According to a legend, Sannyāsa-nirṇaya was composed in Vikram Samvat 1551 during Śrī Vallabhacharya’s journey to Badarikāśrama for Narahari Sannyāsī. As noted in Śrī Vallabha Digvijaya by Śrī Yadunathji, Śrī Mahāprabhu undertook this pilgrimage to Badarikāśrama three times. During the second journey, references to Krishnadas Meghan accompanying him and their visit to Vyāsāśrama are noted. This event is also mentioned in an account given to the temple priest in the form of a document (vṛttipatra), which states the travel year as Devāmbhapati Bhū 1433, equating to Vikram Samvat 1568. If the Vikram Samvat 1551 legend is authentic, it must correspond to the timeline of his first journey. This is corroborated by the Caurāsī Vaiṣṇavan’s Vārtā, which describes an occasion when Narahari Sannyāsī encountered Śrī Mahāprabhu at Badarikāśrama.

In this meeting, Narahari Sannyāsī expressed,

Maharaj, I adopted sannyāsa earlier, but by your grace, I turned to the bhakti-mārga. However, I do not fully understand the types of sannyāsa nor the nuances of bhakti-mārga. Kindly explain this to me.

Śrī Mahāprabhu then composed the Sannyāsa-nirṇaya to clarify the concept of sannyāsa within bhakti-mārga. After teaching it to Narahari Sannyāsī, his heart became firmly established in the principles of puṣṭi-mārga. Immersed in the realization of Śrī Ṭhākurji’s divine līlā, he entered a state of bliss and spiritual absorption. Śrī Mahāprabhu proceeded forward, while Narahari Sannyāsī wandered in divine joy (svarūpānanda).

The earliest reference to this work can also be found in Sampradāya Pradīpa by Gadādhar Dvivedi, written in Vikram Samvat 1690, which mentions Sannyāsa-nirṇaya. The text describes:

Śrī Vallabhāḥ, departing from the banks of the Gaṅgā, sat there and taught the principles of sannyāsa according to the Tridaṇḍa system, as was done by Viṣṇusvāmī, who became a renunciate and journeyed to Kāśī. (Caturtha Prakaraṇa)

However, it is unclear whether Sannyāsa-nirṇaya here refers to the written treatise or an oral discourse. Attention must also be given to the term Tridaṇḍa-vidhinā. The version of Sannyāsa-nirṇaya included in the Ṣoḍaśa Grantha does not discuss taking sannyāsa using the vi-daṇḍa (dual-staff) system, either affirmatively or negatively.

This marks a departure from the traditional caturtha āśrama (fourth stage of life as renunciation) and is the foundational principle of the Sannyāsa-nirṇaya. Uddhava, upon receiving this instruction, renounced all ties, exemplifying intermediate eligibility (madhyama-adhikāra) as recognized in the invocation in trividhanāmāvali:

uddhavādimadhyamabhāvabodhakāya namaḥ

In Puṣṭimārga, the realization of divine fruits on Earth is deemed (in puṣṭi-pravāha-maryāda) supreme:

bhagavān eva hi phalaṁ sa yathā virbhaved bhuvi

Furthermore, the supreme fruit of service—“extraordinary capabilities” (alaukika-sāmarthya) and the sensory experience of divine nectar (rasātmikā anubhūti)—is also realized on Earth.

In Bhakti-vardhinī, it was shown that those with a firmly established bīja-bhāva (seed-like inclination toward devotion) can develop their devotion through the practices of listening (śravaṇa) and singing (kīrtana) of Bhagavat-kathā after renouncing their household. Otherwise, if the bīja-bhāva is not firmly established, individuals should, whenever possible, engage in both Bhagavat-sevā (service to Bhagavān) and Bhagavat-kathā to strengthen it, provided they remain unimpeded (avyāvṛta). If impediments exist—such as the inability to perform Bhagavat-sevā at one’s residence—the firmness of bīja-bhāva can still be achieved by progressing through the successive stages of attachment (prema), affection (āsakti), and passion (vyasana) solely through listening to Bhagavat-kathā.

When sneha (affection) develops through Bhagavat-kathā, attachment to worldly objects diminishes. With the stabilization of bhagavad-āsakti (attachment to Bhagavān), any disinterest in household life becomes evident. A devotee finds their home and belongings, which are unrelated to Bhagavat-sevā, to be obstacles to their devotion. Gradually, when Kṛṣṇa-bhakti reaches the stage of passion (vyasana-daśā), the soul attains fulfillment (kṛtārthatā). For such individuals, residing in a home that is unfit for Bhagavat-sevā could occasionally disrupt their devotion, potentially leading to its decline. Therefore, to strengthen their devotion, those who can renounce their home with a burning desire for the vision of Kṛṣṇa (kṛṣṇa-darśana) are the ones who attain the supreme, steadfast devotion (para-sudṛḍha-bhakti), as described in Bhakti-vardhinī.

Following this, Bhakti-vardhinī prescribed duties for those unable to renounce their homes, but it did not elaborate on how, under what circumstances, with what sentiments, and for what goal such renunciation should occur. Those unable to engage in Bhagavat-sevā at home, nor capable of renouncing their homes, were advised to live near devotees (bhagavadīya) who are devoted to service and narratives of Bhagavān. If permitted, they could also assist in Bhagavat-sevā carried out by such devotees.

Within this context, the qualifications of suitable speakers (vaktā) and listeners (śrotā) for Bhagavat-kathā were explained earlier in Jala-bheda and Pañca-padyāni. Thus, the contemplation of residual home renunciation was essential, and it is being completed in this Sannyāsa-nirṇaya treatise.

From Sarva-nirṇaya Nibandha, between Kārika 191 and Kārika 214, topics such as renunciation, abandonment, devotion, and other related subjects are addressed. However, these teachings are not exclusively targeted at puṣṭi-mārga adherents but are intended for all daivī jīva-s (divine souls). Hence, Kārika 196 states:

bhaktiḥ svatantrā śuddhā ca durlabheti na śocyate - Devotion (bhakti) is independent, pure, and rare; therefore, it is not to be lamented.

to signify that pure devotion is independent, rare, and not a matter of regret. Consequently, significant emphasis is placed on the scriptural procedures of sannyāsa as outlined in:

tridaṇḍaṁ parigṛhṇīyāt sarva-śāstrāvirodhi tat - One should accept the Tridaṇḍa in a manner that does not contradict any scripture.

In contrast, Sannyāsa-nirṇaya takes a more general approach, stating veśaḥ so'pi na cānyathā, which shows less concern for the rigid structures of renunciation. This is because Śrī Mahāprabhu prescribes a distinctive form of renunciation for daivī jīva-s, different from the general renunciation applicable to others.

