Bhakti Sandarbha 179 : Bhakti Descends Through the Association of a Devotee

This is from current work on Bhakti Sandarbha, which is really dragging far behind due to my many distractions. So, figuring the best way to give my fuller attention to the work I am sharing it, with Satyanarayana Dasaji's commentary. [It does help to know that there will be readers in real time.]

I should add that this is not the final translation. There are several other hands through which this will pass before it reaches print. So bear that in mind. Square brackets are parenthetical explanatory comments that are not in the original text.

This is a particularly significant section since it presents a few siddhantas that are rather unique to the Vaishnava point of view, and from one perspective seems a little harsh: God himself does not feel our suffering. The devotees are the agents of his mercy. The  only thing that interferes with such mercy is offenses at the feet of the Vaishnavas.

---

Anuccheda 179

Bhakti Descends Through the Association of a Devotee


अथ तस्या एव प्रकारान्तरेण स्थापनाय प्रकरणान्तरं यावत्तल्लक्षणप्रकरणम्।

Now to establish this bhakti again in a different manner, we begin a new section that continues up to the following one where the definition of bhakti will be given (Anu. 216).

तदेवं परमदुर्लभस्वरूपं परमदुर्लभफलं चाकिञ्चनाख्यसाक्षाद्भक्तिरूपं साम्मुख्यं कथं स्यादिति वक्तुं साम्मुख्यमात्रस्य निदानमुपलक्षयति (भा. १०.५१.५३)—

[In the previous section, it was discussed that bhakti is the only viable means of bringing one’s attention to focus on the Absolute and more specifically on Bhagavān.] This centering of awareness on the Supreme, which is in the form of unadulterated, direct devotion is supremely rare by its very nature both as the means of attaining the Supreme and as the rarest fruit to be attained. So the question is how can one attain this direct awareness in the form of bhakti known as akiñcanā?

In order to explain this, King Mucukunda hints at the cause leading a person to turn his or her focus toward the Absolute, in even the slightest degree:

भवापवर्गो भ्रमतो यदा भवे-
ज्जनस्य तर्ह्यच्युत सत्समागमः।
सत्सङ्गमो यर्हि तदैव सद्गतौ
परावरेशे त्वयि जायते मतिः॥

O Bhagavān Acyuta, the living being wanders in the cycle of birth and death. When the time for his release from this cycle approaches, he obtains the association of a devotee. From the moment he obtains such association, a devotional inclination is awakened toward You, who are the supreme goal of attainment for the saintly and the orchestrator of both, cause and effect [i.e., Bhagavān arranges for the association of devotees as the cause of giving up material existence and in so doing allows for its effect—that the living being gives up all attachments that bind him to material existence ]. (SB 10.51.53)

यदा भ्रमतः संसरतो जनस्य भवापवर्गो भवेत्, भवस्य अपवर्गः सम्प्राप्तकालः स्यात्, तदा सत्सङ्गमो भवेत्। "तदा भवापवर्गो भवेत्" इति वक्तव्ये वैपरीत्येन निर्देशस्तत्र सत्सङ्गमस्य शीघ्रतयावश्यकतया च हेतुताविवक्षया ।

When the cycle of material existence for a wandering jīva approaches its end, i.e., when the time for liberation from material existence has come, he obtains the association of a saint. In reality, it is the reverse of this that should have been stated here—“When he obtains the association of a saint, only then does his material existence comes to an end.” The intention behind stating it in the opposite way is to emphasize the necessity of the association of a saint as the cause of ending material existence and the swiftness with which it brings about such a result.

अत एवातिशयोक्तिनामालङ्कारस्य चतुर्थो भेदोऽयमित्यालङ्कारिकाः। तदुक्तं तद्विवृत्तौ (भा. १०.१०.४१)—चतुर्थी सा कारणस्य गदितुं शीघ्रकारिताम्। या हि कार्यस्य पूर्वोक्तिः इति।

Therefore, according to aestheticians, or those acquainted with the principles governing refinement in literary style, this statement is an example of the fourth variety of the rhetorical device known as hyperbolical expression (atiśayokti). Its definition is as follows: “The fourth type of atiśayokti is that in which the effect is stated as if it were the cause, just to show how quickly the actual cause is in bringing about its result.”

