Rasa-pancadhyayi III - The Gopi-gita

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.1

The gopīs said:

“By Your birth Vraja has become more glorious than every other place, for Indirā now dwells here perpetually. O beloved, please reveal Yourself. Your own people, who hold their very life-breaths in You, are searching for You in every direction.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

I desire to write about the words and meanings of those whose sole destination is Kṛṣṇa. May those goddesses of the cowherd settlement of Vraja forgive me and extend their own devotion within me.

Śrīdhara Svāmī has drunk the glorious rasa that is the distilled nectar of the sacred Gopikā-gīta. I gather only a little of what remains from him.

Footnote 90 records the variant “the gopikās said.” Footnote 91 records the Viṣṇu Purāṇa reading “beautifully there.” Footnote 92 records the Viṣṇu Purāṇa reading “whose life-breaths have departed.” (1)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.2

“In the autumn lake Your glance steals the beauty from the heart of the finest, perfectly blossomed lotus. O Lord of love, O giver of boons, we are Your unpaid maidservants. Is Your killing us in this way not murder?”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

The phrase “stealing beauty” suggests that His glance is the supreme thief. At the most favorable time, within a fortress of water, it steals the great treasure resembling Lakṣmī that lies among the finest possessions of saintly persons. It is therefore entirely fitting that such a thief should even commit murder. In reality, this language declares the supreme beauty of His glance.

The singular “with a glance” reveals a distinctive emotional force and its power to agitate. Or it means that even one of His glances is sufficient. (2)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.3

“O foremost one, again and again You have saved us from death in poisoned water, from serpents and demons, from rain and wind, from lightning and fire, from the bull demon and Maya's son, and from danger on every side.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

By protecting the cows, cowherds, and others from poisoned water and similar dangers, and all of Vraja from the rain and the other calamities, He protected those who were His very own self. Or, because every rescue was contemplated solely as an auspicious act concerning Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the gopīs declared in an outpouring of prema, “We were saved.”

The reference to the bull demon and Maya's son foretells events still to come. The gopīs possessed natural omniscience, and especially in the pain of separation their extraordinary prema overflowed and spontaneously made those events manifest. Although the events were future, the verse uses the past tense because they were certain.

“How many can we count? You saved us from innumerable sufferings.” Thus “danger on every side” includes fear of Pūtanā, the cart demon, Tṛṇāvarta, the twin arjuna trees, Baka, Vatsa, the forest fire, Keśī, and others. Repeatedly, “we, who are Yours, were protected by You.” Addressing Him as “foremost one” means, “You who excel everyone through compassion and every other virtue,” or “Lord of Vraja.” This makes His saving them entirely appropriate.

Their explicit “we” informs Him of the offense and anger directed at themselves. “Again and again” asks Him to save them even now and shows that He was never indifferent but supremely compassionate. Or, overcome by prema, they repeatedly saw these dangers as if directly present in dreams, wishes, and other inner experiences. Their helplessness in separation disrupts the events' earlier sequence. Or the order suggests that each successive danger to Śrī Kṛṣṇa Himself was less severe than the preceding one; this is why the incidents are named explicitly. The construction can thus be expanded: “You saved us even from death in poisoned water; what need is there to mention serpents and demons?” The other terms should be explained in the same ascending manner. The remaining implications have been explained by earlier commentators.

Alternatively, “serpents” includes Kāliya, the python, and others. “Demons” includes Pūtanā, Agha, and the rest, as well as Śaṅkhacūḍa because yakṣas and rākṣasas are treated as one class, as is made clear at the end of the account of Śrī Dhruva. Their unity by kind again permits a compound joining them. The same principle applies below.

The “rain” was produced by the world-destroying clouds sent by the maddened Indra. “Wind” includes the wind accompanying that storm and Tṛṇāvarta. “Lightning” means the mass of lightning in that same rainstorm. “Fire” means the two forest fires. “On every side” means from the other dangers, beginning with the cart demon. By force of the context, “You protected the cowherds and us” is understood, though the cowherds are not named directly because speaking of them was unsuitable to the gopīs' immediate mood.

From death in the poisoned water the cowherds were revived by His nectarean glance, while the gopīs, overwhelmed by grief, were ready to enter the water and die. Śrī Nanda was saved from the python; from Pūtanā, Vraja was saved from the danger of her falling body; nearly all Vraja was saved from the cart and the twin arjuna trees; the boys were saved from Vatsa, Baka, and other demons; the gopīs from Śaṅkhacūḍa; and all Vraja from the rain. The word “You” is to be supplied by illustration throughout. In this general way they had all been saved. But now, when Kṛṣṇa alone was their destination, they especially needed protection. The rest is the same.

One final reading carries forward the interrogative “what?” from the preceding verse: “Why did You save us from each of those dangers? Had we died then, that alone would have been fortunate.” One should understand each successive danger as preferable to the terrible death they now endured in separation. (3)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.4

“Surely You are not merely the son who delights the gopikā. You are the witness within all embodied beings. Requested by Brahmā to protect the universe, O friend, You arose in the family of the Sātvatas.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

They say that the directly visible form who performs these wonderful pastimes is not present only outside them; He dwells within as well, as indicated by “the witness within all embodied beings.” He therefore already knows the entire course of the burning in their hearts. What need is there to describe it at length?

