मतिर्न कृष्णे परतः स्वतो वा
मिथोऽभिपद्येत गृहव्रतानाम् ।
अदान्तगोभिर्विशतां तमिस्रं
पुन: पुनश्चर्वितचर्वणानाम् ॥
न ते विदुः स्वार्थगतिं हि विष्णुं
दुराशया ये बहिरर्थमानिनः ।
अन्धा यथान्धैरुपनीयमाना-
स्तेऽपीशतन्त्र्यामुरुदाम्नि बद्धा: ॥
नैषां मतिस्तावदुरुक्रमाङ्घ्रिं
स्पृशत्यनर्थापगमो यदर्थः ।
महीयसां पादरजोऽभिषेकं
निष्किञ्चनानां न वृणीत यावत् ॥
matir na kṛṣṇe parataḥ svato vā
mitho’bhipadyeta gṛha-vratānām |
adānta-gobhir viśatāṁ tamisraṁ
punaḥ punaś carvita-carvaṇānām ||
na te viduḥ svārtha-gatiṁ hi viṣṇuṁ
durāśayā ye bahir-artha-māninaḥ |
andhā yathāndhair upanīyamānās
te’pīśa-tantryām uru-dāmni baddhāḥ ||
naiṣāṁ matis tāvad urukramāṅghriṁ
spṛśaty anarthāpagamo yad-arthaḥ |
mahīyasāṁ pāda-rajo-’bhiṣekaṁ
niṣkiñcanānāṁ na vṛṇīta yāvat ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 7.5.30–32)
“[Śrī Prahlāda to Hiraṇyakaśipu:] Inclination towards Kṛṣṇa cannot arise on account of another, on its own, or on account of both [i.e., on its own and on account of another] for those intent upon household life, who have entered darkness because of uncontrolled senses and whose chewing is [only] of the chewed [therein] again and again. They, of debased mind, who honor only those whose aim is in the external, certainly do not understand Viṣṇu, he who is the object to be reached [only] for those whose aim is related to the Self. They also become bound by the strong strands of Īśa’s cord like the blind being led by the blind. Their inclination, the need of which is the cessation of the insubstantial, does not touch the feet of he of great stride [i.e., Bhagavān] so long as one shall not accept a bath in the foot-dust of the divested—the great ones.”
Commentary
āstām iyaṁ vārttā bhavādṛśānāṁ viṣayāsaktānām atrānadhikārād ity āśayenāha—matir iti | parato guroḥ svato vā mitho vā’nyonyato nābhipadyeta na sampadyeta | keṣām? gṛha-vratānāṁ gṛha eva vrataṁ saṅkalpa iti kṛtya-cintā yeṣām | ata evādāntair anuparatair gobhir indriyair hetu-bhūtais tamisraṁ saṁsāraṁ viśatām | tatra carvitasyaiva carvaṇaṁ yeṣām ||30|| nanu śrī-kṛṣṇasya paramānanda-svarūpatvāt te’pi tan-niṣṭhā eva kiṁ na syur iti cet tad-ajñānād ity āha—neti | ye durāśayā viṣaya-vāsitāntaḥkaraṇās te hi viṣṇuṁ na viduḥ | tatra hetuḥ—svasminn evārthaḥ puruṣārtho yeṣāṁ teṣāṁ gatiṁ gamyam | nanu te’pi gurūpadeśād viṣṇuṁ jñāsyanti? tatrāha—bahir viṣayeṣv artho yeṣāṁ, te bahir-arthās tān eva gurutvena mantuṁ śīlaṁ yeṣāṁ te | ato’ndhair upanīyamānā andha yathā panthānaṁ na viduḥ kintu garte patanti, tathā te’pīśasya tantryāṁ dīrgha-rajjvāṁ veda-lakṣaṇāyām urūṇi dāmāni brāhmaṇādi-nāmāni yasyāṁ tasyāṁ kāmyaiḥ karmabhir baddhā eva bhavantīty arthaḥ | tad uktam—‘viṣayāviṣṭa-cittānāṁ viṣṇv-āveśaḥ sudūrataḥ | vāruṇī-dig-gataṁ vastu vrajan naindrīṁ kim āpnuyāt ||’ iti ||31|| nanu ca ‘eko devaḥ sarva-bhūteṣu gūḍhaḥ sarva-vyāpī sarva-bhūtāntarātmā’ ity-ādi-śruti-pratipāditaṁ viṣṇuṁ kathaṁ na viduḥ? kuto vā teṣāṁ tamisra-praveśaḥ? tatrāha—naiṣām iti | niṣkiñcanānāṁ nirasta-viṣayābhimānānāṁ mahattamānāṁ pāda-rajasābhiṣekaṁ yāvan na vṛṇīta, tāvac chruti-vākyato jātāpy eṣāṁ matir urukramasyāṅghriṁ na spṛśati na prāpnoti, asambhāvanādibhir vihanyata ity arthaḥ | anarthasya saṁsārasyāpagamo yad-artho yasyāṅghri-sparśinyā mater arthaḥ prayojanam | mahad-anugrahābhāvān na tattva-niścayo nāpi mokṣas teṣām ity arthaḥ ||32||
(Bhāvārtha-dīpikā)