In Sarva-nirṇaya, Śrī Mahāprabhu begins with contemplations on renunciation (sannyāsa), describing that one may adhere steadfastly to any of the four stages of life (brahmacarya, gṛhastha, vānaprastha, or sannyāsa), progress sequentially through these stages, or divide one’s lifespan into four equal parts, dedicating each to one stage. The scriptures praise all these stages equally, making the fruits derived from them the same. Within such a framework, renunciation in the form of sannyāsa appears to be a scriptural necessity under simultaneous or sequential arrangements.

However, in Ṣoḍaśa Grantha’s Sannyāsa-nirṇaya, Śrī Mahāprabhu does not endorse renunciation for those following the paths of action (karma-mārga), knowledge (jñāna-mārga), or even for those with an unsteady bīja-bhāva (incipient inclination toward devotion) within bhakti-mārga.

These two views align as follows:

  • for non-puṣṭi-mārga divine beings (daivī jīva-s), renunciation within the fourth stage of life (caturthāśrama) is deemed essential within the framework of varṇāśrama dharma. This is suggested by anubhāṣya(3.4.17):

    antaḥkaraṇe saṁskāra-viśeṣādhāyakatvaṁ ca pratīyate sannyāsasya | sa ca saṁskāraḥ phalopakārya-gamity-āvaśyakaḥ sakkyāso maryādāmārge | puṣṭimārge tv anyaiṣa vyavasthā—na jñānaṁ na ca vairāgyaṁ prāyaḥ śreyo bhaved iha |

  • Thus, for a puṣṭi-mārga aspirant who can continuously perform Bhagavat-sevā at home without impediments (avyāvṛtta), renunciation or sannyāsa is unnecessary anubhāṣya(3.4.47):

    tyāge vāṅmanasor eva bhagavati viniyogo na sarvendriyāṇām
    gṛhiṇas tu sarvaiḥ prakārair bhajanaṁ bhavati iti parijanaś ca kṛtārtho bhavatīti bhajane kṛtsnatā

    Conversely, when Bhagavat-sevā cannot be performed at home, and if a puṣṭi-bhakta finds themselves impeded (vyāvṛtta), they should first adhere to the appropriate duties of their varṇa and āśrama. They should then strengthen their bīja-bhāva by listening to, contemplating, and singing Bhagavat-kathā. Once bīja-bhāva becomes firm, devotees may find that, due to the absence of opportunities for service, darśana, or touch (sparśana) of Bhagavān’s form at home, along with family entanglements causing separation-based sorrow (viyoga), it becomes appropriate to renounce the household:

    virahānubhāvārtha tu parityāgaḥ praśasyate

    A devotee whose bīja-bhāva has matured naturally realizes, subodhinī (3.1.2):

    gṛhasthiter utkṛṣṭatvaṁ na bhagavadīyatvamātreṇa kintu bhagavatā saha sthityā bhagavat-kāryārthaṁ vā anyathā na sthātavyam

    Meaning: The excellence of the householder’s life (gṛhastha) is not merely due to the fact that one belongs to the Lord (bhagavadīyatvamātreṇa), but rather because of dwelling in connection with the Lord (bhagavatā saha sthityā) or for the purpose of performing duties for the Lord (bhagavat-kāryārthaṁ). Otherwise, it should not be lived.

    Certain devotees, overwhelmed by abundant devotional sentiments and unable to remain without hearing or witnessing Bhagavān’s līlās, leave their homes and go to the forest.

Narahari, having already taken renunciation, was prohibited by scripture from reverting to a previous stage or transitioning between stages of life. Hence, he was first made to adopt renunciation in Vṛndāvana according to tridaṇḍa-vidhi (scripturally appropriate procedures), and later in Badarikāśrama, he was initiated into the experience of separation from Bhagavān (virahānubhava) through the teachings of the Sannyāsa-nirṇaya.

Scriptures prescribe renunciation for those who transcend desires for children (putraiṣaṇā), wealth (vittaiṣaṇā), and fame (lokaiṣaṇā). However, the desire for discipleship (śiṣyaiṣaṇā) can deceptively amplify these three aspirations manifold.

While the longing for children may be satisfied with just a few offsprings, the craving for disciples never abates, even with thousands of followers. Similarly, financial needs for sustaining one’s immediate family are far less demanding than the resources required to sustain a monastery or an ashram filled with disciples. An ordinary individual is less tormented by the craving for recognition of their virtues than a modern paramahaṁsa is consumed by their desire for acclaim for their renunciation.

Indeed, there is a significant distinction between the renunciation practices of the dispassionate (virakta) and the ascetic (tyāgī).

True dispassion (vairāgya) can elevate an individual to some extent, but renunciation without dispassion pushes one further downward. Śrī Mahāprabhu’s philosophy emphasizes that rather than renouncing an object without purpose, it is better to dedicate it to Bhagavān. Therefore, when dedication is not possible, renunciation grounded in devotional absorption (bhagavad-anurakti) rather than mere detachment (virakti) gives meaning to the act of renunciation.

Renunciation (tyāga) in itself does not hold the significance of an independent path. There are only three primary paths:

  1. Karma-mārga (path of action),
  2. Jñāna-mārga (path of knowledge), and
  3. Bhakti-mārga (path of devotion).

Renunciation is meaningful only as an aspect (aṅga) of action, knowledge, or devotion, but without these, it merely turns an individual into a wanderer (parivrājaka) without guiding them toward any destination.

Thus, renunciation becomes relevant as one progresses on the paths of action, knowledge, or devotion, signifying the strengthening of dispassion.

Considering the three principal paths of action, knowledge, and devotion, along with their subcategories, the Sannyāsa-nirṇaya enumerates eight types of renunciations (sannyāsa). These can be understood more systematically through a classification.

Renunciation (Sannyāsa) in the Context of the Three Paths:

  1. Karma-mārga
    1. Karma-phala: Renunciation of the fruits of action (tyāgarūpa)
    2. Caturtha: Renunciation as the fourth stage of life (āśramarūpa)
  2. Bhakti-mārga
    1. Bhaktyartha: Renunciation to facilitate devotional practices like listening (śravaṇa) and singing (kīrtana)
    2. Renunciation to overcome obstacles to devotion (e.g., household and material attachments—bhakti-bādhaka gṛhādi tyāgārtha)
    3. Bhaktyuttara (Post-devotion)
      1. For experiencing separation from Bhagavān (virahānubhāvārtha)
      2. Through natural inclination (svabhāvasiddha) characterized by detachment from the world (prapañca-vismṛti) and immersion in Bhagavān (bhagavad-āsakti)
  3. Jñāna-mārga (Path of Knowledge):
    1. For the pursuit of knowledge (jñānārtha)
    2. Following the attainment of knowledge (jñānottara).

