श्रीभगवन्नामगुणादिषु वस्तुशक्तेः सिद्धत्वान्न धर्मवद्भक्तेश्चोदनासापेक्षत्वम् । अतो ज्ञानादिकं विनापि फललाभो बहुत्र श्रुतोऽस्ति । चोदना तु यस्य स्वतःप्रवृत्तिर्नास्ति, तद्विषयैव । तथा क्रमविधिश्च तद्विषयः । तस्मिन्नेव नानाविक्षेपवति रुच्यभावेन रागात्मिकभक्तिशैलीमनभिजानति, सत्यामपि ‘धावन्निमील्य वा नेत्रे’ इत्यादिन्यायेन यथाकथञ्चिदनुष्ठानतः सिद्धौ, सुष्ठु वर्त्मप्रवेशाय क्रमशश्चित्ताभिनिवेशाय च मर्यादारूपः स निर्मीयते । अन्यथा सन्तततद्भक्त्युन्मुखताकरतादृशरुच्यभावान्मर्यादानभिपत्तेश्चाध्यात्मिकादिभिरुत्पातैर्विहन्यते च स इति, न तु स्वयं प्रवृत्तिमत्यपि मर्यादानिर्माणम्, तस्य रुच्यैव भगवन्मनोरमरागात्मिकाक्रमविशेषाभिनिवेशात् । तदुक्तं स्वयमेव—‘ज्ञात्वाज्ञात्वाथ ये वै माम्’ इत्यादिना ।
śrī-bhagavan-nāma-guṇādiṣu vastu-śakteḥ siddhatvān na dharmavad bhakteś codanā-sāpekṣatvam | ato jñānādikaṁ vināpi phala-lābho bahutra śruto’sti | codanā tu yasya svataḥ-pravṛttir nāsti, tad-viṣayaiva | tathā krama-vidhiś ca tad-viṣayaḥ | tasminn eva nānā-vikṣepavati rucy-abhāvena rāgātmika-bhakti-śailīm anabhijānati, satyām api ‘dhāvan nimīlya vā netre’ ity-ādi-nyāyena yathā-kathañcid anuṣṭhānataḥ siddhau, suṣṭhu vartma-praveśāya kramaśaś cittābhiniveśāya ca maryādā-rūpaḥ sa nirmīyate | anyathā santata-tad-bhakty-unmukhatā-kara-tādṛśa-rucy-abhāvān maryādānabhipatteś cādhyātmikādibhir utpātair vihanyate ca sa iti, na tu svayaṁ pravṛttimaty api maryādā-nirmāṇam, tasya rucyaiva bhagavan-manorama-rāgātmikā-krama-viśeṣābhiniveśāt | tad uktaṁ svayam eva—‘jñātvājñātvātha ye vai mām’ ity-ādinā |
(Excerpt from Bhakti Sandarbha: 312)
“Because of inherent potency (vastu-śakti) being existent in Śrī Bhagavān’s names, qualities, and so forth, bhakti has no dependence on injunctions like dharma [i.e., unlike dharma, where acts thereof only have potency because of the injunctions in śāstra to perform them, acts of bhakti have inherent potency in and of themselves]. Therefore, attainment of the result [of performing acts of bhakti] even without knowledge and so forth [i.e., even without understanding what bhakti is, without knowing whether one is performing it, without having an intention to perform it, so on] is heard of in many places [throughout the śāstra]. An injunction, rather, has for its object one who has no propensity of one’s own [to engage in a particular action], and a procedure [governing how an injunction is to be executed] also has that [same] object [i.e., is for the same type of person]. Even though attainment (siddhi) [of the result of practicing bhakti] can occur as a result of practicing [bhakti] somehow or other [i.e., by any means of practicing it, be it uninformed, unintentional, or otherwise] as per the principle [stated] in [SB 11.2.35], ‘Even if one runs with one’s eyes closed, one will not trip or fall here [i.e., one will not fail to attain the result of the practice even if one has no knowledge of it],’ the protocol form [of bhakti, i.e., the systematic form of bhakti motivated by injunctions and prohibitions enjoining and governing the practice of bhakti that is given in the śāstra] is created [in the śāstra] specifically for one who is subject to various distractions and does not understand the conduct of rāgātmikā-bhakti because of an absence of taste (ruci) [for it] for the sake of [supporting such a person’s] proper entrance into the path [of bhakti] and gradual absorption of the mind [therein]. Otherwise, on account of both an absence of such taste (ruci) [i.e., taste for rāgātmikā-bhakti] that produces constant intentness (unmukhatā) upon that [rāgātmikā-] bhakti [for which one has taste] and non-adherence to protocol [i.e., non-engagement in bhakti on the basis of śāstric injunctions and prohibitions], one is ruined by the disturbances related to the self [i.e., those of the body and mind] and so forth [i.e., disturbances arising through other living entities and disturbances arising through the devatās, since someone who does not take up the path of bhakti by one means or the other, be it by taste (in the case of rāgānugā-bhakti) or by śāstric injunction (in the case of vaidhī-bhakti), is sure to inevitably endure various karmic reactions, suffer, and stray from engagement in bhakti]. The creation of the protocol [i.e., the path of bhakti based on śāstric junctions, viz., vaidhī-bhakti] is [thus] not, rather, also for one possessed of a propensity [to engage in bhakti] of one’s own accord because of such a person’s absorption in a particular manner of rāgātmikā [-bhakti] pleasing to the mind of Bhagavān just by taste (ruci) [for that variety of rāgātmikā-bhakti, i.e., because someone with taste for a form of rāgātmikā-bhakti has the propensity to engage in bhakti simply because of that taste, there is no need for injunctions to be imposed on such a person to motive them to engage bhakti, and thus it is understood that a protocol enjoining engagement in bhakti is created only for those who lack a propensity to engage in bhakti, that is, for those who lack taste in some form of rāgātmikā-bhakti]. This is stated by he himself [i.e., Bhagavān, in SB 11.11.33], ‘Having understood, or not having understood, me as far as I am, for who I am, and of what nature I am, those who worship me with a one-pointed (ananya) bhāva are considered by me the best of bhaktas.’”