Bhāgavata Sandarbha

tad ekaṁ tattvaṁ svarūpa-bhūtayaiva śaktyā kam api viśeṣaṁ

tad ekaṁ tattvaṁ svarūpa-bhūtayaiva śaktyā kam api viśeṣaṁ dhartuṁ parāsām api śaktīnāṁ mūlāśraya-rūpaṁ, tad-anubhāvānanda-sandohāntarbhāvita-tādṛśa-brahmānandānāṁ bhāgavata-paramahaṁsānāṁ tathānubhavaika-sādhakatama-tadīya-svarūpānanda-śakti-viśeṣātmaka-bhakti-bhāviteṣv antar-bahir apīndriyeṣu parisphurad vā, tadvad vivikta-tādṛśa-śakti-śaktimattā-bhedena pratipādyamānaṁ vā bhagavān iti śabdyate | … evaṁ cānanda-mātraṁ viśeṣyaṁ, samastāḥ śaktayo viśeṣaṇāni, viśiṣṭo bhagavān ity āyātam | tathā caivaṁ vaiśiṣṭye prāpte pūrṇāvirbhāvatvenākhaṇḍa-tattva-rūpo’sau bhagavān | brahma tu sphuṭam aprakaṭita-vaiśiṣṭyākāratvena tasyaivāsamyag āvirbhāva ity āyātam |
(Bhagavat Sandarbha: 2–3)

“When the one [Absolute] Reality, which is by nature the fundamental shelter of [all] other śaktis, to manifest some type of [wonderful] specificity solely by means of its own inherent śakti, fully manifests to the internal and external senses of devoted transcendentalists (bhāgavata-paramahaṁsas), subsumed in whose [experience of an] abundance of bliss from experience thereof [i.e., of the Absolute Reality so manifest with specificity] is such [experience of the] bliss of Brahman, [and whose internal and external senses are] imbued with bhakti [which is] constituted of a specific inherent śakti of bliss thereof [i.e., of that Absolute Reality] that is singularly most effectual of such experience [of that Absolute Reality’s manifest specificity], or, when it as such is to be defined with discrimination between the distinction of [its] being [both] śakti and the possessor of śakti (śaktimat), it is known as Bhagavān. … In this way, furthermore, it is understood that bliss alone is the qualificand (viśeṣya), all śaktis are [its] qualifiers (viśeṣaṇas), and Bhagavān is the qualified entity (viśiṣṭa). Furthermore, when possessed of such specificity (vaiśiṣṭya), that undivided [Absolute] Reality is Bhagavān on account of being the complete manifestation [thereof], whereas Brahman, evidently, is an incomplete manifestation thereof on account of [its] being an appearance devoid of manifest specificity. This is understood.”

Read on →

tad ekam evākhaṇḍānanda-svarūpaṁ tattvaṁ thūtkṛta-pārameṣṭhyādikānanda-samudayānāṁ

tad ekam evākhaṇḍānanda-svarūpaṁ tattvaṁ thūtkṛta-pārameṣṭhyādikānanda-samudayānāṁ paramahaṁsānāṁ sādhana-vaśāt tādātmyam āpanne, satyām api tadīya-svarūpa-śakti-vaicitryāṁ tad-grahaṇāsāmarthye cetasi yathā sāmānyato lakṣitaṁ, tathaiva sphurad vā, tadvad evāvivikta-śakti-śaktimattā-bhedatayā pratipādyamānaṁ vā brahmeti śabdyate |
(Bhagavat Sandarbha: 2)

“When transcendentalists (paramahaṁsas) who have spat on the bliss of supremacy and so forth [i.e., all varieties of so-called happiness that exist throughout saṁsāra, including even that of Lord Brahmā, who holds the supreme position within the fourteen worlds] attain as a result of sādhana a state of identity (tādātmya) [i.e., a qualified degree of oneness based on cognitive self-identification] with the one [Absolute] Reality which is undivided and of the nature of bliss, or, when it [i.e., that Absolute Reality] manifests exactly as it is generally regarded [by them] in their minds that are unable to perceive the variegation of its inherent (svarūpa) śakti [i.e., when it manifests without any sort of specificity as non-differentiated consciousness apparently equivalent in nature to the self (ātmā) in response to their being cognitively fixed in a state of self-identification with that Absolute Reality as non-differentiated consciousness], or when it as such is to be defined without discrimination between its possessing the division of being [both] śakti and the possessor of śakti (śaktimat), it is known as Brahman.”

