Abhanga 2673
A useful structure for politely declining well-meaning persuaders when your chitta has already chosen. Hear this with folded hands; I can't stop those who keep applying their own frames; but my real bhāva is known only to the one my chitta is entangled with; please don't keep entreating me, because it breaks me. The bhakta does not refute the persuaders' arguments; he asks them to stop bringing the minatī. This is wise — once chitta is entangled, no argument resolves it; only the entreater can choose to stop entreating.
The verse
ऐका हें वचन माझें संतजन । विनवितों जोडुन कर तुम्हां ॥१॥
तर्क करूनियां आपुल्या भावना । बोलतिया जना कोण वारी ॥ध्रु.॥
आमुच्या जीवींचा तो चि जाणे भावो । रकुमाईंचा नाहो पांडुरंग ॥२॥
चित्त माझें त्याचे गुंतलेंसे पायीं । म्हणऊनि कांहीं नावडे त्या ॥३॥
तुका म्हणे मज न साहे मीनती । खेद होय चित्तीं भंग मना ॥४॥
Literal translation
Hear this word of mine, sant-folk — I petition with folded hands to you. Those who apply their own bhāvanā (imagination, frame) and tarka (reasoning) speak — who can stop them? Our heart's bhāva — only he knows — Rakumāī's husband, Pāṇḍuranga. My chitta is entangled at his feet — therefore nothing pleases me besides him. Tukā says: I cannot bear the minatī (entreaty, persuading-argument); sorrow comes to chitta, breaking the mind.
What it means
A 4-verse polite-but-firm address to well-meaning persuaders. Aikā hē vachana mājhē santajana — vinavitōm jōḍuni kara tumhām — hear this word of mine, sant-folk — I petition with folded hands to you. The audience is santajana — even the sants — and the gesture is jōḍuni kara (folded-hands), the most respectful petition-gesture.
The dhrūpada acknowledges that others-with-other-frames will keep speaking: tarka karūnīyā āpulyā bhāvanā — bōlatiyā janā kōṇa vārī — those who apply their own bhāvanā (frame, imagination) and speak — who can stop them? The bhakta cannot prevent others from approaching with tarka (logic) and bhāvanā (their own emotional-frame). But there is something they cannot enter.
The second verse names what they cannot enter: āmuchyā jīvīñchā tō chi jāṇē bhāvō — Rakumāīñcā nāhō Pāṇḍuranga — the bhāva of our jīva — only he knows — Rakumāī's husband, Pāṇḍuranga. The bhakta's bhāva is known only to Pāṇḍuranga, not to the well-meaning sants. Rakumāīcā nāhō (Rakumāī's husband) is the affectionate Vārkarī name.
The third verse: chitta mājhē tyāche gumtalēmsē pāyīm — mhaṇōnī kāmhī nāvaḍē tyā — my chitta is entangled (gumtalēm) at his feet — therefore nothing else pleases. Gumtaṇē (entangled) — the same affectionate verb as 2624's gōvā (entanglement). The bhakta's chitta is entangled there; this is not a state one can argue someone out of.
The close: na sāhē minatī — khēda hōya chittīm bhanga manā — I cannot bear the minatī (entreaty, argued-persuasion); sorrow comes to chitta, breaking the mind. Minatī — repeated entreating-argument. The bhakta admits: more persuasion will break me. The petition is to stop persuading, not to refute the persuasion.
For someone today
A useful structure for politely declining well-meaning persuaders when your chitta has already chosen. Hear this with folded hands; I can't stop those who keep applying their own frames; but my real bhāva is known only to the one my chitta is entangled with; please don't keep entreating me, because it breaks me. The bhakta does not refute the persuaders' arguments; he asks them to stop bringing the minatī. This is wise — once chitta is entangled, no argument resolves it; only the entreater can choose to stop entreating.
Where this applies
- Politely asking well-meaning persuaders to stop bringing arguments
- The claim that one's jīva-bhāva is known only to the beloved — not to outsiders
- Acknowledging that further minatī genuinely breaks the mind
- The image of chitta-entangled-at-feet as a state argument cannot dissolve