The three paths of self-realization—karma, jñāna, and bhakti—consider worldly egotism (ahantā) and possessiveness (mamatā) as obstacles. True methods for overcoming these obstacles lie in dispassionate action, knowledge, or devotion but not in mere renunciation or sannyāsa. Yet, people often, in their misdirected enthusiasm, rush into renunciation or sannyāsa without steadfastness in their chosen path or adequate dispassion, leading to deviation from their path as well as the righteous path (sanmārga).

Even puṣṭi-mārga jīva-s may occasionally fall into the trap of false renunciation or sannyāsa. Especially for devotees with firmly established bīja-bhāva (incipient devotion) who are unable to perform Bhagavat-sevā at home, Śrī Mahāprabhu’s guidance in Bhakti-vardhinī regarding household renunciation may be misunderstood. Without proper understanding of puṣṭi-mārga principles (viveka), hasty renunciation or sannyāsa could lead to regrettable mistakes, leaving such devotees with nothing but repentance.

To ensure that puṣṭi-mārga jīva-s avoid false renunciation and do not deprive themselves of the fruits of puṣṭi-mārga or turn their entire lives into a charade of hypocrisy, Śrī Mahāprabhu clarifies his perspectives on renunciation and sannyāsa. This is to protect them from potential regret associated with entanglement in renunciation or sannyāsa, and to guide those, like Narahari Sannyāsī, who have already adopted sannyāsa, back onto the path of devotion (bhakti-mārga) and help them emerge from their remorse.

Karma Mārgīya

Karma-phala Tyāgarūpa Sannyāsa

Actions (karma) prescribed according to one’s varṇa (caste) or āśrama (stage of life) should not be abandoned (refer to Bhagavad Gītā 3.35):

śreyān swa-dharmo viguṇaḥ para-dharmāt sv-anuṣṭhitāt
swa-dharme nidhanaṁ śreyaḥ para-dharmo bhayāvahaḥ

Meaning: It is far better to perform one’s prescribed duties, even if imperfectly, than to perform another’s duties perfectly. It is preferable to die in the discharge of one’s own duty, for following the path of another is fraught with danger.

At the beginning of Sarva-nirṇaya, it is stated that only the fruits of one’s duties (nitya-karma-phala), which provide self-contentment, may be renounced, but forsaking such actions altogether leads to a fault (pratyavāya-aparādha). If these nitya-karma-s are accompanied by brahma-vidyā (knowledge of Brahman), they result in brahmānanda (divine bliss):

bhagavad-ānanda-rūpaṁ phalaṁ brahma-jñāna-yuktasya yathokta-karma-kartur eva

As long as bodily identification (dehābhimāna) exists, the duties prescribed by the scriptures (śāstra) under varṇāśrama dharma should not be abandoned:

yāvad dehābhimānaḥ tāvad varṇāśrama-dharma eva svadharma - (Subodhinī 3.28.2).

According to Śrī Śaṅkarācārya, even one who performs selfless duties (niṣkāma karma) can be established in Brahman (brahma-saṁstha), Chāndogya Bhāṣya:

tasmād ya eva brahma-saṁsthaḥ svaśrama-vihita-karmavatāṁ so’mṛtatvam eti. na karma-nimitta-vidyā-pratyayor virodhāt

When combined with brahma-vidyā, selfless actions (niṣkāma-karma) can also yield brahmānanda (bliss of Brahman), Bhagavad Gītā (4.24):

brahmārpaṇaṁ brahma haviḥ brahmāgnau brahmaṇā hutam brahmaiva tena gantavyaṁ brahma-karma-samādhinā

Meaning: One who is fully absorbed in Brahman sees Brahman everywhere. For them, the offering is Brahman, the oblation is Brahman, the fire is Brahman, and the act of offering is Brahman. Such a person truly attains Brahman through the focus of their actions on Brahman.

For devotees practicing selfless action with bhagavad-bhakti, bhajanānanda (bliss of devotion) becomes attainable, Bhagavad Gītā (9.34):

man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru mām evaiṣyasi yuktvaivam ātmānaṁ mat-parāyaṇaḥ

Meaning: Engage your mind always in thinking of Me, become My devotee, worship Me, and offer your obeisance to Me. Thus, you will come to Me alone, having your mind fixed on Me as the Supreme.

The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.22) declares:

tam etaṁ vedānuvacanena brāhmaṇā vividiṣanti yajñena dānena tapasā’nāśakena etam eva viditvā muniḥ bhavati

By engaging in study of the Vedas, sacrificial rituals, charity, and austerities free from attachment, one attains the state of a sage. Duties prescribed in the stages of celibacy (naiṣṭhika brahmacarya), household life, and forest dwelling are upheld as means of purification for brahma-jñāna (knowledge of Brahman).

The identity of Vedic duties like study (vedānuvacana), sacrifice (yajña), and charity (dāna) with āśrama dharma is supported in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (2.23.1):

trayo dharma-skandhāḥ yajño’dhyayanaṁ dānam iti prathamaḥ tapa eva dvitīyo brahmacāryācārya-kulavāsī | tṛtīyo’tyantam ātmānam ācāryakule’vasādayan | Sarve ete puṇyalokā bhavanti, brahma-saṁsto’mṛtatvam eti |

The first aspect of dharma comprises sacrifice, study, and charity. The second is austerity. The third is complete surrender at the feet of one’s teacher. All who adhere to these attain merit, and one established in Brahman achieves liberation.

The Vedic duties of study (adhyayana), sacrifice, and charity yield meritorious realms (puṇyaloka) when performed without brahma-vidyā. When combined with brahma-vidyā, they also yield liberation:

brahma-saṁsto’mṛtatvam eti (Chāndogya)

In Sarva-nirṇaya (Kārika 246), Śrī Mahāprabhu asserts:

gṛhasthasyaitan mukhyam, evaṁ kurvan sa-kuṭumbo bhagavat-sāyujyam aśnute. brahmacārī-prabhṛtīnām api sevaka-sādhana-sampattau etat-kartavyam.

This signifies that even in puṣṭi-mārga, adherence to prescribed duties is necessary as long as bodily identification persists. In the fourth stage (caturthāśrama), household renunciation makes performing bhagavat-sevā at home irrelevant, which is why Sarva-nirṇaya prescribes continuous pilgrimage with a yearning for Kṛṣṇa’s vision (kṛṣṇa-darśana).