Read on →

śrī-bhagavata eva sarva-hitopadeṣṭṛtvāt sarva-duḥkha-haratvāt

śrī-bhagavata eva sarva-hitopadeṣṭṛtvāt sarva-duḥkha-haratvāt raśmīnāṁ sūryavat sarveṣāṁ parama-svarūpatvāt sarvādhika-guṇa-śālitvāt parama-prema-yogatvam iti prayojanaṁ ca sthāpitam |
(Tattva Sandarbha: 45)

“Because of Śrī Bhagavān alone being supremely worthy of prema on account of [his] being (1) the benevolent advisor of all, (2) the remover of suffering for all, (3) the ultimate nature [i.e., Self] of all, like the sun [is] of [its] rays, and (4) the bearer of qualities superior to [those of] all, the prayojana [i.e., the supreme puruṣārtha, prema for Śrī Bhagavān] is also established.”

Read on →

tasya paramānandaika-rūpasya sva-parānandinī svarūpa-śaktir yā hlādinī-nāmnī vartate

nanu niratiśaya-nityānanda-rūpasya bhagavataḥ kathaṁ tayā sukham utpadyeta, niratiśayatva-nityatvayor virodhāt? ucyate—śāstre khalu niratiśayānandatvaṁ nityatvaṁ ca bhagavataḥ śrūyate | bhakter api tathā tat-prīti-hetutvaṁ śrūyate | tata evaṁ gamyate—tasya paramānandaika-rūpasya sva-parānandinī svarūpa-śaktir yā hlādinī-nāmnī vartate, prakāśa-vastunaḥ sva-para-prakāśana-śaktivat parama-vṛtti-rūpaivaiṣā | tāṁ ca bhagavān sva-vṛnde nikṣipann eva nityaṁ vartate | tat-sambandhena ca svayam atitarāṁ prīṇātīti | ata eva tasya prīti-rūpasyāpi bhakti-prīṇanīyatvam āha—‘yat-prīṇanād barhiṣi deva-tiryaṅ-manuṣya-vīrut-tṛṇam ā viriñcāt, prīyeta sadyaḥ sa ha viśva-jīvaḥ prītaḥ svayaṁ prītim agād gayasya’ | … ata eva tathābhūtatvenātmārāmasya pūrṇa-kāmasyāpi tasya kṣudra-guṇa-vastv api paritoṣāya kalpata iti dṛṣṭānenāha—‘tatropanīta-balayo raver dīpam ivādṛtāḥ | ātmārāmaṁ pūrṇa-kāmaṁ nija-lābhena nityadā || prīty-utphulla-mukhāḥ procur harṣa-gadgadayā girā | pitaraṁ sarva-suhṛdam avitāram ivārbhakāḥ ||’ … tathā ātmārāma-pūrṇa-kāmatve’pi tādṛśasya sva-sambandhābhimāni-prītimat-putrādiṣu prīti-viśeṣodayo yathā dṛśyate, tathā teṣu taṁ prītimantam … | evaṁ kalpataru-dṛṣṭānte’pi bhagavato bhakta-viṣayikā kṛpā yathārtham evopapadyate | ye khalu sahaja-tat-prītim evātmani prārthayamānā bhajante, tebhyas tad-dāna-yāthārthyasyāvaśyakatvāt | tasmād asty evānanda-rūpasyāpi bhaktāv ānandollāsa iti |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 142–143)

