यो मां सर्वेषु भूतेषु सन्तमात्मानमीश्वरम् ।
हित्वार्चां भजते मौढ्याद्भस्मन्येव जुहोति स: ॥
yo māṁ sarveṣu bhūteṣu santam ātmānam īśvaram |
hitvārcāṁ bhajate mauḍhyād bhasmany eva juhoti saḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 3.29.22; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 106)
[Kapiladeva:] “One who disregards me, the Self, the Īśvara, present in all beings, and worships a deity out of ignorance only makes oblations into ashes.”
Commentary
hitvā upekṣya |
(Bhāvārtha-dīpikā)
“Hitvā means disregarding.”
tām evāha—yo mām iti | mauḍhyāt śailī dārumayī vā kācit pratimeyam iti mūḍha-buddhitvāt yaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu vartamānaṁ paramātmānam īśvaraṁ māṁ hitvā tasyā mayaikyam avibhāvya arcāṁ madīyāṁ pratimāṁ bhajate, kevala-loka-rīti-dṛṣṭyā tasyai jalādikam arpayati | yathāgni-purāṇe śrī-daśaratha-mārita-putrasya tapasvino vilāpe—‘śilā-buddhiḥ kṛtā kiṁ vā pratimāyāṁ harer mayā | kiṁ mayā pathi dṛṣṭasya viṣṇu-bhaktasya karhicit || tan-mudrāṅkita-dehasya cetasā nādaraḥ kṛtaḥ | yena karma-vipākena putra-śoko mamedṛśaḥ ||’ iti |yathoktam—‘arcye viṣṇau śilādhīr guruṣu nara-matir vaiṣṇave jāti-buddhir viṣṇor vā vaiṣṇavānāṁ kali-mala-mathane pāda-tīrthe’mbu-buddhiḥ | śuddhe tan-nāmni mantre sakala-kaluṣahe śabda-sāmānya-buddhir viṣṇau sarveśvareśe tad-itara-sama-dhīr yasya vā nārakī saḥ ||’ iti tasya mūḍhasya mad-dṛṣṭy-abhāvāt sarva-bhūtāvajñāpi bhavati, tatas tad-doṣeṇa bhasmani yathā juhoti kaścit, tathā tasyāśraddadhānasya phalābhāva ity arthaḥ | ‘ye śāstra-vidhim utsṛjya yajante śraddhayānvitāḥ’ ity-ādy-ukta-rītyā loka-paramparā-mātra-jāte yat kiñcit śraddhā-sadbhāve tu kaniṣṭha-bhāgavatatvam eva, ‘arcāyām eva haraye pūjāṁ yaḥ śraddhayehate | na tad-bhakteṣu cānyeṣu sa bhaktaḥ prākṛtaḥ smṛtaḥ ||’ ity-ādy-ukteḥ | yadyapi yathā-kathañcit bhajanasyaivāvaśya-phalāvasānatāsty eva, tathāpi jhāṭiti na bhavatīty eva | tathoktaṁ vakṣyate ca sāphalyam—‘arcādāv arcayet tāvad’ ity-ādinā |
(Krama-sandarbha-ṭīkā; excerpt from Bhakti Sandarbha: 106)
“He describes this specifically [i.e., why one makes a mockery of a deity of Śrī Bhagavān by disrespecting any living being]: yo mām … [i.e., he speaks SB 3.29.22]. One who disregards me, the Paramātmā, the Īśvara, present in all beings and worships a deity (arcām)—an image of myself, that is, offers water and so on to that [deity] with vision only in accord with worldly customs, not conceiving of its [i.e., the deity’s] oneness with me ‘out of ignorance’ (mauḍhyāt), that is, because of having the foolish mentality, ‘This is [just] some image made of stone or wood,’ [makes oblations into ashes], as [is described] in the lament [recounted] in Agni Purāṇa of the ascetic [viz., Andha Muni] whose son was [accidentally] killed by Śrī Daśaratha, ‘Has thought of a stone in regard to an image of Hari even been fostered by me, or has disregard of a Viṣṇu-bhakta seen on the road whose body was marked with symbols of him [viz., Viṣṇu] ever been fostered by me in mind? As a result of which reaction for a past action do I have [to undergo] such grief for my son [i.e., what was the act I performed in the past that is the cause of my now having to suffer the loss of my son]?’ As also stated [in the following verse], ‘One who in regard to a deity of Viṣṇu has the thought of a stone, in regard to gurus the idea of a man, in regard to a Vaiṣṇava the notion of a caste,in regard to the sacred foot-wash of Viṣṇu or the Vaiṣṇavas, which is are destroyers the contamination of Kali, the thought of water, in regard to the name of Śrī Viṣṇu, which is a vanquisher of all sin, the notion of an ordinary word, or in regard to Viṣṇu, who is the Īśvara of all Īśvaras, the thought of equality with those other than him, is situated in Naraka.’ Thus, as a result of the absence of vision of me [in all living beings], this ignorant person’s [i.e., the person being described in the verse under discussion’s] disrespect of all living beings also occurs, and thus, because of that fault, the absence of the result [of worship of my deity] occurs for this person devoid of śraddhā just as it does for someone who makes oblations into ashes. This is the meaning. On account of the presence of whatever sort of śraddhā [they happen to have] produced only by folk tradition (loka-paramparā) [rather than ascertainment of the import of śāstra] in accord with the manner spoken of [by Arjuna in BG 17.1], ‘O Kṛṣṇa, what, on the contrary, is the basis of those who perform worship endowed with śraddhā but reject the injunctions of śāstra? Is it sattva, rajas, or tamas?’ there is only the state of being a neophyte (kaniṣṭha) bhāgavata [in their case], as per the statement [in SB 11.2.47], ‘One who for Hari performs worship with śraddhā only of a deity and not of his bhaktas or of others is considered a beginning bhakta.’ Although worship [of Bhagavān] howsoever [it is performed] certainly has a termination state of inevitable result [i.e., although no worship of Śrī Bhagavān ever goes in vain regardless of how it is performed and rather always inevitably produces a highly beneficial result], still that certainly does not occur quickly [in the case of the worship of the neophyte bhakta described in the verse under discussion]. Accordingly, furthermore, the fruitfulness [of even such worship] is also stated ahead [in SB 3.29.25], ‘Being a performer of one’s own duty (karma), one should worship [me, Īśvara] in a deity or elsewhere so long as one does not know in one’s own heart me, Īśvara, to be present in all beings [and once one does, then one should continue to worship a deity of myself, but purely as my bhakta rather than as a follower of the path of karma].’”
bhasmany eva juhotīti prabhutvāt sva-bhaktān śikṣayituṁ tān prati satarjanoktir iyam | tathaiva svayaṁ bhagavato’pi ‘yasyātma-buddhiḥ kuṇape’ ity atra ‘bhauma ijya-dhīḥ’ ity uktvā ‘sa eva go-kharaḥ’ ity ākṣepaḥ | yathaivādhunikā api sad-guravaḥ priyam api sva-śiṣyaṁ sva-sevā-ratam api kvāpy anyatra hari-bhakteṣv aparādha-leśa-mātraṁ dṛṣṭvaiva mat-sevāṁ karoṣi bhasma karoṣi māṁ duḥkhayasy eva kevalam ity ākṣipanti | vastutas tu ṛṣayaḥ kvāpi naivam āhuḥ | yathā—‘arcāyām eva haraye pūjāṁ yaḥ śraddhayehate | na tad-bhakteṣu cānyeṣu sa bhaktaḥ prākṛtaḥ smṛtaḥ ||’ vyākhyā ca śrī-svāmi-caraṇānāṁ—na tad-bhakteṣv api anyeṣu ca sutarāṁ na karoti | prākṛtaḥ prakṛti-prārambhaḥ | adhunaiva prārabdha-bhaktiḥ śanair uttamo bhaviṣyatīty arthaḥ ity eṣā | atrāpi vakṣyate ‘arcādāv arcayet tāvad’ ity ādīti |
(Sārārtha-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“‘One just makes oblations into ashes’—because of [Kapiladeva’s] being the Lord, this is a statement with a scolding to his own bhaktas to teach them. So exactly [too] is the censure [spoken] even by Bhagavān himself, ‘He is indeed a cows’ donkey’ (sa eva go-kharaḥ) after mentioning ‘one who has a notion of worshipability in relation to earth’ (bhauma ijya-dhīḥ) in yasyātma-buddhiḥ kuṇape … [i.e., in his statement in SB 10.84.13], just as even modern qualified (sat) gurus after seeing only a trace of offense (aparādha) towards bhaktas of Hari anywhere else [i.e., other than themselves] censure even a dear disciple of their own, even one engaged in their own service, ‘You are doing my service? [No.] You are spoiling it. You are only disturbing me.‘ In actuality, however, the seers (ṛṣis) never spoke this way, as [can be evidenced in SB 11.2.47], ‘One who for Hari performs worship with śraddhā only of a deity and not of his bhaktas or of others is considered a beginning bhakta.‘ The explanation also of Śrī Svāmīpāda is this: ‘[One performs (īhate) worship [only] of a deity (arcāyām), that is, an image of Hari;] One does not perform [worship] of his [i.e., Hari’s] bhaktas, and thus not of anyone else. He is beginning (prākṛtaḥ), that is, one in whom the fundamental form is beginning, meaning, one in whom bhakti is beginning just now. Gradually, he will become advanced (uttama). This is the meaning.’ In this regard also, it will be stated [later in SB 3.29.25], ‘Being a performer of one’s own duty (karma), one should worship [me, Īśvara] in a deity or elsewhere so long as one does not know in one’s own heart me, Īśvara, to be present in all beings [and once one does, then one should continue to worship a deity of myself, but purely as my bhakta rather than as a follower of the path of karma].”