Śrīmad Bhāgavatam

asyā janma-lakṣaṇaṁ bhakti-vyatirekeṇānyatrānabhirucim upalakṣya

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.’”

Read on →

rāgātmikāyāṁ rucir yathā

rāgātmikāyāṁ rucir yathā—suhṛt preṣṭhatamo nātha ātmā cāyaṁ śarīriṇām | taṁ vikrīyātmanaivāhaṁ rame’nena yathā ramā || atra svābhāvika-sauhṛdyādi-dharmais tasminn eva svābhāvika-patitvaṁ sthāpayitvā, parasyaupādhika-patitvam ity abhipretam | anyatra patyāv ‘ekatvaṁ sā gatā yasmāc caru-mantrāhuti-vrataiḥ’ iti chāndogya-pariśiṣṭānusāreṇa kṛtrimam ekātmatvam | tasmin paramātmani tu svabhāvata evety ātma-śabdasyāpy abhiprāyaḥ | evaṁ yadyapi tasmin patitvam anāhāryam evāsti, tathāpi ātmanaiva mūlya-bhūtenaiva taṁ viśeṣataḥ krītvā yathānyāpi kanyā vivāhātmakena svātma-samarpaṇena kañcit patitvenopādatte, tathā bhāvenāśritya anena parama-manohara-rūpeṇa tena saha rame ramā lakṣmīr yathā | tad evaṁ tasyā rāge piṅgalāyāḥ sva-rucir dyotitā ||
(Excerpted from Bhakti Sandarbha: 310)

“Taste for rāgātmikā [-bhakti] is as follows [as illustrated by a statement of Piṅgalā in SB 11.8.35], ‘He [i.e., Acyuta, Śrī Bhagavān,] is the friend (suhṛt), the most beloved (preṣṭhatama), the Lord (nātha), and the Self (ātmā) of all embodied beings. I shall purchase him by means of my very self and [thereby] enjoy with him like Ramā [i.e., Lakṣmī].’ In this regard, having established inherent (svābhāvika) husbandhood (patitvam) [i.e., capability to act as a husband in relation to a jīva] in him [i.e., Bhagavān] by means of his qualities of inherent friendship [i.e., his capability to act as a friend in relation to a jīva] and so forth, the conditional (aupādhika) husbandhood of others [i.e., of jīvas in saṁsāra who act as the husband of another embodied jīva] is intended [i.e., is meant to be conveyed by Piṅgalā’s statement in SB 11.8.35]. According to the Chāndogya-pariśiṣṭa, ‘She [i.e., a wife] has attained oneness (ekatvam) [with her husband] by virtue of caru [i.e., a type of oblation], mantras, rites, and vows,’ unitedness (ekātmatva) with other husbands is artificial (kṛtrima) [i.e., the unitedness of the jīva in the body of a woman with another jīva in the body of a man is a unitedness non-inherent in either of them that is created by rituals and resolutions], whereas in relation to Paramātmā, it [i.e., a jīva’s unitedness] is existent altogether inherently (svabhāvataḥ). This is the intention of the word ‘Self’ (Ātmā) as well [in SB 11.8.35, i.e., this is the intent of Piṅgalā’s statement that Acyuta is the Self of all embodied beings]. Thus, although husbandhood (patitva) is indeed non-adventitious in him [i.e., although Bhagavān’s capacity to act as a husband in relation to a jīva is not something some created but rather is an inherent capability in him], still [Piṅgalā states that] specially purchasing him by means of my very self, that is, [with myself] as the price, as other unmarried ladies also accept someone as [their] husband by means of the offering of oneself that constitutes [i.e., is known as] marriage, so I, taking shelter [in Bhagavān] by means of bhāva, shall enjoy with him, he of supremely attractive figure, like Ramā, that is, Lakṣmī. In this way, Piṅgalā’s own taste for her [i.e., Lakṣmī’s] rāga is thus illustrated.”

