१ तत्त्व-सन्दर्भः २०१५

Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī ŚRĪ TATTVA SANDARBHA Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī ŚRĪ TATTVA SANDARBHA Vaiṣṇava Epistemology and Ontology Translation & Commentary SATYANARAYANA DASA तत्त्वं यज्ज्ञानमद्वयम् hastamalakavat-tattvam śrīmad-bhagavatasya yaḥ darśayämäsa jivebhyas tam śri-jiva-prabhuṁ numaḥ We bow down to Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī Prabhupada who revealed the essential meaning of Srimad Bhagavatam to the people of the world just as plainly as one would display an amalaki fruit kept on one’s palm. sandarbha yena nadhitäs tasya bhagavate śramaḥ sandarbha yena cãdhitä nästi bhagavate bhramaḥ One who has not undergone comprehensive study of Sat Sandarbhas must struggle to assimilate the message of Srimad Bhagavatam. One who has studied Sat Sandarbhas, however, will have no misgivings about the essential meaning of Srimad Bhagavatam. SAT SANDARBHA Tattva Sandarbha Bhagavat Sandarbha Paramātma Sandarbha Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha Bhakti Sandarbha Priti Sandarbha श्रीश्रीगौरगदाधरौ विजयेताम् ŚRĪ TATTVA SANDARBHA Vaiṣṇava Epistemology and Ontology Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī Sanskrit Text with English Translation and Jiva-toṣaṇī Commentary SATYANARAYANA DASA JIVA Jiva Institute of Vaishnava Studies VrindavanTattva Sandarbha: Vaisnava Epistemology and Ontology. Translation and Commentary Satyanarayana Dasa This book is published and distributed by Jiva Institute of Vaishnava Studies. For further information on Jiva books, please contact Jiva Institute of Vaishnava Studies Sheetal Chaya 1, Raman Reti Vrindavan, UP 281121 India or visit www.jiva.org To learn more about Sat Sandarbha, please go to sandarbhas.jiva.org To report errors, please send a note to contact@jiva.org

Contents at a Glance Preface … Introduction Dedication.. I Mangalācaraṇa Anucchedas 1-8.. II Pramāņa Anucchedas 9-28 III Prameya Anucchedas 29-63 References Editors’ Notes The Language of Transcendence - Key Terms and Concepts. XV xxiii xxxix 1 3 35 37 199 201 445 447 449 Tattva Sandarbha at a Glance… 463 Glossary and Abbreviations… 465 Subject Index, Verse Index, and Bibliography 487 Acknowledgements 568 vii Table of Contents Preface … Introduction… Dedication… I Mangalācaraṇa Invocations 1 Homage to the Inaugurator of Sankirtana… XV xxiii xxxix 1 3 5 2 Homage to Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya 12 3 Homage to Śri Rūpa and Sanatana Gosvāmīs. 14 4 The Source of the Śrī Ṣat Sandarbhas 16 5 Homage to Śri Gopala Bhatta Gosvāmi 18 6 Eligibility of the Reader… 20 7 Homage to the Teachers. 24 The Seed-Conception of the Sat Sandarbhas 8 Homage to Śri Krsna. viii 29 222 27 II Pramāņa Epistemological Validity of the Vedas, Itihāsas, and Purāņas Culminating in Śrimad Bhagavatam 9 The Necessity for Epistemological Validity 10 The Vedas Are a Valid Means of Phenomenal and Transphenomenal Knowing 35 37 41 59 11 The Authority of the Vedas.. 69 12 Difficulties in Studying the Vedas… 74 13 The Itihāsas and Purāņas Are Vedic 81 14 The Itihāsas and Purānas Are the Fifth Veda ….. 87 15 The Origin of the Itihāsas, Purānas, and Vedas Is the Same … 93 16 The Distinctive Illumination of Vyasa, Revealer of the Itihāsas and Purāņas. 17 Three Divisions of the Puranas…. 100 106 18 Śrimad Bhagavatam Fulfills the Criteria of Authority in the Matter of Ultimate Truth……. 112 The Characteristics of Srimad Bhagavatam That Establish Its Epistemological Validity 119 19 Śrimad Bhagavatam Is the Natural Commentary on Vedanta-sutra and the Essence of Gayatri….. 121 20 The Characteristics of Srimad Bhagavatam …… 126 21 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Establishes the Meaning of Mahabharata .. 136 22 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature.. 142 ix 23 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Is Luminous Like the Sun…. 160 24 25 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is the Cream of the Vedas…. The Speaker of Srimad Bhāgavatam, Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmi, Is the Crest-Jewel of Illuminated Sages.. 171 176 26 180 Śrimad Bhagavatam Is Self-Authoritative……. Methodology of the Ṣat Sandarbhas 187 27 Theoretical Formulations to Be Derived from Śrīmad Bhagavatam 189 28 The Sources of Reference.. 194 III Prameya 1 Determination of Sambandha, Abhidheya, 199 and Prayojana Anucchedas 29-49 201 The Transformation of Consciousness of Śrī Sukadeva 201 29 Realization of Bhagavan Supersedes That of the Self …. 205 The Supracognitive Samadhi of Vyasa 215 30 Ultimate Reality Disclosed to Śrīla Vyasadeva in Unmediated Gnosis. … 217 31 The Purna Purusa Is the All-Inclusive, All-Transcending Reality.. 230 X 32 The Individual Self Is Distinct, Conscious, and Subject to Self-Ignorance 237 33 Bhagavan’s Paradoxical Potency, Māyā 246 34 The Jiva Is Conscious and Distinct from Isvara…. 255 35 Essential Distinction between the Jiva and Iśvara … 259 36 The Jiva Is Not Merely the Product of an Upadhi of Brahman.. 264 37 Flaws in Pratibimba-vāda and Pariccheda-vāda… 268 38 Refutations of Pratibimba-vāda and Pariccheda-vāda. . . . . 275 Further Refutations of Pratibimba-vāda and Pariccheda-väda.. 282 40 Inconsistencies in Radical Nondualism, Advaitavāda. 286 41 Śrila Vyasadeva’s Direct Experience Does Not Support Absolute Nondistinction… 294 42 The Valid Interpretation of Pratibimba-vāda and Pariccheda-vāda. . . . 297 43 Valid Interpretation of Nondistinction as Inconceivable Oneness and Distinction.. 302 44 Acausal Devotion Is the Abhidheya. 307 45 Love of God Is the State of Ultimate Completion, Prayojana.. 310 46 Direct Apperception of Abhidheya from the State of Samadhi… 315 47 Prema for the Purna Puruşa Self-Manifests Out of Its Own Prior State as Effecting Means . . . . . . . 320 xi 48 Love of God Transcends the Bliss of Brahman…. 327 49 Śrimad Bhagavatam Attracts Even Atmārāmas… 332 2 Elaboration of Sambandha Anucchedas 50-63 341 Intuition of the Subject through Reference to the Individual 341 50 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Identifies Its Subject… 343 51 Absolute Reality Is Nondual Consciousness…… 346 52 Consciousness Is Primary and Distinct from Its Content - Identity and Distinction of the Jiva and Brahman 352 53 Intuition of the Supreme Self through Analysis of the Characteristics of the Individual Self…. 363 54 The Changeless Self Is the Witness.. 369 55 Summary of Śrī Pippalayana’s Teachings. 376 Intuition of the Subject through Reference to the Universal - The Ten Topics of Srimad Bhāgavatam 379 The Ten Topics as per the Second Canto 381 56 The Ten Topics of Śrimad Bhagavatam Identify Their Subject as the Ultimate Shelter 381 57 The First Nine Universals Culminate in the Tenth 387 58 The All-Inclusive Tenth Universal Specified as Aśraya, the Ultimate Shelter 396 xii 59 The Independent Aśraya and the Three Interdependent Divisions of Embodied Selfhood.. 399 60 The Asraya Is Its Own Independent Shelter and Thus the Shelter of All…. 404 The Ten Topics as per the Twelfth Canto 61 The Second List of the Bhagavatam’s Ten Topics Also Identifies Its Subject as the Ultimate Shelter…. 409 409 62 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya - Part 1 417 63 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Asraya - Part 2 430 References 445 Editors’ Notes .. 447 The Language of Transcendence - Key Terms and Concepts….. 449 Tattva Sandarbha at a Glance.. 463 Glossary 465 Abbreviations 486 Subject Index. 487 Verse Index 539 Bibliography 559 Acknowledgments 568 xiii Preface FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS, India has been the land where people have molded their lifestyle in pursuit of spiritual realization. Many types of spiritual practices and theologies were developed, experi- mented with by religious specialists, and taken up by the masses. It was generally accepted that the ultimate goal of human life was to access direct experience of Absolute Reality. Every aspect of human life, be it economic, social, political, moral, or religious, was designed to facilitate this ultimate aim. It is for this reason that knowledge systems or schools of thought were called darśana (lit., “vision”). Today the word darśana is often translated as “philosophy” or “school of thought,” but that fails to capture its true meaning. Darśana signifies the vision of Reality. A darśana is a system that explains Reality, both empirical and transempirical, how it relates to the conscious self, and also provides a map of the path one can adopt to actualize moment to moment direct visioning capacity of that Reality! 1 Absolute Reality is self-luminous and self-revealing, meaning that It cannot be revealed by any external effort or agency whatsoever. It cannot be “accessed” other than by Its own independent will. But when It self-discloses Itself, It is then knowable only by a conscious subject, one with an intrinsic capacity to know. The conscious self’s capacity to know the transphenomenal Reality, however, is a potential that is actualized only through the pervasion of the intrinsic potency (svarupa-sakti) in the form of bhakti. So, “the actualization of direct visioning capacity” implies the discovery of a higher faculty of cognition or of knowing that becomes a stable structure of consciousness when illuminated by the →→ XVPreface Books like the Sat Sandarbhas were written to help religious practitioners gain intuitive insight into Absolute Reality. In aca- demic circles, however, there is a tacit consensus on remaining objective about religious studies. This “knowledge for its own sake” acts as a barrier preventing the investigator from directly accessing the interior states disclosed by realized authors of religious works. Such studies may serve academic goals without touching the spirit of the book or conveying the true intent of the author? In presenting the Sat Sandarbhas, written by Jiva Gosvāmi, I have not been tied to any such constrictions. Being a practitioner of Gauḍīya Vaisnavism, my comments represent the viewpoint of an insider who was educated in the Gauḍīya tradition. I have tried to preserve the intention and spirit of Jiva Gosvāmi. My commentaries are written primarily for adherents of Gaudiya Vaisnavism to help them fully comprehend its basic tenets so they may follow the path properly and achieve success. Correct understanding fortifies a per- son’s faith and supports effective practice. Improper understand- ing leads to wrong practice and a failure to achieve the desired out- come. It therefore behooves every practitioner of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇav- ism to study the Sandarbhas carefully. It makes a world of difference when practice is undertaken with an accurate understanding of the subject. Our human life is limited; time elapsed does not return. There- fore, we have to use it judiciously. In Srimad Bhagavatam (11.29.22), Śrī Kṛṣṇa teaches that the real intelligence of the intelligent and the wisdom of the wise is to utilize the temporary material body to attain the Eternal. Thus, it is of utmost importance to gain a clear understanding of the darśana, so that one may walk with unfailing vision toward the destination. 2 To give an example, even if you have a superb car in perfect con- dition, are a trained driver, driving on an excellent highway, and are alert, you will still end up in the wrong place if you have taken intrinsic potency of devotion. Such a stratum of knowing, seeing, or experiencing becomes a moment to moment enabled capacity. This is made evident in Anuccheda 6 of Tattva Sandarbha, which specifies the eligibility of the reader. xvi Preface a wrong turn. Alternatively, even if you are walking leisurely on a dirt road, you will reach your goal sooner or later, as long as you are walking in the right direction. Every step you take brings you closer to the destination. Thus, the proper orientation to Reality is necessary for a sincere and serious seeker and practitioner. Spirituality is the path of enlightenment. To be successful one must have a clear picture of the path as well as the goal. As it is said in Maitrayāņi Upanisad 6.22, “One who is adept in the sound rev- elation of Brahman (sabda-brahma) attains the Supreme Brahman (para-brahma).” A practice that is not based on and not aligned with the proper meaning of sastra (scripture) will not yield the desired result: One who, casting aside the ordinances of scripture, acts instead according to the impulse of material desire, attains neither per- fection, nor contentment, nor the supreme goal. Therefore, scrip- tural revelation is the means of authentic knowing available to you in ascertaining what is to be done and what is to be avoided. You should perform action in this world only after knowing the prescriptions of scripture. (GITA 16.23-24)" Some sädhakas (those who undertake a specific spiritual prac- tice) argue that the emphasis on discriminating scriptural knowl- edge is relevant only to the path of jñāna (knowledge) and has noth- ing to do with bhakti (devotion). This is a gross misconception. If such were the case, Jiva Gosvāmi and other ācāryas would not have labored so rigorously to write an abundance of literature. They were certainly not confused about the difference between bhakti and jñāna. Knowledge related to bhakti is also an integral part of bhakti and has nothing to do with jñäna-marga, the purpose of which is quite different. In fact, hearing (śravana), which includes studying sastra via the faculty of human rationality (manana), is the first limb of bhakti. yaḥ sastra-vidhim utsṛjya vartate kama-karataḥ na sa siddhim avapnoti na sukham na param gatim tasmac chastram pramaṇam te käryäkärya-vyavasthitau jnätvå śästra-vidhänoktam karma kartum iharhasi xvii Preface Then there are others who opine that there is no need to study śästra, because bhakti itself, such as chanting the divine Names of Kṛṣṇa, will reveal everything. But how is this conclusion arrived at? Either it is known from sastra or from somewhere else. If the lat- ter option is the case, then such an understanding cannot be taken as authentic. If it is known from sastra, such protagonists must accept the importance of sastric knowledge and concur with the perspective that discloses its central importance. Furthermore, the idea that all knowledge is revealed through chanting of the Name is itself a scriptural teaching on the Name meant to emphasize its extraordinary power, not to minimize the importance of scripture. Moreover, it is from sastra itself that the very process of authentic chanting is to be learned. Indeed, sastra provides a complete view (darśana) of the Supreme Reality and of the means of Its attainment through bhakti. It is this vision alone that can make possible gen- uine devotion in any of its forms. So why would any serious aspirant to true knowledge of and love for God neglect to study the śästra as a whole? Another question that must be addressed in response to sadha- kas who argue that scriptural knowledge is irrelevant to bhakti is this: Without authentic scriptural knowledge, how can a practi- tioner truly know what bhakti is and how to execute it properly? Authentic knowledge of bhakti can be known only from sastra. One’s practice must be aligned with the true understanding of the goal. On the yoga path, faulty practice of asanas (physical postures) or incorrect prāṇāyāma (breathing exercises) is likely to damage one’s body or vital system over the course of time. In the same way, on the bhakti path, a perspective that is not recognized as valid and not aligned with the goal will not yield the desired result, but can cause mental and spiritual complications. Regular prac- tice improperly performed may be slow to deliver its detrimental consequences, but in the long run the cumulative repercussions are significant. It is comparable to making use of a powerful and appropriate medicine, yet doing so in an unprescribed manner. Millions of people pursue the path of bhakti; yet, even after decades of practice, only a few of them are observed to have arrived xviii Preface at or near the goal. If an astute business person is not gaining success, or a dedicated athlete is failing to achieve his desired. goal, then that person will analyze the cause and look to correct. himself. He will consult an expert or a coach in his field. Simi- larly, it behooves a sincere seeker of Reality to do the same thing and investigate the cause behind one’s lack of progress. The most likely reason is either deficiency in, or incompleteness of, one’s root understanding and outlook, which inform and pattern every detail regarding self-concept, God-concept, life-view, and the practice of devotion. Authenticity of practice can arise only from a genuine understanding of Reality, process, and goal. Since Śrī Jīva composed the Sat Sandarbhas to make both the process and the goal crystal clear, there is a great need to study these texts. They have served practitioners for centuries and repre- sent a thoroughly tested and validated body of evidence. Previously this knowledge was locked in Sanskrit and not many had access to it. Now it is available in English and a sincere seeker should take advantage of it. If one is dedicating time and energy in pursuit of one’s goal, one will fare better if one clearly understands the pro- cess as well as the goal. The Ṣat Sandarbhas award this knowledge, dispelling all doubts. A Word on the Second Edition In 1995 the Jiva Institute published its first edition of Tattva Sanda- rbha, which is the first book of Jiva Gosvāmi’s Sat Sandarbhas. This new edition has been completely revised from start to finish. The entire text has been re-translated from the Sanskrit, employing vastly updated language to better represent the subtlety, depth, and complexity of Jiva Gosvāmi’s thought. Some of the most important terms introduced in this new translation have been explained in the article entitled, The Language of Transcendence - Key Terms and Con- cepts, found in the references at the back of the book. The reader is recommended to go through this essay first before reading the main body of the book, as it will greatly facilitate accurate understanding of the text. xix Preface In this edition special attention has been given to the topic of epistemology, which is the beginning point and foundation of Śrī Jiva’s exposition. In particular, the significance of sabda, or the Vedic sound revelation, has been brought to light, not as mere scriptural or canonical authority, but as transhuman (apauruṣeya), self-revealing sound, identical with the truth that it signifies. This insight is of tremendous importance not only for the correct under- standing of this volume and the others in the series, but to access immediate knowing of Bhagavan, which leads to the self-revelation of the means of His worship and the goal of divine love. Many of the original commentaries on the anucchedas of Jiva Gosvāmī have been enlarged or rewritten to accommodate the refinement in understanding. In translating and commenting upon the text of Tattva Sandarbha, I have followed the Sanskrit text from the edition of my guru, śrī śrī 108 Śrī Śrotriya Bhagavad-nişṭha Śrīmad Haridāsa Sastri Mahārāja Nava-tirtha. I also consulted the editions of Puri Dasa, Sitänätha Gosvāmi, and Nityasvarupa Brah- macārī to establish the proper reading. I have provided detailed explanations of each anuccheda based on my study of the Tattva Sandarbha and the rest of the Sandarbhas with my guru, as well as on the basis of Jiva Gosvāmi’s own commentary, Sarva-saṁvādini, and the commentaries of Śri Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa and Radha Mohana Gosvāmi. In addition to the above, the entire book has been reorganized into topical divisions in exact accordance with Jiva Gosvāmi’s over- all view. This master plan can be readily accessed from the Contents, which serves as a map to help guide the reader through the book, as well as from a chart included in the references entitled Tattva Sandarbha at a Glance. The divisions of the book have been titled to help the reader grasp the topics under discussion. In the main body of the book, explanatory texts have been inserted to introduce the subject of each division. In particular, the determination of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana from the transcognitive state of awareness of Śrīla Vyasa and Śri Suka, has been given the place