नृषु तव मयया भ्रमममीष्ववगत्य भृशं
त्वयि सुधियोऽभवे दधति भावमनुप्रभवम् ।
कथमनुवर्ततां भवभयं तव यद्भ्रुकुटिः
सृजति मुहुस्त्रिनेमिरभवच्छरणेषु भयम् ॥
nṛṣu tava māyayā bhramam amīṣv avagatya bhṛśaṁ
tvayi sudhiyo’bhave dadhati bhāvam anuprabhavam |
katham anuvartatāṁ bhava-bhayaṁ tava yad bhrū-kuṭiḥ
sṛjati muhus trinemir abhavac-charaṇeṣu bhayam ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.87.32)
[Translated according to Śrī Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda’s commentary:] “Understanding the ignorance as a consequence of your māyā among these human beings wherefrom repeated birth ensues, the wise foster bhāva [i.e., render service] profusely for you, Non-existence [i.e., you who are the cause of liberation from material existence]. How could your followers have any distress on account of [material] existence, since the furrowing of your brows—time (trinemi)—creates distress perpetually for those who are not in your shelter?”
Commentary
evaṁ nānā-matāny anūdya dūṣayantyo vaiṣṇava-matam eva sthāpayanti | nṛṣu vidvanmāniṣu amīṣu pūrva-śloka-dvayārthāvagamiteṣu nānā-vādiṣu bhramam avagatya bhrāntyaiva nānā-mata-kalpanaṁ jñātvā tvayi abhave bhava-nivartake bhāvaṁ dāsya-sakhyādikam eva kevalam anu prabhavam anu pratikṣaṇaṁ prabhava ullāso yasya tam | yad vā, prati-janmaiva dadhati kurvanti | yathoktaṁ vaiṣṇave—‘nātha yoni-sahasreṣu yeṣu yeṣu bhramāmy aham | tatra tatrācyutā bhaktir acyutās tu dṛḍhā tvayi ||’ iti | nanu, tarhi tvaṁ-padārtha-tat-padārthayor jñānābhāvāc ca teṣāṁ saṁsāras tu naiva nivartate tatrāhuḥ—katham iti | bhava-bhayaṁ teṣāṁ katham anuvartatām anuvṛttaṁ bhavatu tvad-dāsyārambha-daśāyām eva tasyāpagamāt, kintu niṣkāmatvātiśayād bhajanottha-dainyāc ca sveṣu teṣāṁ saṁsāritvābhimānaḥ | yad yasmāt tava bhrū-kuṭir bhrū-bhaṅga-rūpas tri-ṇemis triguṇaḥ tīkṣṇa-dhāraḥ kālaḥ abhavac-charaṇeṣu tvac-charaṇāpatti-rahiteṣv eva bhava-bhayaṁ janma-maraṇādi-lakṣaṇaṁ sṛjati | yad uktaṁ tvayaiva—‘sakṛd eva prapanno yas tavāmīti ca yācate | abhayaṁ sarvadā tasmai dadāmy etad vrataṁ mama ||’ iti | ‘daivī hy eṣā guṇamayī mama māyā duratyayā | mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te ||’ iti | ayaṁ bhāvaḥ—anyeṣāṁ vādinām iva para-mata-khaṇḍane sva-mata-sthāpane ca nātyāgrahaḥ, atyāgrahas tu tvad-bhajana eva | vaiṣṇavānāṁ tatra ca keṣām api vādināṁ vipratipattir iti tan-matam eva sarva-śāstrārtha-sāram | vicitra-rūpa-guṇa-līlā-mahodadhau tvayi kṛṣṇa-rāmādi-svarūpe upāsya-buddhiḥ sveṣūpāsaka-buddhir ity eva teṣāṁ tat-padārtha-tvaṁ-padārthayor jñānam, sūryopamasya bhagavato bāhya-prabhopamā jīvā, ata eva tato bhinnatvenābhinnatvenāpi vyapadiśyante | ‘sūkṣmāṇām apy ahaṁ jīvaḥ’ iti bhagavad-ukteḥ, ‘eṣo’ṇurātmā cetasā veditavyo yasmin prāṇaḥ pañcadhā saṁviveśa’ || iti | ‘bālāgra-śata-bhāgasya śatadhā kalpitasya ca | bhāgo jīvaḥ sa vijñeyaḥ’ | iti | ‘ārāgra-mātro hy aparo hi dṛṣṭaḥ’ ity-ādi-śrutibhyaś ca teṣāṁ paramāṇu-parimāṇatvam eva, tad api sampūrṇa-deha-vyāpi śaktimattvaṁ tu jaṭitasya mahāmaṇer mahauṣadha-khaṇḍasya ca śirasy urasi vā dhṛtasya sampūrṇa-deha-puṣṭikariṣṇu-śaktimattvam iva nāsamañjasam | svarga-naraka-nānā-yoniṣu