Read on →

eṣaivāvihiteti keṣāñcit saṁjñā, ruci-mātra-pravṛttyā vidhi-prayuktatvenāpravṛttatvāt

eṣaivāvihiteti keṣāñcit saṁjñā, ruci-mātra-pravṛttyā vidhi-prayuktatvenāpravṛttatvāt | na ca vaktavyaṁ vidhy-anadhīnasya na sambhavati bhaktir iti—prāyeṇa munayo rājan nivṛttā vidhi-ṣedhataḥ | nairguṇya-sthā ramante sma guṇānukathane hareḥ || ity atra śrūyate | tato vidhi-mārga-bhaktir vidhi-sāpekṣeti sā durbalā, iyaṁ tu svatantraiva pravartate iti prabalā ca jñeyā | … vidhi-nirapekṣatvād eva pūrvābhyāṁ dāsya-sakhyābhyām etadīyayos tayor bhedaś ca jñeyaḥ | … ata eva vidhy-ukta-kramo’pi nāsyām atyādṛtaḥ | kintu rāgātmikā-śruta-krama eva |
(Excerpted from Bhakti Sandarbha: 310)

“This itself [i.e., rāgānugā-bhakti as thus defined] is known by some as ‘non-enjoined [bhakti]’ because of [its] not being engaged in because of being motivated by injunction since it is engaged in only because of taste. It is also not to be said that bhakti is not possible for someone who is not subservient to injunctions [i.e., the injunctions of śāstra], since in this regard it is heard [in SB 2.1.7], ‘O King, for the most part, sages withdrawn from injunctions and prohibitions and situated in transcendence of the guṇas delight in recounting the qualities of Hari.’ Thus, it is to be understood that bhakti following the path of injunction [i.e., vaidhī-bhakti] is weak because it is dependent on injunctions, whereas this [i.e., rāgānugā-bhakti] proceeds entirely independently [of injunctions, that is, not requiring them] and thus is strong. … A distinction between the aforementioned servitude (dāsya) and friendship (sakhya) [i.e., the forms of sādhana-bhakti known as servitude (dāsya) and friendship (sakhya) of vaidhī-bhakti] and these [i.e., the servitude (dāsya) and friendship (sakhya) of rāgānugā-bhakti] is to be understood because of their [i.e., that latter’s] being independent of injunctions. … Thus, here [i.e., in rāgānugā-bhakti], the approach stated by injunctions [i.e., vaidhī-bhakti] too is not highly regarded, and rather, only the approach heard of in rāgātmikā [bhakti] is [i.e., a rāgānugā-sādhaka engages in sādhana in accord with the manners of expression (paripāṭis) of those rāgātmikā-bhaktas who foster the particular rāga one has taste for, and doesn’t engage in sādhana motivated by the injunctions of śāstra].”

Read on →

jano janasyādiśate’satīṁ gatiṁ

jano janasyādiśate’satīṁ gatiṁ
yayā prapadyeta duratyayaṁ tamaḥ |
tvaṁ tv avyayaṁ jñānam amogham añjasā
prapadyate yena jano nijaṁ padam ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 8.24.51)

[Satyavrata Rāja to Matsya Avatāra:] “A person [i.e., a worldly guru] teaches the unrighteous path [i.e., the pursuit of artha, kāma, and so on] whereby a person shall attain to unsurmountable darkness [i.e., saṁsāra], but you [appear in the form of the guru and] teach imperishable and unerring knowledge whereby a person quickly attains your own abode [alt., your own feet].”

