, or otherwise], produces the identity (abhimāna) of being an object of favor [i.e., a junior, servant, or child of Bhagavān] in someone, of being a bestower of compassion [i.e., a senior or parent of Bhagavān] in someone, of being a friend [of Bhagavān] in someone, and of being a beloved [of Bhagavān] in someone. The cause of the manifestation of a particular nature (svabhāva) of Bhagavān [in relation to which prīti manifests a particular identity in a bhakta] is furthermore to be understood as a particular quality of the prīti of the particular dear one of Bhagavān by whose association and so forth prīti was attained [i.e., prīti is attained only from a bhakta who has it, and the prīti that will be attained from a particular bhakta will possess the same particular sense of identity related to the same particular nature of Bhagavān that the prīti of the bhakta from whom it was attained possesses]. In the case of eternal associates [of Bhagavān], the two of these [i.e., a bhakta’s particular identity and the particular nature of Bhagavān that it relates to] are eternal [i.e., eternal associates of Bhagavān have beginninglessly had a particular identity related to a particular nature of Bhagavān].”

Read on →

seyam akhaṇḍāpi nijālambanasya bhagavata āvirbhāva-tāratamyena

seyam akhaṇḍāpi nijālambanasya bhagavata āvirbhāva-tāratamyena svayaṁ tāratamyenaivāvirbhavati | tad evaṁ sati śrī-kṛṣṇasyaiva svayaṁ-bhagavattvena tat-sandarbhe darśitatvāt tatraiva tasyāḥ parā pratiṣṭhā |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 78)

“Although this [i.e., prīti] is undivided [i.e., a singular, indivisible entity], it manifests itself in a gradation in accord with a gradation in the manifestation of its support (ālambana), [viz.,] Bhagavān. Thus existing as such, on account of Śrī Kṛṣṇa alone being shown in his sandarbha [i.e., Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha] to be Svayaṁ Bhagavān, its [i.e., prīti’s] ultimate standing is solely in relation to him [i.e., the ultimate manifestation of prīti has only Svayaṁ Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa for its object, and all manifestations of prīti for other forms of Śrī Bhagavān, such as Śrī Rāma, Śrī Viṣṇu, and so on, are of a lesser degree of completion].”

Read on →

anyeṣām api mahābhaktānāṁ prīter udāsīnā gatir na bhavaty eva

anyeṣām api mahābhaktānāṁ prīter udāsīnā gatir na bhavaty eva | kim uta viruddhā | tad-anukūlā sampattiś cāprārthitaiva bhavatīti sthitam | prītimatāṁ cāyam atiśayaḥ—yadi bhagavatā sa na dīyate tadā tenādānenāpi prīter ullāsa eva bhavati | yadi vā dīyate tadā tenāpīti |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 59)

“Other great bhaktas also never have a destination (gati) indifferent to prīti, much less one contrary [to it]. And it has been established [earlier in PRS 51] that attainments favorable to that [i.e., prīti] also occur unsought [i.e., without their having to be prayed for specifically]. Those [bhaktas] possessed of prītī also have this excellence: if that [i.e., some particular attainment, such as some form of wealth, status, opportunity, etc., or a particular form of mukti] is not given [to them] by Bhagavān, then even with that non-bestowal [of the attainment], there is a definitive increase in [their] prīti, and if, alternately, that [attainment] is given [by Bhagavān], then with that bestowal [of the attainment] also [there is a definitive increase in their prīti, as in the case of Sudāmā Vipra who rejoiced out of prīti after leaving Dvārakā without receiving anything from Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and rejoiced again out of prīti after arriving home and finding all the wealth given to him by Śrī Kṛṣṇa].”