of prominence that it deserves an observation that went almost entirely unnoticed — XX Preface in the first edition. This determination is a key topic that mediates between epistemology and the elaboration of ontology proper. It informs us that the knowable (prameya), like the means of know- ing itself (pramāņa), is self-revealed and not a matter of mere metaphysical speculation or logical thought construction. The new revised edition of Tattva Sandarbha is indispensable to grasp the methodology of Jiva Gosvāmi and the map of Reality he has provided throughout the Sat Sandarbha. Jiva Gosvāmi’s anthol- ogy offers the most systematic and complete synthesis of Vedanta. Consequently, the highest benefit to the reader can be had by follow- ing the order intended by him. This new Tattva Sandarbha will thus greatly facilitate the understanding of the Bhagavat Sandarbha and the volumes that follow, enabling the direct knowing of Bhagavan on His own terms. Śrī Jiva Gosvāmi has rendered tremendous service to the world community of devotional transcendentalists by writing the Sat Sandarbhas. His exposition takes a beginner by the hand, guiding him or her to the ultimate goal of priti, or divine love. He wrote it specifically for those who aspire to enter the relation of tran- scendental service in love. My commentaries have been written keeping that goal in mind. I have relished working on them. Doing so has also deepened my understanding and intuition about the subject. Thus, if the reader is similarly benefited, I would consider my endeavor doubly successful. xxi Introduction THE WILL TO KNOW is one of the most powerful and sustaining instincts in human beings. It begins at birth and continues as one develops self- and then external awareness. Every normal human being is equipped with the impetus to expand his or her experience and insight. The basic instinct for cognition is crucial to our survival as well as to achieve happiness. The urge to know manifests in all aspects of life. In modern times, an individual requires knowledge in many areas in order to make informed decisions about what food to eat, where to live, who to vote for, how to manage finances, how to lead a spiritual life, and so on. Cumulative knowledge resulting from this fundamental instinct results in many fields of study, such as biol- ogy, sociology, environmental science, political science, economics, psychology, and philosophy. Although the instinct to know is universal and not limited to any particular country or race, different fields of knowledge develop in different societies, depending on the inclination and correspond- ing needs and interest of the people. India has traditionally been a fertile ground for various schools of theology and philosophy. The Vedas, the world’s oldest scriptures, contain the seeds of numer- ous systems of thought that later developed into specific and well- defined schools. As a whole, the Indian wisdom schools can be divided into two groups, those that accept the authority of the Vedas and those that don’t. This division is not based on belief in God. The six schools that accept the authority of the Vedas are Nyaya, Vaiśeşika, Sankhya, Yoga, Purva-mimämsä, and Vedanta. Of these, xxiii Introduction Vedanta is the most widely studied and practiced. Within Vedanta are various sub-schools, with the most well-known being the Advaita Vedanta School popularized by Śri Sankaracarya. Another sub-school is that of Vaisnavism, of which the youngest denom- ination is Gauḍīya Vaisnavism (also known as Caitanya or Ben- gali Vaisnavism), which has drawn a great deal of attention from Western scholars in modern times. Every school has its own distinctive tenets and practices. Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism marks a significant development in the the- ology and praxis of divine love. This development is not the out- come of a single person’s work, but resulted from the concerted effort of a group of scholars who were followers of Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu (1486-1534), the founder of the school. Of these, the Six Gosvāmis of Vrindavan, namely, Sanatana, Rupa, Raghunatha Dasa, Gopala Bhaṭṭa, Raghunatha Bhatta, and Jiva Gosvāmi, were the most prominent. Among them, only Raghunatha Bhaṭṭa didn’t compose written works. The rest wrote books concerning devotion to Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Jiva Gosvāmī (1513-1608), the youngest of the six, was the most prolific. He wrote a number of works, some of them voluminous, dealing with almost all branches of Vaiṣṇava literature. It is he who systematized the teachings of Śri Caitanya and gave shape to the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava School on a par with other Vaisnava schools, such as those founded by Śrī Rāmānujācārya, Nimbarkācārya, Mad- hvācārya, and Vallabhācārya. Of all his works, the Sat Sandarbhas, along with his own commentary Sarva-samvadini, are well known for their deep analysis and systematic elaboration of the entire the- ology and philosophy of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism. The original name of the Sat Sandarbhas was Bhagavata Sandarbha, indicating that it is an exposition and analysis of the essential message of Srimad Bhagavata Purana. Śrī Jiva’s exact birth year is unknown, though his father’s death in 1516 is taken as the latest possible date. His death in 1608 is established by the evidence of his last will and testament, which is signed and dated. xxiv Introduction Bhāgavata Purāņa - The Basis of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava Theology The traditional criteria by which a Vedantic School came to be rec- ognized as authentic was that it had to establish its philosophical tenets on the basis of the prasthana-trayi (lit., “the three great high- ways”), which consists of the ten principal Upanisads, the Vedanta- sutra, and the Bhagavad Gita. Every sampradaya" had to deduce its basic tenets, or siddhänta, from these works. Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu, however, placed utmost importance on Śrimad Bhagavata Purana, which He called the flawless Purāņa. He proclaimed it as an explanation of the Vedanta-sutra written by the author Himself, Śri Vyasa. Since Śrimad Bhagavatam fully repre- sents Śrī Caitanya’s own doctrine, His followers did not attempt to write commentaries on the prasthana-trayi, but instead wrote com- mentaries, essays, and independent works on Srimad Bhagavata Purāṇa. Śrī Vallabhācārya was the first to include the Bhagavata Purāṇa, which was self-revealed in the samadhi of Vyasa, as part of sabda- pramāņa, or Vedic testimony, along with the prasthana-trayi? Jiva Gosvāmi, however, went a step further, declaring: “So it is that we shall focus our investigation exclusively on Srimad Bhagavatam to determine, free from any inconsistency between preceding and fol- lowing statements, the ultimate value for human beings” (Tattva Sandarbha, Anuccheda 27). A literary work that discloses the confidential meaning of a subject or book, incorporates its essence, explains the superior- ity of the subject, and elaborates its various meanings, is called a The word sampradaya is used here in the sense of a preceptorial line that forms a distinctive sub-branch of a particular wisdom school, in this case the Vedantic School. The sub-branches (sampradayas) of the latter are primarily the Sankara School of radical Vedanta and the Vaisnava schools of theistic Vedänta. bhagavate kahe mora tattva abhimata Caitanya-caritamṛta, Madhya-lila 11.17 7 vedaḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-vākyäni vyāsa-sūtrāņi caiva hi samadhi-bhāṣă-vyäsasya pramaņam tac catuṣṭayam Tattvärtha-dipa-nibandha 1.7 XXVIntroduction sandarbha. Śrī Jiva Gosvāmi called his work Bhagavata Sandarbha, it being an independent essay and elaborate analysis of the subject of the Bhagavata Purana. It is not a running commentary on Bhāga- vata Purana but an explanation of selected verses to illustrate its essential message. Jiva Gosvāmī also wrote a commentary on the complete Purana, called Krama-sandarbha. Bhagavata Sandarbha is popularly called the Sat Sandarbhas, because it consists of six (sat) books, namely Tattva, Bhagavat, Para- mätma, Kṛṣṇa, Bhakti, and Priti Sandarbha. Another book, Sarva- samvadini, is a self-commentary and a supplement to the first four of the Sat Sandarbhas. It elaborates on some topics that were either not explained clearly or left out completely in the original work. Importance of the Sat Sandarbhas The sage Śrī Vyasa, a Viṣṇu avatara who is celebrated as one of the greatest sages in India, organized the original Vedas into four works and wrote eighteen Purāņas, Vedanta-sutra, and Mahabha- rata. Even after accomplishing all this, He remained dissatisfied, feeling as though something was lacking in His mission of provid- ing knowledge to humanity for their spiritual upliftment. While Vyasa was thus affected by despondency, His teacher Śrī Nārada appeared at His asrama. Following Śrī Narada’s instruction, Vyasa meditated to the point of samadhi, and while in that state of spiritual trance, the original Supreme Person, Bhagavan, self-manifested to Him. Based on this experience, He produced Śrimad Bhagavatam, His ultimate work. According to Vyasa, Śrimad Bhagavatam is an exposition of Abso- lute Reality and the essence of the Vedas (SB 1.1.3). This is also cor- roborated by Sūta Gosvāmi (SB 1.3.42 and 12.13.15). The Sat Sanda- rbhas are the most thorough and systematic presentation of the phi- losophy and theology of Srimad Bhagavatam. Before their composi- tion, many works were written on Śrimad Bhagavatam, but none is as exhaustive and in tune with its spirit. There is a popular saying among Sanskrit scholars, “The test of one’s scholarship xxvi Introduction Proponents of the earlier Vaisnava schools had refuted the Advaitavada doctrine of Sankarācārya, showing it to be but a one- sided and prejudicial view of the Upanisadic revelation. They com- mented on the prasthana-trayi and explained them to establish that Ultimate Reality is not without form and attributes. Even though Śrī Jiva Gosvāmī also did not agree with Sankarācārya’s radical interpretation of Advaita, he did not directly refute his views by commenting on the prasthana-trayi, as had been done by senior Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, such as Śrī Rāmānuja and Madhvācārya. Instead, Jiva Gosvāmï adopted a novel approach to establish his conclusion about Ultimate Reality. On the basis of the descriptions found in Bhagavata Purana, he analyzed the precise nature of the truth disclosed in Vyasa’s trance as well as the direct testimony and realization of its highly enlightened speakers, and showed that all of these “truth-knowers” directly realized the personal form of Bhagavan as being the support and shelter of Brahman as well as Its final completion. Śri Jiva concluded that the Ultimate Real- ity alluded to in Vedanta-sütra could not be different from that depicted in Bhagavata Purana, since both were written by Vyasa. For this reason, he analyzed Bhagavata Purana to ascertain the Ulti- mate Reality, the means of Its realization, and the supreme goal to be attained in relation to that Reality. He adopted this unique strategy, because the meaning of Vedanta-sutra, which is liable to contradictory interpretations, is explicitly found in Bhagavata Purāṇa. The Sat Sandarbhas are the outcome of that analysis. The princi- pal theme of each volume of the Sandarbhas may be summarized as follows:

1. Tattva Sandarbha, besides establishing the authority of the Bhāgavata as epistemological means (pramāna), also determines the knowable (prameya), offering a brief overview of Gauḍīya Vaisnava ontology, on which its theology is based. is in explaining the Bhagavatam” (vidyavatam bhagavate pariksa). Consequently, many great scholars in the past wrote commentaries and essays on Śrimad Bhagavatam. xxvii Introduction
2. Bhagavat Sandarbha describes Bhagavan, the Supreme Person, as the most complete manifestation of nondual Reality, inclusive of Brahman and Paramātmā. It also describes His diverse energies, qualities, name, form, associates, and abode as intrinsic aspects of His essential being.
3. Paramätma Sandarbha describes the specific manifestation of Bhagavan called Paramātmā, or the Immanent Self present within everything. He is both the source of creation, as con- scious ground of awareness and being, and the ingredients of creation, in the form of His extrinsic power of phenomenal being. His regulation of the cosmos occurs automatically or as a mere by-product of His entrance therein out of His own lila, which is concerned instead with His devotees. This Sandarbha also elabo- rates the ontology of the living beings and primordial nature as distinct potencies belonging to Paramātmā.
4. Krsna Sandarbha identifies Śrī Kṛṣṇa not only as Bhagavan but as Svayam Bhagavan, the Supreme Person in His own original form and essential being. In technical terms, Svayam Bhagavan, or “God as He is in Himself,” signifies the nondual personal Abso- lute in His own original, complete, and all-encompassing form as the source of all other manifestations of Godhood.
5. Bhakti Sandarbha delineates the intrinsic nature of unalloyed bhakti, the means of its reception, how it is distinguished from adulterated devotion, and the various methods by which it is executed. Jiva Gosvāmi demonstrates how pure bhakti fulfills the criteria as the ultimate means to realize the Absolute in Its most complete identity as Bhagavan. By showing conclusively that bhakti alone is the essential and effective ingredient in all methods of realization, it is evident that without it, no other process can yield even its own professed result.
6. Priti Sandarbha illustrates that love of Bhagavan, priti, is the ulti- mate goal attainable by conscious beings. After an elaborate anal- ysis of the fundamental nature and constitution of priti, Śri Jiva Gosvāmi concludes that only priti can lead to the complete fulfill- ment of the self’s potential, fully disclosing the state of supreme bliss (paramananda). Through his exhaustive and clear exposition of metaphysics in the Sat Sandarbhas, Śrī Jiva Gosvāmi provided the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava xxviii Introduction School a distinct identity of its own, contributing to Vedanta a unique take on theistic nonduality. He drew freely from the entire heritage of Vaisnava philosophical thought available to him. With- out exception, all the important insights Śrī Jīva brought to light were supported with scriptural references; yet, his conclusions are not mere repetitions, but bear the mark of originality and deserve independent consideration. Śrī Jiva Gosvāmi labored meticulously to present this wonder- ful analysis of the “spotless Purana” for those serious students who truly aspire to attain pure devotion for Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Without earnestly studying the Sandarbhas, one would find it difficult to ascertain the essential theological principles found in Srimad Bhagavatam. Since Śrī Jiva Gosvāmī writes specifically for the devotees of Kṛṣṇa, as he clearly states in the beginning of Tattva Sandarbha, he does presume a prior disposition of faith as a given in those for whom his exposition is being made. This does not indicate a lack of scholarship or realization on his part, as some critics suggest. It signifies, rather, that his method and purpose lay beyond the range of what is accessible through dry scholarship alone, devoid of the unmediated awareness of unalloyed devotion. Scholarship for him is relevant only in the sense of earnest investigative inquiry into truth leading to immediate realization. His erudition, however, is clearly evident from the range of original books and commen- taries he wrote for the Vaisnava community, including a Sanskrit grammar. Disregarding the significance of his statement in the beginning of Tattva Sandarbha concerning eligibility, many mod- ern scholars have severely criticized his description of epistemol- ogy. It seems that his establishing the Bhagavata Purana as a book par excellence has irked their sensibilities. I have addressed some of these criticisms in my commentary on Jiva Gosvāmi’s anucchedas, but did not do so exhaustively as I wished to avoid diverting the reader from the flow of the original text, which is meant for Kṛṣṇa bhaktas. Nevertheless, since I feel strongly that these criticisms are based on improper understanding of the text, I will respond to them in a separate book for those who are interested in the topic. xxix Introduction Summary of Tattva Sandarbha Of the Six Sandarbhas, Tattva Sandarbha is the smallest in size, but not in importance. As its name suggests, it discusses the Reality (tattva) that is the ultimate subject to be understood and realized. Tattva also means “essence,” and thus Tattva Sandarbha provides the essence of what is to be elaborated upon in the rest of the Sandarbhas. Thus, it serves as an introduction to them. Tattva Sandarbha has 63 sections (anucchedas) that fit within three divisions. The first eight anucchedas are invocatory, the next twenty form the division on epistemology (pramāna), and the last thirty-five comprise the division on ontology (prameya). Invocations (Anucchedas 1-8) Jiva Gosvāmi opens the book with a verse from the Bhagavata Purāņa in which sage Karabhajana describes the avatara for Kaliyuga. Jiva Gosvāmi follows this with a verse of his own (Anuccheda 2), in which he identifies this avatara as Caitanya Mahaprabhu and further clari- fies the meaning of the opening verse. He then prays to Śrī Rūpa and Sanatana, his uncles and mentors, at whose behest he composed the Sandarbhas (Anuccheda 3). At the beginning of each Sandarbha, Śrī Jiva acknowledges that his own composition is based upon the work of Sri Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi and expresses his indebtedness to him (Anucchedas 4-5)1o Śri Jiva explicitly states that he undertakes this work only for those who aspire to worship the feet of Śrī Kṛṣṇa and warns all others as to the implications of such a consummate investigation. The commen- tary on this particular anuccheda is especially helpful to the reader to determine the criteria of eligibility for entering the spirit of the text (Anuccheda 6). 10 It is unknown whether or not Gopala Bhatta’s work was ever completed. No such work is currently available, but from Jiva’s statements it seems clear that it was incomplete in scope and not methodically arranged. Though Śrī Jiva credits Gopala Bhaṭṭa with the inceptive idea and for first taking up the challenge of creating a systematic theology based on the Bhagavatam, there is little doubt that he himself did the bulk of the work on the Sandarbhas. XXX Introduction Next, Jiva Gosvāmi declares his gratitude to his mantra-guru and to those spiritual teachers who helped him understand the meaning of the Bhagavata Purana (Anuccheda 7). In Sarva-samvadini, he iden- tifies these teachers as Śrī Rāmānujācārya, Madhvacārya, Śrīdhara Svāmi, and others. The final verse of the invocation before Jiva begins his deliber- ation on epistemology is addressed to Śrī Kṛṣṇa. This verse con- tains the seed-conception of all the major themes to be unpacked and elaborated throughout the Sandarbhas (Anuccheda 8). It is an amplification of the famous vadanti verse of the Bhāgavata Purana (SB 1.2.11), which is the definitive statement on which Jīva Gosvāmī bases his understanding of Absolute Reality. The first three Sanda- rbhas are an exposition of Jiva Gosvāmï’s seminal verse, and the fourth is also directly related to it. It is from this verse that each of the first four Sandarbhas derives its name. The subjects of the fifth and sixth Sandarbhas are also alluded to in this verse. Epistemology (Anucchedas 9-28) Jiva’s treatment of epistemology begins with a discussion of the four criteria (anubandha-catuştaya) considered indispensable at the beginning of any such analysis.
7. The subject (visaya) of the book is the tattva mentioned above and is identified as Śrī Kṛṣṇa.
8. The relation (sambandha) of the book to its subject involves the correlation of signified and signifier (väcya-vacaka-sambandha), implying that the signified Reality, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, is self-evidently disclosed through the power of the signifying word in the form of the Bhagavata Purana.