Kṛṣṇa may reply, “It is true that I know, but every duty must be carried out at its proper time.” They answer with “requested by Brahmā.” Having descended into a family of devotees at the request of His foremost devotee, He must protect His devotees even at an improper time. It is therefore inappropriate to require His devotees, the gopīs, to wait for an occasion. In this avatāra He even transgresses rules He Himself has established for the sake of His devotees, as will become manifest later when He retrieves His guru's sons and in similar acts.

If He says, “But you are not My devotees,” they answer that He must still protect them, for Brahmā requested that in this avatāra He protect everyone in the universe. Since the petition of His foremost devotee must be fulfilled, they cannot be neglected. Moreover, they in particular deserve protection, and in a special loving mood. Therefore they address Him as “friend.” The other commentators explain the remaining words.

Alternatively, the sentence is a question: “Although You see the inner self, are You not also the one who delights the gopikā? Of course You are.” How so? Because Brahmā requested His descent. Therefore He must certainly delight them.

Another reading accepts the Vedāntic position in the gopīs' extreme pain: “You are not Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the delight of the gopikā, the one whose own divinity appears through compassion, beauty, pastimes, majesty, and other qualities. You are only the indifferent Paramātmā.” “Surely” means they have now reached this certainty. By joining a negative prefix, “protection of the universe” becomes “non-protection of the universe”: He came only to destroy it. He was born in the family of the Sātvatas, the Yādavas alone, not in the cowherd family. The rest follows accordingly.

Or “O friend!” is bitterly sarcastic. Because the negation stands first, it can govern every quarter of the verse: “O nonfriend, O adversary!” “Surely” expresses conjecture. He cannot be Śrī Yaśodā's son; if He were, the immense subjection to devotees shown in His Dāmodara pastime and elsewhere would make neglect of the gopīs impossible. Nor can He be one who delights all the women of Vraja, for then He could not do the opposite. Nor can He see the inner self of all embodied beings, for then He would know their suffering. Nor could Brahmā have asked Him to protect the universe, for then they too would deserve protection. Nor could He have arisen in the family of devotees, for that relationship would make unconditional compassion possible.

In another interpretation, the renowned Lord was asked by Brahmā to descend in the family of the Sātvatas because He sees the inner self of all embodied beings and would protect the universe. Yet He “arose” only in the sky. Like the sky, He remains unattached and indifferent, and therefore does not delight the gopikā.

Finally, “u” may be a vocative: “O delight of the gopikā!” Vikhana means grandfather and here indicates Kṛṣṇa's paternal grandfather, just as a poetic line says that the monkey army was conquered by the conqueror of the owl. There “owl” indirectly means Kauśika, and through him Śuka. Such indirect expression is not a fault of forced meaning because it belongs specifically to poetry.

The sense is then: requested by Your father's father to protect the entire community of Vraja, You arose in this family of Sātvatas, these devotee cowherds. Now let that protection stand at the door. The words “witness within all embodied beings” charge that He does not even know the pain within their hearts, for if He truly knew their hearts He would destroy the great anguish burning them from within. It is well known that Vrajendra's father worshiped Viṣṇu for the finest possible son.

The indented line is cited as an example of the poetic fault of forced meaning: “With sharp arrows, pouring forth like an unequalled wind, the powerful son bearing the name of the row-flying bird swiftly conquered the monkey army unconquered by the conqueror of the owl.” Sanātana tentatively attributes the example to Rasa-gaṅgādhara. Footnote 99 preserves the continuation supplying that indirect expression. (4)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.5

“O foremost of the Vṛṣṇis, Your lotus hand grants fearlessness to those who approach Your feet out of fear of saṁsāra. O beloved, it fulfills desire and has taken Śrī's hand. Please place it upon our heads.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

“Granting fearlessness” declares that His hand bestows liberation. “Fulfilling desire” means that it grants every cherished object to those who seek, and thus bestows the three worldly aims as well as bhakti. “Having taken Śrī's hand” reveals that prema places Him under His devotees' control and that He is a connoisseur of rasa. Each successive quality is superior to the preceding one.

The metaphor of a lotus, naturally cooling and sweet, indicates that the hand is itself the fruit. Therefore they ask Him to place it upon their heads so that each of these attainments may become theirs. Here liberation means the cessation of the varied sufferings of saṁsāra so that bhakti may be attained without obstruction. The three worldly aims are acceptable only insofar as they support the practice of prema; devotees reject whatever does not. This is the conclusion of bhakti. In the gopīs' own view, however, Śrī Kṛṣṇa's placing His hand upon their heads is itself the supreme fruit. All the other qualities are merely praise arising from the nature of that hand.

If He objects, “You are not qualified for this,” they concede the point but ask Him to act in accordance with His own greatness. “Foremost of the Vṛṣṇis” can mean that He is fit to bear the yoke even before the lord of the Vṛṣṇis and can subdue him, showing mercy to His own side. Or it means that He descended into Yadu's lineage to reveal all His qualities, compassion, and more; the cowherds too are Yādavas. They call Him “beloved” to indicate that He should place the hand upon them in their distinctive loving mood.

