so’cirād eva rājarṣe syād acyuta-kathāśrayaḥ |
śṛṇvataḥ śraddadhānasya nityadā syād adhīyataḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 4.29.38)
“O royal sage! That [i.e., fully performed bhakti-yoga—prema-bhakti] will certainly manifest soon for one who shall take shelter in Acyuta-kathā, hearing and studying it with śraddhā continuously.”
atha śruti-smṛtī mamaivājñe ity-ādi-nindita-mātra-svāvaśyaka-kriyā-niṣedhayor ullaṅghanaṁ dvividham | tau hi dharma-śāstroktau bhakti-śāstroktau ceti | bhagavad-bhakti-viśvāsena dauḥśīlyena vā pūrvayor akaraṇa-karaṇa-pratyāsattau na vaiṣṇava-bhāvād bhraṁśaḥ, ‘devarṣi-bhūtāpta-nṝṇāṁ’ ity-ādy-ukteḥ, ‘api cet sudurācāraḥ’ ity-ādy-ukteś ca | tādṛśa-rucimati tu tayaiva rucyā dviṣṭatvād apunar-bhavādy-ānandasyāpi vāñchā nāsti, kim uta parama-ghṛṇāspadasya | atas tatra svata eva na pravṛttiḥ | pramādādinā kadācij jātaṁ ced vikarma tat-kṣaṇād eva naśyaty api | uktaṁ ca—‘vikarma yac cotpatitaṁ kathañcid dhunoti sarvaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭaḥ’ iti | atha yadi vaiṣṇava-śāstroktau tau, tarhi viṣṇu-santoṣaika-prayojanāv eva bhavataḥ | tayoś ca tādṛśatve śrute sati tadīya-rāga-rucimataḥ svata eva pravṛtty-apravṛttī syātām—tat-santoṣaika-jīvanatvāt prīti-jāteḥ | ata eva na tatra svānugamyamāna-rāgātmaka-siddha-bhakta-viśeṣeṇa kṛtatvākṛtatvayor anusandhānaṁ cāpekṣyaṁ syāt, kintu tat-kṛtatve sati viśeṣeṇāgraho bhavatīty eva viśeṣaḥ | atra kvacic chāstrokta-krama-vidhy-apekṣā ca rāga-rucyaiva pravartiteti rāgānugāntaḥpāta eva | ye ca śrī-gokulādi-virāji-rāgātmikānugās tat-parās te tu śrī-kṛṣṇa-kṣema-tat-saṁsargāntarāyābhāvādi-kāmyātmaka-tad-abhiprāya-rītyaiva vaiṣṇava-laukika-dharmānuṣṭhānaṁ kurvanti | ata eva rāgānugāyāṁ rucer eva sad-dharma-pravartakatvāt śruti-smṛtī mamaivājñe ity etad-vākyasya na tad-vartma-bhakti-viṣayatvam, ‘api cet sudurācāraḥ’ ity ādi-virodhān na ca vidhi-vartma-bhakti-viṣayatvaṁ kintu bāhya-śāstra-nirmita-buddha-rṣabha-dattātreyādi-bhajana-vartma-viṣayatvam eva | tathoktam—veda-dharma-viruddhātmā yadi devaṁ prapūjayet | sa yāti narakaṁ ghoraṁ yāvad āhūta-samplavam || iti | rāgānugāyāṁ vidhy-apravartitāyām api na veda-bāhyatvam, veda-vaidika-prasiddhaiva sā—tatra tatra rucitvāt | vedeṣu buddhādīnāṁ tu varṇanaṁ veda-bāhyaṁ viruddhatvenaiva yathā—tataḥ kalau sampravṛtte sammohāya sura-dviṣām | buddho nāmnāñjana-sutaḥ kīkaṭeṣu bhaviṣyati || ity-ādi |tasmād bhavaty eva rāgānugā samīcīnā | tathā vaidhīto’py atiśayavatī ca | maryādā-vacanaṁ hy āveśārtham eveti darśitam | sa punar āveśo yathā ruci-viśeṣa-lakṣaṇa-mānasa-bhāvena syāt, na tathā vidhi-preraṇayā, svārasika-mano-dharmatvāt tasya | tatra cāstāṁ tāvad-anukūla-bhāvaḥ, parama-niṣiddhena pratikūla-bhāvenāpy āveśo jhaṭiti syāt | tad-āveśa-sāmarthyena prātikūlya-doṣa-hāniḥ syāt | sarvānartha-nivṛttiś ca syād iti bhāva-mārgasya balavattve dṛṣṭānto’pi dṛśyate | tatra yady anukūla-bhāvaḥ syāt, tadā paramaikānti-sādhya evāsau |
(Excerpted from Bhakti Sandarbha: 312)
“Then, transgression of compulsory actions and prohibitions [i.e., those enjoined in śāstra] for oneself, which is criticized outright in [the aforementioned verse of Vādhūla-smṛti wherein Bhagavān states], ‘Śruti and Smṛti are verily my orders. One who proceeds transgressing them is a defier of [my] orders and my enemy. Even if he is my bhakta, he is not a Vaiṣṇava,’ is of two types. These [two types of compulsory actions and prohibitions] are (1) those stated in dharma-śāstra, and (2) those stated in bhakti-śāstra. In the case of non-performance and performance of the former [i.e., of non-performance of compulsory actions stated in dharma-śāstra and performance of acts prohibited in dharma-śāstra] because of conviction (viśvāsa) in bhakti to Bhagavān, or because of bad character, falling from the state of being a Vaiṣṇava does not occur, as per the statement [in SB 11.5.41], ‘O King, one who has forsaken one’s duties [i.e., the duties of one’s varṇa and āśrama] and taken shelter completely in the ultimate shelterer, Mukunda, is neither a servant of, nor a debtor to, the devas, the ṛṣis, living beings, relatives, mankind, or ancestors,’ and the statement [in BG 9.30], ‘If even a person of extreme misconduct serves me exclusively, he should be regarded as a sādhu because he is rightly resolved.’ One endowed with such taste (ruci) [i.e., taste for a particular form of rāgātmikā-bhakti that produces disinterest in everything apart from such bhakti], however, has no desire even for the bliss of the non-repetition of birth and so on [i.e., no desire for any of the varieties of mokṣa or any of the pleasures that can be attained through adherence to dharma], much less [desire] for anything that is an object of repugnance [i.e., much less for things that contravene the directives of śāstra, that is, that are adharmic] because of [all such things from the bliss of mokṣa on down] being detested [by that bhakta] just by virtue of that taste [i.e., taste for a particular form of rāgātmikā-bhakti]. Therefore, there is naturally just no propensity [in such a bhakta] for that [i.e., for actions that contravene the directives of śāstra]. If at some time a wrongful action is occasioned [by such a bhakta] as a result of inattention or otherwise, that is also destroyed immediately. This is also stated [in SB 11.5.42], ‘Situated in the heart [of a dear one who has given up regard for others, i.e., all other devatās, and is engaged in service to the soles of his feet, Hari, the Supreme Lord,] washes away in full any wrongful action that has somehow arisen [i.e., that has somehow been committed by that bhakta].’ Now, when those [compulsory actions and prohibitions that may so happen to be contravened by a bhakta] are those stated in Vaiṣṇava-śāstra, then those are existent only for the singular aim of the satisfaction of Viṣṇu. When they are heard of as being such [i.e., when it is known that they exist solely for the purpose of satisfying Bhagavān], then a propensity [to perform the actions enjoined in bhakti-śāstra] and a non-propensity [to perform the actions forbidden in bhakti-śāstra] shall come about entirely naturally for one endowed with [the aforementioned] taste (ruci) for a rāga related to him [i.e., Bhagavān, that is, for the rāga of a particular rāgātmikā-bhakta], because of his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] satisfaction being the very life of the manifestation of prīti [i.e., prema for Bhagavān]. Therefore, there shall also be no examination or necessary observability of performance and non-performance in this regard [i.e., in regard to performance of actions enjoined in bhakti-śāstra and non-performance of actions forbidden in bhakti-śāstra] by the particular rāgātmaka-siddha-bhakta [i.e., the realized bhakta possessed of rāga for Bhagavān] being followed by oneself, but eagerness does occur in particular [on the part of a sādhaka] for those [actions] that are performed [by the rāgātmaka-siddha-bhakta whom a sādhaka follows]. In this regard, in some cases, observance of [injunctive] procedures stated in śāstra also proceeds [i.e., occurs in the sādhana of a rāgānugā-bhakti-sādhaka] just because of [the aforementioned] taste (ruci) for a [particular] rāga and thus [such observance] is indeed included in rāgānugā [-bhakti]. Those who are followers of the rāgātmikās [i.e., rāgātmikā-bhaktas] residing in Śrī Gokula or elsewhere and devoted to them perform Vaiṣṇava [practices] and conventional dharma practices only with their [i.e., those rāgātmikā-bhaktas’] disposition and intention [which is] constituted of an object of desire such as Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s well-being or the negation of obstacles to meeting with him. Therefore, because of taste (ruci) alone being the impetus for [adherence to] proper conduct (sad-dharma) in rāgānugā [i.e., on the path of rāgānugā-sādhana-bhakti], this statement, ‘Śruti and Smṛti are verily my orders …,’ has no applicability to the bhakti of that path [i.e., to rāgānugā-bhakti]. It also has no applicability to the bhakti of the path of vidhi [i.e., to vaidhī-bhakti either] because of [its] contrariety to [the aforementioned statement in BG 9.30,] ‘If even a person of extreme misconduct serves me exclusively, he should be regarded as a sādhu because he is rightly resolved.’ It has applicability, rather, only to the paths of worship of [i.e., taught by] Buddha, Ṛṣabha, Dattātreya, and others that are formulated by exterior texts [i.e., by texts that are not part of the Vedic canon]. Thus, it is said, ‘If someone whose disposition is opposed to the dharma of the Vedas intently worships Deva, he goes to a a fearsome naraka until the summoning of the flood [i.e., until the dissolution of the universe].’ Although rāgānugā [-bhakti] is not impelled by injunction [i.e., the injunctions enjoined in the Vedic śāstras], it is not exterior to [the scope of] the Vedas. It is indeed [rather] fully established in [alt., highly renowned throughout] the Vedas and śāstras based on the Vedas on account of taste (ruci) [within it] for these [i.e., for the Vedas and śāstras based on the Vedas, that is, on account of sādhakas following the path of rāgānugā-bhakti invariably having taste (ruci), that is, great regard, for the general authority of the Vedas and texts related to them and in a particular for the specific portions of them that pertain to the path of rāgānugā-bhakti]. The descriptions of Buddha and so forth [i.e., Ṛṣabha, Dattātreya, and others that can be found] in the Vedas [and śāstras based on them], however, are exterior to the Vedas because of [their, i.e., Buddha and so forth’s] being opposed [to the Vedas], as [is indicated] in [the following statement from SB, 1.3.24], ‘Then at the beginning of [the Age of] Kali, Buddha, the son of Añjanā, will appear among the Kīkaṭas [i.e., in the region of Gayā in Bihar] for the purpose of bewildering the suras’ foes’ [i.e., Buddha, Ṛṣabha, Dattātreya, and others are considered to be exterior to the Vedas and Vedic dharma even though they are mentioned within texts of the Vedic canon and recognized as avatāras because they taught people to disregard the Vedas’ authority and follow a path not enjoined by the Vedas]. Therefore, rāgānugā [-bhakti] is certainly proper [i.e., a path supported by Vedic authority, a path worthy of being followed, and a path not to be confused with paths exterior to Vedic dharma] and so also superior even to vaidhī [-bhakti]. That the pronouncement of protocol [i.e., the śāstra’s stating injunctions and prohibitions as an impetus for people to follow the path of bhakti, i.e., the path of vaidhī-bhakti] is only for the purpose of [leading people towards the state of] absorption [in bhakti] has been shown [already]. That absorption, furthermore, shall not come about [as strongly and completely] by means of the impetus of injunctions as it shall by means of the disposition (bhāva) of the mind characterized by a specific taste (ruci) because of its [i.e., that absorption based on taste’s] being the natural characteristic of the mind. And in that regard, let alone a specifically favorable disposition (anukūla-bhāva) [towards the object of bhakti, viz., Bhagavān], absorption [of the mind in Bhagavān] can quickly come about even by means of an unfavorable disposition (pratikūla-bhāva) [towards the object of bhakti, viz., Bhagavān] that is completely forbidden [i.e., since absorption of the mind in Bhagavān can quickly occur even when one fosters a forbidden and offensive unfavorable disposition towards Bhagavān, it can occur all the more by means of a favorable disposition towards Bhagavān]. Removal of the fault of unfavorability [in one’s disposition in the case of those who become absorbed in Bhagavān out of unfavorability] shall occur by the power of that absorption [in Bhagavān, he who is the ultimate cause of all purification]. The cessation of all obstructions (anarthas) shall also occur [by virtue of that absorption in Bhagavān even out of an unfavorable disposition]. Thus, an illustration of the powerfulness of the path of bhāva [i.e., the path of engagement on the basis of the mind’s natural propensity for absorption in objects for which it has taste (ruci)] is also evident [since absorption of the mind even by means of a bhāva (disposition) of unfavorability towards Bhagavān results in full purification of the mind]. In that regard [i.e., in regard to that state of absorption], if one shall have a favorable disposition (anukūla-bhāva) [towards Bhagavān therein], then that [state] is itself the object sought by those who are supremely one-pointed [i.e., by those who practice complete mental one-pointedness upon Bhagavān by various forms of sādhana].”