तथोक्तं नलकूबरमणिग्रीवौ प्रति श्रीभगवता—

साधूनां समचित्तानां सुतरां मत्कृतात्मनाम्।
दर्शनान्नो भवेद्बन्धः पुंसोऽक्ष्णोः सवितुर्यथा॥ इति।

Bhagavān Kṛṣṇa spoke to Nalakūvara and Maṇigrīva in a similar manner about the effect of association with saints: "Simply by seeing the saints who look upon everything with equanimity and moreover have fully dedicated themselves to Me, there is no bondage for human beings, just as there is no obstruction [of darkness] for the eyes when in the presence of the sun." (SB 10.10.41)

तत्र हेतुः—यर्हि यदा सत्सङ्गमस्तदैव परावरेशे त्वयि मतिर्भवति, तद्वैमुख्यकरानादिसिद्धतज्ज्ञानसंसर्गाभावान्ते तत्साम्मुख्यकरं तज्ज्ञानं जायत इत्यर्थः। अत एवोक्तं श्रीविदुरेण (भा. ३.५.३) —

The reason [why a person’s material existence comes to an end on meeting a saint] is that as soon as such association is obtained, one's mind becomes fixed on Bhagavān, who is the controller of spirit and matter or the orchestrator of cause and effect [the compound word parāvareśe may be interpreted in both of these ways]. The implication of this statement is as follows: From a beginningless state the living beings are devoid of knowledge of Bhagavān, and this is the cause of their being turned away from Him. When this ignorance is dispelled, the knowledge that enables them to turn their attention toward Bhagavān appears. Therefore Vidura said to the sage Maitreya:

जनस्य कृष्णाद्विमुखस्य दैवादधर्मशीलस्य सुदुःखितस्य।
अनुग्रहायेह चरन्ति नूनं भूतानि भव्यानि जनार्दनस्य॥ इति।

Auspicious devotees of Bhagavān Kṛṣṇa like you wander in this material world simply to bless those who due to misfortune are turned away from Him, who are thus irreligious and exceedingly miserable. (SB 3.5.3)

अत्र दैवात् प्राचीनकर्मणो हेतोस्तदावेशादधर्मशीलस्य भगवद्धर्मरहितस्येत्यर्थः।

In this verse the words "due to misfortune" (daivāt) means that due to their past karma and their absorption in it, they are irreligious (adharma-śīla), which means that they are devoid of bhagavad-dharma or bhakti.

मूलपद्ये "यर्हि… तदैव" इति निर्देशान्न कालविलम्बेन। तत्र चैवकारान्नान्यदा कदाचिदपीत्यर्थः।

In the original verse under discussion (10.51.53), the use of the correlative adverbs of time yarhi and tadā eva, "from the moment" and "precisely then," means there is no delay in obtaining the result mentioned. [In other words, “When a person obtains the association of a devotee, at that very moment a devotional inclination is awakened toward You.”] The restrictive particle eva in tadā eva, "precisely, only at that time" indicates that a devotional attitude toward Bhagavān is not awakened at any other time [than upon contacting a devotee of Bhagavān].

तेन तन्मतौ हेतुः—सद्गतौ, यत्र यत्र सन्तः सङ्गच्छन्ते, तत्र तत्र गतिः स्फुरणं यस्य तस्मिंस्त्वयि इति। तथा चेतिहाससमुच्चये—

The reason why the devotional inclination (mati) is awakened toward Bhagavān by the association of devotees is given by the word sad-gatau [which is an adjective for Bhagavān]. The word sat means the saints, and gati here means an appearance or vision of Bhagavān within the mind. This indicates that Bhagavān manifests wherever the saints gather together, for that is where the devotional inclination to Him is awakened.

The same idea is expressed in the Itihāsa-samuccaya:

यत्र रागादिरहिता वासुदेवपरायणाः।
तत्र सन्निहितो विष्णुर्नृपते नात्र संशयः॥ इति।

Bhagavān Viṣṇu or Vāsudeva is present wherever His devotees, who are devoid of material attachment, assemble. O King, there is no doubt about this.

सतां गतावित्यत्र व्याख्यानेऽपि असतां त्वसौ न गतिः। अतस्तद्द्वारैवान्येषां तल्लाभो युक्त इति पूर्ववदेव।

[An alternate meaning for the word sad-gatau can be given. The word gati also means goal. Thus in this sense,] sad-gatau means that Bhagavān is the supreme object of attainment for the saints, which indicates that Bhagavān is not the goal for those who are not saintly. So even if sad-gatau is interpreted in this way, the implication remains that it is only by the association of saints that others can attain Bhagavān.