9. The means (abhidheya) that self-discloses the subject is bhakti. 4. The end state (prayojana), which is the completion stage of the means, is prema, or divine love for Kṛṣṇa. Usually adhikari, or the eligibility of the reader, is included in these four criteria in place of abhidheya, but Jiva has covered this previously, as mentioned above (Anuccheda 6). xxxi Introduction Next, Jiva sets out to determine the means that alone is suit- able for intuiting the transphenomenal Reality (Anuccheda 10). He points out that sense-perception (pratyakşa), inference (anumana), and other such conventional methods of knowing are limited and deficient in regard to the direct cognition of truth (tattva), which lies entirely beyond the scope of empiricism. For this rea- son, he accepts only the revealed word, sabda, which for him means the Vedas, as the means of valid truth-cognition, since they are devoid of human deficiencies (Anuccheda 11). But, Śrī Jiva argues, the Vedas are difficult to understand, because they are only partially available and there are no reliable traditions to make clear their highly esoteric meaning (Anuccheda 12.1). He there- fore suggests that the Itihasas and Purāņas now provide greater understanding (Anuccheda 12.2). He argues that the Itihāsas and Purāņas have the same source, meaning, and authority as the Vedas (Anuccheda 12.3-4). Taking pains to establish the authority of the Purāņas and Iti- hāsas (Anucchedas 12-16), Śrī Jiva demonstrates that the Purāņas are a superior source for the knowing of Reality because they are easier to comprehend, are fully available, and are suitable for the present age. He does not reject the authority of the Vedas, as some have wrongly accused him, but simply considers them to be impractical for his undertaking. Śrī Jiva claims on the authority of Matsya Purana that the Purāņas are grouped according to three dispositional psychoses (the gunas);" namely, sättvika (illuminating), rājasika (activating), and tāmasika (restraining) (Anuccheda 17). It is only the sättvika Purāņas, embodying illumination, that are suitable to disclose the “The word “psychoses” as a translation of the gunas is not meant in the conventional sense of mental disorders, but in its original psychological sense of “the total mental condition of a person at a specific moment.” A person’s individual mental condition is influenced by, or corresponds to, the three archetypal patterning psychoses of illumination, activation, and restraint. The Purāņas are grouped into three to accommodate all three psychological dispositions. In doing so, they adopt one of the three perspectives as primary to address those with the corresponding psychosis or “total mental condition.” Naturally, the Purāņas that embody “illumination” will carry the greatest authority in the disclosure of Ultimate Reality. xxxii Introduction knowledge of Ultimate Reality. Among them, he argues for the preeminent position of the Bhagavata Purana. In Anucchedas 19- 26, Jīva points out some of the precise criteria that affirm the Bhāgavata Purana’s epistemological validity, doing so with plentiful references from other Purānas. The Bhāgavata Purana is asserted as the elaboration of Gaya- tri, and as the natural commentary on Vedanta-sūtra written by Vyasa Himself. It also explains the essential meaning of Maha- bharata and the original four Vedas. To support this contention, Jiva Gosvāmī cites verses from Garuda Purana, likely taking them from Madhvācārya’s Bhagavata-tätparya on SB 1.1.1, one of Śri Jiva’s important sources. This becomes evident in Anuccheda 28, where Jiva writes that he has quoted some verses from secondary sources like Madhva’s work, which he has not seen in the original source12 Embodying all the above characteristics, Bhagavata Purāņa is shown to be the supreme authority in conveying the linguistic cognition of truth (tattva) and concomitantly the immediate real- ization thereof. Jiva Gosvāmi offers an elaborate explanation of the verses from Garuda Purana. He quotes Bhagavata Purana itself, in which its appearance is compared to the sun for the people of Kali, the present age, after Krsna’s departure from the earth for His own abode (Anuccheda 23). Śrī Jīva points out the popularity of the Purana by listing a number of available commentaries and essays on it, surpassing those on any other Purana. Śrī Jiva Gosvāmi writes that Śrī Śańkarācārya13 recognized the true import and greatness of the Bhagavata, and that the truth that it disclosed was superior to the radical Advaitavada propounded by him. Therefore, out of respect for the Bhagavata Purana and 12 The status of Madhvacārya’s pramānas has been challenged by opponents since the beginning of his mission. See Roque Mesquita’s excellent study, Madhva’s Unknown Literary Sources: Some Observations (Mesquita 2000). Śrī Jiva is practical: He accepts whatever verses confirm his point of view without entering into a debate about their authenticity. It may be observed, however, that such verses are provided only in a supporting role; so in no way does Jiva’s argument hinge solely on Madhva’s testimony. 13 Sankarācārya is popularly accepted as an avatara of Lord Siva, who, according to Bhagavata Purana, is a gunavatara of Vişņu and a great devotee of Visnu or Kṛṣṇa. xxxiii Introduction to not distort its meaning, he did not write any commentary on it. According to Jiva Gosvāmi, Śankarācārya propagated Advaitavada to delude the masses in this age who were predisposed to deny the Absolute as a qualified entity. Some of his followers, not discern- ing Sankara’s inner disposition, wrote distorted commentaries on the Bhagavata Purana. Seeing this, Śri Madhvācārya, who was ini- tiated in the Sankarācārya sampradaya, wrote a gloss (Bhagavata- tätparya) to substantiate the actual import of the Bhagavata Purāṇa. It is on the basis of this epistemological evaluation that Śrī Jiva has elected to analyze the Bhagavata Purana to ascertain its sub- ject, the means prescribed for its realization, and the end state to be arrived at through maturation of the prescribed means. In Anucche- das 27-28, Jiva explains the methodology of his analysis throughout the Sandarbhas and enumerates the various sources from which he draws guidance and support. Ontology of the Bhāgavata Purana (Anucchedas 29-63) In Anucchedas 29 to 49, Śrī Jiva begins an analysis to determine from a transcognitive perspective the subject, the means, and the goal of Bhagavata Purana. In doing so, he adopts a unique approach in which the subject, means, and goal are shown to be not logical propositions but directly cognized truths from the transempirical states of awareness of Sri Suka and Śrī Vyasa. Suka’s experience involved a transformation of consciousness from the living liber- ated state of Brahman awareness to immersion in prema for Bha- gavän, brought about simply by hearing a few select verses from Bhāgavata Purana. Vyasa’s experience was from the supracognitive state of samadhi. Both experiences were shown to be in perfect har- mony, because in both there was a self-disclosure of the subject as Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the means as devotion to Him, and the goal as love for Him. This same determination was additionally confirmed by Śrī Sūta, who intuited its meaning from the immediate experience of Śrī Śuka, as expressed in the former’s prayers to his teacher. Con- sequently, these self-disclosed truths form the essential message of xxxiv Introduction the book and are meant to be the guiding principles for the correct interpretation of Bhagavata Puraṇa. Before composing Bhāgavata Purana, Vyasa entered the uncon- ditional awareness of devotional samadhi, and in that state Śrī Kṛṣṇa along with His energies were self-revealed to Him. Vyasa directly perceived Kṛṣṇa’s extrinsic energy called maya, which was apart from, yet supported by Him. He also saw that the individual living being, suffering due to the influence of maya, can obtain release by complete absorption in the yoga of devotion, bhakti-yoga, to Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Equipped with this direct vision, Vyasa then composed Bhāgavata Purana to make this knowledge available to suffering humanity (Anucchedas 32-48). In the midst of this exposition, Śrī Jīva refutes the Advaita- vada doctrines of pratibimba-vada (the theory of reflection) and pariccheda-vāda (the theory of limitation), which argue that an indi- vidual living being is nothing but Brahman conditioned by māyā. According to Bhagavata theology, the individual living beings are real and eternal integrated parts of the conscious energy of the Supreme Person, just as a ray of sunlight is part of the sun’s energy. Vyäsa first taught Bhagavata Purana to His son, Suka. Even though Suka was indifferent to material life from his very birth, being absorbed in the bliss of Brahman, the Bhāgavata drew his consciousness out of and beyond immersion in the Self, disclosing the still more rarefied state of prema. It was due to this transforma- tion that Suka studied the Bhagavata from his father. This incident demonstrates the excellence of the Bhagavata - that it discloses a Reality (i.e., Bhagavan) that both includes and transcends Brahman (Anuccheda 49). In this way, Śrī Jiva verifies that the realization of Vyasa, the author, and of Sukadeva, its primary speaker, is one and the same. Therefore, the meaning of Bhagavata Purāņa should be ascertained in the light of their common understanding. This is the litmus test: Any meaning contrary to this will be improper and misleading. After determining the core truths of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana from the viewing frame of immediate perception (aparokṣa-anubhava), Śrī Jiva begins the elaboration of ontology XXXVIntroduction proper. He first cites the second verse of the Bhagavata, which states that the truth to be investigated in the Bhāgavata is the Immutable Reality, vastava-vastu (Anuccheda 50). The nature of this Reality is outlined in the vadanti verse (SB 1.2.11) from which this Sandarbha derives its name. This Reality, tattva, is specified as nondual consciousness (advaya-jñāna) and is known by the names of Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavan. To help the reader directly intuit this transrational truth, Jiva Gosvāmi first portrays it through reference to the individual, or vyaşți, point of view, and then from the aggregate, or samaşți, point of view. This strategy is adopted because in the investigation of anything unknown, knowledge systems generally begin with ref- erence to what is already known or available to conscious exami- nation. The first thing available to the examiner is his or her own consciousness (vyaşți-nirdeśa). From the careful inspection of indi- vidual consciousness through the self-illuminating light of Śrimad Bhāgavatam, the nature of the Supreme or Source Consciousness is made evident (Anucchedas 50-55). The next thing available to the examiner is the cosmos, or in other words, phenomena. This involves the operation of the laws that determine the cosmic order. Ultimate Reality may also be intu- ited with reference to these universals (samaşți-nirdeśa), as being their ultimate Source and Shelter (Anucchedas 56-63). This ultimate Shelter, or asraya, is the foundation and support of both the individual living beings as well as the aggregate order in the form of cosmic and supracosmic energies. This aśraya is the tattva with which Bhagavata Purana is solely concerned. There are ten primary topics described in Bhagavata Purana. The first nine items are discussed simply to elucidate the tenth, which is aśraya. Śri Jiva describes all the ten items as listed by Sukadeva in the Sec- ond Canto, and by Suta in the Twelfth Canto, identifying the tenth item as Śrī Kṛṣṇa. On this note he concludes his first Sandarbha. 14 There are two types of vastu (reality), namely, vastava and avastava. Vastava is the unchanging Reality (Bhagavan), whereas avastava is the changing reality (jagat). xxxvi Introduction A Few Points To Be Gleaned from Tattva Sandarbha (1) Śrī Jiva Gosvāmī takes a bold step in assigning Bhagavata Purāṇa as the highest pramana for his study of tattva. Jiva Gosvāmi, follow- ing Caitanya Mahaprabhu, recognizes Bhāgavata Purana as the natural explanation of Vedanta-sutra by Vyasa Himself. There- fore, he does not attempt to comment on Vedanta-sutra. In Krama- sandarbha and Paramatma Sandarbha, Śrī Jiva traces the meaning of some of the seminal sutras that he finds embedded in the first verse. He does this to corroborate his view that Bhāgavata Purana explains Vedanta-sutra. When Jiva Gosvāmi says that Bhagavata Purāņa is a commentary on Vedanta-sutra, he obviously does not mean that it is a traditional commentary, but that it contains the meaning of the sutras.15 (2) The first verse of Bhagavata Purana is an explanation of the Gayatri mantra. (3) Bhagavata Purana is the sonic representation of Śrī Kṛṣṇa Himself and thus intrinsically endowed with the power to reveal Him. It was, therefore, able to attract the consciousness of a Brahman-realized sage like Suka, establishing him at once in the yet deeper state of devotional love. In other words, for Jiva Gosvāmi, Bhāgavata Purāṇa is not just another book, but the Supreme Person Himself in the form of sound, sabda. (4) Bhāgavata Purana is eternal, meaning that it is without orig- ination. It was not composed by Vyasa but only manifested to Him in the state of samadhi. (5) It has 335 chapters, a fact which is significant primarily in terms of authenticating three important chapters considered by some as interpolated. (6) All ten subjects of Bhagavata Purana can be found in every one of its cantos. (7) Prema (divine love) and not mukti (release from the cycle of 15 Śrī Haridasa Sastri Mahārāja compiled a book entitled Vedanta-darśana in which he identifies which Bhagavata Purana verses correspond to each of the sutras of Vedānta-sutra. xxxvii Introduction birth and death) is the ultimate goal, enabling the highest degree of completion of the conscious self. (8) The Itihasas and Puranas are the fifth Veda. (9) It is not possible to understand the true meaning of the Vedas without studying the Itihasas and Purāņas. (10) Absolute Reality is realized by conscious attunement of one’s heart with that of one’s spiritual teacher. (11) Śrī Śańkarācārya, who is Śiva and thus a devotee of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, did not comment on Bhagavata Purana lest it displease Bhagavan. (12) Śrīdhara Svāmi wrote his famous commentary, Bhāvārtha- dipika, with an Advaitic slant to attract the followers of Advaitavada to Bhagavata Purana and to the path of bhakti. In conclusion, it may be said that Tattva Sandarbha lays the foundation for entry into the subject matter of Bhāgavata Purāṇa, a detailed analysis of which follows in the rest of the Sandarbhas. It does so particularly by providing the epistemological viewing frame through which Bhagavan is directly intuited, devotionally served, and established ultimately as the supreme object of divine love. Xxxviii Dedication vraja-bhaktireva vedantaḥ śri-gaura eva rādhākāntaḥ prakhyapito yena räddhantaḥ rätvidam mudam tasya sväntaḥ Loving service to Bhagavan Śrī Kṛṣṇa in the mood of the Vraja gopis is the ultimate conclusion of all the Vedas and Vedic literature. Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu is indeed Krsna, the beloved of Radha. May this book delight the heart of my guru, who clearly disclosed this unequivocal truth unto me. THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED to my guru Śri Śrī 108 Śrī Śrotriya Bhagavad-nistha Śrīmad Haridasa Sastri Mahārāja Nava-tirtha, an ideal example of a devotee and acārya. I bow down at the holy feet of my Gurudeva. He taught me with great love most of the works of Śri Rupa, Sanatana and Jiva Gosvāmi, and other Gauḍīya acaryas. The Ṣat Sandarbhas were the first works I studied under him. He was a great admirer of the Gosvāmis, not only through words but by being a strict adherent of their teachings. He was a living example of Gauḍīya Vaisnava theology and philoso- phy. Thus, I learned from him not only during his discourses, but also through being with him, seeing him deal with various life situa- tions, and serving in the gośala and elsewhere. It is he who inspired me to propagate this knowledge by making it available in English. xxxix xl Special Gratitude Introduction My spiritual journey began with ISKCON at the Detroit temple. It was through the books of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Śrila Prabhupada that I became acquainted with Śrī Jiva Gosvāmi and his works. When I read about the Sat Sandarbhas, it awakened in me an intense desire to study them. It was a long journey over many years before this desire could be actualized. I want to acknowledge my gratitude to Srila Prabhupada for leading me to the study of the works of Sri Jiva Gosvāmi, especially the Sat Sandarbhas. I shall remain indebted to him forever. I Mangalācaraṇa Invocations Anucchedas 1-7 An undertaking such as the composition of the Sat Sandarbhas, which are a systematic elaboration of theistic Vedanta, cannot be simply a function of the dialectical mind. In this enterprise, ratio- nal mind is merely an instrument for the linguistic revelation of truth. Without immediate apperception of the truth (aparoksa- anubhuti), metaphysical speculation, however thorough and pen- etrating, must remain within the sphere of intellectual thought construction (kalpana). It is in recognition of this fact that enlight- ened sages and authors of the past realized the need to first attune their awareness to the conscious source before initiating the writ- ing process. In this way, the truth that was intended to be disclosed would shine through their psyche of its own accord, with no per- sonal sense of “doership” or egoic self-appropriation on the part of the author. The composition of a mangalacarana, or “auspicious invoca- tions,” at the beginning of philosophical works, is a method by which the author’s consciousness is linked with his or her worship- ful deity and the line of masters. In the deeper sense, it is thus self-surrender, or dying to the separate self-sense, which allows for the self-revelation and pervasion of the light of the Absolute. In this way, mangalacarana is to be understood not as mere eulogy, but as a conscious process by which illumination, or a higher cog- nitive mode of knowing, becomes available to the writer. Manga- lacarana is thus a key to transpersonal authorship (apauruşeyatva), discussed later in the text. 3 Anuccheda 1 Homage to the Inaugurator of Sankirtana 1 कृष्णवर्णं त्विषाकृष्णं साङ्गोपाङ्गास्त्रपार्षदम् । यज्ञैः सङ्कीर्तनप्रायैर्यजन्ति हि सुमेधसः ॥ १ ॥ IN THE AGE OF KALI, the Supreme Absolute [Bhagavan] appears within this world with a non-blackish complexion and con- stantly sings or describes the names of Kṛṣṇa, accompanied by His associates, servants, weapons, and confidential compan- ions. Those endowed with discriminating wisdom worship the Absolute in this form primarily through sacrifice of the self in complete [samyak] kirtana (singing the names of God), involving the totality of one’s being. (SB 11.5.32)1 Commentary IN VEDIC CULTURE every undertaking begins with an invocation, technically called mangalacarana. The purpose is to invoke the blessings of one’s worshipful deity for the removal of all obstacles to the completion of the work. The Śri Sat Sandarbhas are a detailed treatise on the Complete Absolute known as Bhagavan, making evident the transcendental nature of His name, form, qualities, abode, divine acts, and associates and pure devotion to Him. As such, it is already all-auspicious by nature, and hence needs no kṛṣṇa-varṇam tvişäkṛṣṇam sangopangastra-pārşadam yajñaiḥ sankirtana-prayair yajanti hi sumedhasaḥ 5I Mangalǎcarana invocation. Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi nonetheless performs mangalāca- rana, following in the footsteps of the previous acaryas, and setting an ideal example for his readers. Mangalacarana is of three types and may have one or more verses. The three types are:
