te ca prāṇi-mātrāṇām eva paramopakartāraḥ, kim uta sveṣām |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 269)
“They [i.e., my bhaktas who sing of my līlās] are the foremost benefactors of all living beings, and all the more of themselves.”
mat-saṅga-śabdenātra mama saṅgo madīyādīnāṁ ca saṅga ity abhidhāpyate | ubhayatrāpi mat-sambandhitvād ity abhiprāyeṇa | tatra svasyāpi sattvāt sat-saṅga-prakaraṇe sva-saṅgo’py antarbhāvitaḥ | yat tu purā bhāgavata-saṅgenaiva bhagavat-kṛpā bhavatīty uktaṁ, tat tu tat-sāmmukhya-janmany eva | atra tu sa eva bhāgavata-saṅgaḥ sādhana-viśeṣatvenocyata iti na doṣaḥ | yadi vātra kutracit sāmmukhya-janma-kāraṇam api bhagavat-saṅgo bhavet, tadāpy evam ācakṣmahe—sac-chabdārtham avatāram aṅgīkṛtya yat kadācit sarvatra kṛpāṁ vitanoti bhagavān, tac ca sat-sambandhenaivety ato nābhyupagama-hānir iti ||
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 240)
“Here [i.e., in SB 11.12.7] by the [compound] word mat-saṅga [lit., ‘my association’], the association of myself [i.e., Bhagavān], and the association of those who are my own [i.e., Bhagavān’s own, meaning, his bhaktas], are [both] indicated with the intention being because of there being a relation with me [i.e., Bhagavān] in both cases [i.e., by means of both types of association]. In that regard, because of himself also being sat [i.e., because Bhagavān himself is also a sādhu], his own saṅga is also included in the subject of sat-saṅga. While it was stated previously [in Anuccheda 180] that Bhagavān’s grace occurs [towards a jīva in saṁsāra] only because of [the jīva first having] association with those devoted to Bhagavān (bhāgavatas) [i.e., his bhaktas], that was [stated] specifically in relation to the production of intentness (sāmmukhya) upon him [i.e., Bhagavān]. Here, however, that very association with those devoted to Bhagavān is [being] referred to as a type of sādhana. Thus, there is no fault [i.e., no inconsistency between these two statements, since sat-saṅga understood as association with bhaktas of Bhagavān specifically, and not association with Bhagavān himself, can be considered the sole cause of the sāmmukhya towards Bhagavān, which is only an initial, general state of intentness upon Bhagavān, whereas association with bhaktas, or association with Bhagavān, or various other practices can all be rightly recognized as forms of sādhana, that is, means to siddhi, meaning, full attainment of Bhagavān, which are all processes that begin after the attainment of the aforementioned initial sāmmukhya towards Bhagavān]. If, alternately in this regard, association with Bhagavān shall also be [seen to be] in some cases a cause of the production of intentness (sāmmukhya) [upon Bhagavān], even then we shall consider the meaning of the word sat [as follows] in this manner: when Bhagavān, after undertaking a decent (avatāra), sometimes distributes his grace everywhere, then that is also because of a relation with the sat [i.e., his bhaktas, meaning, Bhagavān primarily descends for the sake of gracing his bhaktas, as was explained earlier in Anuccheda 93 of Paramātma Sandarbha, and in the process if he happens in some cases to distribute his grace widely to everyone around his bhaktas as well and as a result persons around his bhaktas are seen to attain sāmmukhya towards him, then that extension of grace is still to be considered to have occurred because of Bhagavān’s relation with the sat, that is, his bhaktas]. Therefore, there is no loss in conceding [that sometimes Bhagavān extends his grace directly to some persons who are not seen to have previously had any association with his bhaktas, since even in those cases his bestowing his grace upon such persons is actually still because of a relation with his bhaktas, and thereby the principle that sat-saṅga is the sole cause of sāmmukhya toward Bhagavān stands].”
uddiśya devatā eva juhoti ca dadāti ca |
sa pāṣaṇḍīti vijñeyaḥ svatantro vāpi karmasu ||
(Padma Purāṇa: 6.235.8; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 222)
“One who performs sacrifices or gives in charity only for the sake of the devatās [i.e., without due regard for or the intent to please Bhagavān] or who is independent in action [i.e., performs action considering oneself independently capable of doing so and entitled to the fruit thereof independent of Bhagavān] is to be known as a heretic (pāṣaṇḍi) [i.e., one who is fallen from the Vaiṣṇava path].”