gamanaṁ ca teṣām upādhi-pāravaśyād eva | yad uktaṁ prāṇam adhikṛtya dattātreyeṇa ‘yena saṁsarate pumān’ iti | teṣāṁ bahutvaṁ nityatvaṁ ca ‘nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām eko bahūnāṁ yo vidadhāti kāmān ||’ iti śrutyā pratipāditam | samuditānāṁ teṣāṁ bhagavatas taṭastha-śaktitvenaikatvaṁ ca jñeyam | te ca meghopamayāvidyayāvṛtā baddha-jīvā eke, anye bhaktimaj-jñānena tad-āvaraṇonmuktā mukta-jīvāḥ, anye kevalayā pradhānībhūtayā vā bhaktyā tad-āvaraṇonmocita-prāpita-cid-ānandamaya-bhajanopayogi-śarīrāḥ siddha-bhaktāḥ, anye’vidyā-yoga-rahitā eva nitya-pārṣadā iti catur-vidhāḥ | tal-lakṣaṇaṁ ca nārada-pañcarātre—‘yat taṭasthaṁ tu vijñeyaṁ sva-saṁvedyād vinirgatam | rañjitaṁ guṇa-rāgeṇa sa jīva iti kathyate ||’ asyārthaḥ—yat taṭasthaṁ viśeṣato jñeyaṁ cid-vastu sa jīvaḥ, ‘yathāgneḥ kṣudrā visphuliṅgā vyuccaranti’ iti śruteḥ sva-saṁvedyāc cit-puñjād bhagavataḥ sakāśād vinirgataṁ cet tadā guṇa-rāgeṇa rañjitaṁ bahiraṅgayā māyā-śaktyā svīyānāṁ guṇānāṁ rāgeṇa rañjitaṁ māyikākāraṁ syād ity arthaḥ | yadā tu kevalayā pradhānībhūtayā vā bhaktyā māyottīrṇaṁ syāt tadāntaraṅgayā cic-chaktyā svīya-kalyāṇa-guṇena rañjitaṁ bhagavaty anuraktīkṛtaṁ cinmayākāra-yuktaṁ syād ity arthaḥ | evaṁ ca māyā-cic-chaktyos taṭastha-vartitvāt taṭastham iti tan-nāma kṛtam | yadā tu bhaktimaj-jñānena muktaṁ syāt tadā brahmaṇy apṛthag-bhūya sthitaṁ naiva guṇa-rāgeṇa rañjitam ity upāsaka-nirūpaṇam | ata eva rājakīya-puruṣo’pi rāja-puruṣa itivat tat-padārtha-sambandhī tvaṁ-padārtha iti tat tvam asīti mahāvākyārthaṁ kecit tu tasya tvam iti ṣaṣṭhī-tat-puruṣeṇāpi vadanti | athopāsya-nirūpaṇam—sūryopamasya bhagavataḥ prasṛmara-sāndrajyotiḥ puñjopamaṁ brahma ‘brahma-saṁjñam abhūd ekaṁ jyotir yat sarva-kāraṇam’ iti nārasiṁhokteḥ ‘mamaiva tad-ghanaṁ tejo jñātum arhasi bhārata’ iti hari-vaṁśokteś ca | tasyāntarmaṇḍalopamaḥ paramātmā rathasārathy-ādi-parikara-viśiṣṭava-dana-nayana-pāṇi-pādādi-sundara-sūryopamaḥ saparikaraḥ śrī-bhagavān, yathā nagarasyātidūrasthā janā viśeṣam anupalabhamānā idam agre sthitaṁ kāntimayaṁ vastu-mātram iti tad eva nagaraṁ paśyanti, anatidūrasthā dhvaja-patākādi-viśiṣṭaṁ vṛkṣa-ṣaṇḍam iti, atisamīpasthās tu pura-gopura-niṣkuṭa-rathyā-prāsādādi-yuktaṁ nagaram iti, tathaivātidūrasthā bhagavantam eva jyotirmayaṁ brahmeti, anatidūrasthā aticid-viśeṣamayaḥ paramātmeti, atisamīpasthā nānānanta-cid-viśeṣamayo bhagavān iti tatrāpy antaḥpraviṣṭā apāra-mādhuryānubhavinaḥ kṛṣṇa iti vadanti | yathāhuḥ prāñco’pi—‘cayastviṣāmityavadhāritaṁ purā tataḥ śarīrīti vibhāvitākṛtim | vibhurvibhaktāvayavaṁ pumāniti kramādamuṁ nārada ity abodhi saḥ ||’ ity evam etāvan mātram api sva-mataṁ vaiṣṇavāḥ ke’pi jñātum apekṣante ca ke’pi nāpekṣante sadaivāpekṣante bhajana-prakāram eveti | atra śrutayaḥ—‘etad dhi viṣṇoḥ paramaṁ padaṁ ye nityodyuktāḥ saṁyajante na kāmāt | teṣām asau gopa-rūpaḥ prayatnāt prakāśayed ātma-padaṁ tadaiva ||’ ity ādyāḥ |