“‘Let this discussion be [i.e., stop] on account of the lack of eligibility for it on the part of those such as you all who are attached to objects of the senses (viṣaya).’ With this intent, he [i.e., Śrī Prahlāda] says [to Hiraṇyakaśipu] matir … [i.e., he speaks SB 7.5.30]. [Inclination (matiḥ) towards Kṛṣṇa] Cannot come about (abhipadyeta) on account of another, on its own, or account of both, that is, on account both of these [i.e., on its own and on account of another] mutually. For whom? Those whose intent (vrata), that is, resolve (saṅkalpa), is solely upon household life (gṛha), meaning, those whose concern is [the] duties [of household life alone]. Thereby, they have entered darkness, that is, saṁsāra, because of [their] uncontrolled senses (adānta-gobhiḥ), and therein their chewing is only of the chewed. ||30||
“If [the objection is raised], ‘Well, because of Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s being the embodiment of the supreme bliss, won’t they too also certainly become endowed with fixity upon him [i.e., won’t they also foster an inclination and devotion towards Śrī Kṛṣṇa since everyone fundamentally is seeking bliss and Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the ultimate source of bliss]?’ he says no [they will not] because of [their] ignorance of him: na … [i.e., he speaks SB 7.5.31]. They, of debased mind (durāśayāḥ), that is, whose psyche is affected by objects of the senses (viṣaya), certainly do not understand Viṣṇu. The cause in this regard is that he is the object to be reached [only] for those whose aim, that is, puruṣārtha, is specifically related to the Self [i.e., Viṣṇu, and the bliss that can be experienced in him can only be understood by those who do not seek bliss externally in objects of the senses (viṣaya) but rather in direct connection with him].
“[A question is raised:] ‘Well, will they too understand Viṣṇu by means of instruction from a guru?’ To that, he says, ‘They whose disposition is to honor as a guru only those whose aim is in the external, that is, is in the objects of the senses (viṣaya).’ Thus, as the blind being led by the blind do not know the path and rather fall into a ditch, so they too verily become bound by the rites related to objects of enjoyment (kāmya-karmas) [described] in the strong strands known as the brāhmaṇas and so on within Īśa’s long rope (tantryām) in the form of the Vedas. This is the meaning. Thus, it is said, ‘For one whose mind is absorbed in the objects of the senses, absorption in Viṣṇu is very far off. Can one attain an object situated in the West by going to the East?’ ||31||
“[Another question is raised:] ‘Well, furthermore, how do they not understand Viṣṇu, who is explained in the Śrutis, such as [Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 6.11], ‘One Deva is hidden in all beings, all-pervading, and the Inner Self of all beings’? And why do they enter darkness?’ To this, he says naiṣām … [i.e., he speaks SB 7.5.32]. Until one shall accept a bath in the foot-dust of the greatest of the mahats, the divested (niṣkiñcanānāṁ), that is, they who have cast away self-conceit based on objects of the senses (viṣaya)—until then, their inclination, even [if] produced by statements of the Śruti, does not touch, that is, do not attain, the feet of he of great stride (Urukrama) [i.e., Śrī Bhagavān], meaning, it is obstructed [from doing so] by impossibility and so on. ‘The need of which’ (yad-arthaḥ), that is, the necessity (arthaḥ) of which inclination is touching [his] feet, is the cessation of the insubstantial (anarthasya), that is, saṁsāra. In the absence of favor from the mahats, they [of debased mind] have no certainty about the nature of existence and so also no [attainment of] mokṣa. This is the meaning.” ||32||