asyā janma-lakṣaṇaṁ bhakti-vyatirekeṇānyatrānabhirucim upalakṣya—sā śraddadhānasya vivardhamānā viraktim anyatra karoti puṁsaḥ | hareḥ padānusmṛti-nirvṛtasya samasta-duḥkhāpyayam āśu dhatte ||
(Excerpted from Bhakti Sandarbha: 310)
“Indicating the absence of relish [alt., pleasure, inclination, interest, desire] for anything apart from bhakti to be the characteristic of its [i.e., rāgānugā-bhakti’s] appearance [i.e., to be the characteristic of taste (ruci) for a specific rāga and its manners of expression (paripāṭis)], [it is stated in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 3.5.13]: ‘That [i.e., inclination, meaning, taste, for discussion of Hari], upon flourishing, produces disinterest in all else in a person endowed with śraddhā. The dissolution of all suffering of one who is delighted by continuous remembrance of Hari’s feet is quickly effected.’”
atha sakhyam | tac ca hitāśaṁsana-mayaṁ bandhu-bhāva-lakṣaṇam | … asya cottaratra pāṭhaḥ prema-viśrambhavad-bhāvanā-mayatvena dāsyād apy uttamatvāpekṣayā | kiṁ ca, parameśvare’pi yat sakhyaṁ śāstre vidhīyate, tan nāścaryam, nādevo devam arcayet iti tad-bhāvasyāpi vidhāna-śravaṇāt | kintu tad-bhāvas tat-sevā-viruddha iti śuddha-bhaktair upekṣyate | sakhyaṁ tu parama-sevānukūlam ity upādīyata iti | tad etat sākṣād-bhajanātmakaṁ dāsyaṁ sakhyaṁ ca … | atra ca tābhyāṁ karmārpaṇa-viśvāsau na vyākhyātau, sāksād-bhaktitvābhāvāt | karmārpaṇasya phalaṁ bhaktir viśvāsaś ca bhakty-abhiniveśa-hetur itīha pūrvam uktam | tac ca bhagavad-viṣaya-hitāśaṁsana-mayaṁ sakhyam, bhagavat-kṛta-hitāśaṁsanasya nityatvāt, tena saha tasya nitya-sahavāsāc ca | bhajana-viśeṣeṇāpi viśiṣṭaṁ sampādayituṁ nātiduṣkaraṁ syād ity āha—ko’ti-prayāso’sura-bālakā harer upāsane sve hṛdi chidravat sataḥ, svasyātmanaḥ sakhyur aśeṣa-dehināṁ sāmānyataḥ kiṁ viṣayopapādanaiḥ |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 306)
“Now, friendship (sakhyam) [will be discussed]. That, furthermore, is made up of well-wishing [for the object of friendship, Śrī Bhagavān,] and possessed of the characteristic of amity [i.e., the bhāva of being friends with Bhagavān]. … Its [i.e., sakhyam’s] reading [i.e., placement] later on [in the list of the nine primary limbs of bhakti in SB 7.5.23–24] is out of regard for its superiority even to servitude (dāsya) by virtue of [its] being filled with a spirit (bhāvanā) possessed of love (prema) and intimacy (viśrambha). Moreover, that [such] friendship (sakhyam) is enjoined in śāstra even by the Supreme Lord (Parameśvara) is not surprising on account of hearing [in certain places in śāstra] of the practice even of the bhāva [alluded to in the statement], ‘A non-deva should not worship Deva’ [i.e., the bhāva of considering oneself to be Deva, that is, Śrī Bhagavān himself, meaning, if Bhagavān himself has even enjoined the practice of considering oneself to be himself, then it is not surprising that he would enjoin the practice of considering oneself to be his friend]. That bhāva [i.e., the practice of ahaṁgrahopāsanā wherein one meditates one oneself as being Bhagavān himself], however, is disregarded by pure bhaktas because it is