इदं भगवता पूर्वं ब्रह्मणे नाभिपङ्कजे ।
स्थिताय भवभीताय कारुण्यात् सम्प्रकाशितम् ॥
आदिमध्यावसानेषु वैराग्याख्यानसंयुतम् ।
हरिलीलाकथाव्रातामृतानन्दितसत्सुरम् ॥
सर्ववेदान्तसारं यद ब्रह्मात्मैकत्वलक्षणम् ।
वस्त्वद्वितीयं तन्निष्ठं कैवल्यैकप्रयोजनम् ॥
idaṁ bhagavatā pūrvaṁ brahmaṇe nābhi-paṅkaje |
sthitāya bhava-bhītāya kāruṇyāt samprakāśitam ||
ādi-madhyāvasāneṣu vairāgyākhyāna-saṁyutam |
hari-līlā-kathā-vrātāmṛtānandita-sat-suram ||
sarva-vedānta-sāraṁ yad brahmātmaikatva-lakṣaṇam |
vastv advitīyaṁ tan-niṣṭhaṁ kaivalyaika-prayojanam ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 12.13.10–12)
“At the beginning, middle, and end replete with narrations productive of non-attachment (vairāgya); filled with the amṛta of discussion of Hari’s līlā by which the sādhu suras [i.e., Hari’s bhaktas, or, the self-satisfied (ātmārāmas)] become blissful; focused on that non-dual Reality (advitīya Vastu) which is the essence of the entire Vedānta [i.e., of the Upaniṣads] and has the characteristic of oneness of [i.e., the characteristic of non-excessive non-difference between] the ātmā with Brahman; and possessed of the singular aim of kaivalya [i.e., purity, meaning, pure bhakti, Bhagavat-prema, or, direct perception of Supreme Entity]—this [i.e., Śrīmad Bhāgavatam] was previously manifested in full [i.e., taught] out of compassion by Bhagavān [i.e., Śrī Kṛṣṇa] to Brahmā, who was situated on the navel-lotus [of Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu] and frightened of material existence.”
Commentary
garbhodakaśāyino nābhi-paṅkaje sthitāya brahmaṇe bhagavatā śrī-kṛṣṇena prakāśitam | santa ātmārāmā eva surāḥ | ‘itthaṁ satāṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā’ ity atra sac-chabdāt | … tathā kaivalyaika-prayojanam | kevalaḥ śuddhaḥ | sa ca projjhita-kaitavo yo bhaktaḥ, sa eva ‘dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavo’tra paramaḥ’ ity uktatvāt | tasya bhāvaḥ kaivalyam, mokṣādi-kāma-rahitā bhaktiḥ | ‘kaivalya-sammata-pathas tv atha bhakti-yogaḥ’ ity atra ‘kaivalyam ity eva sammataḥ panthā yo bhakti-yogaḥ’ iti ṭīkā-kṛdbhir vyākhyātatvāt | tatra panthā iti bhagavat-prāpty-upāya ity arthaḥ | sā bhaktiḥ prema-lakṣaṇaiva, tasyaiva tatra mukhyatvāt | tasmāt kaivalyaṁ bhagavat-premaiva puruṣārthatvena pratipādyaṁ yasya tat | ‘sālokya-ṣarṣṭi-sāmīpyam’ ity ādi vacana-vṛndebhya iti |
(Excerpt from the Krama-sandarbha-ṭīkā)
“[This Śrīmad Bhāgavatam was] Manifested by Bhagavān, that is, by Śrī Kṛṣṇa, to Brahmā, who was situated on the lotus above the navel of Garbhodakaśāyī [Viṣṇu]. The ‘sādhu suras’ (sat-suram) refers to ātmārāmas [i.e., those who are satisfied within themselves] in accord with the [meaning of the] word sat here in [i.e., SB 10.12.11], ‘[Thus. the cowherd boys play] With he who is experienced as the bliss of Brahman by the sat’ (itthaṁ satāṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā). … [The word] Kevala means one who is pure (śuddha) and that is the bhakta who has utterly rejected deceit, on account of the statement [in SB 1.1.2], ‘Here [in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam], for the sādhus who are free from envy, is the highest dharma wherein deceit is utterly rejected.’ His [i.e., such a bhakta’s] bhāva is called kaivalya [i.e., ‘purity’], meaning, bhakti that is free from desire for mokṣa and so forth, on account of the explanation of the revered commentator [i.e., Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda] in regard to [the statement in SB 2.3.12], ‘Then [one attains] bhakti-yoga, the path affirmed [by the wise] as kaivalya,’ [wherein the commentator has written], ‘Bhakti-yoga, which is the path affirmed specifically to be kaivalya ….’ Therein, the ‘path’ (panthā) refers to a means of attaining Bhagavān. This is the meaning. That bhakti [i.e., the bhakti that is designated as kaivalya] is specifically of the nature of prema because of that [i.e., prema] alone being principal therein [i.e., in such bhakti]. Therefore, [the meaning of the compound kaivalyaika-prayojanam qualifying Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is] that whose object to be taught as being the puruṣārtha is kaivalya, that is, definitively, prema for Bhagavān [i.e., the object Śrīmad Bhāgavatam teaches to be the supreme puruṣārtha is not merely any of the varieties of mukti spoken of elsewhere in the text, but rather is prema-bhakti, which is free from any desire for any form of mukti], as per statements such as [that of Śrī Bhagavān himself in SB 3.29.13], ’Without my service, people [i.e., those imbued with nirguṇa-bhakti to me] do not accept even sālokya, sārṣṭi, sāmīpya, sārūpya, or ekatva [i.e., sāyujya] even when [these are] offered [to them by me].’”