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“After thus mentioning various views and faulting them [in the two prior verses], they [i.e., the personified Śrutis] establish the Vaiṣṇava view specifically [in this verse]. ‘Understanding the ignorance’ (bhramam avagatya), that is, understanding the fabrication of various views purely out of delusion, ‘among these human beings’ (amīṣu nṛṣu), that is, among those who consider themselves learned, have conviction in regard to the meaning of the two previous verses, and are proponents of various doctrines (vādīs), [the wise (sudhiyaḥ)] foster only bhāva alone, meaning, servitude (dāsya), friendship (sakhya), and so forth [i.e., or another form of rati] that is anu prabhavam, meaning, that has delight (prabhava) at every moment (anu) [i.e., in this commentary anu prabhavam is read as a qualifier of bhāvam rather than as a qualifier of bhramam as it was glossed by Śrī Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda], for ‘you, Non-existence’ (tvayi Abhave), meaning, [for] you [Bhagavān] who are the terminator of [material] existence (bhava), as it is stated in Viṣṇu Purāṇa (1.20.18) [by Śrī Prahlāda], ‘O Nātha, wherever I go in the course of thousands of births, may I always have unwavering (acyutā) bhakti to you, the unwavering Lord (Acyuta)!’
“[An objection is raised:] ‘Well, then [i.e., in the case of the wise simply fostering bhāva for you] their saṁsāra will certainly not cease because of [their] lack of knowledge of the referent (padārtha) of “you” (tvam) and the referent (padārtha) of “that” (tat) [mentioned in the statement tat tvam asi, “You are that” in Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.8.7, meaning, one cannot overcome saṁsāra without the necessary knowledge, and if one lacks that knowledge and only fosters bhāva, one will not success in transcending saṁsāra].’ To this, they say katham … [i.e., the Śrutis speak the second half of the verse]. How (katham) could their [i.e., Vaiṣṇavas’] distress on account of [material] existence (bhava-bhayam) persist (anuvartatām)?^ [It certainly could not] On account its withdrawl verily in the stage [even] of beginning servitude unto you. Their [i.e., Vaiṣṇavas’] mentality within themselves of being a saṁsārī, however, [can persist even in that stage of actually having become free from the distress of material existence] because of an exceedance of desirelessness (niṣkāmatva) and because of the humility (dainya) arising from worship (bhajana). [The reason for Vaiṣṇavas’ having no further distress on account of [material] existence (bhava-bhayam) is then stated:] ‘Since’ (yat) ‘that possessed of three edges’ (triṇemiḥ), that is, the sharp tripartite sword of time in the form of the furrowing of your brows (bhrū-kuṭiḥ) creates the distress of [material] existence in the form of birth, death, and so forth only for those who are not in your shelter (abhavac-charaṇeṣu), that is, for those who have neglected to take shelter of you, as it is said by you yourself [in Rāmāyaṇa], ‘Upon one who takes shelter [in me] and even once prays, “I am yours,” I bestow fearlessness forever. This is my vow,’ and [in Śrī Gītā 7.14], ‘This divine māyā of mine constituted of the guṇas is certainly difficult to surmount. [Still,] Those who take shelter in me exclusively cross beyond this māyā.’