contrary to service to him [i.e., when one considers oneself to be Śrī Bhagavān, then one does not foster the attitude of service to Śrī Bhagavān himself and thus pure bhaktas disregard such a practice]. Friendship (sakhyam) [i.e., the bhāva of considering oneself a close companion of Śrī Bhagavān], however, is highly favorable for service [to Śrī Bhagavān], and thus is adopted [by pure bhaktas]. So, this servitude (dāsyam) and friendship (sākhyam) [mentioned in SB 7.5.23–24] are of the nature of direct service (bhajana) [to Śrī Bhagavān]. … Here [i.e., in the context of discussion of forms of direct bhakti to Śrī Bhagavān], furthermore, offering karma and faith (viśvāsa) are not alluded to by these two [i.e., by the forms of direct bhakti known as dāsyam and sakhya, and thus dāsyam here does not refer to offering karma to Bhagavān and sakhyam here does not refer to faith (viśvāsa) alone], because of the non-existence of [their, i.e., offering karma and faith (viśvāsa)] being direct [forms of] bhakti. In this regard, it was previously stated that [direct] bhakti is an outcome of offering karma and faith (viśvāsa) is a cause of absorption in [direct] bhakti. Because of the constancy [alt., eternality] of the well-wishing performed by Bhagavān [for his bhaktas], and because of one’s [i.e., a jīva’s] constant [alt., eternal] co-abidance with him [i.e., Bhagavān], sakhyam, constituted of well-wishing the object of which is Bhagavān, qualified even by a distinct [act of] bhajana [i.e., sakhyam in the form of an act performed for the pleasure of Bhagavān in the manner that a friend acts for the pleasure of another friend] shall not be very difficult to perform. Thus, he [i.e., Prahlāda Mahārāja] says [in SB 7.7.38], ‘O boys of the asuras, what great exertion [i.e., difficulty] is there in worship of Hari, he who is [ever] present like space in one’s heart and is the inherent Self and common Friend of all embodied beings [who fulfills all their desires, be they material or spiritual, when worshiped as a friend]? [Therefore,] What [is the use] of accumulating objects of the senses [instead of engaging in the worship of Hari]?’”
kahahu bhagati patha kavana prayāsā |
joga na makha japa tapa upavāsā ||
sarala subhāva na mana kuṭilāī |
jathā lābha saṁtoṣa sadāī ||
mora dāsa kahāi kara nara āsā |
kara-i tau kahahu kahā bisvāsa ||
bahuta kaha-u̐ kā kathā baḍhai |
ehi ācarana basya maiṁ bhāi ||
(Rāma-carita-mānasa: 7.45.1–2)
[Rāma addressing an assembly at his court:] “Tell me, on the path of bhakti, what is the exertion [i.e., what is so troublesome]? There is no yoga, sacrifice (yajña), japa, austerity, or fasting. [Rather,] there is [just] sincere disposition, non-crookedness of mind, and always being satisfied with whatever is obtained. If someone says they are my servant but places their hope in men, then tell me, where is their faith [i.e., what faith do they really have in me]? I have said so much, and what is the use of prolonged discussion? [Simply] This conduct [i.e., the aforementioned conduct of being sincere, non-deceitful, satisfied, and fully faithful to me] captivates me, O brother!”