Caturtha Āśrama Sannyāsa

Just as there are provisions in the stages of life (āśrama) such as celibacy (brahmacarya), household life (gṛhastha), or forest-dwelling (vānaprastha) for performing vows of devotion (naiṣṭhika vrata) and celibacy (brahmacarya), there are also regulations for entering the fourth āśrama, renunciation (sannyāsa). The aforementioned statement from the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.22) highlights this principle:

etameva prabrajino lokamicchantaḥ pravrajanti… putra iṣaṇāyāśca vitta iṣaṇāyāśca loka iṣaṇāyāśca vyutthāya atha bhikṣācaryāṁ caranti… nainaṁ kṛtākṛte tapata…

This means that Brahmins/dvija in the stages of celibacy, household, and forest-dwelling āśrama, who perform rites such as Vedic study (vedādhyayana), offerings (yajña), charity (dāna), and austerities (tapas), seek the knowledge of Brahman (brahmajñāna) in the sannyāsa āśrama as well. Renunciates abandon desires for children (putra), wealth (vitta), or worldly pleasures (loka) and engage in alms (bhikṣācaryā) without being subjected to the fruits of their actions (kṛtākṛta karma).

Similarly, the Jābālopaniṣad (Section 4) states:

brahmacaryaṁ samāpya gṛhī bhaved, gṛhī bhūtvā vanī bhaved, vanī bhūtvā pravrajet…

Here, the systematic progression from one āśrama to the next is outlined.

Likewise, Manusmṛti (6.86 – 6.87) states:

brahmacārī gṛhasthaśca vānaprastho yatistathā… caturvāraḥ pṛthagāśramāḥ sarve’pi kramaśastvete yathāśāstra-niṣeviṇā yathokta-kāriṇaṁ vipraṁ nayanti paramaṁ gatim

The progression of life through the four āśramas, emphasizing that one must follow the duties associated with each stage according to the scriptures. By doing so with proper discipline and adherence, a spiritually inclined individual can achieve the highest spiritual realization.

Bhāgavata (11.18.11–27) explains the practices of vānaprastha (forest-dwelling stage) and elucidates the principles of renunciation (sannyāsa) as the fourth āśrama. It also describes the procedure for tri-daṇḍa sannyāsa (renunciation with three staffs):

yadā karma-vipākeṣu lokeṣu nirayātmasu virāgo jāyate samyaṅ nyastāgniḥ pravrajet tataḥ

This demonstrates that entering the fourth āśrama, sannyāsa, is indeed a prescribed duty.

Those who do not undertake the vow of naiṣṭhika brahmacarya (lifelong celibacy), as described in the statement tṛtīye’tyantam ātmānam ācāryakule’vasādayan, or do not adopt the vow of naiṣṭhika-gārhasthya (lifelong household duties) as per the statement yāvajjīvam agnihotraṁ juhoti, or do not undertake the vow of naiṣṭhika vānaprastha (lifelong forest-dwelling) as per the statement araṇyam iyāt tato na punar āyāt, are required, following the sequential order of āśramas, to enter the fourth āśrama, sannyāsa, after completing the first three stages.

An exception to this is mentioned in the Jābālopaniṣad:

yadi vetarathā brahmacaryād eva pravrajed gṛhād vā vanād vā. atha punar avratī vā vratī vā snātako bā’snātako vā, utsannāgnir anagniko vā. yadāhareva virajet tadāhareva pravrajed

However, this type of renunciation is not meant for the general populace but is specific to highly detached Brahman-realized individuals:

eṣa panthā brahmaṇā hānuvittas tena iti sakkyāsī brahmavid iti evam eva eṣa

Even for Brahman-realized individuals, this kind of sannyāsa is permissible only upon the manifestation of intense detachment, otherwise not. Therefore, this statement emphasizes not so much on the act of renunciation itself but rather on the necessity of detachment. This concept will be further elaborated as “post-knowledge sannyāsa”.

Valid tri-daṇḍa sannyāsa, as the fourth āśrama, is considered essential for adherents of the disciplined path (maryādā-mārga), as stated in the Anubhāṣya (3.14.17):

sac saṁskāraḥ phalopakārya-gamityāvaśyakaḥ sannyāso maryādāmārge. puṣṭimārge tu anyaiṣa vyavasthā"

Similarly, according to Bhāgavata (11.20.31–34):

tasmād mad-bhaktiyuktasya yogino vā mad-ātmanaḥ na jñānaṁ na ca vairāgyaṁ prāyaḥ śreyo bhaved iha yad karma-bhir yad tapasā jñāna-vairāgyataś ca yat; yogena dāna-dharmeṇa śreyobhir itarai rapi sarva mad-bhakti-yogena mad-bhakto labhate’njasā; svarga-apavargaṁ adhamam kathañcid yadi vāñchati na kiñcit sādhavo dhīrā bhaktā hy ekāntino mama; vāñchitāpi mayā dattaṁ kaivalyam apunarbhavam

This implies that devotees who have no desire for liberation (mokṣa) do not require jñāna (knowledge), vairāgya (detachment), tapas (austerity), charity (dāna), or dharma. For such individuals, sannyāsa as the fourth āśrama becomes unnecessary.

Contrarily, Bhāgavata (11.18.40-41) criticizes those who adopt the fourth āśrama of tri-daṇḍa sannyāsa (renunciation with three staffs) without possessing jñāna (knowledge) and vairāgya (detachment):

yastv asaṁyataṣaḍvargo pracaṇḍendriyasārathiḥ jñānavairāgyarahitaḥ tri-daṇḍam upajīvati, surān ātmānam ātmāsthaṁ nindute māṁ ca dharmahā, avipakvakṣāyo asmād amuṣmāc ca vihīyate

Therefore, even though tri-daṇḍa sannyāsa, as the fourth āśrama of the path of action (karma-mārga), is entirely established and pure according to śāstra, it is not highly recommended in the Kali Yuga.

Padma Purāṇa (in Śrīmad Bhāgavata Māhātmyam) mentions that in the Kali Yuga, Bhakti (devotion) is youthful, but her two sons, Jñāna (knowledge) and Vairāgya (detachment), have grown feeble:

ahaṁ bhaktir iti khyātā imau me tanayau matau jñāna-vairāgya-nāmānau kālāyogena jarjarau

Thus, for practitioners with weakened knowledge and detachment, adhering to the rules of tri-daṇḍa sannyāsa becomes challenging.

Śrī Mahāprabhu accordingly prohibits it: sutarāṁ kalikālataḥ. Due to the adverse effects of the Kali Yuga, even though karma-mārga sannyāsa as the fourth āśrama remains valid for those lacking jñāna and vairāgya, it is not unattainable but certainly arduous. Therefore, it is also not recommended, especially for puṣṭi-jīvas (souls nourished by divine grace).