kevalaḥ śuddhaḥ, tasya bhāvaḥ kaivalyam | tad ekam eva prayojanaṁ parama-puruṣārthatvena pratipādyaṁ yasya tad idaṁ śrī-bhāgavatam iti pūrva-ślokasthenānvayaḥ | doṣa-mūlaṁ hi jīvasya parama-tattva-jñānābhāva evety uktam—‘bhayaṁ dvitīyābhiniveśataḥ syāt’ ity ādau, ‘īśād apetasya’ ity-ādibhiḥ | atas taj-jñānam eva śuddhatvam iti kaivalya-śabdasyātra pūrvavat tad-anubhava eva tātparyam | | athavā kaivalya-śabdena paramasya svabhāva evocyate | yathā skānde—brahmeśānādibhir devair yat prāptuṁ naiva śakyate | sa yat svabhāvaḥ kaivalyaṁ sa bhavān kevalo hare || iti | kvacit svārthika-taddhitāntena kaivalya-śabdenāpi parama ucyate | yathā śrī-dattātreya-śikṣāyāṁ—parāvarāṇāṁ parama āste kaivalya-saṁjñitaḥ | kevalānubhavānanda-sandoho nirupādhikaḥ || iti | tathāpy ubhayathaiva tad-anubhava eva tātparyam, tat-svabhāvam eva vā | tam evānubhāvayitum idaṁ śāstraṁ pravṛttam ity arthaḥ |
(Excerpted from Prīti Sandarbha: 1)
“[The word] Kevala means pure (śuddha), and the state (bhāva) thereof is [called] kaivalya [i.e., ‘purity’]. That whose singular (eka), meaning, only, aim (prayojana), that is, object to be taught as the supreme puruṣārtha, is that [i.e., is kaivalya] is this Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. This is the syntactical relation with the prior verses [i.e., with SB 12.13.11–12]. The root of the jīva’s deficiency (doṣa) [alt., impurity] is only the absence of awareness of the Supreme Entity (Parama-tattva), as stated by [the phrase], ‘For one who is averse to the Lord’ (Īśād apetasya) in [the verse] bhayaṁ dvitīyābhiniveśataḥ syād … [i.e., SB 11.2.37]. Therefore, only awareness of him [i.e., the Supreme Entity] is purity. Thus, here, as [was stated] previously, the intention [alt., import] (tātparya) of the word kaivalya is only experience (anubhava) of him [i.e., the Supreme Entity (Parama-tattva)]. Alternately, specifically the nature (svabhāva) of the Supreme [Entity, (Parama-tattva)] is referred to by the word kaivalya, as [stated] in Skanda Purāṇa: ‘He whom the devas beginning with Brahmā and Īśāna [i.e., Śiva] are unable to attain, and whose nature (svabhāva) is kaivalya—you alone are he, O Hari!’ Sometimes, the Supreme [Entity (Parama-tattva) himself] is also referred to by the word kaivalya by means of a svārthika-taddhita [i.e., the affix whereby the meaning of the word created by applying to a root it is identical to the meaning of the root], as in the teachings of Śrī Dattātreya [in SB 11.9.18, where is was said], ‘[The Original Puruṣa, the Controller of pradhāna (prakṛti) and the puruṣa (the jīvas),] The Supreme [i.e., the ultimate shelter, alt., the ultimate object to be attained, or, to be worshipped] for the greater and the lesser [i.e., for those who are parts of his own self (svīyāṁśas), e.g., his avatāras, and for those who are parts differentiated from him (vinnbhinnāṁśas), viz., jīvas; alt., for jīvas that are liberated and jīvas that are bound], known as Kaivalya, the aggregation of pure (kevala) [i.e., inherent] experience (anubhava) and bliss without any adjunct [i.e., any tinge of māyā] remains [during the period of universal dissolution (pralaya)].’ Even still, certainly in both [meanings of the word kaivalya, i.e., in the case of kaivalya meaning purity and the case of kaivalya being a name for the Supreme Entity], the intention [i.e., import of the word] is specifically experience (anubhava) of him, or, specifically his nature (svabhāva). [Thus the sense of the phrase kaivalyaika-prayojanam in SB 12.13.12 is:] This śāstra [i.e., Śrīmad Bhāgavatam] is brought forth only to cause experience (anubhava) of him.”