Read on →

ekāntinas tāvad dvividhāḥ—ajāta-jāta-prītitva-bhedena

ekāntinas tāvad dvividhāḥ—ajāta-jāta-prītitva-bhedena | jāta-prītayaś ca trividhāḥ—(1) eke tadīyānubhava-mātra-niṣṭhāḥ śānta-bhaktādayaḥ; (2) anye tadīya-darśana-sevanādi-rasa-mayāḥ parikara-viśeṣābhimāninaḥ; (3) svayaṁ parikara-viśeṣāś ca | tatra teṣu ajāta-prītibhiḥ sarva-puruṣārthatvena tat-prītir eva prārthanīyā | atha jāta-prītiṣu śānta-bhaktādayas tu kadācid darśanādikaṁ vā prārthayante sevādikaṁ vinaiva, tad-vāsanāyā abhāvāt | sakṛd api kṛpā-dṛṣṭy-ādi-lābhena tṛptāś ca bhavanti | … ata eva tat-sāmīpyādike’pi teṣām anāgrahaḥ | ye tu tat-parikara-viśeṣābhimāninas te khalu tat-tat-prīti-viśeṣotkaṇṭhino yadā bhavanti, tadā tat-tat-sevā-viśeṣecchayā prārthayanta eva tat-sāmīpyādikam | tat-prārthanā ca prīti-vilāsa-rūpaiva | puṣṇāti ca tām iti guṇa eva | yadā ca teṣāṁ dainyena tat-prāpty-asambhāvanā jāyate, tadāpi ca tat-prīty-aviccheda-mātraṁ prārthayante | so’pi ca guṇa eva | yat tu kevala-saṁsāra-mokṣa-tat-sāmīpyānanda-viśeṣa-prārthanaṁ prīti-vikāratā-śūnyaṁ tat punaḥ sarvathā keṣāṁcid apy ekāntināṁ nābhirucitam | … tatraikatva-lakṣaṇaṁ sāyujyaṁ tu svarūpata eva tad-vinābhūtam | anyat tu vāsanā-bhedena | sārūpyasya tu sevopakāritvaṁ śobhā-viśeṣeṇa, śrī-vaikuṇṭhe’pi tadīya-nitya-sevakānāṁ tathaiva tādṛśatvam | loke’pi kiśora-vidagdha-kṣiti-pati-putraiḥ samāna-rūpa-vayaskā sevakāḥ saṅgṛhītā dṛśyante ślāghyante ca lokaiḥ | tasmād yathā tathā śrīmat-prīter eva puruṣārthatvam ity āyātam | te prīty-eka-puruṣārthino’pi bhāva-viśeṣeṇānyad vāñchantu na vāñchantu vā, sva-sva-bhakti-jāty-anurūpā bhakti-parikarāḥ padārthāḥ saṁsāra-dhvaṁsa-pūrvakam udayanta eva | na te kadācid vyabhiracanti ca |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 51)

“Ekāntīs [i.e., those who are one-pointed upon Bhagavān] are of two types as per a distinction of being (1) those in whom prīti has not manifested and (2) those in whom prīti has manifested. Those in whom prīti has manifested, furthermore, are of three types: (2a) some are śānta-bhaktas and others whose fixity is solely in experience (anubhava) of him [i.e., Bhagavān; they do not have fixity in a particular identity related to Bhagavān or in a particular form of service to Bhagavān], (2b) others are possessed of the identity (abhimāna) of [being] a particular associate [of Bhagavān] and immersed in the rasa of seeing him, serving [him], and so forth [i.e., they have a particular sense of identity in relation to Bhagavān and are immersed in serving him but they have not yet attained the state of actually being associates of Bhagavān], and (2c) some are themselves particular associates [of Bhagavān, i.e., they have attained the state of actually being associates of Bhagavān]. Therein, among them [i.e., among all the types of aforementioned ekāntīs], prīti for him [i.e., Bhagavān] is alone to be prayed for as all puruṣārthas [i.e., as the sum total of all puruṣārthas] by those [ekāntīs] in whom prīti has [yet] not manifested [i.e., the first type of ekāntīs]. Then, among those in whom prīti has [already] manifested [i.e., the second type of ekāntīs], śānta-bhaktas and others sometimes may pray for sight and so forth [of Bhagavān] but only without service and so forth [to him] because of the absence [in them] of an inclination (vāsanā) for that [i.e., for service to him]. They also become satiated by attaining even once a glance or otherwise of grace [from Bhagavān]. … Thus, they do not have any strong affinity (āgraha) even for nearness (sāmīpya) to him and so forth [i.e., for sārṣṭi-, sārūpya-, or sālokya-mukti]. When those who are possessed of the identity of [being] a particular associate of his, however, become earnestly desirous (utkaṇṭhita) of a particular type of corresponding prīti [for him], then out of desire for a particular corresponding service [to him] they pray for nearness (sāmīpya) to him and so forth [i.e., for sārṣṭi, sārūpya, and/or sālokya as befitting]. That [type of] prayer, moreover, is an expression of prīti itself. It nourishes that [i.e., prīti], and thus is verily a virtue. Furthermore, when inconceivability of attaining that [i.e., nearness (sāmīpya) to Bhagavān and so forth] arises because of their humility [i.e., when they feel as though it is impossible for them to ever attain nearness (sāmīpya) to Bhagavān or any of the other means they pray for out of their desire to serve Bhagavān as a particular associate of his with prīti], then too, furthermore, they pray just for a continuity of prīti for him [i.e., they pray only for prīti for him that never becomes interrupted]. That too, furthermore, is verily a virtue. Prayer only for liberation (mokṣa) from saṁsāra and the particular bliss of nearness (sāmīpya) to him that is devoid of being an expression of prīti, however, is not relishable under any circumstances to any ekāntīs [i.e., ekāntīs only accept varieties of mukti when they are conducive to service to Bhagavān, and they do so only out of desire to serve Bhagavān and not out of desire for becoming free from the suffering of saṁsāra or experiencing the bliss inherent in sāmīpya and so forth]. … Therein [i.e., among the five types of mukti,] sāyujya, the characteristic of which is oneness [of the jīva and Bhagavān], by its very nature is devoid of that [i.e., of service to Bhagavān, and thus is never accepted by ekāntīs]. Others, however, as per a specific type of inclination (vāsanā) [may be accepted by ekāntīs, e.g., sāmīpya, sālokya, and sāṛṣti may be accepted by ekāntī-bhaktas as means to rendering service to Bhagavān in his domain, in personal presence, and with appropriate paraphernalia]. The utility for service of sārūpya is because of its specific splendor [i.e., because it befits the elegance of the service offered to Bhagavān and thereby increases Bhagavān’s satisfaction]; in Śrī Vaikuṇṭha as well, in precisely this way [i.e., specifically because of sārūpya], his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] eternal servants have an alikeness [to him, i.e., an appearance similar to that of Bhagavān]. In the world as well, servants of equal age and appearance accepted by young, cultured princes are seen and praised by people. Therefore, howsoever [i.e., be it accompanied by subordinate desires for things conducive to it or not], blessed prīti alone being the puruṣārtha is established. Also, those whose puruṣārtha is prīti alone, because of [their] particular [personal] bhāva, may desire, or may not desire, something else [conducive to their service, e.g., a specific type of mukti]; [still,] the paraphernalia corresponding to their own personal type of bhakti that is conductive to [their] bhakti certainly manifests preceded by the dissolution of saṁsāra [i.e., such bhaktas automatically attain the paraphernalia required for and conducive to their service to Bhagavān after becoming liberated from saṁsāra], and they never fall away [i.e., and that paraphernalia is never lost to them thereafter].”