Read on →

atha ātma-nivedanam

atha ātma-nivedanam | tac ca dehādi-śuddhātma-paryantasya sarvato-bhāvena tasminn evārpaṇam | tat-kāryaṁ cātmārtha-ceṣṭā-śūnyatvaṁ tan-nyastātma-sādhana-sādhyatvaṁ tad-arthaika-ceṣṭāmayatvaṁ ca | idaṁ hy ātmārpaṇaṁ go-vikrayavat, vikrītasya gor vartanārthaṁ vikrītavatā ceṣṭā na kriyate | tasya ca śreyaḥ-sādhakas taṁ krītavān eva syāt | sa ca gaus tasyaiva karma kuryāt, na punar vikrītavato’pīti | atha kecid dehārpaṇam evātmārpaṇam iti manyante | … kecic chuddha-kṣetrajñārpaṇam eva | … kecic ca dakṣiṇa-hastādikam apy arpayantaḥ, tena tat-karma-mātraṁ kurvate, na tu dehādi-karmety adyāpi dṛśyate | tad etat sarvātmakaṁ sakāryam ātma-nivedanaṁ yathā … | … atra sarvathā tatraiva saṅghātātma-nikṣepaḥ kṛta iti vaiśiṣṭyāpattyā smaraṇādi-mayopāsanasyaivātmārpaṇatvam | … yathā smaraṇa-kīrtana-pāda-sevana-mayam upāsanam eva āgamokta-vidhimayatva-vaiśiṣṭyāpattyārcanam ity abhidhīyate, tato nāviviktatvam, snāna-paridhānādi-kriyā cāsya bhagavat-sevā-yogyatvāyaiveti, tatrāpi nātmārpaṇa-bhakti-hānir ity anusandheyam | … tad etad ātma-nivedanaṁ bhāvaṁ vinā bhāva-vaiśiṣṭyena ca dṛśyate |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 309)

“Now, ātma-nivedanam [i.e., submission of the self, will be discussed]. That, furthermore, is offering of the body and so forth, up to the pure self (ātmā), in all respects to him [i.e., Śrī Bhagavān] alone. The result thereof, furthermore, is (1) being free from endeavor for the sake of oneself, (2) being of one’s means (sādhana) and ends (sādhya) consigned to him [i.e., Bhagavān, meaning, relying primarily upon Bhagavān for all of one’s means and ends, both in the spiritual sense of one’s bhakti-sādhana and attainment of the ideal of prema, and in the relative sense of one’s practical objectives related to the upkeep of the body and the means of effecting that], and (3) being possessed of endeavor solely for his sake. This offering of the self is like the selling a cow: [after the sale] endeavor is not performed by the seller for the sake of the maintenance of that which was sold [i.e., the cow], and the buyer alone shall be the agent of its [i.e., the cow’s] well-being. Furthermore, [after the sale] the cow shall work only for him [i.e., the buyer], and not any more for the seller [i.e., when one has offered oneself to Śrī Bhagavān, then, like a sold cow, one acts solely for the sake of one’s proprietor, Śrī Bhagavān, and the responsibility of one’s maintenance is solely that of Śrī Bhagavān]. Now, some consider offering of the self to be only offering of the body. … Some [alternately, consider offering of the self to be] offering of the pure knower of the field (kṣetrajña) [i.e., the ātmā]. … Some also offer the right hand or otherwise [i.e., some particular body part, to Bhagavān] and perform only action for him with that [offered part of the body] and not, rather, action for the body and so forth. Even today this is seen. Now, submission of the self, along with its functions, in totality is as follows [i.e., is demonstrated by Mahārāja Ambarīṣa, as described in SB 9.4.18–20]. … In this case [of Mahārāja Ambarīṣa], casting of the entirety of the self [i.e., the body, mind, and so forth up to the ātmā] solely unto him [i.e., Bhagavān] in all respects was performed. On account of the occurrence of this characteristic [i.e., of his engaging all the faculties of his self in action for the sake of Śrī Bhagavān, as described in SB 9.4.18–20], worship (upāsanā) constituted of remembrance and so forth [i.e., of usage of one’s various faculties, such as the mind] itself is part of [the limb of bhakti known as] offering of the self [i.e., ātma-nivedanam]. … As worship (upāsana) constituted of remembrance, praising, and serving the feet [of Bhagavān] is called arcana on account of the occurrence of the characteristic [in such worship] of being based on the injunctions stated in the Āgamas, and is not distinguished from that [i.e., from arcana, when that characteristic is present in them, since arcana is defined as worship performed according to śāstric injunction], one’s acts of bathing, dressing, and so forth [i.e., a bhakta’s attendance to their own basic bodily functions and needs after they have offered themselves to Bhagavān] too are [performed] only because of [their] being useful for the service of Bhagavān, and therein as well are to be considered non-detrimental to the [limb of] bhakti [known as] offering the self [i.e., one who has taken up the limb of bhakti known as offering one’s entire self to Bhagavān can still engage in actions for the sake of maintaining the body and so forth that one has offered to Bhagavān because such actions are actually actions for the sake of Śrī Bhagavān since they facilitate performance of various services to Śrī Bhagavān with the body and are themselves acts of care for something that belongs to and is dear to Bhagavān]. … Then, this submission of the self is seen to be (1) without a [specific] bhāva [as described in SB 11.29.32] and (2) with a specificity of bhāva [as in the case of Rukmiṇī offering herself to Śrī Kṛṣṇa with madhura-bhāva, as described in SB 10.52.1].”