asyārthaḥ—‘na te viduḥ svārtha-gatiṁ hi viṣṇuṁ durāśayā ye bahir-artha-māninaḥ’ iti pūrva-śloke prastutam api yeṣāṁ svarūpato’pi eṣāṁ durāśayānāṁ matir urukramasya bhagavato’ṅghriṁ tāvan na spṛśati na prāpnoti asambhāvanādibhir hanyata evety arthaḥ | yasyā aṅghri-sparśinyā mater arthaḥ, anarthasya saṁsārasya tad-aṅghri-bhajana-vyatiriktārthasya vāpagamo nāśaḥ | yāvan niṣkiñcanānāṁ nirasta-viṣayābhimānānām, yad vā bhagavad-bhakty-apekṣayā sarvatra nirapekṣāṇāṁ mahattamānāṁ pāda-rajasā abhiṣekaṁ na vṛṇīta | mahad-anugrahābhāvān na teṣāṁ tattva-niścayo nāpi kim api tat-phalam iti |
(Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.7.14)
“The meaning of this [verse, viz., SB 7.5.32, is as follows]: the inclination of those of debased mind, whose nature was also stated in the previous verse, ‘They, of debased mind, who honor only those whose aim is in the external, do not understand Viṣṇu, he who is the object to be reached [only] for those whose aim is related to the Self’ (na te viduḥ svārtha-gatiṁ hi Viṣṇuṁ durāśayā ye bahir-artha-māninaḥ), does not touch, that is, does not reach, the feet of he of great stride, that is, Bhagavān, meaning, it is verily obstructed [from doing so] by impossibility and so on. [‘The need of which’ (yad-arthaḥ), that is,] The necessity (arthaḥ) of the inclination which is touching [his] feet, is the cessation (apagamaḥ), that is, destruction, of the insubstantial (anarthasya), that is, saṁsāra, or [the cessation] of any aim distinct from worship of his feet. [One does not touch the feet of Bhagavān] Until one shall accept a bath in the foot-dust of the greatest of the mahats, the divested (niṣkiñcanānāṁ), that is, they who have cast away self-conceit based on objects of the senses (viṣaya), or, alternately, who are indifferent towards everything by virtue of [their] regard [only] for Bhagavad-bhakti. In the absence of favor from the mahats, they [of debased mind] do not have even certainty about the nature of existence, much less that result of that [i.e., much less do they attain realization of the supreme puruṣārtha, Śrī Bhagavān, which is only possible as a result of first acquiring certainty about the nature of existence].”
niṣkiñcanānāṁ nirasta-viṣayābhimānānāṁ bhagavat-prītyā tyaktāśeṣa-parigrahāṇāṁ vā, ata eva mahattamānāṁ pāda-rajo’bhiṣekaṁ yāvan na vṛṇīta, prītyā na bhajet, tāvac chruti-vākyādinā jñātam api eṣāṁ durāśayānāṁ matir urukramasya bhagavataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇasyāṅghriṁ na spṛśati na prāpnoti, asaṁbhāvanādibhir vihanyata ity arthaḥ | anarthasya saṁsārasyāpagamo yasyā aṅghri-sparśinyā mater arthaḥ prayojanam | mahad-anugrahābhāvān na tattva-niścayaḥ nāpi mokṣas teṣām ity arthaḥ | yad vā anarthasya arthatayā bhāsamānasya vicāreṇānartha-rūpasya | yad vā vedāntādau na vidyate artho yasmāt tasya mokṣasyāpagamo yasya pāda-rajo’bhiṣekasyārthaḥ | bhagavad-bhakta-kṛpā-viśeṣam antareṇa na mokṣecchā-nivṛttiḥ, na ca tāṁ vinā mater bhagavac-caraṇāravinda-sparśanam apīti ||
(Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.191)
“As long as one shall not accept, that is, not honor with love, a bath in the foot-dust of the divested (niṣkiñcanānāṁ), that is, those who have cast away self-conceit based on objects of the senses (viṣaya), or, those who have relinquished all acquisition [of worldly objects] out of love for Bhagavān, and are thus the greatest of the mahats—until then the inclination of they who are debased mind, even [if that inclination is] learned from statements of the Śruti and so forth, does not touch, that is, does not attain, the feet of he of great stride, that is, Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa, meaning, it