Read on →

tat-tad-bhaktānāṁ tat-prīti-manoratha evopādeyaḥ

tat-tad-bhaktānāṁ tat-prīti-manoratha evopādeyaḥ | tad anyas tu sarvo’pi heyaḥ |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 43)

“For all bhaktas [of Bhagavān], only desire (manoratha) for prīti [for Bhagavān] is to be accepted, while everything other than that is verily to be rejected.”

Read on →

atha muktibhyo bhagavat-prīter ādhikyaṁ vivriyate

atha muktibhyo bhagavat-prīter ādhikyaṁ vivriyate | tatra yadyapi tat-prītiṁ vinā tā api na santy eva tathāpi keṣāñcit teṣāṁ svasya duḥkha-hānau sāmīpyādi-lakṣaṇa-sampattāv api tātparyaṁ, na tu śrī-bhagavaty eveti teṣu nyūnatā |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 16)

“Now, the superiority of Bhagavat-prīti to the muktis [i.e., to the five aforementioned types of mukti] is to be described. Therein, although even these [i.e., these five aforementioned types of mukti] do not at all occur without prīti for him [i.e., Bhagavān], still the intention (tātparya) of some [i.e., of some muktas] is still on the cessation of their own suffering and the attainment characterized by samīpya and so forth, and not, rather, solely on Śrī Bhagavān. Thus, there is an inferiority in them [i.e., in those whose intention in not solely upon Bhagavān because of impurity in their prīti].”

Read on →

tad evaṁ śrīmat-prīter evāpavargatvena parama-bhagavad-anugraha-mayatvaṁ

tad evaṁ śrīmat-prīter evāpavargatvena parama-bhagavad-anugraha-mayatvaṁ śrī-bhāgavata-śravaṇa-phalatvaṁ puruṣārtheṣu tasyāḥ paramatva-sādhanāya darśitam |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 18)

“Thus, in this way, blessed prīti’s being the supreme favor of Bhagavān and the [ultimate] result of hearing Śrīmad Bhāgavatam on account of [its] being the final beatitude (apavarga) [i.e., mukti] has been shown for the sake of establishing its supremacy among the puruṣārthas.”

