Vāsanā

śṛṇvatāṁ sva-kathāḥ kṛṣṇaḥ puṇya-śravaṇa-kīrtanaḥ

śṛṇvatāṁ sva-kathāḥ kṛṣṇaḥ puṇya-śravaṇa-kīrtanaḥ |
hṛdy antaḥstho hy abhadrāṇi vidhunoti suhṛt satām ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 1.2.17; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 12)

“Situated internally, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Well-Wisher of the sat, he of whom hearing and praising are purifying, completely washes away vices in the hearts of those who hear narrations of himself.”

Read on →

hantāsmin janmani bhavān mā māṁ draṣṭum ihārhati

hantāsmin janmani bhavān mā māṁ draṣṭum ihārhati |
avipakva-kaṣāyāṇāṁ durdarśo’haṁ kuyoginām ||
sakṛd yad darśitaṁ rūpam etat kāmāya te’nagha |
mat-kāmaḥ śanakaiḥ sādhu sarvān muñcati hṛc-chayān ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 1.6.22–23)

“[Bhagavān as a disembodied voice to Śrī Nārada in his previous life after once giving him darśana:] Hanta! You will not be able to see me [again] in this life. I am imperceptible to immature yogīs, whose impurities are not burnt away. O sinless one! This form which was once shown [to you by me] was for the sake of your desire [i.e., to intensify your desire for me]. A sādhu with desire for me gradually gives up all that lie in the heart.”

Read on →

ūtiḥ syād vāsanā sātra saptame kathyate dvidhā

ūtiḥ syād vāsanā sātra saptame kathyate dvidhā |
aśubhā ca śubhā cāpi kopato’nugrahāt satām ||
santaś ca trividhāḥ śuddha-bhaktā jñānādi-miśritām |
bhaktiṁ dadhānās tan-miśra-jñānavantaś ca kīrtitāḥ ||
hiraṇyakaśipoḥ svābhāvikī yā vāsanāśubhā |
tatra hetuḥ sanandādi-kopaḥ prācīna eva saḥ ||
tasyāpi putro yas tasya prahlādasya śobhottamā |
śuddha-bhaktau vāsanā śrī-nāradāṅghri-kṛpā-bharāt ||
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā on Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 7.1.1)

Ūti (wish) shall mean [in this case] vāsanā (inclination). This is discussed here in the Seventh Canto and is of two types, inauspicious (aśubha) and auspicious (śubha), as a result of the anger and favor of the sat [i.e., inauspicious ūtis or vāsanās arise as a result of a sādhu’s anger and auspicious vāsanās arise as a result of a sādhu’s favor]. The sat, furthermore, are said to be of three types: (1) pure bhaktas, (2) those who foster bhakti mixed with jñāna and so forth, and (3) those possessed of jñāna mixed with that [i.e., with bhakti]. The cause in regard to the natural, inauspicious vāsanā which Hiraṇyakaśipu had was verily the prior anger of Sananda and so forth [i.e., the four kumāras]. The auspicious vāsanā for pure bhakti of Prahlāda, he who was his [i.e., Hiraṇyakaśipu’s] own son, was because of the abundance of grace [Prahāda received] from the blessed feet of Nārada.”

Read on →

ūtiś ca vāsanā proktā tat-tat-karmānusāriṇī

ūtiś ca vāsanā proktā tat-tat-karmānusāriṇī |
aśubhā ca śubhā ceti dvidhā sā hetu-bhedataḥ ||
aśubhā mahatāṁ kopāc chubhā mahad-anugrahāt |
harer dvārapayor yadvad vaikuṇṭhe vasator api ||
catuḥsana-ruṣā viṣṇu-dveṣādy-aśubha-vāsanā |
yathā ca daitya-garbhe’pi prahlādasya sataḥ sthirā ||
nāradānugrahād āsa viṣṇau sad-bhakti-vāsanā |
sva-bhaktaṁ ca sadā viṣṇur dviṣantam api rakṣati ||
tṛtīye’tha bhave dvāḥsthāv akarod ātmasāt prabhuḥ |
ato manīṣiṇā yatnaḥ kāryo mahad-anugrahe ||
ity etad artham ūtīnām atra lakṣaṇam ucyate |
tatrādau daśabhir daitya-tat-putra-mati-bhedataḥ ||
mahat-kopānukampottha-vāsanā bheda ucyate |
(Bhāvārtha-dīpikā on Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 7.1.1)