पिङ्गलाया "अपि सत्सङ्गो विदेहानां पुरे ह्यस्मिन्नहमेकैव मूढधीः" (भा. ११.८.३४) इत्यत्र व्यक्तोऽस्ति। टीका च—"सत्सङ्गतौ सत्यामप्यहो मे मोह इत्याह—विदेहानामिति॥" इत्येषा।

In the case of the prostitute Piṅgalā, [who later developed a devotional attitude towards Bhagavān, although there is no direct mention of her obtaining the association of saints, it is to be understood] that she had received such association. This is made clear from her own words:

In this city of Videha, I am the only fool because I am an unchaste woman who has forsaken Bhagavān Kṛṣṇa, who bestows real knowledge of the self, and I have been desiring enjoyment with common men. (SB 11.8.34)

Svāmīpāda comments: “This verse is spoken to indicate Piṅgalā’s lamentation that even after obtaining the association of saints she had fallen into bewilderment." This is the underlying implication of her statement.

तदेवं यत्र नोपलभ्यते सत्सङ्गः, तत्राप्याधुनिकः प्राक्तनो वा पारम्परिको वानुमेय एव।

Thus, in cases where individuals became devotees without any apparent association of the saints, it should be assumed that they obtained such association either at some other time in this life, in a previous life or indirectly.

[So if the association of devotees is the cause of developing a devotional attitude toward Bhagavān, why is it that some people don’t become devotees in spite of coming into such association?]

अत्र कृतश्रीनारदादिदर्शनादेरपि देवतादेः श्रीनलकूवरादिवत् तादृशत्वप्राप्तिर्न श्रूयत इत्यत एवं विवेचनीयम्—यद्यप्यपराधसद्भावो वर्तते पुरुषे, तदा तद्दोषेण सत्सु निरादराणां साधारणपुण्यादिदृष्टीनां च तद्दोषशान्त्यर्थं सत्सङ्गस्य भगवत्साम्मुख्यकारणत्वेऽपि तत्कृपासाहाय्यमपेक्ष्यते। निरपराधत्वे सति सत्सङ्गेनैव जातपरमोत्तमदृष्टीनां तेषु मनोऽवधानाभावेऽपि सत्सङ्गमात्रं तत्कारणमिति।

The devas and others obtained the association of devotees like Śrī Nārada, but they did not attain Bhagavān as Nalakūvara and Maṇigrīva did. This is to be resolved as follows. If the presence of offenses persists within certain people, then as a result of this defect they become disrespectful toward devotees or consider them to be merely ordinary pious people. So although the association of devotees has the power to center people’s awareness on Bhagavān, in order to become free of the fault of offenses, the mercy of devotees is required to give further assistance. On the other hand, if offenses are absent, then merely by the association of devotees a person may develop the most exalted regard for them. For such individuals, even if there is a lack of attentiveness toward those saints, even the slightest contact with them is the cause for attaining devotion.

अतः सापराधान् एवाधिकृत्योक्तमजानजदेवैः (भा. ३.५.४५) —

तान् वै ह्यसद्वृत्तिभिरक्षिभिर्ये
पराकृतान्तर्मनसः परेश।
अथो न पश्यन्त्युरुगाय नूनं
ये ते पदन्यासविलासलक्ष्म्याः॥ इति।

Thus the ajānaja-devas [the celestial beings who preside over the material elements] spoke the following words about those who are under the influence of offenses:

O Supreme Ruler, whose fame is virtuous, The minds of those whose senses are sinfully engaged constantly avoid introspection. Those who know the beauty of the movement of Your feet certainly do not care to look upon them. (SB 3.5.45)

ते तव पदन्यासविलासलक्ष्म्याः सम्बन्धिनो ये भक्ता इत्यर्थः। ते तान् नूनं प्रायो न पश्यन्ति न कृपादृष्टिविषयीकुर्वन्तीत्यर्थः। कान् ? य असद्वृत्तिभिः सापराधचेष्टैरक्षिभिरिन्द्रियैः पराकृतान्तर्मनसो दूरीकृतान्तर्मुखचित्तवृत्तयो बहिर्मुखा इत्येवं व्याख्यानमत्राप्यनुसन्धेयम्।

Those who have a connection to the beauty of the movement of Bhagavān's feet are the devotees. They generally do not look upon those persons described in this verse, meaning that they do not make them the objects of their merciful glance. Who are the ones so deprived of mercy? Those whose minds are turned away from Bhagavān due to avoiding introspection, i.e, distancing themselves from engaging the mind by turning inwards. on account of senses that are sinfully engaged, namely by offensive activities undertaken with the senses. This explanation of the verse should also be considered.