Read on →

puruṣa-prayojanaṁ tāvat sukha-prāptir duḥkha-nivṛttiś ca

puruṣa-prayojanaṁ tāvat sukha-prāptir duḥkha-nivṛttiś ca |
puruṣa-prayojanaṁ tāvat sukha-prāptir duḥkha-nivṛttiś ca | śrī-bhagavat-prītau tu sukhatvaṁ duḥkha-nivartakatvaṁ cātyantikam iti | etad uktaṁ bhavati—yat khalu parama-tattvaṁ śāstra-pratipādyatvena pūrvaṁ nirṇītaṁ, tad eva sad-ananta-paramānandatvena siddham | … nānā-svarūpa-dharmato’pi tasya kevalānanda-svarūpatvam eva ca darśitam | tathā-bhūta-mārtaṇḍādi-maṇḍalasya kevala-jyotiṣṭvavat |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 1)

“The aim (prayojana) of an embodied being (puruṣa), fundamentally, is the attainment of happiness and elimination of suffering, and only in prīti for Śrī Bhagavān are happiness and elimination of suffering absolute. Thus, this is said: only that Supreme Entity (Parama-tattva), who was ascertained previously [i.e., in the first four sandarbhas] as being the object to be taught by the śāstra, is established [by the śāstra] as being eternal, infinite, paramount bliss. … Although possessed of various inherent characteristics, his [i.e., that Supreme Entity’s] verily being of the nature of bliss alone is also shown [in śāstra, i.e., his fundamental nature, upon which all of his other attributes are based, is bliss (ānanda) alone], just as the sun, which has [within it] the there existent Mārtaṇḍa [i.e., the devatā Sūrya] and so forth [i.e., as well as Sūryadeva’s chariot, horses, etc.], is [fundamentally] of the nature of light alone.”

Read on →

paramātmatvādi-lakṣaṇa-nānāvastha-bhagavat-sākṣātkāra eva tatrāpi paramaḥ

paramātmatvādi-lakṣaṇa-nānāvastha-bhagavat-sākṣātkāra eva tatrāpi paramaḥ | (1) tatra saty api nirupadhi-prīty-āspadatva-svabhāvasya tasya svarūpa-dharmāntara-vṛnda-sākṣātkṛtau paramatve prīti-bhakty-ādi-saṁjñaṁ priyatva-lakṣaṇa-dharma-viśeṣa-sākṣātkāram eva paramatamatvena manyante | (2) tayā prītyaivātyantika-duḥkha-nivṛttiś ca | (3) yāṁ prītiṁ vinā tat-svarūpasya tad-dharmāntara-vṛndasya ca sāksātkāro na sampadyate | (4) yatra sā tatrāvaśyam eva sampadyate | (5) yāvaty eva prīti-sampattiḥ, tāvaty eva tat-sampattiḥ | (6) sampadyamāne sampanne ca tasmin sādhikam āvirbhavati |
(Prīti Sandarbha: 1)

“Direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of Bhagavān in various states, such as that the character of which is [his] being Paramātmā and so on, is supreme in this regard as well [i.e., in regard to the aforementioned conclusion that direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of the Supreme Entity (Parama-tattva) manifest with clear specificity as Bhagavān is superior to direct perception of the Supreme Entity manifest without clear specificity as Brahman]. (1) Although this is so and direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of other inherent qualities of his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] is [accepted to be] supreme [since direct perception of him is in general accepted to be supreme], direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of the particular quality of priyatva [i.e., ‘dearness’] of he [i.e., Bhagavān] who by nature is the object of unconditional prīti, is considered the supreme-most [i.e., although direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of the Supreme Entity (Parama-tattva) with clear specificity as Bhagavān is considered to be supreme, this is a general understanding, and more specifically, direct perception of Bhagavān’s inherent quality of priyatva, that is, the direct perception of him known by terms such as prīti, prema, bhakti, rati, and bhāva, wherein he is directly perceived specifically on the basis of his inherent nature of being the ultimate object of unconditional prīti, is the supreme-most direct perception of him]. (2) By that prīti [i.e., by such direct perception of him] alone the absolute cessation of suffering also occurs [i.e., even direct perception of him does not lead to the absolute cessation of suffering if it is devoid of the nature of prīti]. (3) Without this prītī, direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of his nature (svarūpa) [i.e., his nature in general] and his other qualities does not occur [i.e., Bhagavān’s true nature and qualities are not perceived without prīti]. (4) In whomever this [prīti] is present, that [i.e., direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of his nature (svarūpa) and other qualities] certainly occurs. (5) As far as there is attainment of prīti [alt., as far as the wealth of prīti is present], so far exactly there is attainment of that [i.e., of direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of his nature (svarūpa) and other qualities]. (6) In one in whom attainment [of prīti] is [in the process of] occurring, and in one in whom it has been attained, that [i.e., direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of his nature (svarūpa) and other qualities] manifests to a [comparatively] greater extent [respectively, i.e., that direct perception manifests somewhat in one in whom the attainment of prīti is still in the process of occurring, and it manifests more so in one in whom the attainment of prīti has already occurred].”

Read on →