श्रुतिस्मृतिपुराणादिपञ्चरात्रविधिं विना ।
ऐकान्तिकी हरेर्भक्तिरुत्पातायैव कल्पते ॥
भक्तिरैकान्तिकी वेयमविचारात् प्रतीयते ।
वस्तुतस्तु तथा नैव यदशास्त्रीयतेक्ष्यते ॥
śruti-smṛti-purāṇādi-pañcarātra-vidhiṁ vinā |
aikāntikī harer bhaktir utpātāyaiva kalpate ||
bhaktir aikāntikī veyam avicārāt pratīyate |
vastutas tu tathā naiva yad aśāstrīyatekṣyate ||
(Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.2.101–102; Brahma-yāmala; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 284, 312)
“‘Without [adherence to] the injunctions of the Śrutis, Smṛtis, Purāṇas, Pañcarātras, and other śāstras, [even so-called] one-pointed bhakti to Hari simply leads to disturbance.’ Such bhakti [as mentioned in this verse from Brahma-yāmala] may appear to be one-pointed as a result of misjudgement. In reality, however, it is not so because it is seen to be unsupported by śāstra.”
Commentary
ekāntitvaṁ khalu bhakti-niṣṭhā | sā rucyaiva vā śāstra-vidhy-ādareṇaiva vā jāyate | tato rucer viralatvād uttarābhāvenāpi yad aikāntikītvaṁ tat tasyaikāntika-mānino dambha-mātram ity arthaḥ | tatas tad anūdyaiva nindā ‘śruti-smṛti-purāṇa’ ity-ādinā, na tu ruci-bhāve’pi tan-nindā yuktā … | tathā coktaṁ pādmottara-khaṇḍe—svātantryāt kriyate karma na ca vedoditaṁ mahat | vinaiva bhagavat-prītyā te vai pāṣaṇḍinaḥ smṛtāḥ || iti | prītir atra tādṛśa-ruciḥ | tad evam atra śāstrānādarasyaiva nindā | na tu tad-ajñānasya ‘dhāvan nimīlya vai’ ity-ādeḥ | gautamīya-tantre tv idam apy uktam—na japo nārcanaṁ naiva dhyānaṁ nāpi vidhi-kramaḥ | kevalaṁ santataṁ kṛṣṇa-caraṇāmbhoja-bhāvinām ||
(Excerpt from Bhakti Sandarbha: 312)
“‘One-pointedness’ is verily fixity in bhakti. That arises [in a genuine manner] either by taste (ruci) [for a particular form of rāgātmikā-bhakti] or by adherence to the injunctions of śāstra. Then, because of taste being rare, [apparent] one-pointedness that lacks even the latter [i.e., the latter cause of a propensity to engage in bhakti, viz., adherence to the injunctions of śāstra] is just the pretense of one who considers oneself one-pointed. This is the meaning [of the aforementioned verse from Brahma-yāmala (śruti-smṛti-purāṇādi …). Therefore, the criticism in [the verse] śruti-smṛti-purāṇādi … [of those with one-pointedness in bhakti who do not adhere to śāstric injunctions] is to be stated specifically in regard to that [person, i.e., to someone who is apparently one-pointed in bhakti to Bhagavān but actually is only fostering a pretense because one neither has taste for rāgātmikā-bhakti nor adheres to the injunctions of the śāstra]. That criticism is not, rather, applicable as well to those who have taste [for bhakti, i.e., for those following the path of rāgānugā-bhakti]. Accordingly, it is also stated in the Uttara-khaṇḍa of Padma Purāṇa (6.235.9, 7): ‘They who, without prīti for Bhagavān, independently perform grand works not stated in the Vedas are known as heretics (pāṣaṇḍis).’ Here, prīti means such taste [i.e., taste for a particular form of rāgātmikā-bhakti that naturally motivates one to engage in bhakti to Bhagavān]. Thus, in this way, there is in this regard only criticism of disregard for śāstra, and not rather, of ignorance of it, on account of [the statement 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 of bhakti even if one has no knowledge of it].’ This is also definitively stated in the Gautamīya Tantra (33.57): ‘Neither japa, nor worship (arcana), nor meditation, nor even procedures [enjoined in śāstra] are necessary for those who only and always think of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa.’”