त्रिभुवनविभवहेतवेऽप्यकुण्ठ-
स्मृतिरजितात्मसुरादिभिर्विमृग्यात् ।
न चलति भगवत्पदारविन्दा-
ल्लवनिमिषार्धमपि य: स वैष्णवाग्य्र: ॥
tri-bhuvana-vibhava-hetave’py akuṇṭha-
smṛtir ajitātma-surādibhir vimṛgyāt |
na calati bhagavat-padāravindāl
lava-nimiṣārdham api yaḥ sa vaiṣṇavāgryaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.2.53; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.53; Bhakti Sandarbha: 14, 196, 198, 278)
“One of unchecked remembrance who does not even for the sake of dominion over the three worlds diverge for even half a blink of an eye or half of a sixth of that from Bhagavān’s lotus feet, which are to be sought after [even] by the suras and others whose self is Ajita [i.e., the Unconquerable One, viz., Bhagavān], is the foremost Vaiṣṇava.”
Commentary
kiṁ ca, tri-bhuvana-vibhava-hetave’pi trailokya-rājyārtham api lavārdham api nimiṣārdham api bhagavat-padāravinda-bhajanād yo na calati sa vaiṣṇavāgryaḥ | nanu lavārdha-mātra-bhajanoparame cet tāvān lābho bhavet, tat kuto na calet? tatrāha—akuṇṭha-smṛtiḥ bhagavat-padato’nyat sāraṁ nāstīty evaṁ-rūpākuṇṭhānapagatā smṛtir yasya saḥ | bhagavat-padāravindād anyat sāraṁ nāstīti kutaḥ? ata āha—ajite harāv evātmā yeṣāṁ tathābhūtaiḥ surādibhir api durlabhāt, kintu kevalaṁ vimṛgyāt | tad-apekṣayā sarvasya tucchatvaṁ smaran yo na calatīty arthaḥ |
(Bhāvārtha-dīpikā)
“Furthermore, one who does not even for the sake of dominion over the three worlds, that is, for the sake of a kingdom constituted of the three worlds, diverge for even half a blink of an eye, or half of a sixth of that, from worship (bhajana) of the lotus feet of Bhagavān is the foremost Vaiṣṇava. [A question is raised:] ‘Well, if attainment of that much can occur by stopping one’s worship for only half of a sixth of the blink of an eye, then why would one not diverge [from one’s worship of Bhagavān’s lotus feet for just that very brief amount of time and acquire that]? In this regard, he says [such a foremost Vaiṣṇavas is], ‘One of unchecked remembrance’ (akuṇṭha-smṛtiḥ), that is, one whose remembrance is not checked, meaning, deviated, in that way because [one has the conviction that] there is no other substance [alt., essence] (sāra) than Bhagavān’s feet. [Still, one may ask:] Why is there is no other substance [alt., essence] (sāra) than Bhagavān’s feet? Thus, he says, ‘[Bhagavān’s feet are] Difficult to attain, and rather, only able to be sought after, even by the suras and others whose self is Ajita, that is, Hari.’ Remembering the insignificance of everything in comparison to that [i.e., Bhagavān’s lotus feet], one does not diverge [from them]. This is the meaning.”