10. Namas-kriyātmaka, offering obeisances to one’s teacher(s) or worshipful deity, or to both.
11. Asīr-vādātmaka, invoking Bhagavan’s blessings upon the work or upon the readers, or exclaiming simply “All glories to the Lord!” 3. Vastu-nirdeśatmaka, identifying the book’s primary subject. The mangalacarana also points out four essential elements of a book, called anubandha-catuṣṭaya: In the beginning of an educational text, four elements must cer- tainly be enumerated: the criteria of eligibility for study of the book (adhikari), the relation between the book [as signifier of its subject] and the subject itself [as the signified] (sambandha), the subject to be known through the investigative inquiry (visaya or abhidheya), and the book’s purpose (prayojana) [i.e., the value to be actualized by the reader/inquirer through assimilation of the teaching]? The purpose of delineating these four items is to inspire interest in the mind of the reader, as Śrī Kumārila Bhaṭṭa states in his Śloka- värttika: Only upon acquaintance with a book’s explicit intent (siddhartha) and its specific relation (sambandha) with that intent, does a reader undertake to study the book. Therefore, sambandha and prayojana must be stated at the beginning of an educational text. (Śloka- värttika 1.1.17)3 A sensitive reader will not take interest in studying a book unless he or she clearly knows the subject described in the book 2 adhikari ca sambandho visayas ca prayojanam avasyam eva vaktavyam sastradau tu catuṣṭayam 3 siddharthaṁ jñata-sambandham śrotum śrota pravartate śästradau tena vaktavyaḥ sambandha sa-prayojanaḥ 6 1 Homage to the Inaugurator of Sankirtana and the purpose to be achieved by understanding it. Different peo- ple have different goals, and different qualifications are needed to achieve those goals. Therefore, the book must also describe the qualifications required to study it. Sambandha refers to the relation between the book and the subject it intends to elucidate. In modern books this discussion is usually covered in the introduction. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi begins his mangalacarana with a quotation from Srimad Bhagavatam and not with a verse of his own composi- tion. By doing so, he shows his reverence for Srimad Bhagavatam and his surrender to the instructions of Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu, for whom Śrimad Bhagavatam was the supreme scriptural authority. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī also implies that in the Sat Sandarbhas he will ana- lyze the Bhagavatam and show it to be the culmination of all other scriptures. In addition, this verse establishes that his worshipable Deity is Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Karabhajana Ṛși speaks this verse in response to Mahārāja Nimi’s question about Bhagavan’s color and name and the pre- scribed methods for His worship in the various yugas. He describes Bhagavan’s avatara in Kaliyuga, and in so doing, he indirectly reveals that Śri Caitanya Mahaprabhu is Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the original complete Absolute Truth, Bhagavan. Kṛṣṇa-varna indicates one who describes the pastimes of Śrī Kṛṣṇa to others, or who always chants “Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa.” Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu certainly meets this criterion for being kṛṣṇa-varna. Varna also means “class” or “category.” So, kṛṣṇa-varna may also refer to one who is of the same class as Kṛṣṇa. Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahaprabhu is kṛṣṇa-varna in this sense too, because He is non- different from Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Varna also means “letter” or “word,” and thus kṛṣṇa-varna also indicates one whose name has the word Kṛṣṇa in it - in this case, Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya. Other meanings of varna are “fame,” “form,” “outward appear- ance,” “quality,” and “ritual.” One may apply all these meanings to the phrase kṛṣṇa-varna, and in all cases the meanings point to Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahaprabhu. For example, kṛṣṇa-varna may be understood as one whose fame is identical to that of Kṛṣṇa’s, or one whose form is of the same constitution as Kṛṣṇa’s. I Mangalacarana In Sarva-samvadini, the supplementary commentary to the Śri Sat Sandarbhas by Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi, he explains that Śrī Caitanya is referred to as kṛṣṇa-varna, because people were reminded of Śrī Kṛṣṇa just by seeing Him. Another reason is that although Śrī Cai- tanya displayed a golden complexion in outward society, to His inti- mate associates He sometimes appeared as blackish. Finally, kṛṣṇa- varna also means one who is blackish like Krsna, but in the case of Śrī Caitanya, this meaning could refer only to His inner complexion. Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi explains this in the next anuccheda. The compound word tvisäkṛṣṇam may be broken as tviṣā akṛṣṇam, giving the meaning “whose bodily hue is not blackish.” In Srimad Bhāgavatam, Garga Muni tells Nanda Mahārāja: Your son, Kṛṣṇa, appears as an avatara in every millennium. In the past He assumed three different colors - white, red, and yellow- and now He has appeared in a blackish color. (SB 10.8.13) According to Srimad Bhagavatam, Bhagavan manifested a white complexion when He appeared in Satyayuga, a red one in Tretayuga, and a blackish one in Dvaparayuga. Hence, by the pro- cess of elimination, the word akṛṣṇa (non-blackish) must indicate the avatara with a yellow complexion - that is, the golden avatara, Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Garga Muni’s mention of His yellow color “in previous yugas” may refer either to Śrī Caitanya’s previ- ous appearances or to His future appearances, but Garga Muni uses the past tense, because he is mentioning the yellow avatara along with other avataras who had appeared in the past. This usage is an instance of “overarching description,” wherein a statement that applies to the majority of members in a group over- looks any single distinct member to whom it is not relevant. The stock example provided in Indian Poetics to illustrate this linguis- tic device is as follows: On a rainy day one may observe a crowd of people, most of whom are carrying umbrellas, and exclaim “Here come the umbrella-bearers.” Yet another consideration is that Gargācārya may have used the past tense to hide Kṛṣṇa’s future asan varnas trayo hy asya grhnato’nu-yugam tanuḥ suklo raktas tatha pita idānim kṛṣṇatām gataḥ 8 1 Homage to the Inaugurator of Sankirtana avatara as Śri Caitanya. Garga Muni’s purpose would have been to avoid confusing Nanda Maharaja and to play along with Bhagavan’s plan to appear in Kaliyuga as the channa-avatara (hidden avatara). This last reason is why the Vedic scriptures only indirectly refer to Śrī Caitanya’s avatara. In Bhagavad Gita, Śrī Kṛṣṇa says, “Because I veil Myself through the agency of My yogamaya potency, I am not manifest to everyone as I am” (nähaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya yoga-maya-samavṛtaḥ, GĪTĀ 7.25). This declaration specifically applies to the Lord’s appearance in Kali- yuga as Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya, not as the Supreme Lord but as a devo- tee. Prahlada Mahārāja also refers to Śrī Caitanya when he says in Srimad Bhagavatam, “O Lord, Your appearance in Kaliyuga is hidden, or confidential, and therefore You are called Triyuga, one who appears in three yugas [namely Satya, Treta, and Dvapara]” (channah kalau yad abhavas tri-yugo’tha sa tvam, SB 7.9.38). Here the word channa (covered) also signifies that Śrī Caitanya is Śrī Kṛṣṇa covered by the transcendental affects and complexion of Śrī Rād- hikā. Nāradīya Purana also foretells Bhagavan’s appearance as a devotee: The Lord said: “Concealing My real identity, O vipra [Märkandeya Rṣi], I appear in Kaliyuga in the garb of a devotee and always protect My devotees.” (Naradiya Purana 5.47)5 Tvisäkṛṣṇam may also be broken as tvişä kṛṣṇam, meaning “one whose complexion is blackish.” Although Śrī Caitanya’s complexion was golden, He is Śrī Kṛṣṇa Himself, and thus the words tviṣā kṛṣṇam indicate His original form as Śrī Kṛṣṇa, which He revealed only to certain devotees, such as Ramananda Rāya. Sangopangastra-pārṣada means “with His limbs, ornaments, weapons, and confidential companions.” According to Śrīla Baladeva Vidyabhūṣaṇa, Śrī Caitanya’s limbs [associates] are Śrī Nityananda Prabhu and Advaita Acarya; His ornaments [servants] are Śrīvāsa Thakura, Śrila Haridasa Thakura, and others; His weapons are the Holy Names, which dispel ignorance; and His confidential 5aham eva kalau vipra nityam pracchanna-vigrahaḥ bhagavad-bhakta-rupeņa lokan rakṣāmi sarvadā 9 I Mangalācaraṇa companions are Gadadhara, Govinda, and the many other devotees who stayed with Him in Jagannatha Puri. Sangopängastra-pärşada may also refer to Sri Caitanya’s form as Śrī Kṛṣṇa, which He showed to His intimate devotees. This form has beautiful limbs decorated with ornaments, such as the Kaustubha gem, which function like weapons because they cut the knot of egoic identity by attracting one’s attention toward Śrī Kṛṣṇa. The Lord’s ornaments are also associates; they are persons and naturally, of course, devotees. The sentence yajñaiḥ sankirtana-prāyair yajanti hi su-medhasaḥ means that although the Vedas recommend many processes for wor- shiping the Supreme Lord, in Kaliyuga the wise worship Him pri- marily through sacrifice of the self in complete [sam] kirtana of His Holy Names. The prefix sam carries the sense of “altogether” and “completion.” Thus, it can imply both congregational chanting and chanting in which the self is completely offered. The main point is that such chanting should not be enacted from the egoic position of independent doership. When consciousness is fully turned toward its Source, the name self-manifests to con- sciousness as identical with Bhagavan. In such complete kirtana, the devotee transcends all sense of being a “chanter of the name;’ rather, it is the Absolute Consciousness that manifests to the indi- vidual consciousness in the form of the Name. The power of kirtana to transport one beyond egoic identity or egoic chanting is gener- ally enhanced by the congregational experience, and hence, the two meanings of the prefix are complementary. Egoic chanting, how- ever, can be held to, or sometimes even strengthened, in a group setting, such as when it is undertaken simply as a form of enter- tainment or to impress others with one’s musicianship. Therefore, whether alone or in a group, kirtana should involve the complete offering of the self, including the totality of awareness, feeling, vital force, and intent. This is the true import of sankirtana. The present age is called Kali, or the age of strife, quarrel, dis- sension, contention, deception, and war. Such characteristics are prevalent at present whether within a family or among neighbors, co-workers, or states. The antidote to such a temperament is love, 10 1 Homage to the Inaugurator of Sankirtana. which begins with cooperation. That also is the implied meaning of sankirtana, since true sankirtana is not possible without the coop- eration and surrender of the individual egos of the participants for the pleasure of the Supreme Person. The fact that sankirtana is primary means that even if one wor- ships the Lord by another process, it must be accompanied by the chanting of His names. Śrī Caitanya inaugurated this process and is thus called the father of the sankirtana movement. The word su- medhasaḥ means “those endowed with discriminating wisdom.” The implication is that those of lesser discrimination will worship Bha- gavan in other ways, while those altogether bereft of discrimina- tion will oppose the validity of sankirtana. Sankirtana is very dear to Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu. He Himself was always absorbed in sankirtana, and He enjoined all others to participate, declaring it the universal remedy for the defects of Kaliyuga. Sukadeva Gosvāmi confirms this: My dear King, although Kaliyuga is an ocean of faults, it has one supreme virtue: Simply by chanting the names of Kṛṣṇa one can become free from material identification and attain the transcen- dental state. Whatever result was obtained in Satyayuga by med- itating on Vişņu, in Tretayuga by performing sacrifices, and in Dvaparayuga by serving the Lord’s lotus feet, can be obtained in Kaliyuga simply by kirtana of Sri Hari. (SB 12.3.51-52) Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi’s worshipful Deity is Śrī Caitanya Mahāpra- bhu. Therefore, he begins his comprehensive literary undertaking by quoting a verse about Śri Caitanya from Srimad Bhagavatam, the supreme scriptural authority in the matter of the Complete Reality, Svayam Bhagavan. This mangalacarana verse is thus of the vastu- nirdeśātmaka variety, identifying the book’s primary subject. kaler doşa-nidhe rajann asti hy eko mahan gunaḥ kirtanad eva kṛṣṇasya mukta-sangaḥ param vrajet kṛte yad dhyayato viṣṇum tretayam yajato makhaiḥ dvapare paricaryayam kalau tad dhari-kirtanät 11 Anuccheda 2 Homage to Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya अन्तः कृष्णं बहिर्गौरं दर्शिताङ्गादिवैभवम् । कलौ सङ्कीर्तनाद्यैः स्मः कृष्णचैतन्यमाश्रिताः ॥ २ ॥ IN KALIYUGA We take shelter of Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya through full participation of the self in complete kirtana [sam-kirtana] and other forms of devotion. He is golden without, while conceal- ing His blackish complexion within, and He has revealed the transcendental majesty of His bodily limbs and of His integral associates. Commentary HERE ŚRILA JIVA GOSVĀMĪ EXPLAINS the meaning of the opening verse. Śrī Kṛṣṇa, whose complexion is blackish, covered Himself with the golden complexion of Srimati Rādhārāṇī to appear in Kali- yuga as Kṛṣṇa Caitanya. He is the Supreme Absolute, Bhagavan, but His purpose is to model how devotion is to be enacted by per- fectly embodying it in His own being. For this reason it is not readily apparent that He is Bhagavan, and so Srimad Bhagavatam describes Him as “the hidden avatara.” Alternatively, the words antaḥ kṛṣṇam bahir gauram may be taken to mean not that Śrī Caitanya is black- ish within and golden without, but that He is Kṛṣṇa within though outwardly appearing as Gaura, Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī also indicates here that one can be devotionally attuned to 12 2 Homage to Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya through full participation of the self in complete kirtana (sam-kirtana). Darsitāngādi-vaibhava means that Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu manifested His opulence through His limbs and integral associates. His body was so beautiful that just by seeing Him, people would be inspired to surrender to Him. He also manifested His majesty through Nityananda Prabhu and other associates, who preached the chanting of the Holy Name. This phrase can also mean that Śrī Caitanya manifested the greatness of His associates by engaging them in distributing love of God. By using the plural pronoun in the clause “we take shelter of Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya,” Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī includes the readers of the Śri Sat Sandarbhas. He invites them to join him in taking shelter of Sri Caitanya by full participation in sankirtana, the transcenden- tal means that self-discloses Bhagavan and establishes the integral self in the permanent state of unconditional love. By using the plu- ral form, Śrī Jiva also implies that Śri Caitanya’s teachings are not limited to a particular sect or nationality. In this anuccheda, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has described his wor- shipable Deity, which is a vastu-nirdeśatmaka-mangalācaraṇa. Additionally, the author says that he takes shelter, which is an act of namaskāra. So in this sense, it is also a namas-kriyātmaka- mangalacarana. Next, he performs āśīrvādātmaka-mangalacarana, invoking auspiciousness by declaring the glories of his spiritual teachers. 13 Anuccheda 3 Homage to Śrī Rūpa and Sanatana Gosvāmis जयतां मथुराभूमौ श्रीलरूपसनातनौ । यौ विलेखयतस्तत्त्वं ज्ञापकौ पुस्तिकामिमाम् ॥ ३ ॥ ALL GLORIES to Śrīla Rūpa and Sanatana Gosvāmis who reside in the land of Mathura. They have engaged me in writing this book to broadcast the essential truth (tattva) regarding Bhagavān. Commentary HERE ŚRILA JIVA GOSVAMI EXPLAINS his reason for composing the Sat Sandarbhas. He is doing it at the behest of his spiritual teachers, Rūpa and Sanatana Gosvāmis, who are also his uncles. Jiva Gosvāmī studied under them, and they asked him to compile their teachings into a book for the benefit of all. This request is indicated by the word jñāpakau, which literally means “those who are inspired to teach others.” Previously Rupa and Sanatana were famous in Bengal as minis- ters of Hussein Shah. Now they are glorious in the land of Math- ură, which is itself glorious, being the place of Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s pastimes. To be glorious in this land means to be endowed with the wealth of kṛṣṇa-prema, love of God, which is the rarest attainment. To distin- guish this opulence, Jiva Gosvāmī adds the honorific “Śrila” before their names. “Śrila” signifies that Rūpa and Sanatana Gosvāmis are endowed with transcendental knowledge, non-attachment, devo- tion, and love of God. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi prays that through the Sat 14 3 Homage to Śrī Rūpa and Sanatana Gosvāmis Sandarbhas these two great beings may manifest their opulence and glory for the welfare of others. According to Sanskrit grammatical rules, the pronoun imām (this) is used for objects near at hand. Since at this point Jīva Gosvāmi was just at the outset of writing the Sat Sandarbhas, his mention here of pustikām imam (this book) may seem a defect. Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa comments, however, that because the book already existed within the author’s mind, his usage is proper. 15Anuccheda 4 The Source of the Śrī Ṣat Sandarbhas कोऽपि तद्वान्धवो भट्टो दक्षिणद्विजवंशजः । विविच्य व्यलिखद् ग्रन्थं लिखिताद् वृद्धवैष्णवैः ॥ ४ ॥ ŚRI GOPALA BHATTA GOSVĀMI, a friend of Śri Rūpa and Śrī Sanā- tana, born in a South Indian brahmana family, compiled the orig- inal version of this book after extracting the essence from the works of ancient Vaisnava masters. Commentary ŚRILA GOPALA BHATTA GOSVAMI was the son of Vyeńkata Bhaṭṭa, the head priest of the Ranganatha Temple in Srirangam, where the Śrī Vaiṣṇava sect has its headquarters. It was in Vyenkata’s home that Śri Caitanya Mahaprabhu stayed for four months of the rainy season during His tour of South India in 1513. There, He and Vyenkata discussed philosophy, as is known from the Caitanya- caritämṛta, Madhya-lila, Chapter 9, and the Bhakti-ratnākara, First Wave. At that time, Gopala Bhaṭṭa was a young boy, and he learned the intricacies of Gaudiya Vaisnava philosophy directly from Śrī Caitanya. Later he studied the writings of the eminent Vaisnavas of the Śri-sampradaya. On Śrī Caitanya’s order, Gopala Bhaṭṭa later moved to Vṛndāvana, where he established the temple of Śrī Radha-Ramana. He is one of the great authorities on Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s teachings. 16 4 The Source of the Śri Sat Sandarbhas As we shall learn further on, the venerable Vaiṣṇavas that Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi refers to here as sources for Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi include Śrī Rāmānujācārya, Śri Madhvācārya, and Śrīdhara Svāmi. Śrila Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi culled the essence from the works of these previous ācāryas and Vaisnava scholars, and then com- posed a book explaining the essential truths about Kṛṣṇa, the Sup- reme Person. That book is the basis for the present work. In this way, Jiva Gosvāmī hints at the authenticity of his work, for by basing it on Śrila Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi’s book, he implies that the work is authoritative, free of concocted ideas. Unfortunately, Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi’s book, which formed the basis of the Sat Sandarbhas, is no longer extant. 17 Anuccheda 5 Homage to Śrī Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī तस्याद्यं ग्रन्थनालेखं क्रान्तव्युत्क्रान्तखण्डितम् । पर्यालोच्याथ पर्यायं कृत्वा लिखति जीवकः ॥ ५ ॥ SOME PARTS of this first book by Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi were in order, some were out of order, while other parts were incom- plete or missing. After thorough deliberation, Śrī Jiva now rewrites this book in the appropriate order. Commentary THE QUESTION MAY ARISE, “If Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi had already composed a work on this subject, why would Rupa and Sanatana have engaged Jiva Gosvāmi in compiling a similar work?” Jiva Gosvāmī replies in this verse: His mission is to complete the task that Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi began and to set the material in proper order. In the previous two verses, Jiva Gosvāmi has already estab- lished that his work is not a product of his imagination but is based on the authority of the scriptures and previous ācāryas. From this verse it appears that the work of Śrila Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī did not take the final shape of a book, but was in the form of notes, technically called kaḍacă, and so was not arranged systematically. By using the word jivaka, Jiva Gosvāmī makes a pun on his own name. Jivaka means “a petty being,” or else it can be taken as the name of the author. Out of humility the author refers to himself 18 5 Homage to Sri Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi here in the third person. The suffix kan is used in this context in a diminutive sense, to indicate that a humble being is writing. As jīvānugas (followers) of Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi, we may prefer to interpret jivaka in other ways. We may, for example, apply the def- inition, “One who induces living beings to emit ecstatic sounds by supplying them with the esoteric meaning of Srimad Bhāgavatam [through his Sat Sandarbhas] is known as jivaka” (jivan kāpayati bhāgavatartha-pradanandeneti jivakaḥ). Or, alternatively, “One who explains the inherent nature of the jiva, his unconditional relation with Bhagavan, the process by which such a relation can be actual- ized, and the completion stage of such actualization, is known as jivaka” (jiva-svarupa-sambandhabhidheya-prayojanän käyati varṇa- yatīti jivakaḥ). Or even, “One who infuses life into living beings by giving them love of Kṛṣṇa is known as jiva or, equivalently, jivaka” (jivayati jivän kṛṣṇa-prema-pradăneneti jivo, jiva eva jivaka iti svärthe kan). Finally, the word jivaka may also be formed by applying to the root √jiv the suffix -aka in the sense of “blessing.” In this case, jivaka means “the person who confers blessings on the living entities.” 