धिग्जन्म नस्त्रिवृद्विद्यां धिग्व्रतं धिग्बहुज्ञताम् ।
धिक्कुलं धिक्क्रियादाक्ष्यं विमुखा ये त्वधोक्षजे ॥
dhig janma nas trivṛd vidyāṁ dhig vrataṁ dhig bahujñatām |
dhik kulaṁ dhik kriyā-dākṣyaṁ vimukhā ye tv adhokṣaje ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.23.39)
“Fie on the threefold birth, fie on the education, fie on the vow, fie on the great learnedness, fie on the family, and fie on the rites and expertise of we who are utterly averse to Adhokṣaja!”
Commentary
tṛvṛt śaukraṁ sāvitraṁ daikṣam iti triguṇitaṁ janma | vrataṁ brahmacaryam | kriyāḥ karmāṇi dākṣyaṁ ca kriyā-dākṣyam ity ekaṁ vā padam | dhig ity adhikṣepe | ye vayaḥ tv adhokṣaje vimukhās teṣāṁ janmādi tat sarvaṁ dhig iti vyagarhann ity arthaḥ |
(Bhāvārtha-dīpikā)
“‘Threefold’ (tṛvṛt) birth refers to the threefold seminal, sāvitra, and daikṣa [lit., dīkṣā-related, i.e., yājñika, births]. ‘Vow’ (vratam) refers to celibacy (brahmacarya). [The reading is kriyā dākṣyaṁ, meaning,] Rites (kriyāḥ) and expertise (dākṣyam), or, it is one [compound] word, kriyā-dakṣyaṁ [i.e., it refers to expertise in rites]. ‘Fie’ (dhik) is in the sense of contempt. ‘Fie on everything—the birth and so on—of we who are averse to Adhokṣaja.’ Condemnation is the sense.”
janmādīnām uttarottaram uttamatām abhipretya krameṇādhikṣipanti—dhig iti | janma dhik tatra ca viśuddha-mātā-pitṛbhyāṁ śauklyaṁ janma, sāvitram upanayanākhyam, daikṣyaṁ yajñādi-dīkṣā-sambandhi, adhokṣaje śrī-yaśodā-nandane’pīty arthaḥ | etan niruktiḥ pūrvam eva likhitāsti |
(Brḥad Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī)
“They condemn [their] birth and so forth in sequence, intending successive superiority [i.e., of the objects of condemnation listed in the verse]. ‘Fie on [our] birth, and in that regard, [fie on our] seminal birth from a pure mother and father, [our] sāvitra [birth], which is known as the upanayana [-saṁskāra], and [our] daikṣya [birth], the birth which is related to dīkṣā into yajña and so on. Adhokṣaje refers also to the blessed Son of Yaśodā. The etymology of this [i.e., of the name Adhokṣaja] was already written earlier.”
ye adhokṣaje pratyāvṛttau prādurbhāvini paramātmany api vimukhās teṣāṁ janmādīni dhig iti śaukrasya janmanaḥ ‘kiṁ punar brāhmaṇāḥ puṇyā bhaktā rājarṣayas tathā’ iti tad-bhaktau upayuktatamatve’py anuyojanāt sāvitrasya tad-abhidhāyitvena gāyatry-ajñānāt gāyatryās tat-paratvaṁ ca tad-artha-vistara-rūpasya śrīmad-bhāgavatasya tat-paratvāt tad-uktaṁ gāyatrīṁ bhagavat-paratvena vyākhyāyāgni-purāṇe’pi ‘yatrādhikṛtya gāyatrīṁ kīrtyate dharma-vistaraḥ’ ity ādi, daikṣasyāpi—‘ahaṁ hi sarva-yajñānāṁ bhoktā ca prabhūr eva ca | na tu mām abhijānanti tattvenātaś cyavanti te ||’ iti | tattvājñānāt | evaṁ vratādīnām api kulaṁ vaṁśa-paramparām |
(Laghu Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī-ṭīkā)
“Fie on the birth and so forth of they who are averse to Adhokṣaja, that is, even to Paramātmā of repeated appearance [i.e., who repeatedly appears as avatāras]. This [condemnation] is (1) because of the non-engagement of the seminal birth [these brāhmaṇas had] even though it is most fit for bhakti to him as per the principle [stated by Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa himself in BG 9.33], ‘[By taking shelter in me somehow or other, even those of sinful birth, women, vaiśyas, and śūdras certainly attain the supreme destination, so] What more [is to be said] of meritorious brāhmaṇas and royal seers [i.e., kṣatriyas] who