“An ūti (wish) is also called a vāsanā (inclination) and follows from particular karmas. It is of two types, inauspicious (aśubha) and auspicious (śubha), as a result of a difference in cause. An inauspicious vāsanā occurs as a result of the anger of a great one (mahat), and an auspicious vāsanā occurs as a result of the favor of a great one (mahat), as in the case of the inauspicious vāsanā for enmity and so forth towards Viṣṇu of the door-keepers’ of Hari [i.e., Jaya and Vijaya], even though they were residing in Vaikuṇṭha, as a result of the anger of the catuḥsana [i.e., the four kumāras], and as in the case of the unwavering vāsanā for pure bhakti to Viṣṇu of Prahlāda, even though he was born in the womb of a daitya, that occurred as a result of the favor of Nārada. Also, Viṣṇu always protects his own bhakta, even [when his bhakta is] inimical [towards him, as Jaya and Vijaya became as a result of the four kumāras’ anger and curse upon them]. Also, in the Third Canto, Prabhu accepted the door-keepers as his own [i.e., Bhagavān still considered Jaya and Vijaya his own bhaktas and protected them even though they acquired an inauspicious vāsanā as a result of their actions in relation to the kumāras]. Thus [i.e., the principle to be understood from the aforementioned is that], effort is to be made by the wise for the favor of a great one [i.e., to acquire an auspicious vāsanā, that is, a vāsanā for pure bhakti, one must endeavor to attain the favor a great one (mahat)]. This is the meaning. [Thus,] Here, the characteristics (lakṣaṇas) of ūtis (wishes) are stated. In that regard, by the first ten [chapters of the Seventh Canto], on the basis of the difference in mentality of the daitya [i.e., Hiraṇyakāśipu] and his son [i.e., Prahlāda], the distinction between the vāsanās arising from the anger and favor of a great one (mahat) is stated [i.e., they are distinguished as inauspicious and auspicious].”

Read on →

indriyasyendriyasyārthe rāga-dveṣau vyavasthitau

indriyasyendriyasyārthe rāga-dveṣau vyavasthitau |
tayor na vaśam āgacchet tau hy asya paripanthinau ||
(Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā: 3.34)

“Attraction (rāga) and aversion (dveṣa) to an object of each sense is firmly established [i.e., bound to occur]. One should not come under the control of these since they are one’s obstructions.”

Read on →

bhakty-astreṇa tyājayitvā viṣayān sva-mano yatiḥ

bhakty-astreṇa tyājayitvā viṣayān sva-mano yatiḥ |
dhvastāvidyo’vadhatte yaḥ kṛṣṇaṁ muktaḥ sa ucyate ||
bhakty-abhāvān mano-vṛttīr āśrayad vāsanāmayam |
avidyāṁ yasya puṣṇāti sa pumān baddha ucyate ||
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā on Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 5.11.17)

“An ascetic who with the weapon of bhakti removes viṣayas from his own mind and, having destroyed ignorance (avidyā), attends to [i.e., devotedly serves] Kṛṣṇa is called a mukta [i.e., one who is liberated from saṁsāra]. A person who nourishes his avidyā by taking shelter in functions (vṛttis) of the mind based on inclinations (vāsanās) as a result of a lack of bhakti is called baddha [i.e., bound in saṁsāra].”

Read on →

teṣu nityaṁ mahābhāga mahābhāgeṣu mat-kathāḥ

teṣu nityaṁ mahābhāga mahābhāgeṣu mat-kathāḥ |
sambhavanti hi tā nṝṇāṁ juṣatāṁ prapunanty agham ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.26.27; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.277)

“O you of great fortune [i.e., O Uddhava], discussions of me continuously take place among they who are most fortunate [i.e., among the sat as described in the prior verses], and they [i.e., those discussions] completely wash away the sin of human beings who honor [alt., delight in, them].”

Read on →

guṇeṣv āviśate ceto guṇāś cetasi ca prajāḥ

guṇeṣv āviśate ceto guṇāś cetasi ca prajāḥ |
jīvasya deha ubhayaṁ guṇāś ceto mad-ātmanaḥ ||
guṇeṣu cāviśac cittam abhīkṣṇaṁ guṇa-sevayā |
guṇāś ca citta-prabhavā mad-rūpa ubhayaṁ tyajet ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.13.25–26)

“[Haṁsa Bhagavān to Sanaka and other sages:] O sons! The mind becomes absorbed in the guṇas [i.e., the sense objects], and the guṇas [become absorbed] in the mind. Both the guṇas and the mind are bodies of [i.e., external adjuncts to] the jīva, who is constituted of me. The mind remains absorbed in the guṇas because of constant attendance to the guṇas, and the guṇas likewise remain strongly apparent in the mind. One who is absorbed in my form can abandon them both.”