Bhakti Mārgīya

Bhaktyartha Sannyāsa - Śravaṇa (Hearing) and Kīrtana (Singing)

Bhāgavata (11.20.9) states:

tāvat karmāṇi kurvīta na nirvidyeta yāvatā mat-kathā-śravaṇādau vā śraddhā yāvanna jāyate

At first glance, this suggests that renunciation (sannyāsa) is prescribed for hearing bhagavad-kathā (divine discourses). However, the true intention is not to mandate renunciation upon the awakening of vairāgya(detachment) or śraddhā (faith). Rather, it emphasizes not renouncing karma (duties) until detachment or faith in hearing divine discourses arises.

Thus, for devotees practicing affection-filled devotion (snehātmikā bhakti), taking sannyāsa to enable uninterrupted execution of nine devotional practices—śravaṇa (hearing), kīrtana (chanting), smaraṇa (remembering), pāda-sevana (serving feet), arcana (worship), vandana (prayer), dāsya (servitude), sakhya (friendship), and ātma-nivedana (self-surrender)—presents five critical contradictions:

  1. Solitude vs. Companionship: Sannyāsa demands absolute detachment and solitary wandering—ekaḥ caren mahīm etāṁ niḥsaṅgaḥ saṁyatendriyaḥ (Bhāg. 11.18.20). However, practicing the nine-fold devotion often requires companionship and the association of other devotees.

  2. Possessions for Devotion: Devotional acts like hearing require a speaker, chanting and remembering involve scriptures, tulasī beads, gomukhī bags, while worship demands items like divine icons, flowers, naivedya (offerings), and utensils. Protecting and managing these creates distractions, which contradict the renunciate’s principle of non-possession—bibhṛyāc cen munir vāsaḥ kaupīna-acchādanaṁ param tyaktaṁ na daṇḍa-pātrābhyām anyat kiñcid anāpadi (Bhāg. 11.18.15).

  3. Humility vs. Status: Sannyāsa often fosters pride in being in the highest āśrama, turning renunciates into “Swāmījī.” In contrast, devotion thrives on humility, with the devotee embracing the identity of “dāsa” (servant). While debates might aid discernment during hearing, sannyāsa forbids such discussions—veda-vādarato na syāt. Moreover, sannyāsa cultivates the non-dualistic realization of “so’ham” (I am He), whereas bhakti emerges from the dualistic perspective of “dāso’ham” (I am the servant). A devotee benefits from acknowledging the Lord as the master and oneself as the servant.

  4. Continuous Practice: The devotional practices of śravaṇa and others must be repeated constantly—tasmād bhārata sarvātmā bhagavān harir īśvaraḥ śrotavyaḥ kīrtitavyaś ca smartavyaś ca (Bhāg. 2.1.5).

    The Subodhinī explains that consistent repetition of śravaṇa and kīrtana up to the point of death alone yields fearlessness:

    vihite sadā bhavataḥ śravaṇa-kīrtane trayāṇāṁ deha-pāta-paryantam āvṛtānām evābhaya-sādhakatvaṁ, uttara-avadhir deha-pātaḥ eva, pūrva-avadhir saṁsāra-bhaya-jñānam

    Such repetition is not feasible without residing near another devotee. However, solitary wandering is held superior for renunciates—vāse bahūnāṁ kalaho bhaved vārtā dvayor api eka eva cared bhikṣuḥ (Bhāg. 11.9.10).

  5. Incompatibility of Renunciation with Service: The ultimate purpose of devotional practices is to qualify oneself for divine service. However, sannyāsa principles make practitioners incompatible with the form of service esteemed by devotional traditions.

Therefore, the fourth āśrama (sannyāsa) or independent renunciation—whether valid or otherwise—is not conducive to the execution of śravaṇa and other devotional practices by a devotee.

Bhakti Bādhaka Gṛhādi Tyāgārtha Sannyāsa

Bhaktivardhinī states:

gṛhasthānāṁ bādhakatvam anātmātvam ca bhāsate

Therefore, when familial ties and material possessions in the household hinder devotion, they must be renounced to allow uninterrupted progress in devotion. However, if the seed of devotion (bīja-bhāva) is not firmly established, such renunciation can ultimately degenerate into mere hypocrisy (pāṣaṇḍa). Bhaktivardhinī further emphasizes that renunciation bears dangers such as association with bad company (duḥ-saṅga) and impurities related to food (annadoṣa), which can lead to significant spiritual downfall. This is explained here through three contradictions:

  • After renouncing, one still needs to beg for alms at the doors of householders. These householders providing alms are no different from the renouncer’s own family. There is no guarantee that the food offered from their homes is consecrated to Bhagavān. Such food can corrupt the mind.

  • Due to the adverse influence of Kali Yuga, even if one abandons everything externally, inner attachments and desires may remain unbroken. This could transform the individual into a hypocrite rather than a true renouncer.

  • A person engrossed in sensory indulgence, having hypocritically renounced, can never experience the presence or divine influence (hāri āveśa) of Bhagavān in their body.

Hence, for practitioners of Puṣṭimārga, renunciation or sannyāsa—whether as an āśrama or independent, valid or invalid—should not be undertaken during the state of unsteady bīja-bhāva. If one desires to experience the bliss of devotion (bhakti-sukha), they should refrain from such forms of renunciation.

Bhaktyuttara Sannyāsa - Virahānubhāvārtha (Intense Longing)

Bhaktivardhinī depicts the development of devotion up to the stage of intense longing (vyasana-daśā). Upon the establishment of this stage, if divine service (bhagavat-sevā) cannot be performed at one’s residence, and there is a strong sense of separation due to familial entanglements causing disruptions, then renunciation of household life is permitted. Since this renunciation occurs after the firm establishment of the seed of devotion (bīja-bhāva), it does not lead the devotee astray.

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam (11.18.28–36) declares:

jñāna-niṣṭho virakto vā mad-bhakto vānapekṣakaḥ sa-liṅgān āśramāṁs tyaktvā cared avidhi-gocaraḥ … śaucam ācamanaṁ snānaṁ na tu codanayā caret anyāṁś ca niyamān jānī yathāhaṁ līlayeśvaraḥ

Here, a distinct form of renunciation different from the fourth āśrama of sannyāsa is prescribed.

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam (11.12.8–15) explains:

kevalena hi bhāvena gopyo gāvo khagā mṛgāḥ … anyāṁś ca niyamān jānīyāt yathāhaṁ līlayeśvaraḥ

Here, the renunciation of nivṛtti-dharma (path of renunciation) akin to pravṛtti-dharma (path of worldly duties) is outlined. In the stage of vyasana-daśā of devotion, this bhagavad-anurakti (attachment to Bhagavān)-centric, detachment-based renunciation aids in maintaining a continuous focus on Bhagavān and accepting the intense heat of separation as an ally. This form of renunciation is specified as mad-bhakto vānapekṣakaḥ sa-liṅgān āśramāṁs tyaktvā cared, referring to detachment from external markers of āśramas.

