Verse Text
śrī-bhāgavataṁ yathā—
śaṅke nītāḥ sapadi daśama-skandha-padyāvalīnāṁ
varṇāḥ karṇādhvani pathikatām ānupurvyād bhavadbhiḥ |
haṁho dimbhāḥ parama-śubhadān hanta dharmārtha-kāmān
yad garhantaḥ sukhamayam amī mokṣam apy ākṣipanti ||240||
Translation
The power of hearing Bhāgavatam: O idiots, how unfortunate you are! I think that you must have been hearing all the syllables, one by one, of the verses of the Tenth Canto of Bhāgavatam, because your ears are now denouncing the most auspicious goals of dharma, artha and kāma, and even decrying the fourth goal of liberation which is most blissful.
Purport (Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura)
Varṇā eva karṇādhvani pathikatāṁ nītā means “the syllables of the Bhāgavatam have become travelers on the pathways belonging to the ears.” The implication is that the foolish persons have not understood the meaning of what they have heard (just hearing syllables). “O idiots! (ḍimbhā) You must have been hearing, because from hearing those syllables, those ears are now criticizing dharma, artha and kāma, and deriding even liberation.” By extreme criticism in the two verses, one can understand that the author is praising the subjects in the two verses. This is the ornament called vyāja-stuti.
Purport (Jiva Goswami)
This is a praise of the Bhāgavatam using the device of criticism. This and the previous verse are examples of the literary ornament called aprastuta-praśaṁsā, conveying the subject by something that is not the subject.
kārye nimitte sāmanye viśeṣe prastute sati |
tad anyasya vacas tulye tulyasyeti ca paṣcadhā ||
When irrelevant topics are introduced in reference to the topic at hand, it is called aprastuta-praśaṁsā. There are five types: stating the effect when the cause is the subject, stating the cause when the effect is the subject, stating the general when the particular is the subject, stating the particular when the general is the subject, and stating similarity. Kāvya-prakāśa 10.99
Instead of the general topic, details of the topic are introduced. The general topics are serving the deity and hearing the Bhāgavatam, but details are introduced as the focus. The aim is actually to become aware of the greatness of the general topic.
Moreover, in the previous verse, because the intention is to praise the form of the Lord, the literal statement — that forbids one from seeing Govinda — is not the real meaning. Similarly, in the present verse, the real meaning is not contempt for hearing Bhāgavatam, expressed by saying ‘O fools!’ (haṁho ḍimbā), because the auspiciousness of dharma, artha, kāma and the happiness achieved through liberation are actually surpassed by the supreme bliss attained by bhāva induced through the hearing of the Tenth Canto of Bhāgavatam. In these two verses, the subjects are praised by the use of extreme criticism. To praise an object by criticizing it is the ornament called vyāja-stuti, indirect eulogy.
Purport (Nectar of Devotion)
Rūpa Gosvāmī further writes, “My dear foolish friend, I think that you have already heard some of the auspicious Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which decries seeking the results of fruitive activities, economic development and liberation. I think that now it is certain that gradually the verses of the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, describing the pastimes of the Lord, will enter your ears and go into your heart.”
In the beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is said that unless one has the ability to throw out, just like garbage, the fruitive results of ritualistic ceremonies, economic development and becoming one with the Supreme (or salvation), one cannot understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The Bhāgavatam deals exclusively with devotional service. Only one who studies Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in the spirit of renunciation can understand the pastimes of the Lord which are described in the Tenth Canto. In other words, one should not try to understand the topics of the Tenth Canto, such as the rāsa-līlā (love dance), unless he has spontaneous attraction for Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. One must be situated in pure devotional service before he can relish Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as it is.
In the above two verses of Rūpa Gosvāmī there are some metaphorical analogies that indirectly condemn the association of materialistic society, friendship and love. People are generally attracted to society, friendship and love, and they make elaborate arrangements and strong endeavors to develop these material contaminations. But to see the śrī-mūrtis of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa is to forget such endeavors for material association. Rūpa Gosvāmī composed his verse in such a way that he was seemingly praising the material association of friendship and love and was condemning the audience of śrī-mūrti or Govinda. This metaphorical analogy is constructed in such a way that things which seem to be praised are condemned, and things which are to be condemned are praised. The actual import of the verse is that one must see the form of Govinda if one at all wants to forget the nonsense of material friendship, love and society.