Read on →

tathā tat-priya-vargaś ca pūrvaṁ darśitaḥ ‘tulayāma lavenāpi’ ity ādinā

tathā tat-priya-vargaś ca pūrvaṁ darśitaḥ ‘tulayāma lavenāpi’ ity ādinā | asya bhagavad-viṣaya-prīty-ālambanatvam api yuktam | smaraṇādi-pathaṁ gate hy asmiṁs tad-ādhārā sā prītir anubhūyate | ālambana-śabdaś ca viṣayādhārayor vartana iti | … tad evam api yam āśritya śrī-bhagavati sa prīti-viśeṣaḥ pravartate, sa evālambano jñeyaḥ | anye tūddīpanāḥ | athaivaṁ sa-vāsana-bhinna-vāsanaka-dvidha-tat-priya-varga-viṣayā ca yā prītiḥ sāpi tat-prīty-ādhāratvenaiva na tu sva-sambandhādinā | ata eva tat-priya-varge’pi sva-sambandha-hetukāṁ prītiṁ niṣidhya śrī-bhagavaty eva tām abhyarthya punas tat-priya-varge tad-ādhāratvenaiva prītim aṅgīkaroti | atha tatra niṣedhaḥ—‘atha viśveśa viśvātman viśva-mūrte svakeṣu me | sneha-pāśam imaṁ chindhi dṛḍhaṁ pāṇḍuṣu vṛṣṇiṣu ||’ atha abhyarthanā—‘tvayi me’nanya-viṣayā matir madhu-pate’sakṛt | ratim udvahatād addhā gaṅgevaugham udanvati ||’ atha aṅgīkāraḥ—‘śrī-kṛṣṇa kṛṣṇa-sakha vṛṣṇy-ṛṣabhāvani-dhrug-rājanya-vaṁśa-dahanānapavarga-vīrya | govinda go-dvija-surārti-harāvatāra yogeśvarākhila-guro bhagavan namas te ||’ atra śrī-kṛṣṇa-sakhety ādi-sambodhenais tat-prīty-ādhāratvenārjunādiṣv api prītir aṅgīkṛtyā | evaṁ ‘vṛknaḥ’ ity ādi-dvayaṁ śrīmad-uddhava-vākyam api saṅgamanīyam | yathā—‘vṛkṇaś ca me sudṛḍhaḥ sneha-pāśo dāśārha-vṛṣṇy-andhaka-sātvateṣu | prasāritaḥ sṛṣṭi-vivṛddhaye tvayā sva-māyayā hy ātma-subodha-hetinā || namo’stu te mahā-yogin prapannam anuśādhi mām | yathā tvac-caraṇāmbhoje ratiḥ syād anapāyinī ||’ sṛṣṭi-vivṛddhaye tvayā svādhīnayā māyayā yo dehādi-sambandhajaḥ sneha-pāśaḥ prasāritaḥ sa vṛkṇaś chinnaḥ | kena? ātma-subodha-hetinā, tvadīya-prīty-utpādaka-śobhana-jñāna-lakṣaṇa-śastreṇa | adhunā tvat-sambandhenaiva sa bhātīty arthaḥ | ata evottara-padyam api tathaiva | iyaṁ coktiḥ śrīmad-uddhavasya siddhatvān na sambahavatīti sva-vyājenānyān uddiśyaiveti jñeyam |
(Excerpted from Prīti Sandarbha: 112–115 and Krama-sandarbha-ṭīkā on Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 1.8.41–43)

