मुनय ऊचुः—
कथं भक्तिर्भवेत्प्रेम्ना जीवन्मुक्तस्य नारद ।
जीवन्मुक्तशरीराणां चित्सत्तानिःस्पृहा यतः ।
विरक्तेः कारणं भक्तिः सा तु मुक्तेस्तु साधनम् ॥
नारद उवाच—
भद्रमुक्तं भवद्भिश्च मुक्तिस्तुर्या परापरा ।
निरहं यत्र चित्सत्ता तुर्या सा मुक्तिरुच्यते ॥
पूर्णाहन्तामयी भक्तिस्तुर्यातीता निगद्यते ॥
कृष्णधाममयं ब्रह्म क्वचित्कुत्रापि भासते ॥
निर्बीजेन्द्रियगं तत्तु आत्मस्थं केवलं सुखम् ।
कृष्णस्तु परिपूर्णात्मा सर्वत्र सुखरूपकः ।
भक्तिवृत्तिकृताभ्यासात्तत्क्षणाद्गोचरीकृतः ॥
munaya ūcuḥ—
kathaṁ bhaktir bhavet premnā jīvan-muktasya nārada |
jīvan-mukta-śarīrāṇāṁ cit-sattā-niḥspṛhā yataḥ |
virakteḥ kāraṇaṁ bhaktiḥ sā tu muktes tu sādhanam ||
nārada uvāca—
bhadram uktaṁ bhavadbhiś ca muktis turyā parāparā |
nirahaṁ yatra cit-sattā turyā sā muktir ucyate ||
pūrṇāhantāmayī bhaktis turyātītā nigadyate ||
kṛṣṇa-dhāma-mayaṁ brahma kvacit kutrāpi bhāsate ||
nirbījendriyagaṁ tat tu ātmasthaṁ kevalaṁ sukham |
kṛṣṇas tu paripūrṇātmā sarvatra sukha-rūpakaḥ |
bhakti-vṛtti-kṛtābhyāsāt tat-kṣaṇād gocarīkṛtaḥ ||
(Bṛhad Gautamīya Tantra; cited in Prīti Sandarbha: 32)
“The sages said, ‘O Nārada, how can a jīvan-mukta have bhakti [endowed] with prema, since embodied jīvan-muktas have a conscious existence free from desire [i.e., they have no absorption, inclination, or desire related to the body or things of the world even though they are still embodied and situated within the world]. Bhakti is but a means of detachment (virakti), and that [i.e., detachment] is but a means of mukti.’
“Nārada replied: ‘You all have spoken well. Mukti is the fourth (turyā) [state of consciousness] and superior to the others [i.e., to the other three states of consciousness known as wakefulness, dreaming, and deep sleep]. That wherein there is conscious existence (cit-sattā) devoid of ‘I’ is called the fourth, mukti. Bhakti constituted of complete ‘I’-ness [i.e., the ultimate form of self-identification] is said to be beyond the fourth [i.e., greater than even mukti]. Brahman, constituted of Kṛṣṇa’s luster, sometimes manifests somewhere [i.e., Brahman is manifest only beyond the realm of prakṛti and in inside the realm of Vaikuṇṭha]. It [i.e., Brahman] is self-situated bliss alone known [only] with the seedless sense [i.e., with the potential for perception inherent in the jīva, which is not a faculty constituted of the guṇas of prakṛti, be it an bahiḥkaraṇa or antaḥkaraṇa]. Kṛṣṇa, however, is the fully complete Self (Ātmā) and embodiment of bliss [present] everywhere [i.e., pervasively present throughout the realm of prakṛti and the realm of Vaikiṇṭha who is] brought into one’s range [of perception] immediately as a result of executing repeated performance of the practice of bhakti.’”