Read on →

atha sakhyam tac ca hitāśaṁsana-mayaṁ bandhu-bhāva-lakṣaṇam

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]?’”

Read on →

tad-vāg-visargo janatāgha-viplavo

tad-vāg-visargo janatāgha-viplavo
yasmin prati-ślokam abaddhavaty api |
nāmāny anantasya yaśo’ṅkitāni yac
chṛṇvanti gāyanti gṛṇanti sādhavaḥ ||

(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 1.5.11; 12.12.52)

“Destructive of humanity’s sins is any composition of language in which, even if devoid of [syntactical] sense, there are names marked with [i.e., derived from descriptions of] the glories of Ananta [i.e., Bhagavān, lit., “he who is without end”] in every verse, since sādhus hear, sing, and speak [those names in the process of reciting the composition].”

Read on →

ajñāna-timirāndhasya jñānāñjana-śalākayā

ajñāna-timirāndhasya jñānāñjana-śalākayā |
cakṣur unmilitaṁ yena tasmai śrī-gurave namaḥ ||
(Cited in Krama-sandarbha-ṭīkā to Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 1.1.1; Prema-bhakti-candrikā: 1)

“Obeisance unto śrī-guru, he by whom my eyes, which were blinded by the cataract of ignorance, have been opened with the collyrium-wand of knowledge.”

Read on →

aho he putrakā yūyam asmad-arthe’tiduḥkhitāḥ

aho he putrakā yūyam asmad-arthe’tiduḥkhitāḥ |
ātmā vai prāṇināṁ preṣṭhas tam anādṛtya mat-parāḥ ||
etad eva hi sac-chiṣyaiḥ kartavyaṁ guru-niṣkṛtam |
yad vai viśuddha-bhāvena sarvārthātmārpaṇaṁ gurau ||
tuṣṭo’haṁ bho dvija-śreṣṭhāḥ satyāḥ santu manorathāḥ |
chandāṁsy ayāta-yāmāni bhavantv iha paratra ca ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.80.40–42; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 2.112)

“[Sāndīpani Muni to Kṛṣṇa and Sudāmā after finding that they have endured a night trapped in the forest by a storm after going out to collect firewood for his service]: Aho! O sons! The body is certainly most dear to living beings, but you two, being devoted to me, have disregarded it and been greatly troubled for my sake. Purely offering the entirety of one’s wealth and self to guru—this is indeed the requital of guru to be performed by sincere disciples. Bho! Best of the twice-born! I am satisfied [with you both because of your ideal attitude and conduct as disciples]. In this world and the next may your desires be fulfilled, and may the mantras [i.e., the mantras in the Vedas that I have taught you] be undiminished [i.e., remain ever-fresh and imbued with their essence—may they manifest themselves in your mind and bestow their wisdom and benefit upon you in this life and the next].”

Read on →

tatra bhāgavatān dharmān śikṣed gurv-ātma-daivataḥ

tatra bhāgavatān dharmān śikṣed gurv-ātma-daivataḥ |
amāyayānuvṛttyā yais tuṣyed ātmātmado hariḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.3.22; cited in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.2.98; Bhakti Sandarbha: 206)

“One for whom the guru is the Self (ātmā) and the Devatā should, through unaffected adherence, learn from him [viz., the guru] Bhāgavata-dharmas by which Hari, he who is the Self and the Bestower of himself, can be pleased.”

Read on →

Scroll to Top