In the Bhagavad Gītā (12.16–18), a similar form of renunciation is described:

anapekṣaḥ śucir dakṣa udāsīno gata-vyathaḥ |
sarvārambha-parityāgī yo mad-bhaktaḥ sa me priyaḥ ||

yo na hṛṣyati na dveṣṭi na śocati na kāṅkṣati |
śubhāśubha-parityāgī bhaktimān yaḥ sa me priyaḥ ||

samaḥ śatrau ca mitre ca tathā mānāpamānayoḥ |
śītoṣṇa-sukha-duḥkheṣu samaḥ saṅga-vivarjitaḥ ||

These verses describe the qualities of a devotee who is especially dear to Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Such a devotee is:

  • Free from expectations, pure, efficient, impartial, and free from sorrow.
  • Neither elated nor envious, does not lament or desire, and remains detached from favorable and unfavorable outcomes.
  • Maintains equanimity towards both friends and enemies, honor and dishonor, heat and cold, happiness and distress.
  • Lives without attachment and possesses a calm, composed demeanor.

The emphasis is on equanimity, self-control, and unwavering devotion as the attributes of a person who is dear to the Lord. Let me know if you’d like to explore any specific quality or verse further!

Veśa

While undertaking such renunciation, if the family’s attachment toward the individual does not break, one may adopt the attire of a renunciate (sannyāsī). Otherwise, it is not mandatory.

Guruḥ

In this type of renunciation, there is no need for a guru for pronouncing the vows (praishocharādi). As evident in the aforementioned Uddhava-upadeśa, where Bhagavān inspired Uddhava toward the renunciation rooted in the love (bhagavad-anurāga) of the gopikā devotees, the gopikās of Vraja themselves should be considered the gurus in this type of renunciation. An example of such renunciation is also found in the character of Kaṇḍinya ṛṣi (as mentioned in Bhaviṣyottara), who too is regarded as akin to a guru.

Sādhana

As praised in the aforementioned Uddhava-upadeśa, Bhagavān lauded the sentiment (bhāva) underlying the total renunciation of the gopikās. Accordingly, in this renunciation undertaken for experiencing separation (viraha-anubhava), the singular bhāva becomes the only means (sādhana).

Bhāvodbodhana (Awakening of Sentiment)

When Bhagavān went to Mathurā, the intense experience of separation (viraha-anubhava) enabled the gopikās to attain a continuous state of focus on Bhagavān. Similarly, when in our earthly Vraja, we are unable to relish the bliss of service to Bhagavān (bhagavat-sevā), we should contemplate Bhagavān’s journey to Mathurā. This thought will awaken an intense feeling of separation akin to that of the gopikās in the devotee’s heart… and one day, the mind will become so restless that the devotee will suddenly set out to search for Bhagavān beyond the confines of their home!

This renunciation is inspired not by dry detachment (śuṣka-vairāgya) rooted in the realization of the faults of the material world (prapañca-doṣa-darśana), but by a sweet and affectionate attachment (anurāga) toward the divine qualities of Bhagavān. Therefore, this type of renunciation is praiseworthy in the path of devotion (bhakti-mārga).

To prevent misunderstandings regarding this type of renunciation, Bhagavān specifies: “cared avidhi-gocaraḥ”, granting permission for such renunciation to uttamādhikārīs (highly qualified practitioners) and giving instructions for the same to madhyamādhikārīs (moderately qualified practitioners). Thus, according to eligibility (adhikāra), both the meanings of “cared”—as permission (anujñā) and as instruction (ājñā)—can be accepted without contradiction. Just as the phrase “the sun is setting” can signify, depending on context, either a brāhmaṇa preparing for evening sandhyā rites or a housewife preparing to cook the evening meal, the interpretation varies based on the individual’s eligibility.

The Gopālatāpinī Upaniṣad further highlights this devotional renunciation, indicating it through the term naiṣkarmya:

bhaktir asya bhajanaṁ tad iha’mutropādhi-nairāśyenaiva amuṣmin manaḥ kalpanam etad eva ca naiṣkarmyam

Pariṇāma (Outcome)

The outcome of renunciation undertaken for the experience of separation (viraha-anubhava) is, however, not favorable! A humorous anecdote captures this sentiment:

Question: Why are your servants so emaciated?
Answer: They stayed in Vraja, but now that they’ve come onto the path, they’re reaping its fruits!

In renunciation for the sake of separation (viraha-anubhava), if corresponding sentiments are cultivated, one day the pang of separation (viraha-vedanā) will arise in the heart. Or, if the flow of emotion culminates in an ocean of longing, then waves of love will surge in the heart! These waves (such as cakṣurāga – attachment via sight, manaḥ saṅga – mental absorption, samālpa – reduced speech, nidrācchēda – disturbed sleep, tanutā – thinness, viṣaya-nivṛtti – withdrawal from sense objects, prapānaśa – breathlessness, unmāda – delirium, mūrchā – unconsciousness, and finally maraṇa – death) will overwhelm both the physical and spiritual boundaries of the self! The body, senses, mind, life-breath, and soul will all be inundated by the flood of love.

This love-induced restlessness and discomfort represent the ultimate nature or essence of devotion. It should not be mistaken for worldly or physical illness—it is an intimate touch of the supreme blissful Divine with the individual soul. Even amidst the oneness of love’s non-duality (prema-advaita) that engulfs all dualities, the sweet duality of the beloved (priyatama) and the lover (premī), of Bhagavān and the devotee, remains preserved. Care must be taken that this is not erased by discussions of the absolutism of Brahman as seen in brahmavāda-śuddhādvaitajñāna or the qualities of Brahman highlighted by the path of knowledge (e.g., omnipresence, universal existence, self-sufficiency, formlessness). Such knowledge and qualities obstruct the sentiments of the devotional path (bhakti-mārga-bhāva).

Just as a practitioner on the path of knowledge (jñāna-mārga) resides in Satya-loka due to attributes like wisdom and renunciation (vairāgya), a practitioner on the path of devotion (bhakti-mārga) can, through the strength of their emotions, reside in the eternal divine Vraja pastimes (nitya-vraja-līlās) of Bhagavān in expansive Vaikuṇṭha. Therefore, devotional sentiments should not be disrupted by statements like, Paramātmā (Supreme Being) is pervasive, so He cannot go to Mathurā, for He is present everywhere, as such knowledge-oriented assertions can diminish the devotional state.