The lotus metaphor also suggests that His hand grants every good by removing burning pain and producing happiness, and, through its natural coolness, that it is itself the supreme fruit. “Granting fearlessness” means that those who approach even from fear of saṁsāra receive freedom from every fear. Therefore He should destroy the gopīs' renewed fear of separation. The hand is both “beloved” and “desire-fulfilling”: it is itself every object of desire and also bestows every desired object. Although “beloved” is stated later, its superiority gives it first place. This may be understood according to the doctrine of bhakti stated in Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta, or according to their immediate intent: they desire both the hand itself and fulfillment of their particular longing.

They show that this is possible by saying it has taken Śrī's hand. Her example allows the same expectation for them. Or the prayer is, “Place upon us even the hand that has taken Śrī.” “Foremost of the Vṛṣṇis” supplies the reason. Akrūra will later expand this same hope in the verse beginning “When I fall at the root of His feet” (Bhāgavata 10.38.16). There “beloved,” or alternatively “desire-fulfilling,” receives the fuller honor. The meaning is otherwise clear, and similar constructions below should be understood in this way.

Finally, saṁsṛti can mean fleeing here and there from fear of an enemy. The hand grants fearlessness to people who come to His feet for shelter by destroying their foes. It “holds auspicious marks”: conch, disc, and the other fine lines of the palm. In this reading the reference is to His majesty. (5)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.6

“O destroyer of the suffering of Vraja's people, O hero whose smile destroys the pride of Your own women, please cherish us, Your maidservants. O friend, reveal to us Your lovely lotus face.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

They had already suggested that He must not merely place His sacred hand upon their heads but also fulfill their longing. In their intense eagerness they now express this directly with “O destroyer of the distress of Vraja's people.” The address establishes that they deserve His loving attention, for otherwise their reaching the final condition of separation would prevent Him from fulfilling His identity as the destroyer of suffering.

“Hero” declares that He has the power to give even what should not ordinarily be given. Smaya means pride, and even His smile alone dispels their pride. There is no need for Him to disappear for that purpose. Or the word indicates that His smile is supremely enchanting and therefore must certainly be seen.

Calling Him “friend” indicates a particular intimate manner in which He should cherish them. Or if He does not, their wretched condition will afterward bring suffering to Him as well, since friends share one another's pain. Otherwise He will incur the fault of betraying their trust.

If He says, “I have no regard for such requests,” they humbly answer that they are His maidservants. Neglecting the destitute who have taken shelter is utterly improper. If He says, “Then follow Śrī Balarāma,” they insist, “We are Your maidservants and no one else's.”

“Reveal Your face as lovely as a lotus” means that in prema it should be adorned with a smile, playful brows, and sidelong glances. Or “reveal” asks Him to come near so that they may see it fully. Comparing His face to a lotus indicates that the mere sight of it removes the burning pain of separation. (6)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.7

“Your lotus feet remove the sins of embodied beings who bow to them, follow the grass-eating cows, serve as the abode of Śrī, and were placed upon the serpent's hoods. Place those feet upon our breasts and destroy the desire in our hearts.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

The pronoun means, “Those extraordinary feet are Yours.” Or the request is, “Place them upon the breasts of us who belong to You.” “Sin” means the suffering of saṁsāra or an exceedingly intense affliction. “Following the grass-eaters” reveals His compassion as the protector of all the animals of Vraja. These four descriptions declare the feet's power to destroy sin and their other qualities.

If He asks whether they desire the feet merely for these general purposes, they answer no: “Destroy the desire in our hearts.” This alone is their purpose; every other benefit follows it. One should distinguish appropriately which qualities benefit His devotees and which bring some pleasure to Him. Like the earlier lotus-hand metaphor, the lotus-foot metaphor suggests both the universal means and the supreme goal. The earlier commentators explain the rest.

Kṛṣṇa may object, “Fearless girls, I am afraid of committing sin.” They answer with “of those who bow.” His feet destroy the sins of all creatures who bow even once or somehow take shelter. Why then should He fear sin? Or He may say that because their pride and related behavior made them offenders, He should not act as they request. They answer that because they have bowed to Him, their offense must certainly be destroyed. Scripture says:

Language: Sanskrit

“Whoever takes refuge in Me even once and petitions, ‘I am Yours,’ I grant fearlessness forever. This is My vow.”

Footnote 101 notes that Śrī Raghunātha spoke this in the Rāmāyaṇa when Vibhīṣaṇa approached Him, and cites Hari-bhakti-vilāsa 11.653.

If He says, “Even so, I cannot place My very tender feet upon such hard breasts, fearing that the feet will suffer,” they answer that those feet wander from forest to forest among the cows. This will cause them no greater pain.

Or He may say, “Association with inexperienced girls such as you is unworthy of Me.” They answer with “the grass-eaters.” Cows are so utterly unknowing that they eat only grass and not even sugar placed before them. Like those animals, the gopīs too deserve His compassion.