[Jīva Gosvāmī says that this explanation should also be considered because Śrīdhara has taken it to mean that those whose minds run outwards certainly do not see the devotees who are attracted to the beauty of Bhagavān’s feet.]

अत्र साधारणासद्वृत्तित्वं न गृह्यते। सर्वस्य तत्कृपायाः प्राक् तथाभूतत्वात्, "जनस्य कृष्णाद्विमुखस्य दैवात्" (भा. ३.५.३) इत्यादिकविषयं स्यादिति।

The detrimental behavior (asad-vṛttibhiḥ) mentioned in this verse, which disqualifies one from the mercy of devotees, refers to offenses and not to the ordinary course of absorption in sense objects. This is because everyone is compelled by nature to fulfill the urges of the senses until blessed by the grace of a devotee. Furthermore, that devotees are merciful towards those entangled in sense desires has already been expressed above, "Auspicious devotees of Bhagavān Kṛṣṇa like you wander in this material world simply to bless those who due to misfortune are not devoted to Him, who are thus irreligious and exceedingly miserable." (SB 3.5.3)

[This statement would be inconsistent with the previous one, if the only shortcoming were routine engagement in sense enjoyment.]

तस्मादनपराधासद्वृत्तौ तेषां कृपा प्रवर्तत एव। कथञ्चिदवधानाभावेन तदप्रवृत्तावपि सङ्गमात्रेणैव तेषां सन्मतिः स्यात्। यत्र तु सापराधेऽपि स्वैरतयैव कृपां कुर्वन्ति, तस्यैव तन्मतिः स्यान् नान्यस्य, नलकूवरवत् साधारणदेवतावच्चेति।

Therefore, the meaning is that the mercy of the devotees is certainly bestowed on those who are caught up in unsubstantial pursuits but who are not offensive. Even if somehow there is a lack of awareness or non-engagement, still merely by saintly association, their minds will turn towards Bhagavān. If, however, the devotees willingly bless somebody who is offensive, then only will his or her mind turn towards Bhagavān, but not for others. This was shown in the cases of Nalakūvara and the ordinary gods respectively.

[Although Nalakūvara and Maṇigrīva were offensive, they were blessed by Nārada and thus attained devotion for Bhagavān (See Bhāgavatam 10.9). The ordinary devatās were not blessed and so a devotional inclination towards Bhagavān was not awakened in them.]

तथा श्रीभरतस्य रहूगणे, यथा चोपरिचरवसोर्वृत्तं विष्णुधर्मे—स हि देवसाहाय्यायैव दैत्यान् हत्वा विरज्य च भगवदनुध्यानाय पातालं च प्रविष्टवान्। तं च निवृत्तमपि हन्तुं लब्धच्छिद्रा दैत्याः समागत्य तत्प्रभावेणोद्यतशस्त्रा एवातिष्ठन्। ततश्च व्यर्थोद्यमाः पुनः शुक्रोपदेशेन तं प्रति पाषण्डमार्गमुपदिशन्तोऽपि जातया तत्कृपया भगवद्भक्ता बभूवुः (वि.ध.पु. ३.३४६) इति। अत उक्तं विष्णुधर्म एव—

King Rahūgaṇa is another example of an offensive person who was awarded devotion by the mercy of Śrī Bharata. The story of King Uparicara Vasu’s mercy on the demons is described in the Viṣṇu-dharma. The king took up the fight against the demons and killed many of them just to assist the gods. After doing so, he desisted from fighting and went to Pātāla to meditate on Bhagavān. Although he had given up fighting, the demons, came there to take advantage of this opportunity to kill him. By his influence, however, they remained motionless with uplifted weapons and so their effort was thwarted. Then on the instruction of Śukrācārya, they began preaching atheism to Uparicara Vasu to break his trance and thus counteract his power. In spite of this, the king’s compassion was aroused and he blessed them. As a result, they became devotees. Thus it is stated in the Viṣṇu-dharma Purāṇa:

अनेकजन्मसंसारचिते पापसमुच्चये।
नाक्षीणे जायते पुंसां गोविन्दाभिमुखी मतिः॥ इति।

Unless the sins accumulated in many lifetimes as a result of materialistic desires are destroyed, one’s mind cannot be turned towards Bhagavān Kṛṣṇa.