The ten states of attachment (sneha) described from cakṣurāga to maraṇa, maraṇa can only culminate in the tenth stage—death—when the separation becomes completely unbearable. Due to profound attachment and separation, Bhagavān’s entire līlās (divine activities) are internally experienced by the devotee. At times, these līlās even manifest externally. Once manifest externally, their absence becomes intolerable for the devotee. Should they ever vanish again, the devotee would find sustaining life impossible. Just as fire hidden within wood, when fully manifest, reduces the wood to ashes, similarly, should the blissful śrī-kṛṣṇa, hidden as a permanent sentiment (sthāyi-bhāva) in one’s heart, manifest externally as a support-giving determinant (ālambana-vibhāva) and then disappear, all bodily and worldly bonds would break.

Before reaching this state, however, the devotee’s life is sustained in separation through the virtues of Bhagavān. The memories and praises of Bhagavān’s qualities in the context of devotion provide solace repeatedly, sustaining life even in the absence of one’s beloved Bhagavān’s direct presence.

In the process of experiencing separation (viprayoga-anubhūti), the realization of Bhagavān’s essence as rasa (divine nectar) reaches its culmination. As per the theorists of rasa (aesthetic bliss), love (rati) is dual in nature—comprising both union (saṅgama) and separation (viyoga). Accordingly, this experience of separation too becomes an aspect of the devotional experience of Bhagavān’s essence as rasa. Consequently, the incompleteness of this experience does not obstruct Bhagavān’s self-manifestation or the fruition of devotion.

One may ask why Bhagavān sent Uddhava with a knowledge-oriented message (jñāna-mārga sandeśa) to console the gopikās during their agony of separation. The answer lies in the fact that Bhagavān knew that Uddhava’s knowledge would not affect the gopikās. Instead, the gopikās’ love would overwhelm Uddhava, causing him to imbibe their sentiments. Therefore, the message of Bhagavān was not accepted by the gopikās.

Similarly, those who renounce for experiencing viraha-anubhava should ignore any sentiments of disapproval or criticisms from scholars of knowledge or practitioners of the disciplined path (maryādā-mārga), even if such comments are rooted in the authority of Vedānta and other scriptures.

One should not assume that disregarding these scriptural principles will incur Bhagavān’s displeasure. Since He is merciful, just as He overlooks scriptural transgressions in various guises (nāna-veṣa), He did not take offense at the gopikās’ disregard for His directives during their emotional fervor.

Bhaktyuttara Sannyāsa - prapañca-vismṛti and bhagavad-āsakti

Bhaktimārgīya madhyādhikārarūpa sannyāsa, which is performed emulating the gopikās’ sentiment of complete surrender (sarvātma-bhāva) by abandoning worldly and scriptural norms, is neither in the form of an āśrama nor is it a legitimate sannyāsa. The fourth āśrama of sannyāsa is prescribed exclusively for brāhmaṇa males, not for non-brāhmaṇas or women. Consequently, the gopikās’ renunciation was not motivated by any scriptural injunction but was impelled by the singular focus (bhagavad-ekatānata) of their minds. It was an innate aspect of their natural attachment (bhagavad-āsakti) to Bhagavān.

Bhagavān Himself describes their love-inspired renunciation in these words, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.46.4):

tāḥ manmanaskā matprāṇā madarthe tyaktadaihikāḥ ye tyaktalokadharmāś ca madarthe…

Indeed, the gopikās’ renunciation was prompted purely by the compulsion of love (premabhāva). Such a form of renunciation is extremely rare.

Jñāna Mārgīya (Knowledge-Oriented)

Jñānārtha Sannyāsa (Renunciation for the Pursuit of Knowledge)

For Puṣṭimārga practitioners, jñānārtha sannyāsa (renunciation for the attainment of knowledge) is not highly beneficial. Prior to embracing such renunciation, purification of the mind through previous āśrama duties such as the study of the Vedas (vedādhyayana), charity (dāna), and sacrificial offerings (yajña) is essential. Without this preparatory purification, simply adopting renunciation or detachment (vairāgya) is insufficient for mental purification, especially in the Kali Yuga. Those who undertake this form of vividiṣā sannyāsa (renunciation inspired by a desire for knowledge) in the Kali Yuga either regret it later or become adept at turning sannyāsa into hypocrisy (pāṣaṇḍa).

Therefore, Manusmṛti (6.34–37) states:

āśramād āśramaṁ gatvā huta-homo jitendriyaḥ bhikṣā-bali-pariśrāntaḥ pravrajan pretya vardhate; ṛṇāni trīṇy apākṛtya mano mokṣe niveśayet, anapākṛtya mokṣaṁ tu sevamāno vrajaty adhaḥ; anadhītya dvijo vedān anutpādya tathā sutān aniṣṭvā caiva yajñaiś ca mokṣam icchan vrajaty adhaḥ

This emphasizes that an individual must purify their mind by clearing the “three debts” (ṛṇa-traya)—to the gods (through sacrifices), to the ancestors (by producing offspring), and to the sages (by studying the Vedas)—before pursuing liberation. Without this purification, neither knowledge (jñāna) nor detachment (vairāgya) can remain stable in an impure mind. Consequently, any renunciation undertaken by such individuals culminates either in repentance or hypocrisy.

Some argue that this criticism applies to unattached (avirakta) seekers of knowledge, not to detached (virakta) seekers. However, the point here is that renunciation driven by a desire for liberation (mokṣa-icchā) is being discouraged. Liberation itself stems from detachment (vairāgya), and without fulfilling the ṛṇa-traya, purification of the mind is not possible. As a result, renunciation devoid of preparation often leads to regret or hypocrisy.

This principle applies universally to all beings; hence, Śrī Mahāprabhu explicitly prohibits it for Puṣṭimārga practitioners: tasmād jñāne na sannyaset (therefore, one should not renounce for the sake of attaining knowledge).

Additionally, the Muṇḍakopaniṣad states:

andhenaiva nīyamānāḥ yathāndhāḥ

Even when criticizing the duties of householders in the gṛhasthāśrama for the sake of knowledge, the same text reinstates the rights of detached individuals to study and teach Vedānta:

kriyāvantaḥ śrotriyāḥ brahma-niṣṭhāḥ svayaṁ juhvataḥ eka-ṛṣi-śraddhayantaḥ teṣām evaitāṁ brahma-vidyāṁ vadet śirovrataṁ vidhivad yais tu cīrṇa, naitad acīrṇa-vratod hīte

Thus, renunciation solely for knowledge without fulfilling preliminary duties is neither beneficial nor encouraged in the path of devotion.