“This is the purport: [Vaiṣṇavas have] No great intentness (āgraha) upon refuting the views of others and establishing their own views like others who are proponents of [various] doctrines (vādīs) [do]. Rather, they have great intentness only upon worship (bhajana) of you. Vaiṣṇavas’, furthermore in this regard, have no disagreement with any of the proponents of [various] doctrines (vādīs). Thus, their view alone is the essence of the meaning of all the śāstras. Their conception of the object of worship (upāsya) is set upon you who are a vast ocean of marvelous forms, qualities, and līlās in the manifestations (svarūpas) of Kṛṣṇa, Rāma, and so forth, and [their] conception of the worshiper (upāsaka) is set upon themselves. Thus, they certainly have knowledge of the referent (padārtha) of “you” (tvam) and the referent (padārtha) of “that” (tat) [in the statement tat tvam asi]. The jīvas, who are compared to the external radiance of Bhagavān, who is compared to the sun, are thus designated as being different and being non-different from him. As per the statement of Bhagavān [in SB 11.16.11], ‘Also, of the minute, I am the jīva,’ and the Śrutis [i.e., the statements in Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad (3.1.9), Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (5.9), and Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (5.8)]: ‘The atomic ātmā is to be understood with the mind into which the fivefold prāṇa has fully and dividedly entered,’ ‘The jīva is to be known as a one-hundredth part of a one-hundreth part of the tip of a hair,’ and, ‘Although only [the size of] the tip of an awl, and although distinct, [the jīva] is perceived,’ their [i.e., the jīvas’] being of the measure [i.e., size] of an atom (paramāṇu) is established. Even so, there is no disharmony (asamañjasa) [on account of this atomicity of the jīvas] with their [i.e., the jīvas’ also] being possessed of śakti pervading the entire body just as a great jewel studded with gems or a piece of a highly medicinal plant held on the head or the chest is possessed of the śakti to stimulate the entire body. Their [i.e., the jīvas’] moving throughout Svarga, Naraka, and various wombs, furthermore, is solely because of [their] subjection to adjuncts (upādhi), since it is said by Dattātreya [in SB 11.9.20] in regard to prāṇa, ‘[Prāṇa is that] By which a person transmigrates.’ Their [i.e., the jīvas’] multiplicity and eternality, furthermore, is established by the Śruti [i.e., Gopāla Tāpanī Upaniṣad: 1.20, Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad: 6.13, or, Kaṭha Upaniṣad: 5.13], ‘The Eternal among eternals, the Conscious Being among conscious beings, who although one, fulfills the desires of the multitudes ….’ The oneness of them all [i.e., of all jīvas] collectively because of [their] being the taṭastha-śakti of Bhagavān is also to be understood.
“Furthermore, they [i.e., the jīvas] are of four types: (1) one [type] is the bound jīvas covered by ignorance (avidyā), which is comparable to a cloud, (2) another [type] is the liberated jīvas freed from that covering by jñāna possessed of bhakti, (3) another [type] is the siddha-bhaktas who have become freed from that covering by pure (kevala) or predominant (pradhānībhūta) bhakti [i.e., by bhakti that is free from jñāna, or bhakti wherein jñāna is also present but bhakti is predominant] and attained a conscious, blissful body suited to worship (bhajana) [of Śrī Bhagavān in one of his eternal abodes], and (4) another [type] is the eternal associates (nitya-pārṣadas) [of Śrī Bhagavān] who are entirely free from contact with ignorance (avidyā) [beginninglessly and endlessly].