“Similarly [i.e., just as Śrī Kṛṣṇa was shown to be the objective support (viṣayālambana) of prīti], his dear ones were also shown [to be the “vessel-supports” (āśrayālambanas) of prīti] in accord with [the statement in SB 1.18.13], ‘Let us not equate Svarga or non-repetition of birth [i.e., mokṣa], much less the blessings [i.e., wealth] of mortals, with even an instant of association with those who are devoted to Bhagavān.’ Their being supports of prīti the object of which is Bhagavān is also appropriate since that prīti, the substratum of which is them, is experienced in them when he is situated on the path of [their] remembrance and forth. The word __ālambana__, furthermore, signifies both the object (viṣaya) and substratum (ādhāra) [of prīti]. … Thus, in this way as well, only the one [i.e., the particular dear one of Śrī Bhagavān] by taking shelter in whom a particular form of this prīti for Śrī Bhagavān proceeds [from the heart of the dear one towards its object, Śrī Bhagavān] is to be known as the support (ālambana) [of prīti], whereas others [i.e., other dear ones of Śrī Bhagavān] are excitants (uddīpanas) [of that prīti]. Now, similarly, even that prīti the object (viṣaya) of which is his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] dear ones, who are of two types—(1) of like inclination (vāsanā) and (2) of different inclination (vāsanā) [with respect to a particular bhakta’s inclination (vāsanā)]—exists only because of [those dear ones’] being substrata of prīti for him, and not, rather, because of a [a particular dear associate’s] own relationship or otherwise [with them]. Therefore, one [i.e., a particular dear associate of Śrī Bhagavān] terminates [one’s] prīti even for his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] dear ones the cause of which is one’s own relationship [with them], prays for that [i.e., prīti] only in relation to Śrī Bhagavān, and then accepts prīti for his dear ones only because of [their] being substrata of that [i.e., prīti for him]. Now, the termination in this regard [is illustrated in the following prayer of Śrī Kuntī Devī to Śrī Kṛṣṇa in SB 1.8.41], ‘Now, O Lord of the universe, O Giver of consciousness to the universe, O Form of the universe, please cut this strong bond of affection of mine for my relatives, the Pāṇḍavas and Vṛṣṇis.’ Now, the prayer [for prīti solely for Śrī Bhagavān, as illustrated in the next statement of Śrī Kuntī Devī in SB 1.8.42], ‘O Madhupati, may my mind, having no other object [but for you], continuously [i.e., without cessation, and without regard for obstacles] carry forth rati for you, just as the Gaṅgā carries forth its stream [i.e., its water, continuously towards the ocean, disregarding all obstacles in its path].’ Now, the acceptance [of prīti for dear ones of Śrī Bhagavān because of their being substrata of prīti for him, as illustrated in the next statement of Śrī Kuntī Devī in SB 1.8.43], ‘O Śrī Kṛṣṇa! O Friend of Arjuna! O Best of the Vṛṣṇis! O you who are the fire upon the dynasties of kings who are destructive of the earth! O you who are of unlimited potency! O Govinda! O you whose descent is for removing the distress of the cows, twice-born, and suras! O Master of Yoga! O Guru of all! O Bhagavān! Obeisance unto you.’ Here, by means of the invocations, ‘O blessed Friend of Arjuna’ and so forth, prīti even for Arjuna and others on account of [their] being substrata of prīti for him [i.e., Bhagavān] is accepted.
“The statement of Śrīmad Uddhava [to Śrī Kṛṣṇa] in the two [verses] beginning __vṛknaḥ__ … [i.e., SB 11.29.39–40] is also to be contextualized in this way. ‘The exceedingly firm bond of my affection for the Dāśārhas, Vṛṣṇis, Andhakas, and Sātvatas, which was extended by your own māyā for the purpose of perpetuating the emanation [i.e., the universe], has been cut away with the weapon of fine understanding of the Self [viz., you]. May my obeisance be [offered] unto you, O Greatest of yogīs. Please instruct me, who have taken shelter [in you], so that I may have everlasting rati for your lotus feet.’ [This citation is explained as follows:] This bond of [my] affection born of relationships with bodies and so on, which was extended [i.e., created and made extensive] by you by means of [your] independent māyā for the purpose of perpetuating the emanation [i.e., the universe], has been cut away. With what? With the weapon of fine understanding of the Self, that is, with the weapon in the form of brilliant knowledge productive of prīti for you. Now, that [bond of affection] shines only in relationship to you. This is the meaning. Therefore, the latter verse [i.e., SB 11.29.40] too is exactly so [i.e., it is spoken with the same sense and intent]. Because of Śrīmad Uddhava’s being a siddha, this statement [of his], furthermore, is not possible [for him to make on his own account]. Therefore, it is to be understood to be [spoken] only for the sake of others on the pretext of referring to himself.”

Read on →

Scroll to Top