If He asks how it could be proper to place His feet upon their exceptionally beautiful breasts, they answer that His feet are the abode of Śrī. As the seat of beauty surpassing all else, they will become the finest ornament.

If He says that His timid nature makes Him fear their husbands, they answer that He placed those feet upon the serpent's hoods. Or this phrase declares that His feet destroy the calamity of poison and every similar evil. Therefore He should place them upon their hearts and destroy heart-born desire, which resembles poison.

In verse 5 the gopīs said “upon our heads” with an intention of unity among them all, because merely placing His hand upon their heads gives no occasion for rivalry. Here “upon our breasts” is plural and asks Him to place His feet upon each pair individually. This intimate rasa can give rise to rivalry. To prevent division among them, He should therefore perform the act in an extraordinary manner for every one of them simultaneously. Heart-born desire is an unseen illness and must be counteracted by an equally inward remedy. The rest is the same. (7)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.8

“O lotus-eyed hero, Your sweet voice speaks charming words that captivate the wise. We obey Your commands, yet now we are fainting. Revive us with the nectar of Your lips.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

They ask Him to revive them with the wine of His lips; otherwise they will die at once. Why? Remembering His voice and such statements as “Nothing anywhere is dearer to Me than you” has made them faint, and fainting accompanies the final condition of separation. Their delirious passion arose in separation because they could not obtain that wine. According to the medical principle of reversing the cause of an illness, only obtaining it can bring relief. Their request is proper because they obey His commands.

They explain why His voice causes bewilderment. It is “sweet,” delicious like nectar. Or it directly bestows madhu, intoxicating wine, and is therefore supremely intoxicating. How so? Its “charming words” delight through the loveliness of their meaning and through the excellent arrangement of their sounds. His voice therefore attracts the hearts of the budhas, the discerning connoisseurs, and delights both ear and mind. “These” shows that their fainting is visible, indisputable, and happening at this very moment.

If He asks how mere speech could cause fainting, they answer, “O hero, possessor of tremendous power.” His voice possesses the same power. Or if He asks how He can give what ought not to be given, they call Him a hero of compassion or a hero of generosity. “Lotus-eyed” means supremely beautiful. When He spoke, His lovely glances and other gestures made the enchantment of His voice still greater. As Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta 33 says:

Language: Sanskrit

“Its every word and turn pours the nectar one has begged for; it is lovely, and the wide eyes dance as it is spoken.”

The earlier commentators explain the rest. Alternatively, they faint because of His voice and thereby became obedient maidservants after bewilderment removed their discrimination. Or His voice itself made them obedient, and now the pain of separation makes them faint.

By joining a negative prefix, the voice captivates even the unwise, what then of connoisseurs? Or it captivates even the wise, what then of devotees? Or it captivates even learned people, what then of unlearned gopīs such as themselves? “Sweet” can mean merely pleasing to the ear.

In a final, anguished reversal, they call it “speech that is not charming and pleases only the foolish.” Even so, they obey Him. Why? Because these gopīs have lost all judgment through love for Him. Therefore, as they swoon for the wine of His lips and for His sake, He should not revive them but kill them. That alone is fitting for undiscriminating women such as themselves. This is speech produced by overwhelming pain in prema. (8)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.9

“The nectar of Your stories gives life to those who burn, is praised by sages, and removes impurity. Auspicious to hear, rich with beauty, and spread throughout the world, it is proclaimed by people who bestow the greatest gift.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

His stories give life to people scorched by separation and other suffering. No effort is needed to hear them because poets of former and present times praise and describe them as intrinsically glorious. Nor should one say that desire, anger, sin, or similar impediments prevent realization of their meaning and thus block the fruit, for the stories themselves naturally remove those obstructions. This is the force of “removes impurity.” Realization of their meaning therefore arises of itself. The words “auspicious to hear” show that even such realization is not required.

Alternatively, their giving life to the afflicted does not mean merely that they remove immediate sorrow. Poets praise them because they grant every goal. “Removing impurity” means destroying saṁsāra, or all suffering, because impurity is the sole root of saṁsāra. Together with “auspicious to hear,” this shows that by removing both pain and fault and by producing auspiciousness they are the means to every good. “Rich with beauty” declares that they are themselves the supreme fruit. Each successive quality is superior to the preceding one.

Thus the story itself is nectar. Just as nectar is a means because it removes hunger, skin disease, and other troubles and produces strength and nourishment, while also being a goal because it consists of sweet rasa, so too Kṛṣṇa's story is both means and goal. “Spread” means extended widely or universally pervasive. In this it surpasses the nectar enjoyed by the gods, which is not all-pervading. The earlier commentators explain the rest.

Another reading says that because no such generous reciter is present now, and because separation has made the gopīs incapable of speaking the stories themselves, they are as good as dead.

Or Kṛṣṇa may say, “O utterly distressed girls, until I revive you, pass this moment by speaking among yourselves about Me.” Terrified, they reverse the verse: “Your story itself is death.” Calling the effect by the name of its cause expresses their absolute identity. Why? Because it burns life. Those who speak it are bhūridā: taking the root do in the sense of cutting, they are great destroyers of life. This is speech born solely of extreme pain in prema.

