Madhurya Kadambini

Anarthas arising from previous sinful activities (Duṣkṛtottha) fall in the category of the five types of kleśa previously mentioned: ignorance, false ego, attachment, hatred and fear of death.

Anarthas arising from pious activities (Sukṛtottha) are the addictions to the enjoyments which arise from pious action.

Some sages include the anarthas arising from pious activities under the categories of the kleśas mentioned above.

Anarthas which arise from offenses refers to those arising from the nāma-aparādhas, not sevā-aparādhas (such as entering the temple in a palanquin or with shoes).

The acharyas have discerned that sevā-aparādhas do not usually have effect being nullified by chanting the Name, by recitation of stotras which have the power to cancel the effect of any sevā-aparādha and by constant service.

Constant engagement in these activities practically nips in the bud the slightest effect of sevā-aparādha.

However, one should not become careless and take advantage of being protected from all effect of sevā-aparādha by the above measures.

Then this sevā-aparādha becomes nāma-aparādha, an anartha which will obstruct his progress.

He is guilty of the nāma-aparādha of committing sin on the strength of the Holy Name, nāmno balād yasya hi pāpa-buddhiḥ.

The word nāma in the phrase nāma-aparādha is being used to represent all the aṅgas of bhakti that destroy sin and aparādha, of which the Holy Name is the primary aṅga.

Even according to dharma-śāstra (scriptures dealing with codes of karma), one should not commit sin knowing that he can be exempted from the effect by prāyaścitta (remedial measures for commission of sin).

Then the effect of the sin will not be destroyed but rather increased.

Sādhu-nindā, or criticism of Vaiṣṇavas, is the first of the ten offenses against the Holy Name.

The word nindā means animosity or malice.

If by chance this offense occurs, the person should repent, “Oh, I am such a low class person, I have committed an offense to a saintly person!”

A person who has been burned by fire seeks relief in fire (kṛśānau śāmyati taptaḥ kṛśānunā eva ayam).

According to this logic, he should nullify the offense by lamenting, resolving to come before the Vaiṣṇava, falling at his feet, and satisfying him by offering his obeisances, praises and respects.

If the Vaiṣṇava is not satisfied, the person should render favorable services to him according to his desires for many days.

Sometimes the offense is so grievous that the Vaiṣṇava's anger does not die.

In extreme remorse, thinking himself most unfortunate and bound for millions of years in hell for his offense, he should give up everything and take full shelter of continuous nāma-saṅkīrtana.

By the divine power of nāma-kīrtana, certainly, in time that person will be delivered from his offense.

However, he should not justify himself by arguing that śāstra says, nāmāparādha-yuktānāṁ nāmāny eva haranty agham: The Holy Name alone is sufficient to deliver an offender.

So what is the need of humbling himself by offering repeated respects and service to the Vaiṣṇava that he has offended?

This type of mentality makes him guilty of further offense.

Conventional rules cannot be applied, however, to the powerful, spontaneous, most elevated mahā-bhāgavatas who may sometimes bestow fathomless mercy even to the most undeserving or offensive.

For instance, though Jaḍa Bharata was made to carry Rahūgaṇa's palanquin and the King let loose a torrent of harsh words on him, Jaḍa Bharata bestowed his mercy.

In a similar way, Cedirāja, the Vasu who flew in the sky, showed mercy to the atheist heretic daityas who had come to do him violence.

In Mahābhārata there is a story of how Cedirāja, on taking the side of the demigods who were arguing with some brahmarṣis, was cursed by them to fall from his flying chariot to Pātāla-loka where he continued to perform his bhajana.

In the same way, Śrī Nityānanda showed mercy to Mādhāi, even though the most sinful Mādhāi had injured His forehead causing blood to flow.

The offense of guror avajñā, or disrespect to guru, the third aparādha, may be considered in the same way as the first aparādha.

The conscious beings who are dependent on the Lord, jīvas, are of two types: those who are not covered by ignorance and those who are covered: devatās, men and animals.

The uncovered jīvas are of two types: those under the influence of the Lord's aiśvarya-śakti, and those uninfluenced by that śakti.

Those not influenced by the Lord's aiśvarya śakti are broadly two types: those practicing jñāna who merge into the Lord (a lamentable condition), and those practicing bhakti who remain differentiated from the Lord and taste nectarean bliss (a non-lamentable state).

Those who are influenced by the aiśvarya śakti are of two types: those absorbed in jñāna belonging to the spiritual sphere (eg. the Four Kumāras), and those absorbed in the functions of creation, etc. of the material sphere (Brahmā, etc). Thus one may consider that Viṣṇu and Śiva are non-different, being the same īśvara-caitanya.

Those who have not thoroughly researched in the matter say that Viṣṇu is the Lord, not Śiva; or that Śiva is the Lord, not Viṣṇu.

That since I am a devotee of Viṣṇu, I will not give regard to Śiva, or visa versa.

Such people, deliberately involving themselves in such arguments, also commit nāma-aparādha.

If such offenders can become enlightened by a devotee with thorough knowledge of the matter, then they can realize in what way Śiva and Viṣṇu are non-different.

With this realization, and by performing nāma-kīrtana, the person can nullify his offense.

Śruti-śāstra-nindā is the fourth offense of disrespect for śruti scriptures (Vedas), considering that they do not mention anything about bhakti and are thus only glorified by worldly-minded people.

If one commits this offense, one obtains relief when one has the fortune to understand the subject properly from a knowledgeable devotee.

The śrutis very mercifully help the most unqualified people, not following any vedic rules or regulations and blinded by material desires to come to the path of bhakti.

Commission of the fourth offense is nullified by using the same mouth that criticized the śāstra (such as the śrutis, propounding karma and jñāna).

One should praise the same scriptures, as well as the practitioners of those scriptures (eg. performers of karma and jñāna), and perform loud chanting of the Holy Name.

In the same way one should understand the commission and nullification of the other six offenses.

Next are the anarthas arising from bhakti.

As many weeds grow along with the main plant, along with bhakti there appears acquisition of material wealth and other facilities, worship and respect by others, a comfortable position and fame (lābha, pūjā, pratiṣṭhā).

By their nature, they have the power to influence the heart of the devotee, expand, and retard the growth of the main plant intended for cultivation (bhakti).

In the case of Citraketu who had already attained the lotus feet of the Lord, his accidental mahā-aparādha to Śiva was apparent, not real, for there was no ill effect from his mistake.

Both as an associate of the Lord, and assuming the form of a demon (Vṛtrāsura) his wealth of prema was still evident.

The cause of the apparent offense of Jaya and Vijaya was a manifestation of their personal desire stimulated by prema.

The two desired in this way:

“O Prabhu! O Lord of Lords! O Nārāyaṇa! You desire to fight but we do not see a suitable opponent for You. All those available are too weak. Though we are strong, we are not inimical to You. Somehow or other, make us inimical to You, and realize Your desire to fight. We, being Your faithful servants, cannot tolerate to see any lack whatever in Your perfection. Diminish Your quality of affection for your devotees and fulfill our prayer.”