karma-miśrā trividhā sambhavati—sakāmā, kaivalya-kāmā, bhakti-mātra-kāmā ca | yadyapi kāma-kaivalye api … ity ukteḥ kevalayaiva bhaktyā sambhavataḥ, tathāpi tat-tad-vāsanānusāreṇa tatra tatra rucir jāyate | ity evaṁ tat-tad-arthaṁ tan-miśratā tu jāyata ity avagantavyam | tataḥ sakāmā prāyaḥ karma-miśraiva | tatra karma-śabdena dharma eva gṛhyate | tal-lakṣaṇaṁ ca yama-dūtaiḥ sāmānyata uktaṁ, veda-praṇihito dharma iti | vedo’tra traiguṇya-viṣayaḥ, traiguṇya-viṣayā vedā iti śrī-gītokteḥ | … śrī-gītāsv evānyatra tasya karma-saṁjñitatvaṁ coktaṁ—bhūta-bhāvodbhava-karo visargaḥ karma-saṁjñita iti | … bhagavad-arpaṇena bhakti-parikarīkṛtatvena ca bhakti-kṛttvam ucyate | tad evam īdṛśena karmaṇā miśrā sakāmā bhaktir … |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 225)
“Karma-miśrā bhakti can be of three types: (1) sakāmā [i.e., with desire for worldly ends], (2) kaivalya-kāmā [i.e., with desire for kaivalya (mokṣa)], and (3) bhakti-mātra-kāmā [i.e., with desire solely for bhakti]. … Although both kāma [i.e., desired worldly ends] and kaivalya are possible only by exclusive (kevala) bhakti, … still taste arises for that and that [i.e., for kāma, meaning, worldly objects of desire, and kaivalya] in accord with vāsanās for those two [things, viz., worldly objects and kaivalya]. Thus, in this way, its [i.e., bhakti’s] being mixed [with karma] comes about for the sake of those objects [i.e., because of one’s making use of bhakti to obtain those objects, viz., various desired worldly objects and kaivalya]. This is to be understood. Thus, sakāmā [bhakti] is usually mixed only with karma. Therein, by the word karma, dharma is specifically understood [i.e., in the term ‘karma-miśra-bhakti,’ the word karma means dharma], and its definition in general is stated by the messengers of Yama [in SB 6.1.40]: ‘That which is prescribed in the Veda is [called] dharma.’ Here, Veda is that the subject of which is related to the three guṇas as per the statement of Śrī Gītā [in 2.45], ‘The Vedas are that the subject of which is related to the three guṇas’ (traiguṇya-viṣayā vedāḥ). … Elsewhere in Śrī Gītā itself [in 8.3], its [i.e., dharma’s] being defined as karma is also stated: ‘Offering [articles to the devatās] that gives rises to living beings’ desires is defined as karma.’ … Dharma is said to be a cause of bhakti [to Bhagavān in SB 11.19.25 (dharmo mad-bhakti-kṛt proktaḥ)] by its being made an assistant of bhakti and offering it to Bhagavān. Thus, in this way, sakāmā bhakti is that mixed with such [i.e., the aforementioned type of] karma [i.e., that which is synonymous with dharma and constituted of performing that which is prescribed in the Veda in regard to affairs related to the three guṇas].”