is obstructed [from doing so] by impossibility and so on. ‘The need of which’ (yad-arthaḥ), that is, the necessity (arthaḥ) of the inclination which is touching [his] feet, is the cessation of the insubstantial (anarthasya), that is, saṁsāra. In the absence of favor from the mahats, they [of debased mind] have no certainty about the nature of existence and so also no [attainment of] mokṣa. This is the meaning. Alternately, ‘of the insubstantial’ (anarthasya) means of that which appears to be of substance but after deliberation is [understood to be] a form that is insubstantial [i.e., the necessity of the inclination possessed by those of debased mind is the cessation of intentness upon that which initially appears to be of substance but ultimately proves to be insubstantial]. Alternately [i.e., taking the pronoun yat to refer to the bathing in the foot-dust of the mahats rather than to refer to the inclination of those of debased mind], [anarthāpagamo yad-arthaḥ means] the necessity (arthaḥ) of which (yat) [i.e., of such] bathing in [the] foot-dust [of the mahats] is [bringing about] the cessation (apagamaḥ) of [desire for] mokṣa, that on account of which there is no [further] necessity (anarthaḥ) in regard to the Vedānta and so on. There is no cessation of the desire for mokṣa without the special grace of a bhakta of Bhagavān, and without that, one’s inclination’s touching Bhagavān’s lotus feet [i.e., becoming fixed thereupon] does not occur either [i.e., no one’s inclination becomes fixed upon Bhagavān and gives up fixity upon mokṣa and the means to attain mokṣa in the form of the teachings of the Vedānta and other śāstras without the grace of a mahat, and one does not attain the grace of a mahat without bathing in their foot-dust; thus, the necessity of bathing in the foot-dust of the mahats is said to be bringing about the cessation of desire for mokṣa].”
svasmin śrī-viṣṇor evārthaḥ prema-rūpaḥ puruṣārtho yeṣāṁ teṣāṁ gatim ||31|| anarthasya tat-sparśa-vighnasyāpagamaḥ ||32||
(Krama-sandarbha-ṭīkā)
“[Viṣṇu is] He who is the object to be reached (gati) for they who have an aim related to the Self, Śrī Viṣṇu specifically, that is, [who have] the puruṣārtha of prema [for Śrī Viṣṇu]. ‘The cessation of the insubstantial’ refers to [the cessation] of obstruction to their [i.e., the feet of Śrī Bhagavān’s] touch.”
ity uktyā ca bhagavat-kṛpā-parimala-pātra-bhūtasya śrīmato mahataḥ saṅga eva kāraṇam |
(Excerpt from Bhakti Sandarbha: 134)
“As per this statement [i.e., SB 7.5.32] as well, only the association of a blessed mahat who is a vessel of the fragrance of Bhagavān’s grace is the cause [of the appearance of bhakti].”
tataḥ sat-saṅgasyaiva tatra nidānatvaṁ siddham | tac ca yuktam, anādi-siddha-taj-jñāna-maya-tad-vaimukhyavatām anyathā hi tad-asambhavaḥ | … tathaiva śrī-prahlāda-vākyam—‘matir na kṛṣṇe parataḥ svato vā mitho’bhipadyeta gṛha-vratānām’ ity upakramya—naiṣāṁ … |
(Excerpt from Bhakti Sandarbha: 180)
“Thus, association with the sat’s alone being the fundamental cause in this regard [i.e., of intentness (sāmmukhyatā) upon Bhagavān in the form of bhakti coming into being] is established. That, furthermore, is befitting because of the impossibility of that otherwise [coming about] for those possessed of obliviousness (vaimukhyatā) of him based on beginninglessly existent non-awareness of him [i.e., of Bhagavān]. … So exactly, there is a statement of Śrī Prahlāda starting with matir na Kṛṣṇe … [i.e., SB 7.5.30, up through] naiṣāṁ matis … [i.e., 7.5.32, meaning, these three verses of Śrī Prahlāda affirm this conclusion].”