19 64 Anuccheda 6 Eligibility of the Reader यः श्रीकृष्णपदाम्भोजभजनैकाभिलाषवान् । तेनैव दृश्यतामेतदन्यस्मै शपथोऽर्पितः || ६ || THIS BOOK MAY BE STUDIED only by one whose sole aspiration is to worship the lotus feet of Śrī Kṛṣṇa. All others are forewarned as to the implications of this investigation. Commentary HERE ŚRILA JIVA GOSVĀMĪ DEFINES the adhikari, the person eligible to read the Sri Sat Sandarbhas. It is clear from this statement that Śrī Jiva is writing specifically for those whose sole, or primary, desire is to serve Śrī Kṛṣṇa. To all others a warning is extended. From the perspective of the modern objective reader, this appears to be quite a daunting statement. If taken at face value, it would demand from the very outset a view of Reality that is meant to be elicited only through final assimilation of the teaching. Such an uncompromis- ing assertion would effectively rule out the relevance of impartial philosophical investigation or study of the text for the purpose of comparative evaluation. In other words, it would deny the possibil- ity of its own message having any bearing on consciousness save for those whose consciousness is already so turned. If such were the case, there would have been no need for Jiva Gosvāmī to explain his metaphysics in relation to the other major systems of Indian philosophy. That he did so consistently clearly 20 6 Eligibility of the Reader shows that this work is meant to serve for the highest kind of meta- physical consideration. By presenting Bhagavan and bhakti in the broadest possible philosophical context throughout the Sandarbhas, he has made possible the turning of consciousness toward that Real- ity for those not already predisposed in that way. This would seem to contradict his own admonition. So, Jiva Gosvāmi’s statement is not to be interpreted in a dog- matic or absolutistic sense. Rather, it is intended to signal to the reader in no uncertain terms that what is at stake here is the entirety of being and not armchair philosophy. It is not for mere intellectual stimulation, nor is it a presentation of ideas to be appro- priated or rejected through ratiocination. The entire being must be available to the investigation; otherwise, the Truth that it intends to disclose will remain hidden, since that Truth lies beyond the knowing capacity of the mind alone. So the reader is alerted as to the seriousness of the study. Furthermore, the statement specifies that the Truth to be self- disclosed through submission of consciousness to the investigation is Bhagavan. Consequently, even the beginning of the inquiry is based upon a prior devotional turning of consciousness toward its Source, so that the inquiry itself becomes nondifferent in function and essence from the completed realized state. In other words, the inquiry itself should be rooted in a trans-egoic view; otherwise, one need not bother. Therefore, the admonition can indirectly be taken as an invitation to the sensitive reader to suspend the ego- referencing function that predisposes one to forgetfulness of one’s true Self and the sense of independence or separation from one’s Source. The reader is thus alerted that this book is not simply to be read from a detached or non-participatory stance; rather, it must be entered into and received from the core of being, or consciousness itself, beyond the conventional egoic reference. In other words, the author is implying that Ultimate Reality can- not be investigated from a purely objective perspective, divorced from the subjectivity of the researcher, as is the custom of the sci- entific community. The effort of science to unravel and encompass reality in an entirely objective manner has reached a dead-end, as 21 1 Mangalācaraṇa evidenced by the studies in the field of quantum mechanics. There too, it had to be admitted that subjectivity, or the mere act of con- scious observation, tends to exert an influence on the phenomena observed. Śrī Jiva indirectly seems to presage this. In Bhagavad Gita, Śrī Kṛṣṇa imposed a similar restriction on Arjuna: This confidential knowledge is never to be explained to one who is not prepared to undergo spiritual discipline, or to one who is devoid of devotion, or to one who is not wholeheartedly inquisitive, or to one who is envious of Me. (GITĂ 18.67)1 As a further specification of the criteria of eligibility to enter this study, Jiva Gosvāmi uses the word eka (solely) as a qualifier of the word bhajana, the devotional turning of consciousness in whole- bodied worship. In his Sarva-samvadini, he glosses this word eka as “primary.” This means that this study is to be taken up only by one whose prime aspiration is for bhajana (loving service) alone and nothing else. All other desires are subservient to this primary intention. If one side of Jiva Gosvämï’s warning is directed toward those who would approach his work as mere intellectual exercise, the corresponding admonition is directed toward practitioners who presume themselves to be already surrendered but who still har- bor egoic self-reference and self-interest. In this case, the appar- ent outward allegiance to exoteric religion is the cloak with which 1idam te nätapaskäya näbhaktaya kadacana na caśuśrüşave väcyam na ca mam yo’bhyasiyati 2 The term “whole-bodied” worship implies that all faculties of being, including the physical body (anna-maya-kosa), the vital-emotional body (prana-maya-kosa), the mental body (mano-maya-kośa), and ultimately consciousness itself (vijñāna-maya-kośa), should be turned toward Bhagavan in worship. Essentially worship, if it is not just superficial, is an act of consciousness, a devotional turning of consciousness (sammukhya); yet, for it to be complete, it should involve and translate into all aspects of individual selfhood, and hence, it should be “whole-bodied” worship. Note: In Vaisnava siddhanta, vijñāna-maya-kosa refers to the atma (consciousness itself) and ananda-maya-kośa refers to Paramātmā (see Govinda-bhasya 3.13.12-15). This view is distinguished from that of Advaita Vedanta wherein vijñāna-maya-kosa refers to the intellectual or wisdom body and ananda-maya-kosa to the causal or bliss body, or to Brahman itself. 22 6 Eligibility of the Reader such practitioners hide from themselves the internal state of non- surrender and contraction away from God. So, the warning is extended even to those who are merely egoically oriented toward the service of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, appropriating devotion for personal ambition. Such individuals also need not bother to take up the study, because the ego-reference will from the very outset prevent any possibility of immediate and true knowing. But again, as suggested above, the admonition may serve to alert the sensitive practitioner to see through their own ego-patterning and identity as a prerequisite for undertaking this study. Simply stated, the prior devotional turning of consciousness toward its Source, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, is the precondition for the self-revelation and immediate knowing of that Reality. At the same time, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī hints that in the Sri Sat Sandarbhas, he will establish unconditional devotion to Śrī Kṛṣṇa as the supreme goal of life. 23 Anuccheda 7 Homage to the Teachers अथ नत्वा मन्त्रगुरून् गुरून् भागवतार्थदान् । श्रीभागवतसन्दर्भ सन्दर्भं वश्मि लेखितुम् ॥ ७ ॥ AFTER OFFERING OBEISANCES to my initiating guru and to those spiritual teachers who taught me the meaning of Srimad Bhaga- vatam, I wish to write this book called Śri Bhagavata Sandarbha. Commentary AFTER EXTENDING REVERENCE TO HIS TEACHERS, Śrīla Jīva Gosvā- mi names his book. He calls it Śrī Bhāgavata Sandarbha, because he intends to explain the essential meanings of the Bhagavata Purana (Srimad Bhagavatam). To explain the term sandarbha, Śrīla Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa quotes a well-known verse of unknown origin: A literary work that discloses the confidential meaning of a sub- ject, incorporates its essence, explains the superiority of the sub- ject, elaborates its various meanings, and is inherently worthy of study is called a sandarbha by learned scholars! The Bhagavata Sandarbha is also called Sat Sandarbha because it contains six books-the Tattva, Bhagavat, Paramätma, Kṛṣṇa, 1 güdharthasya prakasaś ca saroktiḥ śresthată tatha nänärtha-vattvam vedyatvam sandarbhaḥ kathyate budhaiḥ 24 7 Homage to the Teachers Bhakti, and Priti Sandarbhas. Each Sandarbha is an analysis of the subject stated in the title, and each is based on Śrimad Bhagava- tam. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī also wrote a verse-by-verse commentary on Srimad Bhagavatam called Krama Sandarbha, and this is sometimes referred to as the seventh Sandarbha. Vaisnava scholars and others have written many essays and trea- tises on Śrimad Bhagavatam, but these six works stand among them as the most exhaustive exposition of its theology and philosophy. Thus, it is clear that Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi is perfectly justified in giving the title Sandarbha to his work. In the next anuccheda, while invoking blessings upon his read- ers, Jiva Gosvāmi implicitly suggests the subject matter of the Sat Sandarbhas, the means presented in the book for actualization of the goal, and the goal itself, which is the end-state to be actualized. 25The Seed-Conception of the Sat Sandarbhas Anuccheda 8 A seed-conception is a concise statement, generally expressed in poetic, aphoristic, or benedictory form that encapsulates the nature of the Reality to be realized. Implicit in the seed-formulation are the core truths regarding that Reality, that are to be made explicit through the elaboration of the text. Jīva Gosvāmi’s verse here in Anuccheda 8 represents the seed-conception for the Sandarbhas. We will learn in the next anuccheda that this verse suggests four primary topics-visaya, sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana - which are the reality principles (tattva) to be investigated by the author. Thus, upon careful analysis of the ensuing text, it can be seen that the theological and philosophical unfoldment of this entire book, and indeed, even of all Six Sandarbhas taken as a unit, proceeds from this initial poetic affirmation. It is for this reason that this verse, which completes the mangalacarana, has been set apart here from the rest of the invocatory verses because of its unique distinction. The seed-formula does not merely describe Reality, but serves to turn or attune consciousness to that Reality directly. In so doing, it discloses that Reality along with the core truths that are implicit in its meaning. In this case, Jiva Gosvāmi’s utterance is in the form of a benediction, for the self-revelation of consciousness as love, upon all who are devotionally turned toward the very source of their being. 27 22 Anuccheda 8 Homage to Śrī Kṛṣṇa यस्य ब्रह्मेति सञ्ज्ञां क्वचिदपि निगमे याति चिन्मात्रसत्ताप्य्- अंशो यस्यांशकैः स्वैर्विभवति वशयन्नेव मायां पुमागंश्च । एकं यस्यैव रूपं विलसति परमव्योम्नि नारायणाख्यं स श्रीकृष्णो विधत्तां स्वयमिह भगवान् प्रेम तत्पादभाजाम् ॥ ८ ॥ IN ONE FEATURE, Śrī Kṛṣṇa exists as pure consciousness, with- out any manifest characteristics, and is referred to as Brahman in some portions of the Vedas. In another feature, He expands as the Puruşa, who regulates the extrinsic potency (māyā) by His many plenary portions. In yet another of His principal forms, He is Nārāyaṇa, resplendent in the spiritual sky, Vaikuntha. May that Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the original complete Absolute Truth (Svayam Bhagavan), bestow love for Himself on those who worship His lotus feet in this world. Commentary IN THIS STATEMENT, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī has set forth the seed- conception that enfolds the essential truths of Srimad Bhagavatam that he intends to make explicit in his Sat Sandarbhas. The seed top- ics are clearly spelled out in the next anucccheda as visaya, samba- ndha, abhidheya, and prayojana. We may consider these briefly here. The viṣaya (subject) of the Sat Sandarbhas is stated here to be none other than the original complete Absolute Truth, Svayam Bhagavan, identified as Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Sambandha refers to the integral 29 30 30 I Mangalācarana relationship that words share with their meaning or reference. In Sanskrit linguistics, this is called vācya-vacaka-sambandha, the rela- tion between the signified and its signifier. The idea here is that the signifying words carry an inherent power to turn consciousness toward, or in other words, to reveal, that which they signify. By the words sa śri-kṛṣṇaḥ, Jiva Gosvāmī clearly identifies Śrī Kṛṣṇa as the signified Reality of which his book is the linguistic symbol or signifier. Abhidheya (lit., “that which is to be enacted”) refers to the means for realizing the signified Reality, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. In this case, the words tat-pada-bhājām indicate the means as pure devotional worship of His lotus feet. Prayojana refers to the end-state, or the stage of com- pletion, to be brought about through its actualizing means. In this case, it refers to transcendental love of God, as indicated by the word prema. In this way, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi alludes to the four intro- ductory topics indicated in Anuccheda 1- the subject of the book, the book’s relation with its purpose, the means of actualizing that purpose, and the final purpose itself. In the next anuccheda, he explicitly identifies these four topics as the core truths to be ascer- tained in the text. This then initiates an epistemic inquiry into the means of valid knowing (pramāna) by which these core truths can be definitely determined. In addition to the above, Śrī Jīva Gosvāmi’s statement also con- tains the seed ideas that will be elaborated later in regard to the sub- ject of the text, namely Śrī Kṛṣṇa. The term Svayam Bhagavan has been assigned directly to Him. This term is applicable only to the original and complete Absolute Truth, and not to any partial mani- festation thereof. At the same time, the term implies that the inte- grated unity that He alone is, includes infinite parts and expansions. A few of His principal aspects are mentioned here. In one feature of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, He is manifest as the dazzling self- effulgence of consciousness alone, without form, qualities, or opu- lences, and is called Brahman in some sections of the Vedas. Some transcendentalists are drawn to realize the Absolute in this indivisi- ble, formless impersonal aspect, considering It the Ultimate Reality. This feature of Bhagavan is described in the Taittiriya Upanisad: 8 Homage to Śri Krsna “Brahman is eternal, conscious, and unlimited” (satyam jñānam anantam brahma, TU 2.1.1). Another aspect of Śrī Kṛṣṇa is His feature of interior regulation, or immanence, called the Purușa. There are three such Purusa expansions corresponding to the metacosmic (the causal), the macrocosmic (the subtle or universal), and the microcosmic (the gross or individual) dimensions of being, respectively. The first Puruşa is Kāraṇodakaśāyi Viṣņu, meaning He who lies upon (with- out actually ever touching) the Ocean of Causality. This symbolism is highly significant, for it indicates that although He is the sup- port for primordial creation, He never actually contacts it directly. Furthermore, He is the uncaused Source Condition that makes pos- sible the unfolding of the chain of causal events. As such He is the Paramātmā, or the Immanent Self, of the total material creation. At this level, the immanent, or regulatory, function is concerned with the primal or causal cosmic factors that set in motion the evolution of all forms from out of the sea of infinite possibility. This refers to the Immanent Self as witness of primordial nature taken as an integrated whole in its as yet unmanifest condition, i.e., the witness of the metacosmic order. Of necessity, therefore, there can be only one Karaṇodakaśāyi Vişņu expansion, who is thus called Mahaviṣṇu. He is the reser- voir of all living beings who are sheltered in Him. At the outset of a new creation cycle, He impregnates the material energy with atmas, simply through His glance, or in other words, through His conscious intent, and thus activates the otherwise inert material energy. The Causal Ocean is considered the boundary between the material and spiritual manifestations. It implies that the spiritual existence is beyond any material cause and thus unapproachable by any material means. The second Purusa is Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, meaning “He who lies within the oceanic womb of universal being.” This refers to the Paramātmā, or the Immanent Self, within each of the innumerable universes. The immanent, or regulatory, function at this level is concerned with the subtle creative principles that make possible the development of the individual universes in accordance with the 31 1 Mangalacarana prior causal matrix that governs their unfolding. This refers to the Immanent Self as witness of the individual universes, each taken as an integrated whole, i.e., the witness of the macrocosmic order. Lying on the Garbhodaka Ocean signifies that He is the seed of the individual universe. Garbhodakasayi Vişnu is also the source of the various lilā- avataras who appear within the universe. The word lila-avatara literally means a descent of God for the sake of divine play. Through these divine descents, grace is made available to living beings to access the true purpose of the universe’s unfolding. Like Karano- dakaśāyi Viṣṇu, Garbhodakaśāyi Visnu is not directly in contact with materiality. Rather, He inspires Brahma, who was born from the lotus flower growing from His own lotus navel, with the knowl- edge and will of how to create. This involves the revelation of the subtle creative ideation in accordance with which individual concrete forms come into being. The third Purusa is Kṣirodakaśāyī Visņu, meaning He who lies upon the ocean of thickened milk, which symbolically refers to inner essence, consciousness, and creativity. This implies that He is the conscious substratum even of consciousness itself. This refers to the Paramātmā, or the Immanent Self, within each and every life form and indeed within every atom. The immanent, or regula- tory, function at this level involves being the conscious support for the transmutation of concrete forms, or the evolution of individual beings. This refers to the Immanent Self as witness of individual being, i.e., the witness of the microcosmic order. These three purușăvatāras are also called Sankarṣaṇa, Pradyu- mna, and Aniruddha, respectively. Kṛṣṇa regulates material nature through the agency of His puruşăvatāras. A summary description of these three Puruşa manifestations is given in Sätvata-tantra: Śrī Viṣṇu has three forms called Purusas, or the Immanent Self. The first, Mahaviṣṇu, is He who sets in motion the total material energy [mahat-tattva], the second is Garbhodakaśayi Viṣṇu, who is situated within each egg-like [or womb-like] universe, and the third is Kṣirodakaśäyi, who is immanent within the heart of every 32 8 Homage to Śrī Kṛṣṇa living being. One who intuitively knows these three is liberated from conditional existence. (Satvata-tantra 1.30)1 The above discussion concerns the Absolute in Its feature of immanence. In other words, it shows the Absolute’s “in-volvement” with phenomenal existence, being the conscious context in which and through which all conditional forms arise and pass away. But this is to consider the Absolute only in relation to materiality, and to consider Unity or Nonduality only in contradistinction to phe- nomenal diversity. So the question must be asked, what about the Absolute in Its feature of transcendence? In other words, what about the Absolute in Its own inherent being, distinct from the material world and distinct from our referential power of percep- tion? And concomitantly, if the Absolute is considered in Its own essence, would that not also imply the possibility of a transphenom- enal diversity that is simultaneously and inconceivably of the same nondual nature? This is exactly what is indicated in the next line of Jiva Gosvāmi’s statement. Beyond the material creation is the spiritual sky (para-vyoma), which contains the various spiritual planets (Vaikunthas). The chief deity in the spiritual sky is Śrī Nārāyaṇa, a vilāsa expansion of Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Laghu-bhāgavatamṛta defines a viläsa form as follows: For the purpose of His own divine play, God in His original complete form self-expands as His own integrated forms [that are essentially nondifferent from Him]. When a particular self-expansion appears somewhat different in form from His original form but is virtu- ally identical in quality and potency, it is called a vilasa expansion. (LBH 1.1.15)2 Śrī Kṛṣṇa in His two-handed form is Svayam Bhagavan, God in His original and Absolute completion. This svayam-rupa is described in Laghu-bhāgavatamṛta, “That form of God which is vişņos tu triņi rupani puruşakhyany atho viduḥ ekam tu mahatah srastr dvitiyam tv anda-samsthitam trtiyam sarva-bhūta-stham täni jäätvä vimucyate tasya bhāti vilāsataḥ prayeṇātma-samam saktyă sa viläso nigadyate 33 1 Mangalacarana absolutely independent of all other forms or expansions is called svayam-rupa, the original self-existent form” (ananyapekṣi yad rupaṁ svayaṁ-rupaḥ sa ucyate, LBH 1.1.12). Bhagavan’s svayam-rupa is grounded in its own inherent being and is the basis of all other forms. It is completely independent, second to no other form. In Śrī Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will discuss in great detail the nature of God in His own absolute transcendence. 34 34 II PramāņaEpistemological Validity of the Vedas, Itihāsas, and Purāņas Culminating in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Anucchedas 9-18 The topic of epistemology is indispensable to an investigation of truth, for how can we claim to know anything in truth if our means for knowing it be flawed or uncertain? It would remain at best an approximation, subject to further review. So, before embarking on a deliberation of the core truths of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayo- jana, it is crucial that a valid pramana, or means of valid knowing, be ascertained. At the time of Jiva Gosvāmi’s writing, the orthodox schools of Indian philosophy (darśanas) based their metaphysics primarily on the authority of the Vedas, considering them to be divine sound rev- elation (Śruti or sabda). So, the subject of epistemology comes to focus solely on the discussion of a scriptural line of authority stem- ming from the Vedas. Jiva Gosvāmi extends the discussion a step further by logically and scripturally propounding Srimad Bhagava- tam as the definitive portion of the fifth Veda, which reveals the inner meaning of the Vedas. Apparently, on this foundation alone, the epistemological inquiry is determined to be complete. But if this is the case, then of what relevance can such an apparent epistemological reduction be to the disciplines of modern philosophy, psychology, phenomenology, consciousness studies, mänādhina meyasiddhiḥ Prameya-vivarana-sangraha 1.1 37 32 II Pramāņa quantum physics, and so on? Indeed, of what relevance is it for any modern reader/ enquirer outside of an insular group of believers? The answer to these questions will lead us into deeper epistemological evaluation. First of all, looking beyond the apparent reduction, one that would seemingly require a transempirical leap of faith, a more profound and certain means of knowing is implied in the concept of revealed sound (sabda). Other pramāņas, such as perception and inference, are possible means of valid knowing within the range of operations that define their respective limits, effectively, the quantifiable and the thinkable. Sabda, on the other hand, sig- nifies a supracognitive sound potency, or logos, that is transhu- man (apauruşeya) and thus beyond the limitations of language and thought; that is self-existing and self-revealing (svayam-prakāśa) and thus transempirical; and that is disclosed to consciousness directly (säkṣat-upalabdha), without mediation through any other conditional mode of knowing. Understood in this sense, sabda implies an innate potency of Pri- mordial Consciousness Itself, the Supreme Conscious foundation and Source. It not only signifies Reality, in the manner of concep- tual or logical formulation, but is identical with that Reality. It is thus one specific Reality potency through which Consciousness dis- closes Itself. So sabda points to an epistemological mode of know- ing that transcends perception and inference. This mode of know- ing does not so much involve an effort or intent to know any sort of object, internal or external, on the part of a subject; rather, it is an inturning of consciousness toward its own Source, prior to any conditional subject-object divide. So, by its own self-revelatory power, sabda, which effectuates the turning of consciousness, becomes identical with such turning. It may thus be understood as knowledge through conscious iden- tity and not conceptual knowledge about. The existence of such a direct mode of knowing has been the common experience reported by realized mystics of all traditions throughout recorded history. This adds weight to the argument that this mode of knowing cannot be reduced merely to the subjective experience of a limited knower; 38 4 Epistemological Validity of the Vedas, Itihāsas, and Purāņas Culminating in Śrīmad Bhagavatam rather, it has been recognized by those who have known it as pri- mordial subjectivity itself, prior to identification or involvement with any conditional knower and known. It must be noted, however, that for this higher epistemological capacity to be activated, one must rise above belief and disbelief. In the true sense of the term, belief can have application only when Reality is not directly known through identity in pure conscious- ness; only when the believing subject is the phenomenal self, iden- tified with perceptions, cognitions, affects, and conation. For the conventional practitioner or worshiper, however dedicated, devo- tion is enacted still from the separate self-sense (prthak-bhava) of a conditional subject trying to know some ultimate object through willful efforts of the mind and body. For such a person, sabda then, even though believed in as divine revelation, is reduced to the level of knowledge about Reality. It can just as easily be disbelieved, because it is unknowable and hence unprovable through logic and perception. It must be known directly in consciousness, which is to say that by the turning of con- sciousness upon its Source, sabda is enabled to self-manifest the Reality with which it is identical. What is suggested here for epis- temological consideration is merely the allowance for the possibil- ity of such a transphenomenal mode of knowing, for its actual exis- tence can be known for certain only by one in whom it is awakened. The elaboration of the entire process is intended precisely to actual- ize this possibility. Therefore, sabda as pramana implies far more than mere belief in scriptural authority; it refers, rather, to the direct experience of a person transcending the conventional lim- its and defects of the human perceptual instruments. Thus, sabda entails a superior grade of direct perception conveyed in linguistic form for the cognition of one who is eligible and available to such an experience. Conation refers to that aspect of the mental processes having to do with volition, striving, and willing. In that sense, it involves the potencies of both willing (iccha-sakti) and acting (kriya-sakti). It is a term used widely in psychology and represents a basic mental faculty along with cognition and affection. 