karmārpaṇaṁ dvividham—bhagavat-prīṇana-rūpaṁ, tasmiṁs tat-tyāga-rūpaṁ ceti | … atra nimittāni ca trīṇi—kāmanā, naiṣkarmyaṁ, bhakti-mātraṁ ceti | niṣkāmatvaṁ tu kevalaṁ na sambhavati, yad yad dhi kurute jantus tat tat kāmasya ceṣṭitam ity ukteḥ | atra kāmanā-naiṣkarmyayoḥ prāyaḥ karma-tyāgaḥ | prīṇanaṁ tu tad-ābhāsa eva, svārtha-paratvāt | bhaktau punaḥ prīṇanam eva, bhaktes tu tad-eka-jīvanatvāt | … parama-bhaktās tu bhagavat-paritoṣaṇaṁ prīṇanam eva prārthayante … |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 224)
“Offering karma [to Bhagavān] is of two types: that in the form of pleasing Bhagavān (Bhagavat-prīṇana) [i.e., making an offering of one’s karma to please Bhagavān], and in the form of giving that [i.e., karma] to him [i.e., offering karma to him without any intention to please him]. … There are three causes in this regard [i.e., the desired object of those who offer their karma to Bhagavān is one of three types]: a desire (kāmanā) [i.e., the fulfillment of a particular worldly desire], freedom from karma (naiṣkarmya) [i.e., attaining mukti], and bhakti alone [i.e., attaining bhakti for its own sake]. Pure desirelessness (niṣkāmatva) is not at all possible, as per the statement [in Manu-smṛti 2.4], ‘Indeed whatever a person does is an action of [i.e., motivated by] desire for that [i.e., for whatever object the action is related to].’ Herein [i.e., in regard to these three causes], in the case of [the causes of] desire (kāmanā) and naiṣkarmya, for the most part giving up of karma occurs [i.e., these two causes mostly fall into the second of the two aforementioned categories of offering karma to Bhagavān, that is, simply giving over one’s karma to Bhagavān without any specific intent to please him]. Pleasing [Bhagavān] is present only in appearance in them [i.e., it is not really there] because their [i.e., these actions] being self-interested. In the case of bhakti [i.e., in the case of offering karma to Bhagavān with the desire only of attaining bhakti], on the contrary, pleasing [Bhagavān] alone is present [in such an offering of karma] because of that [i.e., pleasing Bhagavān] being the very life of bhakti. … Great bhaktas pray only for the complete satisfaction of Bhāgavan, that is, pleasing [Bhagavān].”
viśvasya yaḥ sthiti-layodbhava-hetur ādyo
yogeśvarair api duratyaya-yogamāyaḥ |
kṣemaṁ vidhāsyati sa no bhagavāṁs tryadhīśas
tatrāsmadīya-vimṛśena kiyān ihārthaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 3.16.37; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 236)
“[Brahmā concludes his address to the other devatās who are frighted because of the coming births of Hiraṇyakṣa and Hiraṇyakaśipu:] Bhagavān, he who is the cause of the perpetuation, dissolution, and generation of the universe, the master of the three [guṇas, alt., worlds], and the Original Being whose yogamāyā [i.e., divine power] is insurmountable even by masters of yoga, will bring about our well-being. How much use is there in our now deliberating over this? [i.e., there is really nothing to be gained from deliberating over or worrying about how we will fare even in the face of this eminent danger, since Bhagavān will surely do whatever is best for us in a way that may be even better than we presently have the ability to understand].”
sa eva bhakti-yogākhya ātyantika udāhṛtaḥ |
yenātivrajya triguṇāṁ mad-bhāvāyopapadyate ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 3.29.14; cited in Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.19.174)
“This [i.e., nirguṇa-bhakti] alone, known as bhakti-yoga, by which one surpasses the three guṇas and becomes fit for my bhāva [i.e., fit to experience my direct presence (bhāva), or, fit to attain prema (bhāva) for me], is declared the absolute [i.e., the supreme puruṣārtha].”
abhisandhāya yo hiṁsāṁ dambhaṁ mātsaryam eva vā |
saṁrambhī bhinna-dṛg bhāvaṁ mayi kuryāt sa tāmasaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 3.29.8; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 234)
“One possessed of anger and separated vision who shall express bhāva [i.e., bhakti] for me with the aim of violence, deceit, or spite is tāmasa [i.e., of the nature of tamo-guṇa].”
viṣayān abhisandhāya yaśa aiśvaryam eva vā |
arcādāv arcayed yo māṁ pṛthag-bhāvaḥ sa rājasaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 3.29.9; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 232)
“One possessed of separate disposition (bhāva) who shall worship me in the deity and elsewhere with the aim of [attaining] objects of the senses, fame, or affluence [alt., power] is rājasa [i.e., of the nature of raja-guṇa].”
karma-nirhāram uddiśya parasmin vā tad-arpaṇam |
yajed yaṣṭavyam iti vā pṛthag-bhāvaḥ sa sāttvikaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 3.29.10 cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 233)
“[Kapiladeva:] One possessed of separate disposition (bhāva) who shall worship [me in the deity and elsewhere] for the sake of removing karma [i.e., to attain mokṣa], [for the sake of] offering that [i.e., one’s karma] to the Supreme, or as a duty, is sāttvika [i.e., of the nature of sattva-guṇa].”