manasaitāni bhūtāni praṇamed bahu-mānayan |
īśvaro jīva-kalayā praviṣṭo bhagavān iti ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 3.29.34; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha 106)
“Within the mind one should offer obeisance to and greatly honor [all] these beings, [considering,] ‘Bhagavān, Īśvara, has entered [all these beings] by means of impelling the jīvas [i.e., by virtue of his being the Inner Regulator (Antaryāmī), meaning, the Īśvara, within them].”
kvāhaṁ manda-matiḥ kvedaṁ manthanaṁ kṣīra-vāridheḥ |
kiṁ tatra paramāṇur vai yatra majjati mandaraḥ ||
mūkaṁ karoti vācālaṁ paṅguṁ laṅghayate girim |
yat-kṛpā tam ahaṁ vande paramānanda-mādhavam ||
(Bhāvārtha-dīpikā on Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: Maṅgalācaraṇa, 5)
“Where am I of dull-wit? And where is this churning of the ocean of ksir [i.e., this endeavor to explain Śrīmad Bhāgavatam (being made in this commentary)]? What is an atomic particle there where even [Mount] Mandara submerges [i.e., how can I tiny, incapable person like myself take on such an enormous task]? I offer obeisance unto Mādhava, Supreme Bliss, by whose grace a mute speaks and a cripple crosses a mountain [i.e., by whose grace even this otherwise impossible task becomes possible].”
mahāprabhu nityānanda do̐hāra dāsera dāsa |
yāre kṛpā kare, tāra ihāte viśvāsa ||
(Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 3.19.109)
“One upon whom Mahāprabhu, Nityānanda, and a servant of their servants bestow grace can have faith in this [i.e., in the extraordinary līlā of Śrīman Mahāprabhu].”
vikrīḍitaṁ vraja-vadhūbhir idaṁ ca viṣṇoḥ
śraddhānvito’nuśṛṇuyād atha varṇayed yaḥ |
bhaktiṁ parāṁ bhagavati pratilabhya kāmaṁ
hṛd-rogam āśv apahinoty acireṇa dhīraḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.33.39)
“One endowed with śraddhā who shall hear about or describe this extraordinary play and so forth of Viṣṇu with the ladies of Vraja attains superlative bhakti to Bhagavān, quickly casts off the heart disease of kāma, and without delay becomes steadfast.”
oṁ athāśvalāyano bhagavantaṁ
parameṣṭhinam upasametyocāva |
adhīhi bhagavan brahma-vidyāṁ variṣṭhāṁ
sadā sadbhiḥ sevyamānāṁ nigūḍhām |
yathācirāt sarva-pāpaṁ vyapohya
parātparaṁ puruṣaṁ yāti vidvān ||1||
tasmai sa hovāca pitāmahaś ca
śraddhā-bhakti-dhyāna-yogād avaihi ||2||
na karmaṇā na prajayā dhanena
tyāgenaike amṛtatvam ānaśuḥ |
pareṇa nākaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ
vibhrājate yad yatayo viśanti ||3||
vedānta-vijñāna-suniścitārthāḥ
sannyāsa-yogād yatayaḥ śuddha-sattvāḥ |
te brahmalokeṣu parānta-kāle
parāmṛtāḥ parimucyanti sarve ||4||
(Kaivalya Upaniṣad: 1–4; Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad: 3.2.6)
“Om. Now, Āśvalāyana approached illustrious Brahmā and said, ‘O illustrious One, please teach me Brahmā-vidyā, which is most excellent [among all types of knowledge], ever-adhered to by the sādhus, and secret, and by which the wise soon become absolved of all sin and attain the Supreme Puruṣa,’ and to him [i.e., to Āśvalāyana], the Grandsire [i.e., Lord Brahmā] verily spoke, ‘You can realize [the Brahma-vidyā you wish to attain] through the practices of śraddhā, bhakti, and meditation. Neither by karma, nor by progeny or wealth, but only by renunciation can you attain immortality, which is beyond heaven and shines hidden in the cave [i.e., heart]. Ascetics [lit., those who strive (for it)] enter it. Completely determined upon the object of realization established by Vedānta and of purified nature by virtue of practice of sannyāsa, the ascetics in the planes of Brahmā [i.e., in the various planes through the material universe] at the time of the final end [i.e., at the time of the dissolution of the material universe] overcome death and become completely liberated [from entanglement in saṁsāra, i.e., they realize Brahman].”
