वैरेण यं नृपतय: शिशुपालपौण्ड्र-
शाल्वादयो गतिविलासविलोकनाद्यै: ।
ध्यायन्त आकृतधिय: शयनासनादौ
तत्साम्यमापुरनुरक्तधियां पुन: किम् ॥
vaireṇa yaṁ nṛpatayaḥ śiśupāla-pauṇḍra-
śālvādayo gati-vilāsa-vilokanādyaiḥ |
dhyāyanta ākṛta-dhiyaḥ śayanāsanādau
tat-sāmyam āpur anurakta-dhiyāṁ punaḥ kim ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.5.48)
“Kings such as Śiśupāla, Pauṇḍraka, and Śālva attained equality with he [i.e., Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa] whom they meditated upon out of enmity while lying down, sitting, and so forth, their minds imprinted with his movements, play, glances, and so forth. [So,] How much more [is this attainment of equality with him certain to happen in the the case] of those whose minds are attached [to him]?”
Commentary
tad evaṁ bhāva-mārga-sāmānyasyaiva balavattve’pi kaimutyena rāgānugāyām evābhidheyatvam āha—vaireṇa … | ākṛti-dhiyas tat-tad-ākārā dhīr yeṣām | evam evoktaṁ gāruḍe—ajñāninaḥ sura-varaṁ samadhikṣipanto yaṁ pāpino’pi śiśupāla-suyodhanādyāḥ | muktiṁ gatāḥ smaraṇa-mātra-vidhūta-pāpāḥ kaḥ saṁśayaḥ parama-bhakti-matāṁ janānām || iti | ataḥ—‘yathā vairānubandhena’ ity atra vairānubandhasya sarvata ādhikyaṁ na yojanīyam | … atra dveṣādāv api kecid bhaktitvaṁ manyante, tad asad bhakti-sevādi-śabdānām ānukūlya eva prasiddheḥ, vaire tad-virodhitvena tad-asiddheś ca | pādmottara-khaṇḍe ca bhakti-dveṣādīnāṁ ca bhedo’vagamyate—yogibhir dṛśyate bhaktyā nābhaktyā dṛśyate kvacit | draṣṭuṁ na śakyo roṣāc ca matsarād ca janārdanaḥ | … tasmān na dveṣādau kathañcid api bhaktitvam |
(Excerpt from Bhakti Sandarbha: 324)
“Thus, when even just the path of bhāva in general thus has [such] powerfulness [as aforementioned], he [i.e., Śrī Nārada] speaks a fortiori (kaimutya) of the existence of the abhidheya solely in rāgānugā [-bhakti, i.e., he teaches that the abhidheya is rāgānugā-bhakti alone]: vaireṇa … [i.e., he speaks SB 11.5.48]. ’[Their] Minds imprinted’ (ākṛti-dhiyaḥ) means they whose minds had those particular forms [i.e., they whose minds has internally assumed the shape of Kṛṣṇa’s figure as it engaged in movement, play, and so forth]. This [i.e., the aforementioned point that those who meditate on Bhagavān with attachment to him certainly attain the highest end] is stated in Garuḍa Purāṇa: ‘Even the sinful and ignorant like Śiśupāla and Suyodhana [i.e., Duryodhana] who severely insulted the best of the suras [i.e., Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa] became purified of sin just by remembrance [of Śrī Kṛṣṇa] and attained mukti. [So,] What doubt is there of persons possessed of complete bhakti [to Bhagavān attaining the highest end]?’ Therefore [i.e., by virtue of the a fortiori reasoning presented in SB 11.5.48 and the aforementioned statement in Garuḍa Purāṇa], the [supposed] superiority to all [other bhāvas] of constant enmity [that could be posited to be indicated] here in yathā vairānubandhena [i.e., SB 7.1.126] is not to be construed.
“In this regard, some posit the existence of bhakti (bhaktitva) even in hatred (dveṣa) and so forth. That is wrong because of the known establishment of the words bhakti, sevā, and so forth solely in the sense of favorability (ānukūlya) and the non-establishment of them in enmity because of [their] being opposed to that. The distinction between bhakti and enmity and so forth is understood [from a statement] in the Uttara-khaṇḍa of the Padma Purāṇa: ‘Janārdana is seen by yogīs by means of bhakti and is never seen by means of non-bhakti. He is also not able to be seen through anger or envy.’ Therefore, the existence of bhakti (bhaktitva) is not in hatred (dveṣa) and so forth whatsoever.”
nanu parameśvare putra-buddhir evānartha-kāriṇī, āvayor aparādhotpādanād iti cen, maivam | prātikūlya-bhāvenāpi kṛṣṇe’rpita-manasaḥ kṛtārthī-bhavanti, kiṁ punar ānukūlya-bhāvena yuṣmad-ādaya ity āha—vaireṇeti | gati-vilāsādyair yā ākṛtiḥ kṛṣṇasyākāras tan-mātra eva, na tu tan-mādhurye dhīr yeṣāṁ te svīya-śayanāsanādi-karmaṇi dhyāyantaḥ santaḥ sāmyaṁ sārūpyaṁ sāyujyaṁ, kiṁ punas tat tato’py adhikaṁ prāpyaṁ syāt | aparādhasya tu sambhāvanaiva nāstīti bhāvaḥ |
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“[Vasudeva may object:] ‘Well, thinking of Parameśvara as [our] son is a cause of detriment (anartha) because of causing our offense (aparādha) [to Parameśvara].’ If this [is posited], [then it should be said in reply:] No, that is not so. Those who have offered the mind to Kṛṣṇa, even out of a bhāva of unfavorability (prātikūlya) [e.g., enmity or fear], become successful, and all the more so do you all and others [who do so] out of a bhāva of favorability (ānukūlya). Thus he [i.e., Śrī Nārada] speaks this verse (vaireṇa …). They whose minds are upon only the figure (ākṛti) of Kṛṣṇa with its movement, play, and so forth, and not, rather, upon his [alt., his figure’s] sweetness (mādhurya), as they meditate [on Kṛṣṇa] during theirt own acts of lying down, sitting, and so on, shall attain equality (sāmya) [with him], that is, [the forms of mukti known as] sārūpya [i.e., the state of having a form similar to him] or sāyujya [i.e., the state of merging into his form or into Brahman], and, what’s more, even an end greater than that (tat). There is not even any possibility of offense (aparādha). This is the purport.”