Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta

māthuraṁ ca dvidhā prāhur gokulaṁ puram eva ca

māthuraṁ ca dvidhā prāhur gokulaṁ puram eva ca ||
yat tu goloka-nāma syāt tac ca gokula-vaibhavam |
sa goloko yathā brahma-saṁhitāyām iha śruteḥ ||
tad-ātma-vaibhavatvaṁ ca tasya tan-mahimonnateḥ ||
aho madhupurī dhanyā vaikuṇṭhāc ca garīyasī |
dinam ekaṁ nivāsena harau bhaktiḥ prajāyate ||
ayodhyā mathurā māyā kāśī kāñcī avantikā |
purī dvāravatī caiva saptaitā mokṣa-dāyikāḥ ||
evaṁ sapta-purīṇāṁ tu sarvotkṛṣṭaṁ tu māthuram |
śrūyatāṁ mahimā devi vaikuṇṭha-bhuvanottamaḥ ||
iti dhāma-traye kṛṣṇo viharaty eva sarvadā ||
tatrāpi gokule tasya mādhurī sarvato’dhikā ||
(Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta: 1.497–498, 502–505, 519–520)

“‘Well, how can we consider Goloka a magnificence of Gokula?’ To this, the author speaks this verse (tad-ātma …, i.e., 502). Because of the elevation of Gokula’s greatness even in comparison to Goloka [Goloka is considered an expansion of Gokula]. This is the meaning. … By the word Vaikuṇṭha, the domain extending as far as [i.e., including] Goloka is to be understood because of its [i.e., Goloka’s] being its [i.e., Vaikuṇṭha’s] upper portion. [An objection is raised:] ‘Well, on account of the absence of it [i.e., Gokula] being above all, observance of return from there [i.e., rebirth after residing there], and seeing the suffering of old age and so forth in its present residents, it is not superior to Goloka.’ No, that is not so, (1) because of its [i.e., Gokula’s] being, like Hari [i.e., the Paramātmā], above all by virtue of inconceivable potency even while being situated in the midst of all, (2) because of the non-return [i.e., non-rebirth] from there of those who have performed sādhana and attained it, and (3) because of seeing suffering such as old age in its residents, like [seeing] the nature of a human boy in Hari, being a cause of fault. Furthermore, there is no deficiency [there], and, rather, there is certainly an express statement [i.e., the aforementioned verse cited from Padma Purāṇa] of superiority [i.e., of the superiority of Gokula above Goloka] that has also been cited by the revered author [i.e. Śrī Rūpa Gosvāmīpāda].”

Read on →

śriyaḥ kāntāḥ kāntaḥ parama-puruṣaḥ kalpa-taravo

śriyaḥ kāntāḥ kāntaḥ parama-puruṣaḥ kalpa-taravo
drumā bhūmiś cintāmaṇi-gaṇa-mayī toyam amṛtam |
kathā gānaṁ nāṭyaṁ gamanam api vaṁśī priya-sakhī
cid-ānandaṁ jyotiḥ param api tad āsvādyam api ca ||
sa yatra kṣīrābdhiḥ sravati surabhībhyaś ca sumahān
nimeṣārdhākhyo vā vrajati na hi yatrāpi samayaḥ |
bhaje śvetadvīpaṁ tam aham iha golokam iti yaṁ
vidantas te santaḥ kṣiti‑virala‑cārāḥ katipaye ||
(Brahma-saṁhitā: 5.55–56; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 5.143; Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.7.94–95; Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta: 1.5.500–501; Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha: 172, 177, 186; Prīti Sandarbha: 111; Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.14.227)

“That [place] where the lovers [alt., women] are Śrīs [i.e., resemblant of Lakṣmī], the beloved is the Supreme Puruṣa [i.e., he who is superior even to Nārāyaṇa and expands himself to reciprocate with every lover], the trees are desire-trees, the land is made of thought-jewels, the water is nectar, the speech is song, the movement is dance, the vaṁśī [i.e., flute] is a dear sakhī [i.e., is a friend to Kṛṣṇa as his constant companion and a friend to the residents of Vraja by making Kṛṣṇa’s pleasure and whereabouts known], the conscious, blissful, superb light is supremely relishable, an ocean of milk flows from the cows [i.e., where the cows become absorbed in the sound of the flute and yield unlimited milk], and where even the time [i.e., the time span] known as half of the most immense [i.e., half of the lifespan of Brahmā] or [the time span known as half of] the blink of the eye [i.e., an instant] does not pass [i.e., where the troublesome effects of time are absent and the residents are unaware of time on account of their absorption]—I worship [i.e., take shelter in] that Śvetadvīpa [lit., ‘white island’] which [only] a few sādhus in this world, who move about in seclusion on the earth [out of attachment to Kṛṣṇa and non-attachment to everything of the world; alt., who are extremely rare], know to be Goloka.”