ननु,
नैतान् विहाय कृपणान् विमुमुक्ष एको
नान्यं त्वदस्य शरणं भ्रमतोऽनुपश्ये (भा. ७.९.४४)
इत्येवं श्रीप्रह्लादस्य सर्वस्मिन्नपि संसारिणि कृपा जाता, तर्हि कथं न सर्वमुक्तिः स्यात् ?

A doubt may be raised in regard to the above discussion. Prahlāda bestowed his mercy upon all those entangled in material existence, as expressed in this verse:

"I do not wish to be liberated alone, leaving behind all these unfortunate beings. For those wandering on the path of transmigration, I do not see any shelter other than You." (SB 7.9.44)

This statement raises the question as to why everybody did not become liberated.

उच्यते—जीवानामनन्तत्वान्न ते सर्वे मनसि तस्यारूढास्ततो यावन्तो दृष्ट्वा श्रुतास्तच्चेतस्यारूढास्तावतां तत्प्रसादाद्भविष्यत्येव मोक्षः, नैतान् इत्येतच्छब्दप्रयोगात्।

The answer to this is that living beings are unlimited, and Prahlāda could not possibly have recalled all of them in his mind [at the time he made this statement]. At the most he could have thought only of those whom he had seen or heard of, and consequently only they would receive his grace and thereby attain liberation. This conclusion is derived from the use of the demonstrative pronoun etat in naitān [a pronoun which in Sanskrit is used specifically to point out objects or people within one’s immediate vicinity].

ये चान्ये तेषामपि तत्कीर्तनस्मरणमात्रेणैव कृतार्थतावरं स्वयमेव कृपया दत्तवान् श्रीनृसिंहदेवः—

य एतत् कीर्तयेन् मह्यं त्वया गीतमिदं नरः।
त्वां च मां च स्मरन् काले कर्मबन्धात् प्रमुच्यते॥ (भा. ७.१०.१४) इति।

Of His own accord, Bhagavān Nṛsiṁhadeva gave all other jīvas His merciful benediction that they would achieve perfection simply by singing and remembering the prayers recited by Prahlāda, as stated in this verse:

"Anyone who sings the prayers recited by you and who remembers you and Me, will become free from the bondage of karma in course of time." (SB 7.10.14)

यस्त्वां कीर्तयेदपि किं पुनस्त्वं यान् कृपया स्मरसीति भावः। तस्मात् "साधूक्तं भवापवर्गो भ्रमतो यदा भवेत्" इति॥

The import of the verse is that if those who merely sing your glories will attain liberation, then what to speak of those beings you had remembered out of compassion for them. Thus the statement made at the beginning of this Anuccheda, is certainly appropriate: "When the time for a person’s release from the cycle of birth and death approaches, he obtains the association of a devotee." (SB 10.51.53)

॥१०.५१॥ मुचुकुन्दः श्रीभगवन्तम्॥१७९॥

Commentary by Satyanarayana Dasa Babaji Maharaj:

After establishing bhakti as the abhidheya, describing its various wonderful characteristics and explaining the practitioner's eligibility for bhakti, Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī begins to analyse the causes behind its appearance.

It was said in the previous anucchedas that bhakti is the svarūpa-śakti of Bhagavān and the jīva is His taṭastha śakti. The jīva is ignorant about Bhagavān and this ignorance has no beginning. That means that the jīva has been a non-devotee for all of its existence. The jīva remains bound by karma, which keeps on fluctuating according to its actions in human life and the experience of karma outcomes in various lives. During its sojourn in material life, if the jīva comes in contact with a devotee then the possibility of its deliverance arises. Unless one comes in contact with a devotee, one wanders in this material world indefinitely. This is the definite view of King Mucukunda.

The Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is a kāvya, poetic literature, and it makes use of various alaṁkāras, rhetorical or literary ornaments. The verse spoken by King Mucukunda is atiśayokti-alaṁkāra, hyperbole. Hyperbole has five varieties. One of them is when the cause and its effect are interchanged. Cause always precedes effect, but for rhetorical purposes the latter is sometimes described as though it precedes the former. This trope is used to indicate that the cause brings about the effect with such rapidity that the two are barely distinguishable.