If He asks why the Purāṇas and other works teach His stories, they answer that poets such as Vyāsa describe them merely because description is the nature of poets. The stories remove only sin. They are pleasant merely in the hearing, not in their result. Or “removing impurity” and “auspicious to hear” explain why poets praise them: they remove sin and please the ear. For this very reason poets spread them among kings and others maddened by prosperity, or prosperous people disseminate them through drama, song, and similar arts. But the gopīs, who now wish to live for a moment only in hope of Him, have had enough of those stories. (9)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.10

“O beloved deceiver, Your radiant smile, Your loving glances, Your play, which is auspicious to meditate upon, and the intimate words that touched our hearts certainly agitate our minds.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

Kṛṣṇa may say, “Foolish girls, even so, take the medicine of My stories among yourselves by force.” Or the gopīs explain that even hope cannot keep them alive for long.

The grammatical form in “radiant smile” names the act itself. Pra-hasita means an excellent smile, laughter expressed in a pure emotion. “Glance” means a look filled with prema, and “play” means His sportive pastimes. The pronoun “Your” connects with the smile, glance, play, and every other item in the verse. (10)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.11

“When You leave Vraja to graze the animals, O Lord, we think that Your lotus-beautiful feet suffer from stones, grass, and tender shoots. O beloved, our minds become deeply distressed.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

“From Vraja” indicates that their distress begins when He departs and continues until He returns. It also implies that His feet do not suffer within Vraja because the gopīs themselves clear the paths.

“Grazing the animals” suggests that to feed those innumerable and varied creatures He leaves the path and wanders here and there, making injury from stones and similar things possible. Through a play on “animals,” it also suggests that those senseless creatures, lacking understanding, make Him wander even upon paths difficult for His lotus feet.

Although “foot” is singular, it includes both feet, as explained earlier. Still, the special implication here is: “Even one foot may suffer, what then of both?” The grazing grounds are generally covered with thick, soft grass, so the verse does not mention pebbles and rough gravel lying upon bare earth. Hari-vaṁśa 2.8.23 does, however, speak of a forest of thorns. Yet even thorns are absent throughout this region because Girirāja Śrī Govardhana, foremost among Hari's servants, and the surrounding hills that follow him make their own stones turn like fresh butter wherever the sacred lotus feet are placed. Hence those stones too are not named.

“O Lord,” meaning Lord of Vraja, suggests that such exposure is seemingly improper for Him. “O beloved” means that those feet should be touched only by the gopīs' soft hands. These two loving addresses give a special cause for their distress and show how intensely it increases.

Or as Lord He belongs to all the people of Vraja, while as beloved He belongs especially to them. “O Lord!” can also be a reproach: “You who torment Your beloved people in this way!”

If He says, “Discerning girls, then abandon thoughts about Me that cause such pain,” they answer, “O beloved.” Even discrimination cannot eliminate concern for one who is dear. Or “O Lord, master of our life” explains why their minds become distressed.

If He cites the maxim, “For every cherished relationship a creature forms in the mind, a spike of grief is planted in its heart” (Hitopadeśa 4.78), and tells them to reject affection itself as faulty, they answer, “O beloved, O enchanter of the heart.” Sanātana declines to elaborate further; the earlier commentators explain the rest.

Finally, “suffer” can mean “are pained.” If merely thinking of that pain so confounds their minds, He should abandon His wandering in the forest and come to them quickly. (11)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.12

“At day's end You repeatedly show us Your lotus face, veiled by dark curling locks and thickly covered with the cows' dust. O hero, You place desire within our minds.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

The gopīs say that they spend the entire day only in suffering. Yet even when He returns to Vraja in the evening, they are so unfortunate that they gain no happiness. “When the day has completely ended” indicates that their pain has reached its extreme.

The dark locks are curls. By falling over His sacred face they cover it and create an abundance of beauty. Akrūra will therefore later say, “Mukunda's face, covered by curling locks” (Bhāgavata 10.38.9). “Covered” and the related terms indicate supreme beauty, which causes Him repeatedly to implant desire. So too does the end of day, the time when desire naturally awakens.

He “bears” or manifests His face veiled by curls and all the ornaments of natural beauty, and displays it to the gopīs. If He did not show it and simply entered His home, desire would not be planted again and again. “Repeatedly” means that under the pretext of collecting the cows He looks all around at them again and again in many ways, repeatedly implanting desire.

Alternatively, even when they somehow reason with themselves, desire repeatedly rises in the mind. This shows how completely it pervades the mind and cannot be counteracted. Smara is that which agitates by remembrance alone; direct sight must therefore cause supreme agitation. They call Him “hero” to indicate His power. Or in angry play they ask whether His heroism exists only here, not anywhere else. The earlier commentators explain the rest.

Another reading says that He bears thick dust and is therefore su-alam, beautifully adorned. Or “bearing exceedingly well” can connect either with “bears” or with “shows.”