“[A doubt is raised:] ‘Well, how can pleasure (sukha) be produced by that [i.e., by bhakti] for Bhagavān, he who is of the nature of all-exceeding, eternal bliss, on account of the contradiction to the all-exceedingness and eternality [of his bliss if bhakti where to also produce pleasure for him]?’ [To this] It is said that Bhagavān’s all-exceeding blissfulness and eternality are certainly heard of in the śāstra. Bhakti’s being a cause of pleasure (prīti) for him is also heard of therein. Therefore, this is understood: this intrinsic potency (svarūpa-śakti) delighting to himself and others of [i.e., that belongs to] he who is the sole embodiment of the supreme bliss [viz., Bhagavān] which exists bearing the name hlādinī and verily has the form of a superlative function (vṛtti) like a luminous object’s potency of illumination of itself and others—Bhagavān exists eternally verily casting that [viz., this svarūpa-śakti known as hlādinī, which is to say, bhakti] into the many who are his own [viz., his bhaktas] and by connection with that [i.e., by then receiving expressions of bhakti back from his bhaktas] personally feels even greater pleasure [than he does as a result of that hlādinī-śakti’s presence within himself]. Therefore, Śrī Śukadeva describes his [viz., Śrī Bhagavān’s] being able to be pleased by bhakti even though he is the embodiment of pleasure [in SB 5.15.13], ‘He because of whose pleasure the devas, animals, human beings, and plants beginning with Brahmā immediately become pleased, [he who is] the very life of the universe, [and] pleasure himself [i.e., the very embodiment of pleasure], became pleased at the sacrifice of [King] Gaya [i.e., by the bhakti offered to him therein].’ …

“Therefore, even an object possessed of meager qualities is capable of greatly satisfying him even though he is possessed of satisfaction from within the self and of fulfilled desires by virtue of being such [i.e., by virtue of being both the embodiment of pleasure and able to be pleased by bhakti]. Śrī Sūta Gosvāmī describes this with an illustration [in SB 1.11.4–5], ‘There [i.e., Dvārakā], offering gifts like worshippers [offering] a lamp to the sun, [their] faces blossoming out of love, they [i.e., the citizen of Dvārakā] began to speak, like children to their father, with words stammering out of delight to [Kṛṣṇa,] he who is ever possessed of satisfaction from within the self, he of fulfilled desires by virtue of gain from within himself [i.e., by virtue of the supreme bliss that is his essential nature], he who is the well-wisher of all and guardian.’ … Moreover, even in the midst of [his] being of possessed of satisfaction from within the self and of fulfilled desires, he [viz., Bhagavān] is [seen to be] possessed of love (prīti) for them [i.e., for the people of Dvārakā, that is, his bhaktas] just as the emergence of a special form of love (prīti) on the part of one who is such [i.e., one who is possessed of satisfaction from within the self and of fulfilled desires] for a son and others who are possessed of love (prīti) and sense of self that is related to him is [seen in the world]. … In this way, even in the case of the illustration of a desire tree [i.e., even when Bhagavān’s character and conduct is compared to a desire tree, that is, a tree that grants one whatever one so desires from it], Bhagavān’s grace the object of which is [his] bhaktas is indeed rightly manifested on account of the necessity of reciprocal accuracy in granting natural love for himself to they in particular who perform worship [of himself] praying in the heart for that specifically. Therefore, there is indeed an increase in bliss because of bhakti on the part even of he who is the embodiment of bliss [viz., Bhagavān].”

Read on →

niḥsaṁśayeṣu sarveṣu nityaṁ vasati vai hariḥ

niḥsaṁśayeṣu sarveṣu nityaṁ vasati vai hariḥ |
sa-saṁśayād dhetu-balān nādhyāvasati mādhavaḥ ||
(Mahābhārata: 12.349.71; cited in Paramātma Sandarbha: 17 and Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī-tīkā on Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.40.10)

“Hari ever abides in all who are free from doubt. As a result of doubting and the strength of reasoning, [however,] Mādhava does not dwell [in a given place, i.e., Mādhava does not dwell in the hearts of those who are doubtful and rely solely upon reasoning to ascertain reality].”

Read on →

na yasya cittaṁ bahir-artha-vibhramaṁ

na yasya cittaṁ bahir-artha-vibhramaṁ
tamo-guhāyāṁ ca viśuddham āviśat |
yad-bhakti-yogānugṛhītam añjasā
munir vicaṣṭe nanu tatra te gatim ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 4.24.59; cited in Prīti Sandarbha: 7)

“A sage whose heart, pure by virtue of being favored by bhakti-yoga, is not agitated by external objects and does not enter the cave of darkness, rightly and certainly sees your state therein.”