are bhaktas [of mine]?’, (2) [this condemnation is] because of a lack of understanding of sāvitra, that is, gāyatrī, as being a referrer to him as well as [a lack of understanding of] gāyatrī’s being related to him on account of Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, that which is an elaboration of its [viz., gāyatrī’s] meaning, being related to Bhagavān as per an explanation also in Agni Purāṇa, ‘[That] Wherein a exposition of dharma is stated with reference to gāyatrī [is known as Bhāgavatam],’ and (3) [this condemnation is] because of a lack of understanding of the nature (tattva) even of the birth related to dīkṣā [i.e., the yājñika birth and consequent practice of yajña], as per [Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s own explanation of the fundamental nature of yajña in BG 5.29], ‘I alone am the enjoyer and the master [i.e., bestower of the results] of all yajñas [bhaktas of other devatās perform for other devatās]; they, however, do not properly understand me in truth and thus fall down.’ Similarly so of the vow and so forth [i.e., the brāhmaṇas similarly condemn their vow, education, and so on because of their failing to utilize them in bhakti to Bhagavān]. ‘Family’ (kulam) refers to familial ancestry.”
trivṛt śaukraṁ sāvitraṁ daikṣyam iti triguṇitaṁ janma, no’smākaṁ yat tad dhik | vrataṁ brahmacaryaṁ, tridhā nitya-naimittikādi karmāṇi | ye vayam adhokṣaje śrī-kṛṣṇe tu vimukhā eva |
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“‘Threefold’ (tṛvṛt) refers to the threefold seminal, sāvitra, and daikṣya [lit., dīkṣā-related, i.e., yājñika, births]. Fie on this of ours (naḥ). ‘Vow’ (vrata) refers to celibacy (brahmacarya). Rites (kriyāḥ) are threefold: the regular, the occasional, and so on. We who are indeed averse to Adhokṣaja, that is, Śrī Kṛṣṇa [is the sense].”
trivṛt śaukraṁ sāvitraṁ daikṣañ ceti triguṇitaṁ no janma dhik, vrataṁ brahmacaryādi, bahujñatāṁ vedārtha-vyutpattiṁ, kulaṁ mātṛtaḥ pitṛtaś ca viśuddhaṁ, kriyāyāṁ nitya-naimittika-lakṣaṇāyāṁ, dākṣyaṁ tad-anuṣṭhānaṁ cāturyam ity etat sarvaṁ śocyam abhūt ye vayam adhokṣaje vimukhāḥ | yena haris tuṣyet tad eva saphalam anyat tu viphalam iti bhāvaḥ |
(Vaiṣṇavānandinī-ṭīkā)
“‘Threefold’ (tṛvṛt) refers to the threefold seminal, sāvitra, and daikṣa [lit., dīkṣā-related, i.e., yājñika, births]. Fie on these births of ours. ‘Vow’ (vratam) refers to celibacy (brahmacarya) and so on. ‘Great learnedness’ (bahujñatām) refers to proficiency in the meaning of the Vedas. ‘Family‘ (kulam) refers to one that is pure on the mother’s side and on the father’s side. ‘Rites’ (kriyāḥ) refers to the regular and the occasional. ‘Expertise’ (dākṣyam) refers to dexterity in performance of these [rites]. All of these have become lamentable for we who are averse to Adkhokṣa. Only that by which Hari shall be satisfied is successful. All else, on the contrary, is fruitless. This is the purport.”
Note
In some versions of the aforecited commentaries, the variant reading “pure” (śauklam) can be found in place of “seminal” (śaukram), the sense of “pure” (śauklam) here being that one’s birth is from a mother and father of one of the three upper varṇas—the brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, or vaiśya varṇas—who have received all the requisite saṁskāras for the accomplishment of the duties of their varṇa and āśrama in a lineage wherein these saṁskāras have been passed on with uninterrupted generational continuity.