Another interpretation supplies “flute” as the object of “bearing,” because bewilderment or helplessness in prema leaves them unable to utter its name directly. Or He bears a ghana, a flute, and rajas, the dust raised by the cows. The rest is the same.

Even the sight of Him in this dress within Vraja awakened desire. Now, in the forest at night, He wears the elegant attire of a lover for intimate play, and remembrance intensified by separation can only make that desire grow. He should therefore delay no longer. Footnote 107 records Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī's preferred reading “wealth” rather than “thick.” Footnote 108 records the variant “showing beautifully.” (12)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.13

“O lover, destroyer of distress, place Your lotus feet upon our breasts. They fulfill the desires of those who bow, are worshiped by Brahmā, ornament the earth, should be contemplated in danger, and are the most peaceful refuge.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

The song has agitated them with desire. Although they already made this request, in their restlessness they describe His feet more fully than before and petition Him again in this and the next verse.

“Fulfilling the desire of those who bow” declares that the feet bestow every good. Therefore “worshiped by the lotus-born Brahmā” declares their supreme majesty. They ornament the earth with beautiful and extraordinary signs such as the flag and by setting prema-bhakti in motion, revealing both beauty and compassion. “To be contemplated in danger” means they remove every calamity, including obstacles to bhakti, and thus confirms again that they establish bhakti. As before, the lotus metaphor suggests that they are the means to remove every distress.

By destroying pain and fulfilling desire, the feet are also themselves the supreme fruit, as declared by “most peaceful.” The two addresses should be understood in relation to these two functions and directed to Him personally: “Destroy our pain of separation and create happiness through wonderful play; offer Yourself to us.” The earlier commentators explain the rest.

Alternatively, the feet fulfill the desires of devotees who bow, including Brahmā, and are worshiped by Padmajā, Lakṣmī, making them the storehouse of supreme good fortune. They ornament Dharaṇī, His beloved and a second Lakṣmī, through wonderful play and by resting upon her breasts. Or the earth ornaments them through breast-kumkuma and painted designs. This reveals both His subjection to His beloved and His connoisseurship of rasa, suggesting that His love for Dharaṇī exceeds even His love for Lakṣmī, as is renowned in Varāha Purāṇa and elsewhere.

Contemplated in danger, the feet free one from the suffering of separation; being supremely peaceful, they give happiness and consist of happiness. In both interpretations each later quality is superior. “Your feet” belong to “us who are Yours,” so placing them upon the gopīs is entirely proper.

They also call Him “lover,” whose nature is delight in love, and “destroyer of distress.” Otherwise, if they reached the final condition, His fame as destroyer of distress would disappear.

Akrūra's later meditation expands these meanings. His verse beginning “Those feet worshiped by Brahmā, Bhava, the gods, Śrī Devī, sages, and the Sātvatas, which wander the forest to graze the cows and are marked by the kumkuma of the gopikās' breasts” (Bhāgavata 10.38.8; footnote 110) expands “worshiped”; Brahmā and the others expand “contemplated”; the sages expand “earth”; the Sātvatas and grazing expand “most peaceful”; and the gopikās expand the intimate sense. Compared with the previously described powers such as destroying sin, this verse adds the special quality of fulfilling desire.

Earlier, under the second interpretation, they petitioned only after declaring their lowliness. Now the song has brought their minds into the sacred lotus feet, so they simply describe those feet alone as chief and supreme. Earlier they directly stated the purpose, “destroy heart-born desire” (10.31.7); here the address “destroyer of distress” conveys it indirectly and therefore more excellently, for Bhagavān says, “The sages speak indirectly, and indirect expression is dear to Me” (Bhāgavata 11.21.35). Earlier they sought destruction of the disease of desire; now they seek the end of every mental pain. (13)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.14

“O hero, distribute to us the nectar of Your lips. It increases the joy of love, destroys sorrow, is deeply kissed by Your resonant flute, and makes people forget every other attachment.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

Surata means beautiful rati, or prema. Alternatively, it means the happiness of intimate union. The nectar of His lips increases that happiness, suggesting that even after obtaining it repeatedly one never becomes satisfied. This also removes any suggestion that the gopīs' request arises merely from their own boldness. It destroys the grief produced by unfulfilled longing or by separation. Nothing else can truly destroy that sorrow.

The qualification “resonant” indicates that merely coming into contact with those lips gives the flute its supremely intoxicating power. Those lips alone make every sorrow forgotten; nothing else can do so.

Alternatively, in keeping with the previously described abundance of the flute's good fortune, the flute's thoroughly kissing His lips reveals both the nectar's supreme sweetness and its power to bestow an abundance of good fortune. “Kissed” also rules out any fear that the nectar has been diminished, because kissing does not consume it.

The lip nectar makes human beings forget their attachment to every pleasure other than itself, from universal sovereignty all the way to liberation. This declares its supreme captivating power and its superiority both to the nectar enjoyed by the gods and to the nectar called liberation. Its superiority may likewise be inferred over hearing and the other forms of bhakti, and even over the happiness of seeing Him, because this nectar is obtainable only by His most intimate beloveds. Each successive description should be understood as the cause of the next.