satyām iyaṁ kṛṣṇa-viṣayā matir bhavan-mate asaty eva | kiṁ caiṣā matir bhavādṛśānāṁ kuto’pi kadācid api notpadyate iti vakroktyā upahasann āha—matir iti | parata īdṛśād guror anyato vā svato mitho’nyo’nyato vā nābhipadyeta na sampadyeta, kintūttara-grantha-dṛṣṭyā mahac-caraṇa-rajo’bhiṣeka-lipsā-rahitānām iti tadīya-svagatoktir atra śloke’pi jñeyā | keṣāṁ gṛha-vratānāṁ gṛhāsaktānām | gṛha-vratatvam evāha—adāntair avaśīkṛtair gobhir indriyais tamisraṁ narakam | nanu gṛhavratāḥ kadācit svargiṇo’pi bhavanti | tatrāha—sva-parābhyām carvitasyaiva punaś carvaṇaṁ yeṣāṁ teṣāṁ veśyālayaḥ svargo vā tulya eveti bhāvaḥ ||30|| nanu re mūḍha! mām indrādi-vandita-pāda-pīṭhaṁ pitaram api vakrokti-viṣayī-kuruṣe | śṛṇu re kumate śṛṇu | śukrācāryasya śiṣyā mahāvidvāṁsas tvad-guravaḥ kiṁ sarva-śāstra-tātparyaṁ na jānanti, yatas tebhyo’dhītam arthaṁ na tvaṁ sādhu manyase ity ata āha—neti | te svasya artha-rūpāṁ gatiṁ viṣṇuṁ na viduḥ | kintv anartha-rūpāṁ gatiṁ svargādim eva jānantīti bhāvaḥ | yato durāśayā duṣṭāntaḥkaraṇā bahir viṣaya-sukham anartham eva arthaṁ mantuṁ śīlaṁ yeṣāṁ te | atas ta eva yadi viṣṇuṁ na vidus tadā kathaṁ tac-chiṣyā jñāsyantīti sa-dṛṣṭāntam āha—andhair upanīyamānāḥ upadiṣṭa-mārgāḥ santo’ndho yathā garte patati, tathaiva vāci veda-lakṣaṇāyāṁ tantryāṁ dīrgha-rajjvām ūrūṇi dāmāni brāhmaṇādi-nāmāni yasyāṁ, tasyāṁ karmabhir baddhā eva bhavantīty arthaḥ ||31|| nanu ca yadi viṣṇur eva svārtha-rūpā gatiḥ śāstrair ucyate, tadā tva-gurūṇāṁ sarva-śāstra-jñānāṁ matir viṣṇu-niṣṭhevotpadyetety atas teṣāṁ viṣṇu-niṣṭha-matitvābhāvād eva viṣṇu-bhaktir aśāstrīyety anumīyate ity ata āha—naiṣām iti | niṣkiñcanānāṁ ‘mat-kṛte tyakta-karmāṇas tyakta-svajana-bāndhavāḥ’ iti bhagavad-vākya-viśvāsāt tyakta-vyavahārika-vitta-putra-kalatrābhilāṣa-karma-jñānādīnāṁ bhakti-mātraika-vāsanatvena mahīyasāṁ pāda-rajaso svasya vaiṣṇavatvenābhiṣekaṁ yāvan na vṛṇīta, tāvan matir urukramāṅghriṁ na spṛśati—‘yasya deve parā bhaktir yathā deve tathā gurau | tasyaite kathitā hy arthāḥ prakāśante mahātmanaḥ ||’iti | ‘yam evaiṣa vṛṇute tena labhyas tasyaiva ātmā vivṛṇute tanuṁ svām ||’ ity-ādi-śrutibhyaḥ | anarthasya saṁsārasya apagamo yad-artho yasyāṅghri-sparśinyā mater arthaḥ prayojanam, ānuṣaṅgikam eva phalaṁ, mukhyaṁ tūrukramāṅghri-sparśaḥ sa eva ||32||
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“‘Right, this inclination the object of which is Kṛṣṇa certainly does not exist in someone like you. Moreover, this inclination can never by any means arise in those like you.’ With this crooked statement, he [i.e., Prahlāda] laughs and says matir … [i.e., he speaks SB 7.5.30 to Hiraṇyakaśipu]. [This inclination (matiḥ) towards Kṛṣṇa] Cannot come about (abhipadyeta) on account of another, that is, on account of such a guru [as Ṣaṇḍa or Amarka, whom Hiraṇyakaśipu deputed to teach Prahlāda], on its own, or account of both of these [i.e., on its own and on account of another] mutually. On the contrary, by reference to later in the text [i.e., to SB 7.5.32], His [i.e., Prahlāda’s] own statement, ‘For those devoid of desire to bathe in the foot-dust of mahats’ is to be understood here in this verse as well [i.e., although Prahlāda says in the verse under discussion that inclination towards Kṛṣṇa cannot come about on account of another person, it is not his intention to imply that it cannot come about by the association of a mahat when one desires to honor and receive the grace of a mahat, and thus it should be understood that inclination towards Kṛṣṇa cannot come about on account of the association of another person only in the case of those whose characteristics are as per the description in the remainder of the verse]. For whom [does this inclination never come about]? For those intent upon household life, that is, those attached to household life. He describes [such] intentness upon household life specifically: [one enters] darkness, that is, Naraka, because of uncontrolled senses (adānta-gobhiḥ).