anya-vairāgyādinā smaraṇam—tri-bhuvana iti | trailokya-rājyārtham api, yad vā, trīṇi bhuvanāni yasmād vidhātus tasya vibhavaḥ pārameṣṭhyaṁ padaṁ tad-artham api, yad vā, tribhuvanasyāpi, kim utātmano yo vibhavaḥ bhāvābhāvo mokṣaḥ, tad-artham api lavārdham api nimiṣārdham api bhagavat-padāravinda-bhajanād yo na calati, sa vaiṣṇavāgryaḥ | nanu lavārdha-nimiṣārdha-bhajanoparame caitāvān lābho bhavet tat kuto na calet? tatrāha—akuṇṭha-smṛtiḥ | bhagavat-padāravindato’nyat sāraṁ nāstīty evaṁ-rūpākuṇṭhānapagatā smṛtir yasya saḥ | bhagavat-padāravindād anyat sāraṁ nāstīti kutaḥ? ata āha—ajite harāv evātmā yeṣāṁ tathābhūtaiḥ surādibhir api durlabhāt kintu kevalaṁ vimṛgyāt | tad-apekṣayā sarvasya tucchatvaṁ smaran yo na calatīty arthaḥ | yad vā, bhagavat-padāravindād hṛdi gṛhītāt na calati na smaraṇād viramatīty arthaḥ | tribhuvana-vibhavārthaḥ lava-nimiṣārdham api tato’calane hetuḥ—akuṇṭhā anavacchinnā smṛtir yasya | sadaiva bhagavat-smṛtyā anyasya manasi praveśābhāvād iti smaraṇasyaiva parama-puruṣārthatām āha—ajitam aparicchedādinā avaśīkṛtaṁ brahma tad-ātmānas tat-svarūpā muktā ity arthaḥ, tādṛśā ye surā brahmādayaḥ, ādi-śabdāt muny-ādayaś ca, tair api vimṛgyād viśeṣataḥ prārthyād iti | anyat samānam |
(Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.53)
“Remembrance [of Śrī Bhagavān] with detachment (vairāgya) and so forth in regard to all else [is illustrated]: tri-bhuvana … [i.e., this verse is cited]. One who does not even for the sake of a kingdom constituted of the three worlds, or, even for the sake of the dominion of he who is the emanator of the three worlds, that is, the domain of Brahmā (Pārameṣṭhi), or, even for the sake of dominion over not only the three worlds but over the self, that is, the dissolution of world existence, meaning, mokṣa, diverge for even half a blink of an eye, or half of a sixth of that, from worship (bhajana) of the lotus feet of Bhagavān is the foremost Vaiṣṇava. [A question is raised:] ‘Well, if attainment of that much can occur by stopping one’s worship for only half of a sixth of the blink of an eye, then why would one not diverge [from one’s worship of Bhagavān’s lotus feet for just that very brief amount of time and acquire that]? In this regard, he says [such a foremost Vaiṣṇavas is], ‘One of unchecked remembrance’ (akuṇṭha-smṛtiḥ), that is, one whose remembrance is not checked, meaning, deviated, in that way because [one has the conviction that] there is no other substance [alt., essence] (sāra) than Bhagavān’s feet. [Still, one may ask:] Why is there is no other substance [alt., essence] (sāra) than Bhagavān’s feet? Thus, he says, ‘[Bhagavān’s feet are] Difficult to attain, and rather, only able to be sought after, even by the suras and others whose self is Ajita, that is, Hari.’ Remembering the insignificance of everything in comparison to that [i.e., Bhagavān’s lotus feet], one does not diverge [from them]. This is the meaning.
“Alternately, this is the meaning: as a result of holding the lotus feet of Bhagavān in the heart, one does not diverge, that is, one does not desist from remembering [them]. The cause in regard to this non-divergence therefrom even for half a blink of an eye or half of a sixth of that [even] for the sake of dominion over the three worlds is that one has ‘unchecked’ (akuṇṭha), that is, uninterrupted, remembrance (smṛtiḥ) [of Bhagavān]. Because of the non-occurrence of anything else entering the mind as a result of verily constant remembrance of Bhagavān, he speaks of remembrance (smaraṇa) itself as being the supreme puruṣārtha: [Bhagavān’s lotus feet are] to be sought after, that is, to be specially prayed for, even by suras, that is, Brahmā and so forth, whose self (ātma) is the Unconquerable One (Ajita), that is, whose nature is Brahman, that which is unsubjugated on account of being undivided and so on, meaning, [Bhagavān’s lotus feet are to be specially prayed for even by] muktas and others, that is, sages and so on. The rest is the same [i.e., the result of the verse can be understood as aforementioned].”