yadi tatra kevala-śabdena śuddhatvaṁ vaktavyaṁ tadā tat-prīty-eka-tātparyā eva parama-śuddhā iti tasyām eva tātparyam | pūrvaṁ bhakti-sandarbhe’pi śuddha-śabdenaikānti-bhakta eva pratipāditaḥ | tad uktam anyasya sa-doṣatva-kathanena ‘dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavo’tra paramaḥ’ ity atra | ṭīkā ca—pra-śabdena mokṣābhisandhir api nirastaḥ ity eṣā | atra bhāgavata-dharme mokṣābhisandhir api kaitavaṁ tātparyāntarād ity arthaḥ | yadi ca tatra kaivalya-śabdena bhagavān evoktas tat-svabhāvo vā, tathāpi prītimatām eva ‘kāmaṁ bhavaḥ sva-vṛjinair nirayeṣu nas tāc ceto’livad yadi nu te padayo rameta’ iti nyāyena tad-ekānuśīlana-mātra-tātparyāt prītāv eva viśrāntiḥ | ata eva kaivalyān mokṣād apy ekaḥ śreṣṭho yo bhagavat-prīti-lakṣaṇo’rthas tat-prayojanam iti vyākhyāntaram | vastutas tūkta-nyāyena kaivalyādi-śabdāḥ śuddha-bhakti-vācakatā-pradhānā eva | … pādmottara-khaṇḍe ca—viṣṇor anucaratvaṁ hi mokṣam āhur manīṣiṇaḥ iti | tathā skānde revā-khaṇḍe—niścalā tvayi bhaktir yā saiva muktir janārdana | muktā eva hi bhaktās te tava viṣṇo yato hareḥ || iti | … ata eva ‘kaivalya-sammata-pathas tv atha bhakti-yogaḥ’ ity atra ṭīkākārair apy uktam—kaivalyam ity eva sammataḥ panthā yo bhakti-yogaḥ iti | panthā bhagavat-prāpty-upāya-bhūto’pīty arthaḥ |
(Excerpted from Prīti Sandarbha: 16)
“If therein [i.e., in SB 12.13.12] purity (śuddhatva) is to be stated [i.e., conveyed] by the word kevala, then the intention is only upon that [i.e., upon prīti for Bhagavān] since they whose sole intention is prīti for him [i.e., Bhagavān] are supremely pure. Previously in Bhakti Sandarbha as well [in anuccheda 165], a one-pointed bhakta was stated [i.e., spoken of] with the word ‘pure’ (śuddha). This was stated because of the description of the faultiness of others here [in SB 1.1.2], ‘Here [in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam], for the sādhus who are free from envy, is the highest dharma wherein deceit is utterly rejected.’ And in the commentary [of Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda], this [is stated], ‘Even an intention upon mokṣa is repudiated by the prefix pra [‘utterly’]. [Thus,] Here in Bhāgavata-dharma, even an intention upon mokṣa is [considered] deceit because of [its being] another intention [i.e., an intention other than prīti for Bhagavān]. This is the meaning.
“Furthermore, if therein [i.e., in SB 12.13.12] Bhagavān himself is stated [i.e., conveyed] by the word kaivalya, or his nature is [conveyed, as was discussed earlier in the commentary on PRS 1], still, for those possessed of prīti [for Bhagavān], the final repose [of the meaning of the word kaivalya] is in prīti [for Bhagavān] alone because of [their] intention solely upon continuous action (anuśīlana) [i.e., pleasing service] to him alone, as per the principle [demonstrated] in [the prayer of the Kumāras to Śrī Bhagavān in SB 3.15.49], ‘At will let our birth occur in hells as a result of our own wrongful actions if [there] our minds may enjoy in your feet like bees.’ Therefore, another explanation [of the compound kaivalyaika-prayojanam] is, ‘[Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is that which is] Possessed of the aim (prayojana), that is, object the nature of which is prīti for Bhagavān, which is singular (eka), that is, superior, even in comparison to kaivalya, that is, mokṣa.’ In actuality, however, as per the [afore] stated principle, words such as kaivalya are principally only signifiers of pure bhakti. … In the Uttara-khaṇḍa of Padma Purāṇa as well, [bhakti is referred to by the word mokṣa]: ‘The wise say the servitorship (anucaratvam) of Viṣṇu is verily mokṣa.’ Similarly, in the Revā-khaṇḍa of Skanda Purāṇa: ‘O Janārdana, that which is unwavering bhakti to you is verily mukti, since, O Viṣṇu, O Hari, only those who are muktas are your bhaktas.’ … Therefore, in regard to [the statement in SB 2.3.12], ‘Then [one attains] bhakti-yoga, the path affirmed [by the wise] as kaivalya,’ it is also stated by the commentator [i.e., Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda], ‘Bhakti-yoga, which is the path affirmed specifically to be kaivalya ….’ A ‘path’ (panthā) existent even as a means of attaining Bhagavān is the meaning [i.e., bhakti-yoga is affirmed to be kaivalya even as a means of attaining Bhagavān.”