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.”
tathāpi saṅgaḥ parivarjanīyo
guṇeṣu māyā-raciteṣu tāvat |
mad-bhakti-yogena dṛḍhena yāvad
rajo nirasyeta manaḥ-kaṣāyaḥ ||
yathāmayo’sādhu cikitsito nṛṇāṁ
punaḥ punaḥ santudati prarohan |
evaṁ mano’pakva-kaṣāya-karma
kuyoginaṁ vidhyati sarva-saṅgam ||
kuyogino ye vihitāntarāyair
manuṣya-bhūtais tridaśopasṛṣṭaiḥ |
te prāktanābhyāsa-balena bhūyo
yuñjanti yogaṁ na tu karma-tantram ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.28.27–28)
“[Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa:] Nevertheless [i.e., even though brahman is not influenced by the guṇas or the ahaṅkāra], association with the guṇas [i.e., objects of the senses] fabricated by māyā is to be avoided so long as the impurity in the mind—passion (rajas)—is not removed by means of steadfast bhakti-yoga to me. As an improperly treated disease of people again and again crops up and causes trouble, so a mind with unburnt [i.e., undestroyed] impurities and actions that retains attachment to everything thwarts an immature yogī. One who remains an immature yogī [thwarted] because of ordained obstacles existent in the form of human beings sent by the devas, again [i.e., in another birth] by the strength of previous practice engages in yoga, and not rather, in a multitude of karma.”
na yāvad etāṁ tanu-bhṛn narendra
vidhūya māyāṁ vayunodayena |
vimukta-saṅgo jita-ṣaṭ-sapatno
vedātma-tattvaṁ bhramatīha tāvat ||
na yāvad etan mana ātma-liṅgaṁ
saṁsāra-tāpāvapanaṁ janasya |
yac choka-mohāmaya-rāga-lobha-
vairānubandhaṁ mamatāṁ vidhatte ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 5.11.15–16)
“[Rendered according to the Bhāvārtha-dīpikā:] O King, as long as the bearer of a body does not cast away this māyā, and, having become completely freed from attachment and victorious over the six co-wives [i.e., the six senses], understand the nature of the self (ātma-tattva) by means of the appearance of wisdom, so long he wanders here [i.e., in saṁsāra], and as long as one does not understand the mind, a guise of the self, to be the field of a person’s suffering in saṁsāra which bears a continuance of lamentation, delusion, disease, attraction, greed, and enmity, and produces my-ness [so long one wanders in saṁsāra].”
athāpi nopasajjeta strīṣu straiṇeṣu cārtha-vit |
viṣayendriya-saṁyogān manaḥ kṣubhyati nānyathā ||
adṛṣṭād aśrutād bhāvān na bhāva upajāyate |
asamprayuñjataḥ prāṇān śāmyati stimitaṁ manaḥ ||
tasmāt saṅgo na kartavyaḥ strīṣu straiṇeṣu cendriyaiḥ |
viduṣāṁ cāpy avisrabdhaḥ ṣaḍ-vargaḥ kim u mādṛśām ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.26.22–24)
“Even then [i.e., even though women are disgusting in so far as their bodies are made of flesh, blood, stool, urine, pus, and so forth], a sagacious person should not associate with women or those subjugated by women. The mind is disturbed by contact of the senses with [their] objects and not otherwise [i.e., the mind is not disturbed if such contact does not occur]. Feeling does not arise from unseen or unheard of objects. [Thus,] The mind of one who is non-engaged with the prāṇas [i.e., senses] is still and peaceful. Therefore, association is not to be done by means of the senses with women or those subjugated by women, since the ṣaḍ-varga [i.e., the six senses] even of the wise, much less of myself [i.e., of I who am undiscerning], are untrustworthy.”
parigraho hi duḥkhāya yad yat priyatamaṁ nṛṇām |
anantaṁ sukham āpnoti tad vidvān yas tv akiñcanaḥ ||
sāmiṣaṁ kuraraṁ jaghnur balino’nye nirāmiṣāḥ |
tadāmiṣaṁ parityajya sa sukhaṁ samavindata ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.9.1–2)
“Acceptance (parigraha) of whatever is most dear to human beings leads to suffering. One who understands this and is without anything (akiñcana) [i.e., possessionless], however, attains boundless peace. [When] An osprey with a piece of meat was attacked by other powerful ones without meat, then he gave up the meat and attained peace in full.”
yāvatā syāt sva-nirvāhaḥ svīkuryāt tāvad artha-vit |
ādhikye nyūnatāyāṁ ca cyavate paramārthataḥ ||
(Nāradīya Purāṇa; cited in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.2.108)
“One who is sagacious [lit., ‘a knower of utility’] should accept as much as shall be supportive for oneself. One becomes deviated from the ultimate goal as a result of excess and deficiency.”
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.”
dhī-dhṛti-smṛti-vibhraṁśaḥ samprāptiḥ kāla-karmaṇām |
asātmyārthāgamaś ceti jñātavyā duḥkha-hetavaḥ ||
(Caraka-saṁhita: 4.1.98)
“Divergence of the intellect, will, or memory [i.e., prajñāparādhas], the onset of a time period [e.g., a season], karma [i.e., the results of one‘s past actions], and contact with unwholesome objects of the senses are to be known as causes of suffering.”
arthendriyārthābhidhyānaṁ sarvārthāpahnavo nṛṇām |
bhraṁśito jñāna-vijñānād yenāviśati mukhyatām ||
na kuryāt karhicit saṅgaṁ tamas tīvraṁ titīriṣuḥ |
dharmārtha-kāma-mokṣāṇāṁ yad atyanta-vighātakam ||
tatrāpi mokṣa evārtha ātyantikatayeṣyate |
vijñāyātmatayā dhīraḥ saṁsārāt parimucyate |
traivargyo’rtho yato nityaṁ kṛtānta-bhaya-saṁyutaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgatavatam: 4.22.33–35; cited in Prīti Sandarbha: 1)
“For human beings, continuous thought [alt., coveting] of wealth and objects of the senses, because of which one becomes diverted from [one’s] knowledge [of śāstra] and realization [of śāstra’s object] and enters primitivity [i.e., inanimate life forms], is destructive of all arthas [i.e., detrimental to the attainment of all the puruṣārthas]. One who desires to cross over the fearsome darkness [i.e., saṁsāra] should never foster attachment (saṅga) to that which is perpetually [alt., exceedingly] destructive of dharma, artha, kāma, and mokṣa. Even therein [i.e., among the four puruṣārthas], mokṣa alone is regarded as being the ultimate artha, since an artha belonging to the tri-varga [i.e., the three puruṣārthas of dharma, artha, and kāma] is forever fraught with fear of death [alt., time, i.e., is perpetually subject to inevitable loss and thus incapable of ever producing true fulfillment].”
gṛheṣv āviśatāṁ cāpi puṁsāṁ kuśala-karmaṇām ||
mad-vārtā-yāta-yāmānāṁ na bandhāya gṛhā matāḥ ||
navyavad dhṛd aye yaj jño brahmaitad brahma-vādibhiḥ |
na muhyanti na śocanti na hṛṣyanti yato gatāḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 4.30.19–20; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 332)
[Translated according to the Bhāvārtha-dīpikā:] “[Śrī Bhagavān to the Pracetas:] The household lives of persons who are skillful in action and pass their time in discussion of me even though they have entered household lives is not considered to lead to bondage, since I the Knower—this Brahman those who have attained which neither become deluded, nor lament, and nor become excited—appear ever-anew in the heart by means of expounders of Brahman.”
