माथुरं च द्विधा प्राहुर्गोकुलं पुरम् एव च ॥
यत्तु गोलोकनाम स्यात्तच्च गोकुलवैभवम् ।
स गोलोको यथा ब्रह्मसंहितायामिह श्रुतेः ॥
तदात्मवैभवत्वं च तस्य तन्महिमोन्नतेः ॥
अहो मधुपुरी धन्या वैकुण्ठाच्च गरीयसी ।
दिनमेकं निवासेन हरौ भक्तिः प्रजायते ॥
अयोध्या मथुरा माया काशी काञ्ची अवन्तिका ।
पुरी द्वारवती चैव सप्तैता मोक्षदायिकाः ॥
एवं सप्तपुरीणां तु सर्वोत्कृष्टं तु माथुरम् ।
श्रूयतां महिमा देवि वैकुण्ठभुवनोत्तमः ॥
māthuraṁ ca dvidhā prāhur gokulaṁ puram eva ca ||
yat tu goloka-nāma syāt tac ca gokula-vaibhavam |
sa goloko yathā brahma-saṁhitāyām iha śruteḥ ||
tad-ātma-vaibhavatvaṁ ca tasya tan-mahimonnateḥ ||
aho madhupurī dhanyā vaikuṇṭhāc ca garīyasī |
dinam ekaṁ nivāsena harau bhaktiḥ prajāyate ||
ayodhyā mathurā māyā kāśī kāñcī avantikā |
purī dvāravatī caiva saptaitā mokṣa-dāyikāḥ ||
evaṁ sapta-purīṇāṁ tu sarvotkṛṣṭaṁ tu māthuram | śrūyatāṁ mahimā devi vaikuṇṭha-bhuvanottamaḥ ||
(Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta: 1.497–498, 502–505)
“The abode of Mathurā is said to be twofold: [it consists of] Gokula and the city [i.e., the city named Mathurā]. That which can have the name Goloka is a manifestation of Gokula, since that Goloka is heard of as follows here in Brahma-saṁhitā [i.e., in BS 5.42, 56, 57, where it is also called Śvetadvīpa]. … Its [i.e., Goloka’s] being a self-expansion thereof [i.e., of Gokula] is because of the superiority of the greatness thereof [i.e., of Gokula], as [is stated] in the Pātāla-khaṇḍa [of Padma Purāṇa]: ‘Aho! Fortunate Madhupurī is greater than Vaikuṇṭha. Bhakti to Hari manifests by residing there for [even] one day. Ayodhyā, Mathurā, Māyā [i.e., Haridvāra], Kāśī, Kāñcī, Avantikā [i.e., Avantī, Ujjain], and Dvāravatī [i.e., Dvārakā]—these seven [cities] are bestowers of mokṣa. Among these seven cites, however, Māthura is the best of all. O Devī, hear of the greatness of this [abode] which is superior to the domain of Vaikuṇṭha [i.e., Goloka].”
Commentary
nanu gokula-vaibhavaṁ goloka iti kathaṁ manyāmahe? tatrāha—tad-ātmeti | golokād api gokula-mahimādhikyād ity arthaḥ | … vaikuṇṭha-śabdena goloka-paryantaṁ grāhyaṁ, tasya tad-ūrdhvāṅgatvāt | nanu sarvordhvatvābhāvāt tata āvṛtti-darśanāt tad-vāsiṣu sāmpratikeṣu jarādi-duḥkha-vīkṣaṇāś ca na golokāt tasya śreṣṭhyaṁ? maivaṁ, harer iva sarvāntaḥsthatve’pi acintya-śaktyā sarvordhvatvāt, sādhana-sampannānāṁ tat-prāptānāṁ tato’nāvṛtteḥ, harau nara-dārakatvasyeva tad-vāsiṣu jarādi-duḥkhasya dṛṣṭi-doṣa-hetukatvāt | tathā ca nyūnatā nāsti, ādhikyan tu vācanikamasty eva, tat tu grantha-kṛdbhir evodāhṛtam |
(Commentary by Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa)
“‘Well, how can we consider Goloka an expansion of Gokula?’ To this, the author speaks this verse (tad-ātma …, i.e., 502). Because of the superiority of Gokula’s greatness even in comparison to Goloka [Goloka is considered an expansion of Gokula]. This is the meaning. … By the word Vaikuṇṭha, the domain extending as far as [i.e., including] Goloka is to be understood because of its [i.e., Goloka’s] being its [i.e., Vaikuṇṭha’s] upper portion. [An objection is raised:] ‘Well, on account of the absence of it [i.e., Gokula] being above all, observance of return from there [i.e., rebirth after residing there], and seeing the suffering of old age and so forth in its present residents, it is not superior to Goloka.’ No, that is not so, (1) because of its [i.e., Gokula’s] being, like Hari [i.e., the Paramātmā], above all by virtue of inconceivable potency even while being situated in the midst of all, (2) because of the non-return [i.e., non-rebirth] from there of those who have performed sādhana and attained it, and (3) because of seeing suffering such as old age in its residents, like [seeing] the nature of a human boy in Hari, being a cause of fault. Furthermore, there is no deficiency [there], and, rather, there is certainly an express statement [i.e., the aforementioned verse cited from Padma Purāṇa] of superiority [i.e., of the superiority of Gokula above Goloka] that has also been cited by the revered author [i.e. Śrī Rūpa Gosvāmīpāda].”