Read on →

saṁsāra-sindhum ati-dustaram uttitīrṣor

saṁsāra-sindhum ati-dustaram uttitīrṣor
nānyaḥ plavo bhagavato puruṣottamasya |
līlā-kathā-rasa-niṣevanam antareṇa
puṁso bhaved vividha-duḥkha-davārditasya ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 12.4.40; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 86)

“For a person tormented by the forest fire of various miseries who is desirous of crossing over the exceedingly difficult to cross ocean of saṁsāra, there is no vessel other than honoring the rasa of the narrations of the līlā of Bhagavān Puruṣottama.”

Read on →

tatrāprakaṭā dvividhā—mantropāsanāmayī svārasikī ca

tatrāprakaṭā dvividhā—mantropāsanāmayī svārasikī ca | prathamā yathā tat-tad-ekatara-sthānādi-niyata-sthitikā tat-tan-mantra-dhyāna-mayī | … nānā-sthānānusāraṇa-rūpatvād eka-sthāna-niṣṭhāyā mantropāsanāmayyā bhidyate’sau | yathāvasara-vividha-svecchāmayī svārasikī | … nānā-līlā-pravāha-rūpatayā svārasikī gaṅgeva | ekaika-līlātmatayā mantropāsanāmayī tu labdha-tat-sambhava-hrada-śreṇir iva jñeyā | kiṁ ca, mantropāsanāmayyām api vraja-rājādi-sambandhaḥ śrūyate, kim uta svārasikyām iti na kutrāpi tad-rahitatā kalpanīyā | … govindaḥ śrī-vṛndāvana-deva eva … keśavo’pi śrī-mathurā-nātha eva, tau hi vṛndāvana-mathurā-prasiddha-mahā-yoga-pīṭhayos … prāpañcika-loka-dṛṣṭyāṁ śrīmat-pratimākāreṇābhātaḥ, svajana-dṛṣṭyāṁ sākṣād-rūpeṇa ca |
(Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha: 153)

“Therein, the aprakaṭa [-līlā] is of two types: mantropāsanāmayī and svārasikī. The first [is aprakaṭa-līlā that] is a fixed state amid one of various places and so forth and constituted of a correlated mantra and meditation. … This [i.e., svārasikī-līlā] is distinguished from mantropāsanāmayī, which is fixed at one place, because [its, i.e., svārasikī-līlā’s] being a form of movement amidst various places. Svārasikī is constituted of [Bhagavān’s] various personal wishes [manifesting successively in the flow of time within aprakaṭa-līlā] in accord with circumstances [that arise in various places at various times]. Svārasikī is like the Gaṅgā on account of being of the nature of a [continuous] flow of various līlās. Mantropāsanāmayī, on the contrary, on account of being constituted of one singular līlā, is to be understood to be like a multitude of perceived lagoons produced from that [i.e., from the flow of svārasikī-līlā]. Furthermore, [Bhagavān’s] relation with the king of Vraja and so forth is heard of even in mantropāsanāmayī, and so all the more in svārasikī. Thus, it [i.e., Bhagavān’s līlā, of both the mantropāsanāmayī and svārasikī varieties] are never to be conceived devoid of that [i.e., devoid of him having the relationships that he does with all his various associates in the various abodes of his līlās]. … Govinda, the Lord of Śrī Vṛndāvana … and Keśava, the Lord of Śrī Mathurā—at the well-known mahāyogapīṭhas in Vṛndāvana and Mathurā [respectively] these two … shine in the form of splendid deities in the vision of worldly people and in their direct forms in the vision of their own persons [i.e., bhaktas].”

Read on →

mānasādi-pūjāyāṁ bhūta-pūrva-tat-parikara-līlā-saṁvalitatvam api na kalpanā-mayaṁ

mānasādi-pūjāyāṁ bhūta-pūrva-tat-parikara-līlā-saṁvalitatvam api na kalpanā-mayaṁ, kintu yathārtham eva | yatas tasya prākaṭya-samaye līlās tat-parikarāś ca ye prādurbabhūvuḥ, te tādṛśāś cāprakaṭam api nityaṁ tadīye dhāmni saṅkhyātītā eva vartante |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 286)

“In worship [performed] in the mind and elsewhere, although the content of the meditation is possessed of līlās and associates of his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] that were existent in the past, it is not [merely] imaginary but rather real since his associates and the līlās that appeared at the time of his manifestation (prākaṭya) [which one meditates upon] exist eternally beyond enumeration even unmanifestly as such [i.e., in an equally real form] in his abode [as well].”

Read on →

Scroll to Top