Abhanga 2716
Therefore I have become a kṣetrīñce samnyāsī (place-renouncer); controlling the chitta from āśā-pāśa (desire-bonds).
The verse
म्हणऊनि जालों क्षेत्रींचे संन्यासी । चत्ति आशापाशीं आवरूनि ॥१॥
कदापि ही नव्हे सीमा उल्लंघन । केलें विसर्जन आव्हानीं च ॥ध्रु.॥
पारिखा तो आतां जाला दुजा ठाव । दृढ केला भाव एकविध ॥२॥
तुका म्हणे कार्यकारणाचा हेवा । नाहीं जीव देवा समर्पिला ॥३॥
Literal translation
Therefore I have become a kṣetrīñce samnyāsī (place-renouncer); controlling the chitta from āśā-pāśa (desire-bonds). Never have I done sīmā ullanghana (boundary-crossing); the visarjana (dismissal) was done at the āvhāna (invocation) itself. The pārikhā (alien, stranger) — the other place — has now become the second. The bhāva (feeling-orientation) has been drḍha kelā ekavidha (made firm, one-fold). Tukā says: the kārya-kāraṇa hēvā (conflict-of-cause-and-effect) is gone; the jīva has been samarpilā (offered) to Deva.
What it means
A striking self-description verse. Mhaṇa'ūnī jālōm kṣetrīñce samnyāsī — chitta āśā-pāśīm āvarūnī — therefore I have become a kṣetra-samnyāsī — controlling the chitta from desire-bonds. Kṣetra-samnyāsī is an unusual self-naming. Kṣetra (place, field) + samnyāsī (renouncer). Compare with the conventional samnyāsī who leaves the place (goes to forest); Tukārām's kṣetra-samnyāsī renounces in-place — at the kṣetra itself.
This is a major theological-positioning: the Vārkarī householder-bhakta is not a forest-renouncer but a place-renouncer — renouncing the desire-bonds while remaining in the kṣetra (which can mean the village, the Pandharī-region, or the bodily-field). The āśā-pāśīm āvarūnī (controlling-from-desire-bonds) is the samnyāsa; the kṣetra (place) is not abandoned.
The dhrūpada: kadāpi hī navhē sīmā ullanghana — kelē visarjana āvhānī chi — never have I crossed the boundary; the visarjana (dismissal-ceremony) was done at the āvhāna (invocation) itself. The image is from temple-ritual: āvhāna is the inviting of the deity into the mūrti at the start of pūjā; visarjana is the dismissing of the deity at the end. Tukārām claims a striking inversion: the visarjana was done at the very moment of āvhāna. Or, alternatively: the desires were invited-and-dismissed in the same breath — they came and went without crossing the sīmā (boundary).
The second verse: pārikhā tō ātām jālā dujā ṭhāva — drḍha kelā bhāva ekavidha — the other place (the alternative) has now become alien (the second); the bhāva has been made firm-one-fold. The alternative-place is pārikhā (alien); the bhakta has consolidated bhāva into ekavidha (one-fold).
The close: kārya-kāraṇa hēvā — nāhī jīva Devā samarpilā — the conflict-of-cause-and-effect (i.e., the action-result transactional anxiety) is gone — I have offered the jīva to Deva. The full samarpaṇa of the jīva ends the kārya-kāraṇa-anxiety.
For someone today
The verse offers a unique Vārkarī-renouncer self-description: I am a kṣetra-samnyāsī — a place-renouncer. The renunciation is of desire-bonds, not of the place. The boundary has not been crossed; the visarjana of desires happens at the very āvhāna. The bhakta has consolidated bhāva into one-fold and offered the jīva to Deva. This is the Vārkarī alternative to forest-samnyāsa: stay-in-place, renounce-the-desire-bonds, offer-the-jīva. The verse is the theological foundation for the householder-bhakta vocation.
Where this applies
- The unique kṣetra-samnyāsī (place-renouncer) Vārkarī self-naming
- Combining householder-status with renouncer-discipline
- Āvhāna-visarjana-in-the-same-breath — desires invited-and-dismissed without crossing the boundary
- The jīva offered to Deva as the close of kārya-kāraṇa anxiety