“[An objection is raised:] ‘Well, those intent upon household life sometimes also become residents of Svarga.’ To this, he says that for they whose chewing is only of that which has [already] been chewed by themselves and others repeatedly, a brothel and Svarga are verily equivalent. This is the purport. ||30||
“[Hiraṇyakaśipu retorts:] ‘Well, O fool! You make even me, your father whose footstool is worshiped by Indra and others, the object of your crooked speech! Listen! O you of depraved intellect! Listen! Do your gurus, highly learned disciples of Śukrācārya, not understand the intent of all the śāstras, just because you do not consider the meaning you learned from them to be correct?’ Thus, he [i.e., Prahlāda] says na … [i.e., he speaks SB 7.5.31]. ‘They do not understand Viṣṇu, he who is the object to reached in the form of the aim of the self [i.e., Viṣṇu, who is himself is the ultimate puruṣārtha]. Rather, they understand only Svarga and so on, which are insubstantial, to be an the object to be reached since they are of debased mind (durāśayāḥ), that is, depraved psyche (antaḥkaraṇa), and are they whose disposition is to honor as an aim only the external, that is, the insubstantial pleasure produced by objects of the senses (viṣaya). Thus, if indeed they do not understand Viṣṇu, then how will their disciples understand [him]?’ Thus, he speaks with an illustration: As the blind being led, that is, following a path designated, by the blind, fall into a ditch, so exactly in accord with [their, i.e., those teachers who do not understand Viṣṇu’s] words, they [i.e., their followers] verily become bound by activities [described] in the strong strands known as the brāhmaṇas and so on within the long rope (tantryām) in the form of the Vedas. ||31||
“[Hiraṇyakaśipu objects:] ‘Well, if, furthermore, Viṣṇu specifically is said by the śāstras to be the object to be reached, that is, to be one’s [ultimate] aim, then the inclination of your gurus, who have knowledge of all the śāstras, would have come into being as fixity upon Viṣṇu. Therefore, because of the definitive non-existence of their having an inclination towards fixity upon Viṣṇu, Viṣṇu-bhakti is to be inferred to be contrary to the śāstra (aśāstrīya).’ Thus, he [i.e., Prahlāda] says [in reply] naiṣām … [i.e., he speaks SB 7.5.32 in response]. Until one accepts a bath by means of one’s Vaiṣṇavahood in the foot-dust of the divested (niṣkiñcanānāṁ), that is, those who have relinquished desire for conventional wealth, sons, and wife, karma, and jñāna by virtue of conviction in the statement of Bhagavān [in SB 3.2.22], ‘They who have given up karmas and given up relatives and friends for me … [are sādhus],’ and are great ones by virtue of having a singular inclination for bhakti alone—until then one’s inclination does not touch the feet of he of great stride [i.e., Śrī Bhagavān], as per the Śrutis [i.e., statements in the Śruti-śāstra, such as Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 6.23], ‘These [afore-] mentioned objects [i.e., the puruṣārthas] are revealed to the great soul who has pure bhakti to Deva, and as to Deva, so also to the guru,’ and [Kaṭha Upaniṣad 1.2.23], ‘The Ātmā is attainable by one whom he chooses; to him [who is so chosen] the Ātmā reveals his own form.’ ‘The need of which’ (yad-arthaḥ), that is, the necessity (arthaḥ) of the inclination which is touching [his] feet, is the cessation of the insubstantial (anarthasya), that is, saṁsāra; that is only a concomitant result. The primary [result], however, [of one’s inclination coming in touch with the feet of Śrī Bhagavān] is that touch itself of the feet of he of great stride [i.e., Śrī Bhagavān].”