39 II Pramāņa The significance of sabda as pramana, implying the activation of the transmental mode of knowing, will be brought out later both in the case of Sri Sukadeva and Śrīla Vyasadeva, the speaker and author of Śrimad Bhagavatam, respectively. Both of them had effected this turning of consciousness upon its Source, and hence to both of them Reality self-manifested through the self-revealing power of sabda. If the significance of this is rightly understood, then the reader is invited to rise beyond belief and disbelief, and the source of both, which is egoic identification. We are invited to know Reality immediately, apprehending it in perfect identity with the mode of knowing of the Bhagavata’s original speaker and author. When received in this way, sabda becomes not epistemological reduction, but epistemological transmutation and expansion. 40 Anuccheda 9 The Necessity for Epistemological Validity ९ । अथैवं सूचितानां श्रीकृष्णतद्वाच्यवाचकतालक्षणसम्बन्धतद्भजनलक्षणविधेयसपर्या- याभिधेयतत्प्रेमलक्षणप्रयोजनाख्यानामर्थानां निर्णयाय तावत् प्रमाणं निर्णीयते । तत्र पुरु- षस्य भ्रमादिदोषचतुष्टयदुष्टत्वात् सुतरामलौकिकाचिन्त्यस्वभाववस्तुस्पर्शायोग्यत्वाच् च तत्प्रत्यक्षादीन्यपि सदोषाणि ॥ FOUR TOPICS WERE SUGGESTED in the verse from the previous anuccheda: Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the subject (visaya) of this book; the book’s relation (sambandha) to Him is that of signifier (vācaka) to the signified (vacya); devotional turning of all the faculties to Him (bhajana) is what is meant to be enacted in all circum- stances (vidheya) [lit., “that which is to be done,” or “duty”], also known as abhidheya, and unconditional love for Him is the ulti- mate completion of such devotional turning (prayojana). Now, in order to investigate these four topics, we should first determine a means of valid knowing (pramana) [by which these topics can be ascertained]. In this regard, perception, inference, and other such methods are deficient, because human beings are prone to four defects: They are subject to delusion, they make mistakes, they are liable to misrepresentational bias, and their senses are limited in functional capacity. Furthermore, these methods of acquiring knowledge are not at all suited to approach the transcendental Entity, whose nature is inherently inconceivable and beyond phenomenality. 41 II Pramāṇa Commentary WITHOUT KNOWING THE PURPOSE OF A BOOK, a prospective reader is unlikely to develop an interest in it. Therefore, in the previ- ous anuccheda, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī outlines his subject and purpose. Now, with the phrase tad-bhajana-lakṣaṇa-vidheya, he states that the devotional turning of all faculties to Śrī Kṛṣṇa (bhajana), as explained in the Vedic scriptures, is the means for actualizing the final goal, prema-bhakti. But before undertaking any transforma- tive practice, and for it to actually be transformative in nature, it is essential that one is first established in a valid epistemological view. One’s actions are based upon one’s understanding of the sub- ject, and thus for proper practice to begin, one must have a clear understanding of the subject free of all doubts. In this matter the doubts that may arise are chiefly of three varieties: regarding one’s own ability to follow the process and suc- ceed, about the validity and efficacy of the process prescribed, or about the reality and worthiness of the goal to be achieved. Thus, the need arises for discerning the various means of valid know- ing. This portion of Tattva Sandarbha, therefore, deals with Vedic epistemology. Before analyzing the four topics specified above, Jiva Gosvāmi first establishes the validity of the transphenomenal mode of knowing through self-revealing sound (sabda). In English, the word “knowledge” implies valid knowledge. In Sanskrit, valid knowledge is called prama, the knower of such valid knowledge is called pramătă, and the means by which it is validly known is called pramāņa. Pramana can also mean “proof,” “evidence,” or “authority.” Jiva Gosvāmi is concerned with establishing an infallible means of knowing Absolute Reality. His interest is not in discussing epis- temology in general, which has been exhaustively considered by philosophical schools such as Nyaya and Purva-mimāṁsā. He assumes that the reader is familiar with the topic and thus avoids defining the various pramāņas. Human beings in general, he avers, employ various means to acquire knowledge, but none of them, except sabda, are infallible. This fallibility is due to the four 42 9 The Necessity for Epistemological Validity inherent defects found in all ordinary humans. Without excep- tion every ordinary human being may be subject either to funda- mental or circumstantial delusion (bhrama), may commit mistakes (pramada), may be given to misrepresentational bias (vipralipsa), and is restricted by the limited functional capacity of the senses (karaṇāpāṭava). Bhrama, or mistaken identification, is of two kinds. The first is the fundamental ignorance about one’s true self, which leads to identification with the body-mind complex as the self. This is the primordial illusion that perpetuates phenomenal existence and conditional identity. But how completely one identifies with the body depends on the degree of attachment to it, which is in direct correspondence with the degree of intensity of ignorance. This defect is of the nature of a fundamental epistemological error, because in this case, the knower (pramatā), or in other words, the empirical self, is itself conditional and relative. Whatever is observed or known from the relative reference of empirical self- hood is itself necessarily relative. While such empirical knowing may still carry pragmatic value, nature, or the thing in itself as an integrated part of an indivisible whole, is never actually known. On the basis of this error we mistake what is temporary and misery- bound for being permanent and enjoyable. All of our decisions and actions in life become colored by this fundamental illusion. The second kind of illusion is circumstantial. This occurs when we think we perceive something that is not in fact present, as in the case of a mirage or hallucination. While fundamental delusion is a categorical error that skews every act of perception through the lens of egoity, circumstantial delusion is no more than a structural lim- itation of the perceptual instrument, coming into play only under the influence of certain necessary extraneous conditions. In such circumstances too, however, valid knowing is impaired. This latter defect has two further divisions. In the first case, even when a person has proper knowledge of the object perceived, he continues to see the illusion, such as the perception of the sky as blue. Both the knowledgeable and the ignorant see the sky as blue. In the second case, once veridical knowledge of the true object is 43 II Pramāņa apprehended, one no longer mistakes it for something else, as in the case of mistaking a rope for a snake. Pramada, the second defect, is the tendency to make mistakes, either because of inattention or due to mistaking a limited and par- tial perspective for complete and final truth. In the first case, if the mind is not focused on a particular sense - the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, or skin-one is unable to sufficiently access the knowledge it can supply. This leads to errors in judgement or incomplete appre- hension. In the second case, the a priori partial perspective of the subject determines the limits of how the perceived object may be interpreted. For example, from the mechanistic world view of New- tonian science, the quantum world view would seem absurd. Due to perspectivity, observable phenomena may be misinterpreted because they are made to correspond to the narrow preset view of the subject. The third defect is vipralipsă, which literally means “the propen- sity to deceive.” It must be remembered that in the present context, we are discussing the four defects in terms of the epistemological obstacles that they present for the valid knowing of the perceptual field by a witness of that field. A purposeful intent to deceive others would certainly alter the perception of events. Even the perpetra- tor of deception would necessarily view the perceptual field, or the arising of phenomena, from a deceitful, malefic, and self-serving attitude, rather than from an integrated, benign, and wholistic per- spective. Yet, perhaps an even more basic manifestation of vipra- lipsă is in the non-intentional or unconscious operation of decep- tion. This may be termed as misrepresentational bias. In this case, the individuals unknowingly holding to a bias deceive themselves first by believing their view to be perfectly objective. They then misrepresent facts or events of consciousness by forcing them to fit their theory rather than adjusting their theory to fit the facts. This problem is pervasive in the conditioned way that we generally view the world, and hence, it sets serious limits on the validity of our knowledge of the known. In the world of scientific materialism that we now inhabit, people generally place tremendous faith in scientists and their 44 9 The Necessity for Epistemological Validity discoveries, treating scientists almost as modern sages or even as gods while accepting their discoveries as revelations. However, Dr. Rupert Sheldrake, a well-known biologist, writes in his book Science Set Free, “Through studying scientists in action, sociologists of science have revealed that scientists are indeed like other people. They are subject to social forces and peer-group pressures, and they need acceptance, funding and, if possible, political influence. Their success does not depend simply on the ingenuity of their theories or the facts they discover. The facts do not speak for themselves.” He goes on to write, “Phenomena that do not fit - anomalies - are routinely dismissed or explained away. They usually ignore what they do not want to deal with.” The fourth defect is karaṇāpāṭava, the functional limitation of the senses. We have five cognitive senses - seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and touching - which operate through the organs of the eyes, ears, tongue, nose, and skin, respectively. These senses func- tion only within a limited range. The human eye, for instance, can see light between infrared and ultraviolet wavelengths, but there are many other wavelengths the eye cannot discern - radio waves, x-rays, and so on. Even within the visible range, our eyes cannot see clearly if the light is too bright or too dim, if the object is too far or too close, or if the eyes themselves are diseased. Upon analysis, each sense reveals a similar built-in limitation. These four defects are imperfections related to the perceiver, but they also influence the perception. Bhrama, pramada, and karaṇāpā- tava are imperfections that impair perception and other pramānas, such as anumana, or inference, that depend on perception. Vipra- lipsă, however, impedes unmediated knowing through revealed sound, sabda-pramāņa. The conclusion is that since these four defects make perfectly reliable knowledge about even material objects a rare achieve- ment, valid knowledge about the realm beyond our sensory inspec- tion is altogether impossible through percepts and precepts. This premise is the cornerstone of Vedic epistemology. Of course, after Rupert Sheldrake, Science Set Free, p. 297 45II Pramāņa acknowledging these four defects, one will find the quest for a reliable pramāņa to be an exacting challenge. Different schools of Indian philosophy and theology accept dif- ferent pramāņas as valid. According to Jiva Gosvāmī, there are a total of ten pramāņas, or means of valid knowledge, which he lists in his Sarva-samvadini commentary on this anuccheda. Each school recognizes a certain number of these as valid independent means, and either rejects the rest or subsumes them under the accepted pramāņas. Each school presents arguments to support its opin- ion. These ten traditional pramāņas, with the three most important listed first, are as follows:
12. Pratyakṣa, perception.
13. Anumana, inference.
14. Sabda, revealed sound-knowledge.
15. Arşa, the statements of an authoritative sage, rşi, or deva.
16. Upamana, comparison.
17. Arthapatti, presumption.
18. Anupalabdhi, non-cognition of being, or cognition of the absence of being.
19. Sambhava, inclusion.
20. Aitihya, tradition.
21. Ceṣṭā, gesture. PRATYAKṢA. When a sense organ comes in contact with a per- ceivable object under favorable conditions, and provided the sense faculty is internally linked with the mind, then knowledge of the perceived object arises in the mind. This is known as perception. Perception can be a means to either valid or invalid knowledge. But only those sense perceptions that lead to valid knowledge should be considered as pramāņa. Sense perception is the principal means of acquiring knowledge in material life. Both theistic and atheistic philosophers accept pratyakṣa-pramāņa as one of the means to valid knowledge. Percep- tion is of two types - external and internal. An external perception occurs when we acquire knowledge of quantifiable objects through the external senses. In an internal perception we acquire knowl- edge directly through the mind, as when we perceive emotions such 46 9 The Necessity for Epistemological Validity as pain, pleasure, love, and hate. In GITA 15.7, Śrī Kṛṣṇa lists the mind as the sixth sense (manaḥ-şaṣṭhānīndriyāņi). Because of the defect of inadvertence (pramada), and because our senses are prone to delusion (bhrama) and limitation (karaṇa- pätava), pratyakṣa is not a consistently reliable means of acquiring valid knowledge. Besides these defects, the scope of pratyakṣa is lim- ited only to the present, since perceptions by definition cannot be of past or future events. Moreover, it is limited only to external or internal phenomena. An interesting point to consider here is that the word pratya- kṣa literally means “before the eyes.” Hence, it carries the mean- ing not only of the faculty of perception in general, but also of that which is direct and unmediated. Some knowledge systems may of course argue that ordinary perception is in fact an unmediated act. From the perspective presented above, however, the inbuilt limita- tions of conditional seership would tend to deny or severely limit the directness of knowing available through pratyakṣa. From the perspective of scientific materialism, perception may be considered as direct knowing, but from the view of some idealist schools of phi- losophy, perception is itself a mediated event and hence cannot be direct knowing. It was suggested in the discussion on epistemology from the Pro- logue to this division (Anucchedas 9-18) that sabda in the sense of revealed sound implies the existence of a corresponding transphe- nomenal mode of knowing, beyond perception and inference, involving a turning of consciousness upon its Source. The recon- stituting of attention back into its Source actualizes the latent potential within consciousness to know or perceive directly. In this unconditioned state of being, Reality is known not in the dual- istic way of a subject knowing an object, but in the way of recogni- tion through conscious identity. The knowing occurs exclusively through Reality’s own self-revelation and not through any indepen- dent seeing power of the subject. This transempirical mode of know- ing fulfills the higher sense of pratyakṣa as “direct or unmediated perception.” In contrast with this, ordinary perception is mediated through the organic events of embodied selfhood. 47 II Pramāņa Thus, while the word pratyakṣa is generally used to denote ordi- nary perception, it is sometimes used to refer to the actualization of the direct mode of knowing through conscious identity. For this reason, in his Sarva-samvadini commentary on this anuccheda, Śrī Jiva Gosvāmī makes two divisions of pratyakṣa, namely, vaiduşa or “divine perception,” meaning skilled, flawless, and of the nature of unconditioned knowing through all-embracing intuition; and avai- duşa or “sensory perception,” meaning unskilled, flawed, and of the nature of conditioned knowing determined by its objects. Vaidușa- pratyakṣa belongs to God, His associates, and the perfected beings, while avaidușa-pratyakṣa belongs to ordinary humanity. It is the divine perception that is free of any defects and that forms the basis of sabda. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will demonstrate later (Anucchedas 29-30) that both Śrī Śukadeva and Śrīla Vyasadeva were established in this higher mode of knowing, technically called samadhi. Conse- quently, they directly perceived the complete Reality known as Bhagavan, along with His abode and associates. For such realized devotional transcendentalists, even the ordinary sense faculties are refined and transmuted because of being grounded in transem- pirical seership. This enables such realizers to transcend the four defects associated with perception from the conventional viewing frame of subject-object dualism. With the exclusion of God and His associates, who have tran- scendental bodies and senses and are thus beyond all duality or delu- sion, the perfected beings are of various types and can be estab- lished in differing levels of perceptual awareness. The topmost tran- scendentalist (the uttama-bhagavata) sees the world with the eye of pure devotion. According to GITA 6.30 and 7.19 and SB 11.2.45, such a person sees everything as God, or within God, or as a manifesta- tion of God. The next level of transcendentalist sees things exactly as they are presented to awareness, but knows them as integrated parts of the complete Whole. He is like a person who sees the sky as blue, but knows that it is not blue. Pratyakṣa in the higher sense of unmediated knowing can, in some cases, enable direct knowing even of past or future events. For such persons, pratyakṣa is a source 48 9 The Necessity for Epistemological Validity of valid knowing because the seer is established in his primordial Source? Śrī Kṛṣṇa refers to pratyaksa in this sense in GITA 9.2, when He says that “this most confidential knowledge is known only through direct realization in the form of unmediated perception (ratya- kṣāvagama).” And in GITA 6.21, Kṛṣṇa likewise assures Arjuria that in the state of transcendental trance (samadhi), the yogi comes to know with utter assurance through supracognitive intellection and transcendental senses (buddhi-grähyam atīndriyam vetti). This supracognitive mode of knowing of enlightened Vaisnavas is called vaiduṣa-pratyakṣa, divine or realized perception, and it is flawless. Patanjali refers to it as ṛtambhara-prajña, or truth-bearing wisdom, in Yoga-sutra 1.48. Perception is of two types, namely, indeterminate (nirvikalpaka) and determinate (savikalpaka). When a proficient sense faculty comes in contact with a perceivable object under favorable con- ditions, it relays the sensation to the mind. At the first instance, the mind is unable to decipher the sensation and only perceives it as something without any distinction of the object qualified by its attributes. In this micro instant one knows that there is something without any clear determination of the object. This is what is meant by indeterminate knowledge of the object. The intellect (buddhi) then carries this message to the citta, the storehouse of all impressions from past experiences, and tries to match the present perception with a similar impression. It is on the basis of impressions from the citta that the object is cognized or rather “re-cognized,” giving rise to its determinate knowledge. If, however, the person is under the influence of the gunas of either rajas or tamas, then instead of obtaining valid determinate knowl- edge of the object, one acquires doubt or illusory knowledge, respec- tively. Thus, depending upon the influence of sattva, rajas, and tamas, one can perceive an object accurately, be subjected to doubt, For a further discussion on this topic, read “When Stones Float and Mud Speaks: Scriptural Authority and Personal Experience in Jiva Gosvāmin’s Sarva-samvadini,” Jonathan Edelmann and Satyanarayana Dasa, Journal of Hindu Studies, Oxford 2014; p. 1-28. 49 69 II Pramana such as, “Am I seeing a plane or a bird?” or succumb to illusion, such as mistaking a rope for a snake. ANUMANA. Inference is based on generalized experience. The word anumāna literally means “that which follows (anu) consequen- tially from some other previously established knowledge (māna).” Based on repeated experience or authoritative verbal testimony, one arrives at some general principle, called vyapti (invariable con- comitance). This is the relation between a known object, called hetu or linga, and an unknown object, called sadhya, the object to be inferred. For example, by seeing smoke, one can infer the pres- ence of fire on the basis of prior knowledge of the invariable con- comitance (vyapti) between smoke and fire. Inference includes the following three components:
22. Vyapti, knowledge of universal concomitance between the per- ceived mark (linga) or reason (hetu) and the object to be inferred (sadhya).