Thinking that there is nothing He cannot give, they call Him “hero,” a hero of generosity. By a play on words it may also mean a hero in the battle of love, which makes their request especially fitting. According to the usage of that region, addressing a youthful boy as “hero” specifically implies that he is a connoisseur of rasa. This explains why the address recurs, although the nuance changes according to context. The earlier commentators disclose the remaining implications.

Alternatively, the flute is “resonant” because He makes it sound the notes beginning with ṣaḍja. If even men forget every other attachment, what need be said of women? Men might receive that lip nectar indirectly through remnants such as His chewed betel. Or “hero” may be construed as “hero among men,” with the same meaning.

“Every other attachment” means that once this nectar is obtained nothing else remains desirable. This statement of its inherent nature also removes any appearance of arrogance in the gopīs' plea. The distinction from the earlier verse is clear: there it was called wine (10.31.8), whereas here it is called nectar. Footnote 111 records the variant reading “disease” in place of “attachment.” (14)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.15

“When You wander through the forest by day, every instant becomes an age for those who cannot see You. And when we gaze upon Your sacred face framed by curling locks, the maker of our eyelids seems dull-witted.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

The statement that He “wanders in the forest” contains a pun suggesting a lack of sensitivity to rasa. “By day” indicates that at that time the gopīs are unable to go there themselves. An instant “becomes an age” because a time filled with pain is so difficult to cross that it seems greatly prolonged. This expresses their extreme suffering.

“For those who cannot see You” may mean people like the gopīs, or even all the residents of Vraja, with the implication: if everyone suffers so, what then of us? Alternatively, as in the expression “Your people,” it may refer to the eyes of those who belong to Him. The earlier commentators explain the remainder.

Another interpretation addresses Him as one whose nature is impossible to fathom: “We have never received any happiness from You. We suffer when we cannot see You, and even when we see You.” The first half of the verse clearly describes the extreme pain of not seeing Him. Since they cannot endure that long suffering, they seek His sight at once, yet obtaining it also produces the pain caused by blinking. “Alas, how supremely unfortunate we are!” Even so, their intense longing to see Him is disclosed more powerfully still, because while seeing Him they cannot tolerate even the interval of a blink.

There is also a wordplay on “maker of eyelashes.” For those who gaze upon Him, the truly intelligent and rasa-knowing maker would be one who cuts the eyelashes away. Or only one who cuts the lashes from his own eyes is intelligent and qualified to look fully. “We, whose eyes remain covered by lashes, are dull. Even when He stands directly before us, what can we really see?” (15)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.16

“O Acyuta, enchanted by Your loud song and knowing Your ways, we have come to You after completely transgressing husbands, sons, family lines, brothers, and relatives. O cheat, who would abandon women in the night?”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

“Relatives” includes father, mother, and others. According to the principle already explained, each later bond in the list should be understood as weightier than the preceding bond and therefore harder to abandon.

The prefix ati in “completely transgressing” indicates not only disobeying their relatives' words but abandoning affection and everything connected with it. They crossed those bonds radically and without regard even for dharma and the other aims of life. The reason they came is contained in the address “Acyuta”: because of His greatness in delighting those who surrender, it is impossible for Him ever to fall from His nature.

They are “knowers of the way” because He knows His own nature and theirs. Alternatively, they know that He is fully aware: He knows their own greatness, including their fidelity to sacred vows, and He knows that they have no destination but Him. Or they know that His very nature consists of compassion and other such qualities.

Yet they were enchanted by His loud song. They therefore call Him “cheat,” one who has transformed their own nature into something opposite. “At night” means that abandoning timid women in the darkness is especially improper. The optative “would abandon” expresses possibility: what cheat would do so? Even a cheat could not abandon women at night. If He did, the conclusion would be not merely that He is a rogue but that He is supremely ungrateful.

Alternatively, He is truly a cheat because at night, in a lonely place, He first drew the beautiful cowherd women to Himself with His loud song for the sake of love, and then abandoned them. Since His roguery has now become manifest, they imply: “Come before us and display it openly.” The earlier commentators explain the rest.

The address may also be plural: “O cheats!” Or they may identify themselves as “the women of You, a cheat”: “We too are rogues like You and know every one of Your tricks, so stop trying to deceive us.” This is the clever artistry of their prayer that He reveal Himself. (16)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.17

“Your confidential conversations awaken desire in the heart; Your smiling face and loving glances do the same. O broad-chested abode of Śrī, when we behold these qualities of Yours, intense longing repeatedly overwhelms our minds.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

The gopīs' point is that, if He expects them to acknowledge His gratitude, He should not delay appearing even for a moment. This verse describes a distinction beyond what they said earlier. In verse 10 they spoke of many confidential conversations; here the singular means that even one such conversation has this effect, what then of many? The further distinctions described earlier should be understood here as well.

Their conversation causes the awakening and manifestation of desire even when it had lain dormant and motionless in the heart as though asleep. “Awakening desire in the heart” should qualify each item that follows: His smiling face, loving glance, broad chest, and the abode of beauty.

