प्रीतिर्यतो यस्य सुखं च येन
सम्यग्भवेत्तद्रसिकस्य तस्य ।
तत्साधनं श्रेष्ठतमं सुसेव्यं
सद्भिर्मतं प्रत्युत साध्यरूपम् ॥
prītir yato yasya sukhaṁ ca yena
samyag bhavet tad-rasikasya tasya |
tat sādhanaṁ śreṣṭhatamaṁ susevyaṁ
sadbhir mataṁ pratyuta sādhya-rūpam ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.3.152)
“The sādhana related to him [i.e., Śrī Bhagavān] of a relisher of him for which one’s complete affinity (prīti), and by which [one’s complete] satisfaction, shall come about is the best of all, [is] to be excellently performed, and [is] considered, rather, the goal and a form [of that goal] by the sat.”
Commentary
nanu yadi dhyāne saṅkīrtana-sparśanādi-rūpā mano-vṛtti-viśeṣā notpadyante kevalaṁ bhagavataḥ śrī-mūrtau ceto-vṛtti-santatir eva syāt, tatraiva nija-mano ramate, tarhi kiṁ kāryam? ity apekṣāyām āhuḥ—prītir iti | yato yasmin tad eva śreṣṭhatamaṁ tasya sādhanam, atas tad eva tena suṣṭhu sevyam sadā śraddhayā cādareṇa cānuṣṭheyam, prīti-viṣayatvād acireṇa nijeṣṭa-sampādana-yogyatvāt | pratyuta tad eva tasya sādhyaṁ phalaṁ tat-svarūpaṁ ca sadbhir mataṁ premodayāt |
(Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“[A question is raised:] ‘Well, if the particular mano-vṛtti [i.e., function of the mind] in the form of the touch of saṅkīrtana or otherwise does not arise during meditation, but rather only the continuous flow of a ceto-vṛtti [i.e., mano-vṛtti] fixed upon the beautiful figure of Bhagavān shall occur, and therein itself one’s mind delights [i.e., and if one’s mind delights in meditating on Bhagavān’s figure without simultaneously engaging in chanting of his name or other forms of sādhana], then what is to be done?’ In expectation of this [question], they [i.e., the Viṣṇudūtas] speak this verse (prītir …). The sādhana for which one has affinity (prīti) is the best of all, and thus that is to be excellently performed by one [i.e., by one who is a relisher of him], meaning, [it is] to be practiced continuously with śraddhā and adoration (ādara), because of [its] being capable of quickly procuring one’s desired object [i.e., the aim of one’s sādhana] on account of [its] being an object of affinity (prīti). It [i.e., that sādhana for which one has affinity] is, on the contrary, [itself also] considered one’s goal (sādhya), that is, the result [being sought by performing sādhana] and [to be] a form thereof [i.e., to be an anubhāva, an expression of having realized that goal] by the sat on account of the manifestation of prema [i.e., once prema manifests in the course of performing the sādhana one has affinity for, that sādhana continues to be performed as an effect and expression of prema and thus is recognized at that stage as also being the goal, that is, prema itself].”