कथं विना रोमहर्षं द्रवता चेतसा विना ।
विनानन्दाश्रुकलया शुध्येद्भक्त्या विनाशयः ॥
kathaṁ vinā romaharṣaṁ dravatā cetasā vinā |
vinānandāśru-kalayā śudhyed bhaktyā vināśayaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.14.23)
“How without horripilation, without meltedness of the heart, without a teardrop of bliss—without bhakti—could the heart be purified?”
Commentary
romaharṣādikaṁ vinā kathaṁ bhaktir gamyate? bhaktyā ca vinā katham āśayaḥ śudhyet? iti |
(Bhāvārtha-dīpikā)
“Without horripilation and so forth [i.e., meltedness of the heart and tears of bliss], how is bhakti recognized [to be present]? And without bhakti, how could the heart be purified?”
romaharṣādikaṁ vinā kathaṁ bhaktiḥ prema-lakṣaṇā gamyate? bhaktyā ca vinā katham āśayaḥ śudhyet? bhakty-eka-paraḥ sadā sarvatra sākṣād iva śrī-kṛṣṇa-parisphūrtimayo vā syād ity arthaḥ |
(Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 11.644)
“Without horripilation and so forth [i.e., meltedness of the heart and tears of bliss], how is bhakti the characteristic of which is prema recognized [to be present]? And without bhakti, how could the heart be purified? Will not one who is given to bhakti alone be always and in all circumstances filled with clear manifestation of Śrī Kṛṣṇa as though directly [i.e., as though they are perceiving Śrī Kṛṣṇa directly]? [They certainly will, and that perception of Śrī Kṛṣṇa by means of bhakti will melt the heart and give rise to externally observable signs like horripilation and tears of bliss whereby it will be recognizable that the person has bhakti.] This is the meaning.”
romaharṣas tāvad yat kiñcic ceto-dravasya cihnam | ānandāśru-kalā tu viśiṣṭasya tasya [citta-dravasya] cihnam | ceto-dravas tu bhakter antaraṅga-svabhāva iti tathā tathoktam | romaharṣeṇānandāśru-kalayā ca vinā kathaṁ tāratamyeṇa ceto-dravo’vagamyate? dravatā cetasā ca vinā kathaṁ bhaktir āvirbhavati? bhaktyā ca vinā katham āśayaḥ śudhyed iti | evaṁ prīter lakṣaṇaṁ citta-dravas tasya ca romaharṣādikam | kathañcij jāte’pi citta-drave romaharṣādike vā na ced āśaya-śuddhis tadāpi na bhakteḥ samyag āvirbhāva iti jñāpitam | āśaya-śuddhir nāma cānya-tātparya-parityāgaḥ prīti-tātparyaṁ ca | ata eva—‘animittā svābhāvikā’ iti tad-viśeṣaṇam |
(Krama-sandarbha-ṭīkā; Prīti Sandarbha 68–69)
“‘Horripilation’ (romaharṣa), first of all, is a sign of melting of the heart somewhat. ‘A teardrop of bliss’ (ānandāśru-kalā), on the contrary, is a sign of that in particular [i.e., of full melting of the heart]. Melting of the heart, on the contrary, is the internal nature of bhakti [i.e., it is a characteristic of bhakti that exists only within a person and is not directly visible externally]. Thus, such and such is stated. Without horripilation and a teardrop of bliss, how is melting of the heart recognized in gradation [i.e., how can it be known if someone’s heart is melting unless the signs of partial and full melting of the heart, namely, horripilation and tears of bliss, are seen?] And without meltedness of the heart, how does bhakti appear? [i.e., if there is anything that is always coupled with the presence of bhakti within someone, it is meltedness of heart, which in turn produces external signs like horripilation and tears of bliss]. And without bhakti, how could the heart be purified? [i.e., there is nothing that purifies the heart as bhakti does]. In this way, the characteristic of love (prīti) is melting of the heart, and [the characteristics] of that are horripilation and so on. Even when melting of the heart or horripilation and so on occur somewhat, if purification of the heart has not occurred [fully], then still a complete appearance of bhakti does not occur. This is made known [in the verse under discussion]. Purification of the heart, furthermore, means relinquishment of [all] other intentions [i.e., all desires and aims other than prīti], and intention upon [i.e., desire for and pursuit of only] prīti. Thus, there is a description of it [i.e., prīti, in SB 3.25.32] as being ‘causeless’ (animittā) [i.e., free from extraneous desires] and ‘natural’ (svābhāvikī) [i.e., not enacted by force].”
antaḥkaraṇaṁ tu samyaktayā bhaktir eva śodhayati, nānyat sādhanam | sā ca bhaktī romāñcādy-anubhāva-gamyety āha—katham iti | bhaktyā hetunā yad dravac-cetas tena vinā kathaṁ sādhanāntareṇa romaharṣaḥ, kathaṁ vā ānandāśru-kalā | romaharṣaṁ vinā ānandāśru-kalayā ca vinā katham āśayaḥ śudhyed ity anvayaḥ | yad uktaṁ kali-yuga-pāvanāvatāreṇa śrī-bhagavatā—‘śrutam apy aupaniṣadaṁ dūre hari-kathāmṛtāt | yan na santi dravac-citta-kampāśru-pulakādayaḥ ||’ iti | tena niṣkāma-karma-yogādayo bahu-pramāṇa-siddhā antaḥkaraṇasya śodhakās tāvad bhavantu, kintu tasya yena kaṣāyeṇa bhagavad-aparokṣānubhavo na bhavati, tat kaṣāyaṁ tu prema-bhaktir eva jvālayati, na tu jñānāgnir apīti bhāvaḥ |
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“Only bhakti, however, and no other means of accomplishment (sādhana), purifies the psyche completely. That, bhakti, furthermore, is recognizable by the effects of horripilation and so forth. Thus, he says katham … [i.e., thus Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa speaks this verse]. Without a heart melting as a result of bhakti, how—by what other sādhana—does horripilation occur? [It does not occur by any other sādhana.] And how does a teardrop of bliss occur? [It also does not.] And without horripilation and without a teardrop of bliss, how could the heart be purified? This is the syntactical connection [of the words in the verse]. Since it said by Śrī Bhagavān, the avatāra who is the purifier of the Age of Kali [ as recorded in Padyāvalī 39], ‘Let the import of the Upaniṣads, even after hearing which melting of the heart, trembling, tears, horripilation, and so forth do not occur, remain afar from the nectar of discussion of Hari,’ a desireless practice of karma (niṣkāma-karma-yoga) and so forth [i.e., and other sādhanas like jñāna-yoga], which are established by numerous evidences (pramāṇa) [i.e., which are also attested to throughout the śāstras], may well be purifiers of the psyche, but only prema-bhakti burns away that impurity (kaṣāya) thereof [i.e., within the psyche] because of which unmeditated experience (aparokṣa-anubhava) of Bhagavān does not occur, and not, rather, even the fire of knowledge (jñāna). This is the purport.”