sā śraddadhānasya vivardhamānā
viraktim anyatra karoti puṁsaḥ |
hareḥ padānusmṛti-nirvṛtasya
samasta-duḥkhāpyayam āśu dhatte ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 3.5.13)
“That [i.e., inclination (mati), meaning, taste, for discussion of Hari], upon flourishing, produces disinterest for 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.”
rañjanaṁ tat-sādhanaṁ vā rāgaḥ | neha—rajaty asmin raṅgaḥ |
(Vṛtti on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1619)
“[The word] Rāga [made from the dhātu rañj and the pratyāya [gh]a[ṇ]] means rañjana [i.e., coloring, the act of being colored; alt., delighting; alt., desire, attachment, love, or beauty] or a means thereof [i.e., dye, that by which something becomes colored]. Not here [is the operation described in the sūtra applied]: raṅga [thus] means that wherein one delights [i.e., a theater, a stage, etc.].”
aṣṭādaśa-purāṇeṣu vyāsasya vacana-dvayam |
paropakāraḥ puṇyāya pāpāya para-pīḍanam ||
(Mahāsubhāṣita-saṅgraha: 3587)
“Throughout the eighteen Purāṇas, Vyāsa has [just] two [fundamental] statements: benefiting others leads to merit (puṇya) and troubling others leads to sin (pāpa).”
amantram akṣaraṁ nāsti nāsti mūlam anauṣadham |
ayogyaḥ puruṣo nāsti yojakas tatra durlabhaḥ ||
(Unknown source)
“There is no phoneme that is not a mantra [i.e., that cannot function as a mantra]. There is no root that is not a medicine [i.e., that cannot function as a medicine for some ailment]. There is no person that is incapable [i.e., that cannot somehow perform some sort of useful function]. Rare then is the employer [i.e., it is rare to find someone who knows the potential of things and how to make good use of them under varying circumstances].”
svātantryāt kriyate karma na ca vedoditaṁ mahat |
vinaiva bhagavat-prītyā te vai pāṣaṇḍinaḥ smṛtāḥ ||
(Padma Purāṇa: Uttara-khaṇḍa, 235.9a, 7a; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 312)
“One who performs [even] great acts described in the Veda independently [i.e., not out of adherence to the guidance of the Vedas] and without affinity for Bhagavān—they are known as heretics (pāṣaṇḍis).”
yadyapy akiñcanā bhaktir evābhidheyeti tat-kāraṇatvena tad-bhakta-saṅga evābhidheye sati … |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 202)
“Although unconditional (akiñcanā) bhakti is certainly the abhidheya [i.e., the principal direction of the śāstra, the means to attain the highest end], association with his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] bhaktas is certainly [also] the abhidheya because of its being the cause thereof [i.e., of unconditional (akiñcanā) bhakti].”
tad evaṁ teṣāṁ bahu-bhedeṣu satsu teṣām eva prabhāva-tāratamyena kṛpā-tāratamyena bhakti-vāsanā-bheda-tāratamyena sat-saṅgāt kāla-śaighrya-svarūpa-vaiśiṣṭyābhyāṁ bhaktir udayate | … tatra prathamaṁ tāvat tat-tat-saṅgāj jātena tat-tac-chraddhā-tat-tat-paramparā-kathā-rucy-ādinā jāta-bhagavat-sāmmukhyasya tat-tad-anuṣaṅgenaiva tat-tad-bhajanīye bhagavad-āvirbhāva-viśeṣe tat-bhajana-mārga-viśeṣe ca rucir jāyate |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 202)
“Thus, in this way, bhakti manifests with speciality in nature (svarūpa) and with swiftness or time [i.e., relative slowness] as a result of sat-saṅga in accord with a gradation in types of bhakti-vāsanās [i.e., the predilections for particular forms of bhakti fostered by the sādhus with whom one associates], [as well as] in accord with a gradation in [the degree of] grace [received by an individual from the sādhus with whom one associates], and in accord with a gradation in the potency [i.e., spiritual prowess] of those [sādhus] among the numerous types of sādhus there among [i.e., among all the sādhus who are Vaiṣṇavas]. … In this regard, taste [alt., liking] (ruci) for a specific appearance [i.e., form] of Bhagavān as one’s specific object of worship (bhajanīya), as well as for a specific path of worship (bhajana) of him, manifest in the course of ongoing specific association [i.e., association with a specific type of Vaiṣṇava sādhu] for someone in whom intentness (sāmmukhya) upon Bhagavān has manifested by means first of all of a specific form of śraddhā, a specific form of taste (ruci) for the kathā [i.e., discussion of Bhagavān] of a [specific] paramparā [i.e., lineage of Vaiṣṇava sādhus], and so forth, [which become] manifest as a result of a specific form of association [i.e., the association of a particular Vaiṣṇava sādhu].”
jñātvājñātvātha ye vai māṁ yāvān yaś cāsmi yādṛśaḥ |
bhajanty ananya-bhāvena te me bhakta-tamā matāḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.11.33; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.24; Bhakti Sandarbha: 201, 312)
“Having understood, or not having understood, me as far as I am, for who I am, and of what nature I am, those who worship me with a one-pointed (ananya) bhāva are considered by me the best of bhaktas.”
arthendriyārthābhidhyānaṁ sarvārthāpahnavo nṛṇām |
bhraṁśito jñāna-vijñānād yenāviśati mukhyatām ||
na kuryāt karhicit saṅgaṁ tamas tīvraṁ titīriṣuḥ |
dharmārtha-kāma-mokṣāṇāṁ yad atyanta-vighātakam ||
tatrāpi mokṣa evārtha ātyantikatayeṣyate |
vijñāyātmatayā dhīraḥ saṁsārāt parimucyate |
traivargyo’rtho yato nityaṁ kṛtānta-bhaya-saṁyutaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgatavatam: 4.22.33–35; cited in Prīti Sandarbha: 1)
“For human beings, continuous thought [alt., coveting] of wealth and objects of the senses, because of which one becomes diverted from [one’s] knowledge [of śāstra] and realization [of śāstra’s object] and enters primitivity [i.e., inanimate life forms], is destructive of all arthas [i.e., detrimental to the attainment of all the puruṣārthas]. One who desires to cross over the fearsome darkness [i.e., saṁsāra] should never foster attachment (saṅga) to that which is perpetually [alt., exceedingly] destructive of dharma, artha, kāma, and mokṣa. Even therein [i.e., among the four puruṣārthas], mokṣa alone is regarded as being the ultimate artha, since an artha belonging to the tri-varga [i.e., the three puruṣārthas of dharma, artha, and kāma] is forever fraught with fear of death [alt., time, i.e., is perpetually subject to inevitable loss and thus incapable of ever producing true fulfillment].”
nātaḥ parataro loke puṁsaḥ svārtha-vyatikramaḥ |
yad-adhy anyasya preyastvam ātmanaḥ sva-vyatikramāt ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgatavatam: 4.22.32)
“There is no neglect of one’s own interest in this world greater than one’s own neglect of the self (ātmā) [i.e., of one’s true nature as an eternal spiritual entity distinct from the gross and subtle bodies], [the self solely] for the sake of which there is dearness of another [i.e., of any other thing, person, etc., e.g., one’s body gross and subtle bodies, family, wealth, etc.].”