“This characteristic [i.e., the jīva’s characteristic of being constituted of the taṭastha-śakti of Bhagavān] is also [stated] in Nārada Pañcarātra: ‘That which is intermediary (taṭastham), conscious in nature (cid-rūpam), issued forth from that which is to be known by itself [i.e., issued forth from its source, viz., Śrī Bhagavān], and colored by attachment to qualities (guṇas) is called the jīva.’ The meaning of this [verse is as follows:] That which is intermediary (taṭastham) and a conscious existent (cid-vastu) to be known specifically is [called] the jīva. As per the Śruti [i.e., Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad: 2.1.20], ‘As sparks emanate in various directions from a fire, so exactly all the prāṇas, all the planes (lokas), all the devas, and all living entities emanate in various directions from this Self (Ātmā) [i.e., Paramātmā],’ when the jīva is issued forth (vinirgatam) from ‘that which is to be known by itself’ (sva-saṁvedyāt), meaning, from the midst of the mass of consciousness known as Bhagavān, then it shall become ‘colored’ (rañjitaṁ) ‘by attachment to qualities’ (guṇa-rāgeṇa), that is, it shall become colored in the sense of [being possessed of] a māyika form through attachment to her [i.e., māyā’s] own qualities (guṇas) by means of the external (bahiraṅgā) māyā-śakti. This is the meaning. When, on the contrary, it [i.e., the jīva] shall become delivered from māyā by pure (kevala) or predominant (pradhānībhūta) bhakti, it shall become colored in the sense of devoted to Bhagavān and possessed of a form constituted of consciousness (cinmaya) through attachment to her [i.e., the cit-śakti’s] own auspicious qualities (guṇas) by means of the internal (antaraṅgā) cit-śakti. In this way, furthermore, the name ‘intermediate’ (taṭastha) is given [to the jīva] because of being situated on the median (taṭa) between the māyā- and cit-śaktis. When, on the contrary, it [i.e., the jīva] shall become liberated by jñāna possessed of bhakti, then it shall become situated in Brahman in the state of being non-separate [from Brahman] and shall not be colored by attachment to [any type of] qualities [be they manifest by the māyā-śakti or the cit-śakti]. This is the delineation of the worshiper (upāsaka). Therefore, as even a person belonging to [i.e., assisting] a king (rājakīya-puruṣa) is called ‘a man of the king’ (rāja-puruṣa), the referent (padārtha) of ‘you’ (tvam) is a bearer of a relationship with the referent (padārtha) of ‘that’ (tat) in [the statement in of the Chāndogya Upaniṣad], ‘You are that’ (tat tvam asi), and some indeed explain the meaning of this great statement (mahāvākya) even with a genitive determinative compound (ṣaṣṭhī tatpuruṣa-samāsa) [to mean], ‘You are his.’
“Now, the delineation of the object of worship (upāsya): Brahman is comparable to a mass of dense light radiating out from Bhagavān, who is comparable to the sun, as per the statement of Nṛsiṁha Purāṇa, ‘The singular light which was the cause of everything is known as Brahman,’ and the statement [of Śrī Bhagavān] in Hari-vaṁśa Purāṇa, ‘O Bhārata [i.e., O Arjuna], you are able to know that intense light of mine [viz., Brahman].’ Paramātmā is comparable to its [i.e., the sun’s] interior globe, and Śrī Bhagavān along with his associates is comparable to Sūrya [i.e., to the devatā of the sun, viz., Sūrya] possessed of a beautiful face, eyes, hands, feet, and so forth along with his chariot and associates beginning with his charioteer. As people situated very far from a city, not perceiving the differentia [of the city], see that city itself [only] in this manner, ‘This present before [us] is just a luminous object,’ and [as] those situated not very far [from the city see], ‘[This present before us is] A mass of trees replete with flags, banners, and so forth,’ whereas those situated very near [the city see], ‘[This present before us is] A city filled with residences, ornamented gateways, gardens, roads, palatial buildings, and so on,’ so exactly those who are situated very far away say Bhagavān himself is luminous Brahman, those situated not very far away [from Bhagavān say he is] Paramātmā constituted of non-extensive conscious differentiae (cit-viśeṣa), those situated very near [Bhagavān say he is] Bhagavān constituted of an infinite variety of conscious differentiae (cit-viśeṣa), and further in that regard those who have entered into the interior and perceived [his] boundless sweetness (mādhurya) [say he is] Kṛṣṇa, since the ancients also say [i.e., as Māgha Kavi has similarly described Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s perception of Śrī Nārada’s arrival in Dvārakā in Śiśupāla-vadha (1.3)], ‘First Vibhu [i.e., the all-pervading Śrī Kṛṣṇa] ascertained a mass of light, then, an embodied being with a manifested figure, and [then] a person with distinct limbs. After this sequence, he understood, “This is Nārada.”’ Thus, in this way, some Vaiṣṇavas seek to know their own view [i.e., the siddhānta in regard to the nature of the Para-tattva] even only up to this extent and some do not seek [even to do that]; they [all] certainly always [however] seek [to know] the nature of worship (bhajana) specifically. In this regard [i.e., in regard to the point that knowledge of worship (bhajana) is essential and self-sufficient for one to realize Śrī Kṛṣṇa, whereas extensive knowledge of siddhānta regarding him is not essential], the Śrutis [say in Gopāla Tāpanī Upaniṣad (1.21)], ‘To those who are constantly ardent and worship this supreme domain of Viṣṇu not on account of [extraneous] desire, this gopa form [i.e., Śrī Kṛṣṇa] shall assiduously manifest his own domain right then [i.e., right as they are engaged in meditation and so forth upon him].’”