Alternatively, His own heart-born desire becomes manifest through signs such as the special emotion in His smile and the radiance of His cheeks and lips. His face bears an excellent smile, or is filled with abundant laughter. “A loving glance” may be read as two words, as before: a glance given with prema. “Broad-chested” declares supreme beauty and suggests a deep embrace.

That His chest is the abode of Śrī gives a special cause for the gopīs' overwhelming longing, both because Lakṣmī is a rival and because His chest possesses extraordinary splendor. “Seeing” may mean considering or contemplating. One may supply “O afflicted one,” or understand the absolutive construction with different grammatical subjects as an archaic usage. Citsukha reads, “For precisely this reason there is intense longing.” That longing may be for experiencing each of these features, or simply for union with Him. The statement that the mind becomes bewildered by it reveals the supreme intensity of their longing.

Or, as before, they describe only the loss of their composure. His smiling face and the other qualities, or the awakening of desire itself, are connected with their confidential conversation. On this reading “seeing” retains its straightforward meaning. They now remember what they saw before, and remembrance produces intense longing, as previously explained. It may have had the same effect earlier, but now excessive remembrance of each feature has brought them close to death. The earlier commentators explain the rest.

The expression “abode of Śrī” may gather into itself all the beauty not separately stated, including the splendor of His form, dress, and play. Dhāma may also mean a bower of flowering vines. Not only intense longing but the mind itself becomes bewildered by the supremely captivating sweetness of all these things. Because the mind cannot be restrained, the condition has no remedy; this also reveals the gopīs' own supreme humility.

One may object, “I am grateful. Why, then, are you so intensely afflicted?” They reply that He Himself has bewildered them in so many ways. Because He alone is the cause of their anguish, they stress with utmost pain the supremely captivating power of His confidential conversation and all His other qualities. The word “Your” connects with what precedes and follows. Seeing His conversations, smiling face, and the rest, He too develops extraordinary longing and an altered state of mind when He looks at Himself in a mirror. This shows the supreme enchantment of His qualities. Their own intense longing and bewilderment are therefore entirely reasonable. He should reveal Himself before they reach their final condition; only then will His gratitude be established. (17)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.18

“Beloved, Your manifestation among the residents of Vraja and the forest powerfully destroys suffering and brings auspiciousness to the entire universe. Please bestow upon us, whose very selves consist of longing for You, even a little of that which utterly destroys the heart's pain in Your own people.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

At the end of all their appeals, the gopīs settle upon the practical conclusion and say, “Do this now.” “The residents of Vraja and the forest” includes both those who dwell in the settlement and those who dwell in the woodland. His manifestation means His descent or His visible appearance. Since He has appeared for them, His concealment is improper. Aṅga is an address of love.

His manifestation is not merely the destroyer of suffering; it is the auspiciousness of the whole universe and consists of every blessing. The word alam, “exceedingly,” applies to both qualities. Thus the suffering it destroys can never arise again, while the auspiciousness it brings is a succession of ever-new happiness at every moment, preceded by the attainment of bhakti, prema, and all other spiritual wealth.

The pains in the hearts of His own people are their desires for Him. As they are His own people, He surely knows that His appearance utterly destroys those pains. The word for pain is deliberately used because their anguish of prema is so overwhelming.

He may say, “I already know that devotees desire prema-bhakti for Me, constant sight of Me, and even places such as Śrī Vaikuṇṭha for that purpose.” They answer that their longing is solely for attaining Him. Alternatively, their whole self and mind are absorbed only in His own desire for intimate play. What He ought to give women such as these is precisely the fulfillment suited to that condition.

“Even a little” may express the supreme rarity of the gift or the humility proper to a petitioner. In truth, however, the plural “pains of the heart,” together with the intensive prefix in “utterly destroys,” indicates an unbroken variety of loving rati. Their desires concerning Him cannot be eliminated, are always new, and therefore continually increase. The earlier commentators explain the rest.

Alternatively, they address Him as “O member of our own family, O our own person”: “Destroy the heart's pains of us whose very selves are longing for You.” The remainder is the same. (18)

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.31.19

“Beloved, we fearfully place Your exquisitely tender lotus feet very gently upon our hard breasts. Yet with those same feet You wander through the forest. Are they not pained by stones and the like? Our minds reel, for You are our very life.”

Sanātana Gosvāmī's Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī

Until this point the gopīs have petitioned in many ways only for what they themselves desire. At the conclusion, however, they remember Bhagavān's wandering through the forest and imagine the pain this may cause His sacred lotus feet. Overpowered by the abundance of their prema, they disregard even everything for which they had prayed and weep while asking solely for His happiness.

The metaphor of the water-born lotus intends to say that His feet are far more tender even than a lotus. The hardness of their breasts explains both why they are afraid and why they place His feet upon them only very gently. By a play on words, this also conveys their own eternally fresh youth and therefore the increased intensity of their sorrow.

The address “beloved” explains why they nevertheless place His feet there: because He is their beloved, His feet properly rest upon their breasts alone. Their own experience thus confirms the lotus-like beauty and tenderness described earlier.

Footnote 112 records that the earlier master accepts the variant reading “You take [them through the forest]” in place of “You wander.” (19)