Although Mucukunda says that the association of a devotee acts immediately, it does not affect everyone in the same way. This then implies the following four possibilities:

(1) If the person is without any offense and does not disrespect devotees, then the mere presence of a devotee inspires bhakti into his heart. This will happen even if the person and the devotee are not paying any attention to each other.

(2) If the person is without offense but considers the devotee to be just an ordinary human being, then merely coming into his presence will not inspire bhakti. Such a person will need to receive the conscious grace of a devotee.

(3) If the person has committed offenses but still respects devotees, then only the association of the devotee would not inspire bhakti. One would also need his special grace to get it.

(4) If the person has committed offenses and also considers devotees to be ordinary people then also mere association will not inspire bhakti. Such a person will need the extraordinary grace of a devotee.

The essence of all this is that there are three factors involved in bringing awareness about Bhagavān. The first factor is the association of a devotee, the second is his grace, and the third is the nature and attitude of the recipient of association. Out of these, the most important factor is the grace of devotee. It can override even the ill-character of a recipient.

It is very rare that someone belongs to one of the first two categories. Most conditioned beings belong to the latter two. It is advisable for them to have respect for the devotees. They may not have any knowledge of their offenses, but should avoid doing anything to disturb others, especially the devotees.

Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī gives the devas as examples of the third category. Despite attaining the association of Śrī Nārada and having respect for him, they still did not become devotees. The reason for this was that they did not consider bhakti to be a special process. Sometimes they even disregarded Bhagavān and His devotees. This is known from the behavior of Indra who wanted to take revenge on the Vraja residents because they stopped doing his annual yajña. Thus, without Nārada's grace, his association alone did not inspire the gods to become devotees.

The example of the fourth category is the sons of Kubera. Though they insulted Nārada, he blessed them so that they were able to meet Kṛṣṇa personally.

Two more examples in this category are those of King Rahūgaṇa and the daityas. Rahūgaṇa engaged a great devotee, Jaḍa Bharata, in carrying his palanquin and also insulted him verbally, yet by the latter's grace he became a devotee. The other example is of Uparicara Vasu who had helped the devas fight the daityas. Later he went to Pātāla to meditate. The daityas took this as an opportunity to attack and kill him. But Uparicara Vasu became compassionate on them, seeing their ignorance, with the result that they took to bhakti.

From these examples one thing is clear: the association of devotees is always beneficial even if done improperly. Similarly association with the wicked is always troublesome even if done in friendly manner, as is said:

Make neither enmity nor friendship with a wicked person. It is like touching coal: If hot it will burn your hand, and if cold it will make it black. (Hitopadeśa 3.81)

Here an objection is raised. Piṅgalā was a courtesan but suddenly she turned into a devotee. One day she was waiting for some customer at the door of her house but nobody came. She was desperate to get money but was unable to entice anyone. When midnight came, she became very frustrated and went inside her house. She started deliberating on her lifestyle and felt very disgusted with herself. She decided to dedicate her life to Bhagavān. She had no apparent devotee association.

Śrī Jīva replies that although there is no description of her having met any devotees, from her own words it can be inferred that she must have had some association. She was living in the city of Videha, also called Mithila, ruled by Janaka. Janaka was a great devotee of Bhagavān Rāma and he has been referred even by Kṛṣṇa in Bhagavad Gītā (3.20), and is listed one among the twelve mahājanas (6.3.20). Janaka was very fond of inviting scholars, philosophers and saints to his court and engaging in spiritual discourses with them. According to Mahābhārata even Śukadeva, the speaker of Śrīmad Bhāgavatam went to take lessons from Janaka. From the words of Piṅgalā (11.8.34) it appears that Videha was the residence of many saintly people. Thus during different festivals or celebrations she must have got to see these saintly people and also listen to their discourses. She indirectly mentions this (11.8.37), "Bhagavān Viṣṇu has become pleased on me due to some unknown act of mine.”

Śrī Viśvanātha Cakravartī comments on this verse that according to previous ācāryas once Dattātreya happen to come by her house. She hosted him and gave him a place to stay.

Another objection is raised. According to verse 7.8.48, Prahlāda blessed everyone to be liberated but that did not happen. The reply for this is that the close study of Prahlāda’s words shows that he only blessed those who were there in his proximity. This is the significance of the demonstrative pronoun etān, these. In Sanskrit this pronoun is used only for things or objects that are very close to oneself. Thus the principle that bhakti comes by the association of a devotee is valid.