Read on →

ye me bhakta-janāḥ pārtha na me bhaktāś ca te janāḥ

ye me bhakta-janāḥ pārtha na me bhaktāś ca te janāḥ |
mad-bhaktānāñ ca ye bhaktās te me bhakta-tamā matāḥ
(Ādi Purāṇa; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.133; Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.2.218; Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.11.28)

“O Arjuna, those persons who are bhaktas of me [i.e., who are focused only on me and neglect my bhaktas]—those persons are not my bhaktas [i.e., they are not my bhaktas in the full and proper sense]. Those who are bhaktas of my bhaktas are considered my best bhaktas [i.e., I consider those who have bhakti both for me and for my bhaktas to truly be my bhaktas].“

Read on →

śrī-caitanya-mukhodgīrṇā hare-kṛṣṇeti varṇakāḥ

śrī-caitanya-mukhodgīrṇā hare-kṛṣṇeti varṇakāḥ |
majjayanto jagat premṇi vijayantāṁ tad-āhvayāḥ || 
(Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta: 1.4)

“May these names made of the syllables Ha-re Kṛṣ-ṇa pronounced by Śrī Caitanya’s mouth inundate the world with prema and triumph completely!”

Read on →

kair api prema-vaivaśya-bhāgbhir bhāgavatavottamaiḥ

kair api prema-vaivaśya-bhāgbhir bhāgavatavottamaiḥ |
adyāpi dṛśyate kṛṣṇaḥ krīḍan vṛndāvanāntare ||
(Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta: 1.5.392)

“Even by some highly elevated Bhāgavatas who are overwhelmed by prema, Kṛṣṇa is seen playing in Vṛndāvana still today.”

Read on →

santv avatārā bahavaḥ paṅkaja-nābhasya sarvato-bhadrāḥ

santv avatārā bahavaḥ paṅkaja-nābhasya sarvato-bhadrāḥ |
kṛṣṇād anyaḥ ko vā latāsv api prema-do bhavati ||
(Bilvamaṅgala Ṭhākura; cited in Laghu Bhāgavāmṛta: 1.5.37; Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 1.3.27)

“There may be many all-auspicious avatāras of he of lotus-navel [i.e. Bhagavān], but who other than Kṛṣṇa is the bestower of prema upon even creepers?”

Read on →

virodho vākyayor yatra nāprāmāṇyaṁ tad iṣyate

virodho vākyayor yatra nāprāmāṇyaṁ tad iṣyate |
yathāviruddhatā ca syāt tathārthaḥ kalpyate tayoḥ ||
(Kūrma Puraṇa: 1.5.327; cited in Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta: 1.5.327)

“When there is a contradiction between statements [in śāstra], that is not [to be] considered [an instance of] inauthenticity [i.e., one statement should not be considered inauthentic and only the other one authentic]. A meaning of both [statements, rather,] whereby no contradiction arises should be formulated.”

Read on →

na śakyaḥ sa tvayā draṣṭum

na śakyaḥ sa tvayā draṣṭum asmābhir vā bṛhaspate |
yasya prasādaṁ kurute sa vai taṁ draṣṭum arhati ||
(Mahābhārata: 12.323.18; cited in Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.419, Bhagavat Sandarbha: 34)

“O Bṛhaspati, he [i.e., Bhagavān] cannot be seen by you or by us. Only someone whom he has graced is able to see him.”

Read on →

acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā

acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṁs tarkeṇa yojayet |
prakṛtibhyaḥ paraṁ yac ca tad acintyasya lakṣaṇam ||
(Mahābhārata: 6.5.12, 12.5.22; cited in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 2.5.93; Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta: 1.5.111; Tattva Sandarbha: 11, and Caitanya-caritāmṛta 1.17.308)

“Do not assess inconceivable states of being (bhāvas) with argumentation; that which is beyond the [material] elements is the characteristic of the inconceivable.”

Read on →

Scroll to Top