23. Hetu, the perception of the mark or reason in the vicinity.
24. Sadhya, inference of the object in the place indicated by the mark. In terms of Western logic, vyapti corresponds to the universal major premise, hetu to the middle term, sadhya to the major term, and paksa, or the location where the sadhya is inferred to be, to the minor term. Inference is of two kinds: to know for oneself and to facilitate knowing for others. An example of inference for oneself is the pro- cess of reasoning a person undergoes when he repeatedly observes, in the kitchen and elsewhere, the concomitance between smoke and fire and arrives at the general principle, “Wherever there is smoke, there is fire.” Then if he sees smoke issuing from a mountain in the distance, he may recall the principle and conclude, “There is a fire on the mountain.” Inference for others employs a five-step syllogistic formula. After arriving at an inferred conclusion for oneself, a person uses this method to enable others to infer the same conclusion. The syllogistic format is as follows: 50 9 The Necessity for Epistemological Validity
25. Proposition (pratijñā): There is a fire on the mountain.
26. Reason (hetu): Because there is smoke.
27. General principle and example (vyapti and dṛṣṭanta): Wherever there is smoke, there is fire, as in the kitchen.
28. Application (upanaya): There is smoke over the mountain. 5. Conclusion (nigamana): Therefore, there is a fire on the mountain. Vyapti, the invariable concomitance of the middle term with the major term, is the key factor in inference. It is called the heart of anumāna. An object is inferred through its mark, or valid middle term, which is invariably connected with the major term. The pres- ence of the middle term in the minor term (pakṣa) is called pakṣa- dharmată. If the observer mistakes clouds over the mountain for smoke or sees the smoke just after rain has extinguished the fire, his inference that a fire is burning on the mountain would be wrong. If there is any error in perceiving the reason or any deviation in the universal generalization, the inference will be faulty and its conclusion unreliable. Like pratyakşa, therefore, anumana is not a foolproof means of acquiring knowledge. All the limitations that apply to pratyakṣa naturally mar inference as well because of its dependence on the former. ŚABDA. In conventional usage, the word sabda means sound, but as a pramaņa it refers to meaningful articulate sound spoken or writ- ten by an apta-puruşa, a trustworthy person, who is an authority on the matter in question. In its ultimate sense, the term sabda refers to the power of self-revealing sound, identical to the tran- scendental Reality that it signifies. By its very nature it is reliable and free from defects. This kind of sabda differs from ordinary language, which is rooted in the convention of apparent and sub- stantial separation between subject and object, and which involves abstractions away from the actual objects signified by the words. Such ordinary speech is called pauruşeya-sabda, speech as a deriva- tive human thought-construct, which is necessarily limited in its reliability, being based on pratyaksa. For Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi, sabda-pramāņa is restricted to the revealed knowledge of the Vedas. It is called apauruşeya-sabda, self- 51 II Pramāņa existing and self-revealing sound that is transhuman in origin. It originated from and is identical to the Supreme Absolute, Bhagavan. That it originated from Him means that it eternally exists within Him as His own self-revealing sound potency, and not that it has a beginning in time. It is received in disciplic succession through a realized teacher, who initiates and mirrors the way of its immediate realization. Apauruşeya-sabda is, therefore, the definitive pramāņa because it is free from the four defects. Some schools of rational or empirical philosophy reject even the possibility of a transempirical mode of knowing, and hence, they categorically deny the authority of apauruşeya-sabda-pramāņa. Those influenced by such views doubt the very existence of a tran- scendental Reality beyond the empirical world. Then there are oth- ers who intuit the existence of such a Reality and may even accept the principle of hearing apauruşeya-sabda-pramana as a means of knowing about it. But as long as the root problem of egoic self- reference remains, they unwittingly endeavor to know the transra- tional Reality in the same way that they strive to know all phenome- nal objects, through the limited categories of rationality and empiri- cism. This egoic self-reference is so deeply ingrained in the way we view ourselves and the world that even when a person approaches the apauruşeya-sabda-pramāna, he or she unconsciously subjects it to the limited viewing lens of rational or empirical constructs. This amounts to the acceptance of one or more pauruşeya sources of sabda-pramāņa as apauruşeya. Both of these types of individuals are lacking the appropriate epistemological view that can make possible the direct knowing of Absolute Reality. Those who doubt any reality beyond the empir- ical world usually favor knowledge gained through their sensory experience. Yet, they also constantly rely on knowledge imparted to them through authoritative sound agencies. In our practical day- to-day life, everyone depends on knowledge transmitted by parents, teachers, books, magazines, TV, radio, the internet, and numerous experts. Hearing from authorities enhances the extent of our learning, and if we were to dispense with it, we could not function in our 52 9 The Necessity for Epistemological Validity complex modern society. Those who consider sensory experience superior to sabda tend to forget that we gain most of our knowledge by hearing or reading, not by immediate perception. Direct expe- rience is a great teacher, but it is nonetheless severely vitiated by the four human defects, and also by the great expenditure of time it takes to acquire it. Moreover, we cannot directly perceive past or future events, because the sense faculties are not presently in contact with the objects of past or future experience. So, on a pragmatic level, even empiricists (those in the first group above) certainly employ and thus condone the principle of sabda. Yet, because the sabda they accept as authoritative imparts to them only empirical knowledge and is therefore a derivative thought-construct (pauruşeya), they remain skeptical about the existence of transcendental Reality. Ulti- mately, no amount of raw sensory experience, or pauruşeya-sabda, can ever give us access to the transcendent spiritual Reality, for it is a simple fact that neither of these means is at all designed for such transphenomenal knowing. For that, apauruşeya-sabda-pramāņa is expressly the means because of its self-revealing nature. This brings us to the second group- those who accept both the existence of a transcendental Reality and the principle of hear- ing from apauruşeya-sabda-pramana to learn about it. For them, Srila Jiva Gosvāmi elaborately explains in the next anucchedas what constitutes genuine apauruşeya-sabda-pramaņa. It is clear that he has not overexerted himself to convince the first group of people because they are not his target audience, as expressed in Anuccheda 6. Therefore, this lack of rigor on his part should not be misunderstood as a lacuna in his work. Unlike pratyakṣa, sabda is not limited in scope only to the present time. It extends into the past and future as well. It is the most powerful tool for conveying knowledge from one person to another, especially when it involves transcending the conventional limits of time, space, and causality, which is almost always the case when one aspires to know the transphenomenal. For all these reasons, philosophers and theologians in virtually all of India’s orthodox traditions accept apauruşeya-sabda-pramana as the flawless means 53 II Pramāņa for acquiring transcendental knowledge. It must be stated that the basis of sabda is divine perception, known as vaidusa-pratyakṣa, wherein the vaidușa, or “trans-egoic perceiver” includes both God and the realized perfected beings. Thus, when sabda is determined as superior to perception, it means superior to avaiduşa-pratyakṣa, or sensuous perception, and it specifically relates to the field of the transempirical. Like other adherents of India’s orthodox philosophical tradi- tions, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi equates śabda-pramana with the Vedas. The Vedas alone can disclose knowledge of the spiritual Reality, which lies beyond our sensory perception. As explained in the next anuccheda, the Vedas are not human constructs; they are a direct manifestation of the Supreme Śrī Nārāyaṇa (vedo nārāyaṇaḥ sākṣāt, SB 6.1.40), who is free from all defects. In Sarva-samvadini, while discussing the principle of sabda- pramāņa, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī writes: Although there are ten means of acquiring knowledge, sabda, which is of the nature of authoritative speech, is primary, because it is free from the four human defects. All other means are prone to the four human defects and are thus observed to be unreliable. For this reason an ordinary person is unable to determine whether or not the knowledge gained through them is valid, due to the absence of ultimate validity of those means? He further clarifies that sometimes sabda is supremely indepen- dent, sometimes it may be assisted by perception and sometimes it overrides perception. But perception has no power to contradict sabda. ARSA. This primarily refers to the statements of authoritative sages. There are many exceptional sages, such as Kapila, Gautama, and Patanjali, who all founded wisdom schools (darśanas). Natu- rally, their philosophical views differ in accordance with the nature

tathapi bhrama-pramada-vipralipsa-karaṇāpātava-dosa-rahita-vacanãtmakaḥ sabda eva mulam pramanam. anyeṣam prayah purusa-bhramadi-dosa- mayatayanyatha-pratiti-darśanena pramaņam va tad-abhäso veti puruşair nirnetum asakyatvät tasya tad-abhāvāt. 54 9 The Necessity for Epistemological Validity of their direct apprehension of Reality, and therefore Mahabharata says, “One is not considered a seer if his view is not original and hence different from that of other seers” (nāsāv ṛṣir yasya matam na bhinnam, Vana-parva 313.117). Since these sages are all profound thinkers, we take their utterances seriously, but an ordinary person can hardly determine which sage’s affirmation is conclusive. For Vaisnavas, the criterion for determining the degree of validity of a particular ārșa affirmation is the extent of its conformity to sabda- pramāņa. UPAMANA. Comparison serves as a basis of identifying some- thing about an object with which we have no prior knowledge by collating it with a familiar object. In this context the similarity between the objects is made known to us by a reliable person. Sup- pose we have seen an ordinary cow but never a gavaya (a forest quadruped that resembles a cow), and a person living in the for- est tells us that a gavaya resembles a cow. Then, if we go to the forest and see an animal that looks similar to a cow, we may recall that a gavaya resembles a cow and thus recognize the animal to be a gavaya. Another example of upamana can be evidenced in the case of a person who had never seen a saxophone. The person may be told by a musician that it is a musical instrument resembling a u-shaped trumpet. Later on, the person happens to see a saxophone in a sym- phony and recognizes it as such on remembrance of the musician’s statement. Upamāna provides knowledge of the relation between a word, such as gavaya, and the object it corresponds to on the basis of resemblance. ARTHAPATTI. Presumption refers to the reasoned probability of an eventuality posited as the only possible reconciliation of two apparently inconsistent perceived facts. If a man named Devadatta is known to be alive, and it is also known that he is absent from his home, we must presume that he is elsewhere. “Being alive” and “being absent from home” are two perceived facts that cannot be rec- onciled without presuming Devadatta’s existence somewhere out- side the house. Similarly, if we know that Devadatta is robust in stature and yet does not eat during the day, we can safely assume 55 55II Pramana that he must eat at night. Otherwise, his stoutness is inexplicable. We regularly employ this type of presumption in daily life, though we are not always aware of it. For example, if some words are miss- ing from a sentence, we presume them to complete the meaning. Otherwise the sentence may not make sense. If our host invites us to the dinner table and says, “Let us eat,” we understand the host to mean, “Let us eat the dinner.” ANUPALABDHI. This may be understood either as the non- cognition of being or as the cognition of the absence of being. The non-perception of an object by an appropriate, functioning sense organ is instrumental in the knowledge of the absence of that object. For example, a book is a visually perceivable object, and the eye is the appropriate organ of sight. Thus, when one looks for a book on a table and notices in that instant that the table is empty, the non-cognition of the book makes one aware of the book’s absence (abhava) on the table. How is the book’s non-existence on the table known? It cannot be a direct perception through the eyes, because non-existence is a negative fact that cannot stimulate any sense fac- ulty, as an existing object on the table does. The non-existence of the book on the table is known from its non-cognition. Anupalabdhi is classified as a separate category of perception, because there is no actual contact between the sense instrument and the object, as there would be in ordinary sensory perception. What is perceived is the object’s non-cognition. SAMBHAVA. Inclusion is based on the common experience that a larger quantity encompasses a smaller quantity. For example, if we know that someone has one hundred dollars, we automatically know that he has one dollar, five dollars, ten dollars, and so on. This kind of reasoning, based on the principle of inclusion, is called sambhava. AITIHYA. Tradition refers to the handing down of information, beliefs, and customs by word of mouth or by example from one generation to another without knowledge of the original source of such facts. For instance, there is a popular belief that the Pāṇḍavas built the Old Fort in New Delhi. There is no written proof or scriptural authority to support this belief, but it has been passed 56 9 The Necessity for Epistemological Validity down for generations to the present day and is widely accepted as corresponding to fact. CESTA. Gesture refers to the apprehension of ideas, infor- mation, or sentiments conveyed through a qualified individual’s movements of the body, or through his application of symbols. For instance, we may make a “v” sign with our fingers to indicate vic- tory, or a pujari (a priest of the devotional path who worships a deity) may display various mudras (symbolic hand gestures) before the deity to convey specific messages. Different schools of Indian philosophy accept various combi- nations of the ten pramāņas. Cārvākas, who are atheistic empiri- cists, accept only pratyakṣa. The Buddhists and Vaiseṣikas accept anumana along with pratyakṣa. The Sankhya and Yoga schools add sabda to the above two pramāņas. Naiyayikas accept upamāna along with the above three. The followers of Prabhakara, a sect of Mimāmsakas, accept arthapatti as the fifth pramana. The followers of Kumārila Bhatta, a branch of Mimāṁsakas, and the adherents of Advaita Vedanta add anupalabdhi to the above five pramāņas. Pau- ranikas add sambhava and aitihya to the above six. Tantrikas accept cesta and ärṣa along with the above eight. Although Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi accepts all ten pramāņas, he sub- sumes them into the three categories of pratyakṣa, anumāna, and sabda. By acknowledging only three of the ten pramāņas, Jiva Gosvāmi does not exclude the other seven. His opinion is that pratyakṣa, anumana, and sabda include the other seven pramāņas, as follows: comparison, presumption, inclusion, and gesture are varieties of anumana; non-cognition of being is a kind of pratyakṣa; and the statements of sages as well as tradition are kinds of sabda. Out of these, sabda is the only independent pramäṇa capable of disclosing knowledge of the Absolute. Pratyakşa and anumāna can serve as assistants to sabda, but whenever pratyakṣa and anumāna exhaust the limits of their validity, it is to sabda-pramāṇa that we must resort to access certain and ultimate knowing. Here are two scriptural references showing the importance of the first three pramāņas: 57 57 II Pramāņa A person intent on fulfilling the responsibility of human life should be well acquainted with the three means of valid knowing, namely, perception, inference, and hearing the various Vedic scriptures. (MANU 12.105)* [Śrī Kṛṣṇa said:] By perception, inference, scriptural testimony, and personal experience one should know that this world has a beginning and an end, and so it is devoid of ultimate substantial- ity (asat). Thus, one should live in this world without attachment. (SB 11.28.9)5 In SB 11.19.17, Śrī Kṛṣṇa includes aitihya (tradition) with sense perception, inference, and sabda as a distinct means of acquiring knowledge, but in fact aitihya is usually considered as a kind of sabda, although not necessarily apauruşeya-sabda. Next, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī specifies the appropriate epistemologi- cal means by which the reality principles (tattva) he wishes to make explicit can be definitely determined. This refers to visaya (the sub- ject), sambandha (the relation between the visaya and the words that signify it), abhidheya (the means of attainment), and prayojana (the final goal). 4 pratyakṣam canumanam ca sastram ca vividhagamam trayam su-viditam karyam dharma-suddhim abhipsată 5 pratyakşeṇanumanena nigamenatma-samvidā 6 ady-anta-vad asaj jñātva niḥsango vicared iha “śrutiḥ pratyakşam aitihyam anumanaṁ catuṣṭayam pramanesv anavasthänād vikalpät sa virajyate 58 Anuccheda 10 The Vedas Are a Valid Means of Phenomenal and Transphenomenal Knowing १० । ततस्तानि न प्रमाणानीत्यनादिसिद्धसर्वपुरुषपरम्परासु सर्वलौकिकालौकिकज्ञान- निदानत्वादप्राकृतवचनलक्षणो वेद एवास्माकं सर्वातीतसर्वाश्रयसर्वाचिन्त्याश्चर्यस्वभावं वस्तु विविदिषतां प्रमाणम् || CONSEQUENTLY, for us, who are inquisitive about that Entity who is beyond everything, yet is the ground and support of every- thing who is fully inconceivable and wondrous in nature- perception, inference, and so on are not suitable means of valid knowing. For this purpose the only means of valid knowing is the Veda, the transphenomenal [aprākṛta] words that eternally self-exist without beginning! They are the source of all phenom- enal and transcendental knowledge that have been passed down intact through all authentic lines of succession [parampara]. From the Sanskrit text it would appear that the compound anadi-siddha is an adjective of sarva-puruşa-paramparasu, which would translate as “the authentic lines of succession eternally self-exist without beginning.” Yet, in Jiva Gosvāmi’s Sarva-samvadini commentary, he analyses the word as an adjective of the Veda. Following his own example, we have translated it accordingly, as an adjective of the Veda, which has the effect of further emphasizing the Vedas’ epistemological validity. 59 11 Pramāņa Commentary AS ALREADY NOTED, both perception and inference depend on per- cepts, which are limited only to empirical objects and vitiated by the four human defects. Thus, perception and inference are inade- quate in and of themselves for accurately understanding anything beyond our senses. By tracing the chain of causes in material cre- ation, we can infer that something exists beyond our sense percep- tion, but inference can take us no further, leaving us unable to iden- tify it; nor can inference yield valid knowledge about abhidheya, the means for realizing it. Here it must be noted that Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī is not rejecting altogether perception and inference as means of valid knowledge, but only in relation to the Absolute Reality. He is also not saying that they are completely ineffective. They can assist sabda, as was stated before. We can access knowledge of the Absolute only from revealed scripture, the Vedas, which are identical to or directly uttered by Bhagavan Nārāyaṇa (vedo nārāyaṇaḥ sākṣāt) and so are free from the four defects of human beings. The Vedas appeared from the Sup- reme Lord at the dawn of creation, a fact confirmed in the Śvetāśva- tara Upanisad: “That Supreme Deity created Brahma at the begin- ning of creation and delivered the Vedas to him” (yo brahmanam vidadhāti pūrvam yo vai vedamś ca prahinoti tasmai, SU 6.18). In the above anuccheda, the adjective anadi-siddha means that the Vedas are not created but exist without a beginning. As used in this anuccheda, it means that the Vedas were not written at a particular date but exist eternally, like Bhagavan. They first man- ifested in this universe within the heart of Brahma, the first cre- ated being: tene brahma hṛda ya adi-kavaye (SB 1.1.1); then they were handed down through disciplic succession. The Vedas provide both material and spiritual knowledge. Knowledge about such common phenomena as the trees, water, land, and sky originally came from the Vedas, along with knowledge of the divisions of duties for var- ious people according to their psycho-physical natures. As Manu- samhitä (1.21) states: “Brahma learned the names of all objects and the duties of various classes of people exclusively from the words 60 10 The Vedas Are a Valid Means of Phenomenal and Transphenomenal Knowing of the Vedas, and thus in the beginning of creation he could bring forth the numerous manifest forms to which the names and duties correspond.” At the beginning of creation, knowledge about various arts, such as music, dance, singing, sculpture, science, engineering, and medicine, was obtained from the Vedas. The whole human culture was based on Vedic knowledge. Over time, different cultures and languages developed that obscured the original Vedic culture. The Vedas (i.e., sabda-pramāna) are the only effective means for acquiring knowledge of the positive dimension of transcendence. The Vedas inform us about topics beyond empiricism, such as the atma’s existence beyond the body, about the planets of the spiritual domain, and about the Supreme Lord, His pastimes, and other mat- ters. All these subjects are beyond the reach of our sensory and mental faculties. Philosophers such as the Buddhists reject the Vedas on princi- ple, implying that they reject all authority on principle. This pre- determination in their epistemological makeup orients them exclu- sively toward the negation of substance (anatta), and thus they can- not justifiably say anything regarding the positivity (i.e., the sub- stantiality) of transcendence. For this reason their preoccupation is necessarily with the emptiness of phenomena. Sabda-pramāņa is so essential that although Vaisnavas count Lord Buddha among the avataras of Bhagavan on the strength of Vedic testimony, they take issue with His philosophy because it is not consistent with sabda- pramāņa. All orthodox schools of Indian philosophy, whether dualistic or nondualistic, consider the Vedas to be transhuman in nature (apau- ruşeya). Many modern scholars, however, dispute the divine ori- gin of the Vedas. They suggest various dates for the composition of the Vedas, and while most of them agree that the Vedas were sarveṣām tu sa nämäni karmāņi ca pṛthak pṛthak veda-sabdebhya evadau pṛthak-sarnsthaś ca nirmame “The word apauruşeya (lit., “non-human”) has two