kiṁ ca, tribhuvaneti | tribhuvana-vibhavāyāpi, kim uta tad-dhetave ity arthaḥ | sarvo’pi dvandvo vibhāṣayaikavad bhavati iti nyāyād eka-vacanam | kiṁ vicārāt? na, kintv āveśād evety acalane hetum āha—akuṇṭhā saṅkoca-mātra-rahitā smṛtir yasya saḥ | tac ca tasya yuktam evety āha—ajite harāv evātmā yeṣāṁ tair brahmeśa-prabhṛtibhiḥ surādibhir api vimṛgyād durlabhād ity arthaḥ |
(Krama-sandabha-ṭīkā)
“Furthermore, this verse is spoken (tri-bhuvana …). ‘Even for dominion over the three worlds, much less, for the sake of that’ is the meaning [i.e., the foremost Vaiṣṇava does not diverge from Bhagavān’s lotus feet even when dominion over the three worlds is immediately at his disposal, and thus certainly does not diverge from Bhagavān’s lotus feet for the sake of trying to achieve such dominion]. The singular case is used as per the maxim, ‘All dual compounds are optionally like singular ones’ [i.e., the compound tri-bhuvana-vibhava-hetave is read by Śrī Jīvapāda as a dual compound (dvandva) couched in the singular case as per the aforementioned maxim of Pāṇini]. Is it because of deliberation [that the Vaiṣṇava does not diverge from Bhagavān’s lotus feet even for the sake of dominion over the three worlds]? No, rather, it is only because of absorption [i.e., it is not just that the Vaiṣṇava has determined Bhagavān’s feet to be the sole object worthy of one-pointed fixity, but that the Vaiṣṇava further on the basis of such deliberation and fixity is completely absorbed in Bhagavān’s lotus feet]. Thus, he states the cause in regard to this non-divergence [of the Vaiṣṇava from Bhagavān’s lotus feet]: he has remembrance that is ‘unchecked’ (akuṇṭhā), that is, free from any diminution. That [level of remembrance], furthermore, is possessed by him [i.e., the Vaiṣṇava] alone. Thus, he says [Bhagavān’s feet are] ‘to be sought after’ (vimṛgyāt), that is, difficult to attain, even for the suras, that is, Brahmā, Śiva, and so on, and others, whose self is verily Ajita, that is, Hari. This is the meaning.”
acalanatve hetuḥ—tri-bhuvaneti | tatra hetuḥ—ajite harāv eva ātmā yeṣāṁ tair brahmeśa-prabhṛtibhiḥ surādibhir api vimṛgyād durlabhād ity arthaḥ |
(Bhakti Sandarbha: 196)
“The cause in regard to [the Vaiṣṇava’s] being non-divergent [from Bhagavān’s lotus feet] is stated in this verse (tri-bhuvana …). The cause in this regard is that [Bhagavān’s feet are] ‘to be sought after’ (vimṛgyāt), that is, difficult to attain, even for the suras, that is, Brahmā, Śiva, and so on, and others, whose self is verily Ajita, that is, Hari. This is the meaning.”
tri-bhuvana-vibhava-hetave’pi trailokya-rājya-prayojanāyāpi na kuṇṭhā pralobhayitum aśakyā smṛtir yasya saḥ na pārameṣṭhyaṁ na mahendra-dhiṣṇyam ity ādau vāñchanti yat pāda-rajaḥ-prapannā ity-ādi vacanāt, ata eva lavārdham api nimiṣārdham api bhagavac-caraṇāravindād anyatra na calati | kīdṛśāt ajite harāv evātmā yeṣāṁ tathā-bhūtair api surādibhir durlabhatvāt kintu kevalaṁ vimṛgyāt | yad vā, ajitātmāno’jitendriyā ye surādayas tais tu tribhuvana-rājyārthaṁ vimṛgyāt |
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“One who has remembrance that is ‘not checked’ (akuṇṭhā), meaning, not able to be enticed on account of the statement [in SB 10.16.37 or 11.11.14], ‘Those who have taken shelter in the dust of your feet desire neither the post of Brahmā nor the abode of Indra,’ thus does not diverge from the lotus feet of Bhagavān for even half a blink of an eye, or half of a sixth of that, even for the sake of dominion over the three worlds, that is, even out of a necessity related to ruling the three worlds. What is the nature [of Bhagavān’s lotus feet]? Difficult to attain, and rather, only able to be sought after, by the suras and others even though their nature is that of they whose self is Ajita, that is, Hari. Alternately, [the meaning is that Bhagavān’s lotus feet are] to be sought after for the sake of rule over the three worlds by the suras and so forth, that is, they who are of unconquered self (ajitātmā), meaning, unconquered senses [whereby the meaning of the verse as the whole is that the foremost of Vaiṣṇavas is one of controlled senses and one-pointedly fixed mind who does not diverge from Bhagavān’s lotus feet for any reason, unlike the suras and others who are of uncontrolled senses and worship Bhagavān feet only for the sake of worldly attainments].”