Jñānottara Sannyāsa (Post-Knowledge Renunciation)

Jñānottara sannyāsa arises naturally when dispassion (vairāgya) manifests. Therefore, it is not enforced by injunctions but is sanctioned as optional in the Upaniṣads, Smṛti, Purāṇas, and similar texts. The Jābālopaniṣad (4.1) emphasizing this form of renunciation,

yadi vetarathā… yadāhareva virajet tadāhareva pravrajet

If one develops detachment at any stage of life, whether as a brahmacārī (student), gṛhastha (householder), or vānaprastha (forest-dweller), one should immediately renounce and take to the life of a sannyāsī (renunciate). On the very day that detachment arises, one should leave behind worldly attachments and embrace the path of renunciation.

However, for Puṣṭimārga practitioners, this type of post-knowledge renunciation (jñānottara sannyāsa), its outcomes, and even its knowledge hold minimal significance. As the * Śrīmad Bhāgavatam (1.5.12) states:

naiṣkarmyam apy acyutabhāva-varjitaṁ na śobhate jñānam alaṁ nirañjanam

Similarly, in the Gītā (12.2–5), Bhagavān Krishna assesses the comparative importance of knowledge-based impersonal worship (avyākta upāsanā) and devotion to Krishna (kṛṣṇa-bhakti), concluding that devotion is far superior:

mayy āveśya mano ye māṁ nitya-yuktā upāsate śraddhayā parayopetās te me yuktatamā matāḥ, ye tv akṣaram anirdeśyam avyaktaṁ paryupāsate sarvatra-gam acintyaṁ ca kūṭastham acalaṁ dhruvam, sanniyamyendriya-grāmaṁ sarvatra sama-buddhayaḥ te prāpnuvanti mām eva sarva-bhūta-hite ratāḥ, kleśo’dhikataras teṣām avyakta āsakta-cetasām, avyakta hi gatir duḥkhaṁ dehavadbhir avāpyate

After thousands of years of progress along the path of knowledge, a soul may eventually turn towards unwavering devotion to Śrī Kṛṣṇa, Bhagavad Gītā (7.19):

bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ

Hence, undertaking jñānottara sannyāsa could result in obstacles spanning a thousand lifetimes to achieving Krishna-bhakti.

Possibility of Faults in Bhakti Mārga and Resolution

Similar faults, such as hypocrisy or material attachment, as seen in the paths of action (karma-mārga) or knowledge (jñāna-mārga), might also appear in the path of devotion (bhakti-mārga). This concern, however, is unwarranted, as faults arise through three factors:

  1. The influence of kāla (time),
  2. The nature of the individual soul (jīvātmā),
  3. The will of the Supreme Soul (paramātmā).

The Influence of Time Does Not Affect the Path of Devotion

The Śrīmad Bhāgavatam (12.13.45–48) states:

puṁsāṁ kali-kṛtān doṣān dravya-deśātma-saṁbhavān sarvān harati citta-stho bhagavān puruṣottamaḥ, tīrthābhiṣeka-vrata-dāna-japyaiḥ nātyanta-śuddhiṁ vidyāt tapaḥ-prāṇa-nirodha-maitrī, labhate’ntarātmā yathā hṛdi-sthe bhagavaty anante

Similarly, Bhagavān says in the Bhagavad Gītā (9.30–31):

api cet sudurācāro bhajate mām ananya-bhāk sādhur eva sa mantavyaḥ samyag vyavasito hi saḥ, kṣipraṁ bhavati dharmātmā śaśvac-chāntiṁ nigacchati, kaunteya pratijānīhi na me bhaktaḥ praṇaśyati

Therefore, neither in the initial stage of devotion nor in its mature state can the faults of the Kali Yuga or material attachments arise to hinder the path of devotion. Even in the Purāṇas, no examples are given of a devotee faltering like ascetics or others might.

The Nature of the Individual Soul

If faults were to arise due to the nature of the individual soul, the necessity of refraining from renunciation during those stages in the path of devotion has already been explained. Once devotion reaches the stage of intense longing (vyasana-daśā) and household renunciation becomes necessary, there is no risk of faltering. As the seed of devotion (bīja-bhāva) strengthens, devotees appear unhealthy from worldly or Vedic perspectives, Navaratna (6):

loke svāsthyaṁ tathā vede haris tu na kariṣyati puṣṭi-mārga-sthito yasmāt"*

This has already been discussed. When worldly or scriptural rituals aimed at restoring health are renounced, even the soul’s inherent tendencies cannot impede divine sentiments.

The Will of the Supreme Soul

Bhagavān attempted to console the gopikās from their affliction of separation through teachings of knowledge (jñānopadeśa). For this purpose, Uddhava was sent to Vraja. However, as addressed earlier, rather than disrupting the bhāva of Vraja’s devotees, Uddhava’s pride in his knowledge was shattered. Therefore, it cannot be assumed that the Supreme Soul would obstruct the intense absorption of viraha-vyākulatā.

When the seed of devotion is planted in the soul and nourished through opportunities such as association with saints (satsaṅga), devotion matures into love (prema), attachment (āsakti), and eventually the fruit of passion (vyasana). At this stage, cutting down the wish-fulfilling tree of devotion (bhakti-kalpadruma)—whether by time, actions, or inherent tendencies—is beyond even Bhagavān’s ability!

No mother who has nourished her child with her milk would ever allow harm to come to them. Similarly, Bhagavān, who is always subordinate to His devotees (bhakta-parādhīnaḥ), will never mislead them through knowledge nor allow them to be misled by the words of others. As stated in Bhāgavata (4.31.11–12):

kiṁ vā yogena sāṅkhyena nyāsa-svādhyāyor api, kiṁ vā śreyobhir anyaiś ca na yatrātma-prado hariḥ, śreyasām api sarveṣām ātmā hy avadhir arthataḥ, sarveṣām api bhūtānāṁ harir ātmātmadaḥ priyaḥ

That is, yoga, Sāṅkhya, renunciation, self-study, or other virtuous practices are useless if Hari does not manifest Himself within them. Because Hari is the soul’s goal and beloved, He never allows His devotees to falter.

Therefore, when the seed of devotion is firm and household service to Bhagavān is unachievable, one should renounce the home to pursue uninterrupted devotion. Otherwise, remaining in such an environment risks diminishing one’s devotion and depriving the soul of the divine nectar of Bhagavān’s essence (rasātmakānubhava). This remains the resolute perspective of Śrī Mahāprabhu.

Conclusion

Thus, by the grace of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, Mahāprabhu Śrī Vallabhācārya’s resolution regarding sannyāsa (renunciation)—that it can only be undertaken upon the firm establishment of devotion—was completed. Otherwise, adopting sannyāsa in Puṣṭimārga through the methods of the jñāna-mārga or karma-mārga would lead to falling from the steps of devotion.