meanings. Purva-mimämsakas take it to mean that the Vedas are not written or created by anyone, including God. They are eternal and independent of God. Other orthodox schools consider it to mean that the Vedas are composed or spoken by God. 61 II Pramāņa composed before 1500 BCE, they disagree about the exact time of their composition. They have yet to arrive at a definitive conclusion. Here Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī says that the Vedas are beginningless and the source of various kinds of knowledge coming down through many schools of thought since time immemorial. The phrase sarva- purușa, “all persons,” indicates that the knowledge was passed on not only by human beings but also by superhuman beings, such as the devas and divine sages. These traditions of thought all origi- nate with the Supreme Absolute, Bhagavan, who is infallible in all respects and thus completely untainted by the four human defects. Moreover, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī has already shown (in Anuccheda 9) how unreliable are the alternatives to the Vedic authority. If, as he has established, only apauruşeya-sabda can provide access to transcendental Reality, how could the Vedas then have been writ- ten or compiled by human beings? If Jiva Gosvāmī allowed that human authors composed the Vedas, he would be contradicting his previous dismissal of human knowledge as imperfect. One may argue that the names of the authors of the Vedas have been forgotten over time, and thus it is not logical to demand that the Vedas are of divine origin. This argument is weak, because the Vedas have been handed down through the system of disciplic suc- cession from antiquity to the present. In India the members of the first three classes, called dvijas, traditionally belong to a particu- lar branch of the Vedas. When studying their own branch, they would learn the historical data specifically related to it. Even today, though the study of the Vedas has declined, many people in India still know the details about their sakha (branch) of the Vedas, the name of the sage originally in charge of it, and so on. Thus, if the Vedas had human authors, their names would have been handed. down and remembered. On the contrary, from the works of philosophers like Kumarila Bhatta, it is understood that the Vedas are not human composi- tions. Indologists accept that Kumärila lived in the sixth century CE. At that time Vedic culture still flourished in India, along with the system of disciplic succession. But even then, no author was ascribed to the Vedas. Before him, Sabara Svāmi (first century CE), 62 10 The Vedas Are a Valid Means of Phenomenal and Transphenomenal Knowing who wrote a commentary on the Jaimini-sūtra of Purva-mīmāmsā, and Patanjali (second century BCE), the famous author of the Maha- bhasya on Panini-sutra of Sanskrit grammar, accepted the Vedas as apauruseya. One may again argue that the author of the Vedas has been for- gotten because it served no purpose to remember him. This is also a weak argument, since remembering the author of the Vedas is not without value. As stated above, while engaged in Vedic stud- ies or sacrifices, one recites the names of his sakha (branch), gotra (lineage), pravara (subdivision), rşi (sage), and so on. If the sages who propounded the various branches are remembered, why then neglect to remember the author? Of course, the author is not at all forgotten because all orthodox Vedic scholars know Him to be Bhagavan. Those scholars who contest the apauruşeya origin of the Vedas, claiming that they are human compilations, also have no conclusive proof to back up their claim. Refusing to consider the Vedas’ own statements about their origin and purpose, these scholars merely assume that the Vedas are not authoritative and speculate about their true origin. Indeed, the theory that the Vedas have a human author is a recent development advocated by persons who do not come in disciplic succession. They were mostly proponents of Euro- centrism or Western Universalism who refused to believe that India had anything important to offer the world in the realm of philoso- phy and who had their own motives for minimizing the Vedic tradi- tions. They certainly were not impartial judges of the Vedas’ origin. For lack of any definitive proof, therefore, and in light of the many reasonable arguments for the Vedas’ divine origin, an inquirer may find it useful to provisionally accept the transhuman nature of the Vedas to investigate the epistemic possibilities that are thereby opened up. One can then experience directly what that particular frame of reference can disclose. It is suggested here that what is gained thereby is an “all-perspectival” view, inclusive of the human and the phenomenal, yet transhuman and transphe- nomenal in essence. As demonstrated in the previous anuccheda, a human being’s perceptions and cognitions cannot approach that 63 II Pramāņa which is imperceptible and inconceivable, and thus if the Vedic rev- elation is indeed valid, it is not even theoretically possible that the Vedas could have been composed by human beings. In addition, great scholars and saints like Patanjali, Gautama, Kanāda, Kapila, Śabara Svāmi, Śańkarācārya, Madhvācārya, Rāmā- nujācārya, Kumārila Bhaṭṭa, and Rūpa Gosvāmi accepted the Vedas as apauruşeya and eternal. These exalted authorities are famed for their non-attachment, wisdom, and selflessness. Another consideration, and an important one, is that the Vedas themselves repeatedly enjoin that one who aspires to know the wisdom of transcendence must first approach a guru in disciplic succession. Vedic knowledge is verifiable; it is not just a collection of abstract ideas. But to realize the truth of Vedic knowledge, one must approach a genuine teacher. Modern scholars, however, flout this requirement, all the while considering themselves authori- ties on Vedic knowledge. In reality, by not applying themselves to this knowledge in the prescribed way, they ensure that the door to its mysteries will ever remain locked for them. The attempts of these hapless scholars to understand the Vedas without a profound personal commitment to an authorized teacher and discipline is like the effort to reproduce a scientific experiment while willfully neglecting the key steps in the procedure. Their labor is futile, and their analysis and appraisals are inconclusive. 4 To believe that one can know reality by studying it objectively is a myth. This myth was propagated by science and has lost its steam in the field of quantum mechanics. Dr. Rupert Sheldrake puts it aptly, “Sciences are human activities. The assumption that the sci- ences are uniquely objective not only distorts the public perception of scientists, but affects scientists’ perception of themselves. The illusion of objectivity makes scientists prone to deception and self- deception. It works against the noble ideal of seeking truth.” “34 By contrast, the great Vaisnava ācāryas all became Vedic author- ities by virtue of their scrupulously following the injunction to submit to a teacher coming in disciplic succession. As far as motive and character, therefore, the evidence weighs heavily in favor of Op. cit., p. 292 64 49 10 The Vedas Are a Valid Means of Phenomenal and Transphenomenal Knowing the saintly äcāryas. In any case, a seriously interested person can always take up the Vedic process himself and personally verify the Vedic conclusions. Granted, this requires some effort, and it is of course much easier to offer glib speculations denying the Vedas’ authority than to discipline oneself and follow their instruc- tions. Ultimately, however, the Vedas’ scholarly detractors can never prove their claims. Even if someone proposes that just as modern science is evolv- ing, the Vedas also evolved over a period of time, then the question arises, why in recorded history have people stopped making fur- ther refinements in the Vedas? If the Vedas indeed have a human source, they should have been revised and improved over time, and new, improved versions should be available; but this is not the case. Rather, North or South, East or West, the same standard readings of the Vedas are found, and no older or newer versions are seen any- where. The Vedic saints have developed a meticulous system for pro- tecting the word order of the Vedic texts. Changing even a single syllable is considered criminal. Thus, the Vedas are rightly called Śruti, i.e., that which is heard from a guru unchanged, with proper intonation and accent of the syllables. The Vedas are unique. Can one imagine that in a particular field of science or art, we could reach an apex in knowledge and produce one standard book accepted by all, making all other books in that field obsolete? Is it conceivable that no one would make any fur- ther changes or additions to such a book, and that this book would become worshipable for the people interested in that field? The rea- sonable, unbiased answer is “no,” and yet this is precisely the case with the Vedas, for they are free of defects, having emanated from the perfect source, Bhagavän. And if someone were to reply “yes,” there could be no basis for debate over the authority of the Vedas. In addition to the spiritual knowledge they contain, the Vedic literature has references to many modern scientific achievements. The Vedas have sections on astronomy, medicine, yoga, music, drama, dance, algebra, civil engineering, and so on. The list is long indeed. These are all arts and sciences that were practiced in India centuries before the dawn of their modern counterparts. There are 65II Pramana practical examples of Vedic knowledge being authoritative even in the empirical field. For example, cow urine and cow dung, which might well be thought of as impure waste, are stated to be pure objects in the Vedas. All Hindus accept them as such and use them for medicine, worship, and even as a kind of low-conductivity insu- lating material with which they smear the floor and walls of their mud houses. Now it has been proven by scientific experiment that cow dung and cow urine are antiseptic and medicinal. The same is true of various herbal formulae prescribed in Ayurveda. These formulae, which are thousands in number, were not arrived at after research in a laboratory and testing on mice and rabbits. They were revealed directly to sages like Bharadvaja, Atreya, Punarvasu, and Caraka. It would be simplistic, therefore, to brush aside the Vedas as man-made. Had this been the case, renowned thinkers and powerful logicians like Śrila Jīva Gosvāmi and Śrila Madhvācārya would have taken no stock in them. Still one may question the eternal nature of the Vedas, since the only supporting evidence comes from the Vedas themselves. In logic, citing evidence that relies on itself for proof of legitimacy is called self-dependent (svāśraya) reasoning and is unacceptable. The Vedas may thus appear tainted with this defect of sväśraya, or begging the question, relying on themselves to establish their own authority. Circular reasoning would be a serious defect, but a closer look shows that the Vedas are an exception to this fallacy. That the Vedas establish their own authority is not a defect; rather, it is logical and sensible. It simply affirms their absolute, transcendental nature, since if some other source were needed to confirm the authority of the Vedas, the authority of that new source would surpass that of the Vedas. In such a case, an inquisitive person would be obliged to discard the Vedas and begin all over again, analyzing the new source’s authenticity. Before long this new source would need con- firmation from yet another source. This could go on ad infinitum. But the absence of such a superior source for confirmation shows that the authority of the Vedas as apauruşeya-sabda-pramāņa is final. Logically, therefore, no other pramana can substantiate the Vedas. 66 10 The Vedas Are a Valid Means of Phenomenal and Transphenomenal Knowing And that is why the Vedas are traditionally regarded as “mother.” When a person wants to know who his father is, he cannot find out by direct perception, inference, or deduction. To know the identity of one’s father, one has to accept his mother’s testimony. We sim- ilarly have to accept the revealed knowledge of the Vedas to learn about the Reality beyond our sensory and intellectual power. The theories advanced by scholars who surmise the Vedas to be of mundane origin are unreliable and untenable, because such scholars have not committed themselves to the necessary precon- ditions specified by the Vedas themselves, by which their inherent truths become self-revealing and self-evident. This is like consum- ing Ayurvedic medicine while ignoring the guidelines required for its efficacy and then concluding it to be ineffective. Scholars who are plagued by the four human defects and impelled by ulterior motives - desires for degrees, reputation, research funding, and the like are checked by their own ego strategies from accessing direct intuitive insight into the Vedas. These scholars will readily admit that to understand any complex material subject, one needs the help of experts in that field, but somehow they reject the neces- sity of a genuine guru for understanding the Vedas. They do not know that in the case of Vedic literature, submission to a realized teacher is an absolute requirement. The Mundaka Upanisad states that to know the Absolute, one must approach a qualified guru (tad-vijñānärtham sa gurum evabhi- gacchet, MUU 1.2.12). The Chandogya Upanisad says that one who has accepted a teacher can know the Truth (acāryavän puruso veda, CHU 6.14.2). Similarly, the Katha Upanisad says that this knowl- edge is not available by mere logic, but only through study from a teacher (naișă tarkeņa matir äpaneya proktänyenaiva sujñānāya prestha, KU 1.2.9). The Svetasvatara Upanisad says that the true meaning of the Veda is revealed to a student who is devoted to his or her teacher (su 6.23). This prerequisite serves as a kind of pass- word, protecting the Vedas from insincere persons. In Bhagavad Gita, Śri Bhagavan affirms: yasya deve para bhaktir yatha deve tatha gurau tasyaite kathita hy arthaḥ prakāśante mahātmanaḥ 67 II Pramāņa Veiled by My divine potency (yogamaya), I am not manifest to all. Therefore, the deluded world does not know Me, the unborn and imperishable. (GITĀ 7.25) This statement is relevant both when Bhagavan appears in this world via divine descent and when He reveals Himself through scripture. He has provided conditioned beings with the method by which they can approach Him, and that method begins with the culture of knowledge from a genuine disciplic succession. Those unwilling to accept this can have no real access to that Divine Real- ity, even if they study the Vedas on their own for many lifetimes. Nobody can become a surgeon merely by studying books on the subject. In summary, it is to be admitted that there is an absence of any conclusive proof of the Vedas’ being authored by a mortal being. So, by the logic known as the law of the remainder (päriseṣya-nyāya), the authority of the great ācāryas and saints coming in authentic dis- ciplic successions, and ultimately the testimony of the Vedas them- selves, lead us to conclude that the Vedas exist eternally and are an infallible source of knowledge. Next, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī shows that inference cannot be an independent means for understanding the Absolute Truth. 68 nähaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya yoga-maya-samavṛtaḥ mudho’yam nabhijänäti loko mam ajam avyayam Anuccheda 11 The Authority of the Vedas ११ । तच् चानुमतम् “तर्काप्रतिष्ठानात्” (ब्र० सू० २ |१| ११ ) इत्यादौ “अचिन्त्याः खलु ये भावा न तांस्तर्केण योजयेत्” (म० भा० ६।५।२२) इत्यादौ “शास्त्रयोनित्वात्” (ब्र० सू० १।११३) इत्यादी “श्रुतेस्तु शब्दमूलत्वात्” (ब्र० सू० २।१।२७) इत्यादौ “पितृदेवमनुष्याणां वेदश्चक्षुस्तवेश्वर श्रेयस्त्वनुपलब्धे ऽर्थे साध्यसाधनयोरपि ” ( भा० ११।२०।४) इत्यादौ ॥ THE FACT that the Vedas are a valid source for ascertaining Ulti- mate Truth is confirmed by the following scriptural statements: “Logic in and of itself is inconclusive” (vs 2.1.11); “One should not strive to apprehend that which is inconceivable through reason or logic [alone]” (MB 6.5.22);2 “Scriptures are the [only] source of valid knowledge of the Absolute Truth” (vs 1.1.3); “This is con- firmed by the Vedas because they are the source of knowledge of the Absolute Truth” (vs 2.1.27); and “O Lord, in the matter of per- ceiving subtle realities that lie beyond the range of sense percep- tion, and in the matter of determining ultimate purpose and the means for realizing it, Your Veda is the supreme guiding vision for the forefathers, devas, and human beings” (SB 11.20.4) 1 tarkāpratiṣṭhānät 2 acintyäḥ khalu ye bhava na tärns tarkeņa yojayet 3 a sastra-yonitvät śrutes tu sabda-mülatvāt pity-deva-manusyānāṁ vedas cakṣus tavesvara śreyas tv amupalabdhe’rthe sädhya-sadhanayor api 69 II Pramāņa Commentary USING SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi here confirms the conclusion about inferential knowledge he reached in the previous anuccheda. Having argued that logic is not the most reliable means of acquiring knowledge and having used logic to establish this con- clusion, he now presents appropriate Vedic references as the final proof. Again, one should not think that Jiva Gosvāmi is guilty of self- dependent reasoning because he resorts to the Vedas themselves to confirm an assertion about the Vedas. The Vedas are self-luminous like the sun. Just as the sun illuminates itself, independent of any other source of light, so only the Vedas can establish themselves as infallible pramaņa. As explained in the previous anuccheda, this self-confirmation is not a defect in the process of sabda-pramana (sound revelation), because if the Vedas indeed convey knowledge of the Absolute Truth, we can justifiably look to the Vedas themselves to confirm their own authority. Those who have approached Vedic knowledge in the prescribed way have corroborated by their own realization that the Vedas do describe the Absolute Truth. Another consideration is that our objective is to know the incon- ceivable Reality, and after analyzing all sources of knowledge, we find that no source but the Vedas affords us the appropriate medium to actualize this possibility. If all the best logicians, scientists, and philosophers of the past, present, and future, were to assemble and deliberate together, they would be unable to shed any light on the specific nature of transcendence. Any theory this assembly might propose would amount to no more than a rational construct, liable to endless refutations and counter-refutations. Understanding the futility of such a speculative approach, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī has gone directly to the heart of the matter by citing Vedic authority. Śrīla Vyasadeva presented the conclusion of all the Vedas in concise aphorisms called Vedanta-sutra, or Brahma-sutra. vs 2.1.11 states, “Logic in and of itself is inconclusive,” tarkapratiṣṭhānāt. In other words, logic has no absolute stance because its results are always subject to revision. Both deductive and inductive reasoning 70 11 The Authority of the Vedas are based on human perception and cognition, which are both unre- liable owing to the four inherent human defects mentioned earlier. And since different people have varying capacities and types of intelligence, the opinions they derive from their own intelligence also vary. Logical reasoning, therefore, has its limitations; it is inconclusive in transcendental matters except when supported by scriptural evidence. In Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī quotes a verse from Bhartṛhari’s Vakya-padiya (1.34) to this effect: A position that is asserted even with meticulous attention by expert logicians can be shown to be otherwise by those who are even more clever. (BRS 1.1.46)” The truth of this statement is confirmed in the fields of modern science and philosophy, where there is endless theorizing about the origins of the universe and the meaning of life. Among the orthodox schools the Naiyayikas offer logical proofs of God’s existence. The Vedäntists, however, do not give much importance to such proofs because they are liable to be refuted. Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī also cites the Mahabharata’s statement that because logic is limited, one should not depend exclusively on it to try to understand inconceivable realities. For example, by mere logic one will certainly fail to understand the childhood pastimes of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, such as His dama-bandhana-lila, in which His mother bound Him with rope. When Mother Yasoda tried to tie Kṛṣṇa to a grinding mortar, her rope was too short. She was amazed to find that even when she joined together all the ropes she could find in her home, the cumulative length was still too short. Yet, the black sash around Kṛṣṇa’s waist did not break, nor did His waist become inflated. Such inconceivable behavior by the Absolute Person is entirely beyond the reach of all logical faculties; one can understand it only by accepting the authority of Vedic testimony, sabda-pramāņa. In this case, the narration is meant to demonstrate, among other things, the nature of Bhagavan’s transphenomenal form, that it is “yatnenäpädito’py arthaḥ kuśalair anumatṛbhiḥ abhiyuktatarair anyair anyathaivopapadyate 71 24 7 II Pramāņa simultaneously and inconceivably both localized and all-pervading. To be more precise, because His form transcends space and time altogether, it is not subject to the logical categories derived from space-time considerations. Still, although logical reasoning is not a reliable independent method in the quest for knowledge of the Absolute, this does not mean that all logic is useless. The very idea that logic is not fully reliable is itself known through the use of logic supported by scrip- tural references. We should certainly use reason in trying to under- stand the statements of the Vedas. The Bṛhad-aranyaka Upanisad thus states, “The Self, my dear Maitreyi, is to be realized, and so it should be heard about, reflected on, and deeply meditated upon” (ātmā vă are draṣṭavyaḥ śrotavyo mantavyo nididhyäsitavyo maitreyi, BAU 2.4.5). Here the word mantavya refers to logical reflection. We should apply logic to properly understand the Vedic injunctions, but we should reject logic that runs counter to their conclusions. Mere logic can never supersede the opinions of the Vedas, which are free of human defects. The point is, as indicated in the Upanisadic statement above, that appropriate logical reflection (manana) upon scriptural truths leads to intuitive insight, which becomes the basis for deep meditation (nidhidhyasana). Thus, logic that is consistent with scriptural reve- lation serves to turn consciousness toward the direct apprehension of Reality as signified by Its sound revelation. While discussing this topic in Sarva-samvadini, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi quotes an untraceable verse from Kurma Purāṇa: The logical thought process by which the meaning of a scriptural passage is understood without contradicting the statements pre- ceding and following it is known as the “primal,” or highest, order of deliberated logic. Dry logic, however, should be abandoned? Dry logic refers to arguments contrary to scriptures or not sup- ported by scriptural statements. Mere logic can deliver no ultimacy in the field of metaphysics. Dry speculative philosophical musings pürväparavirodhena ko’nv artho’bhimato bhavet ity adyam úhanam tarkaḥ śuska-tarkam tu varjayet 72 11 The Authority of the Vedas amount to no more than a futile mental exercise with no tangi- ble result. No matter how profound and mesmerizing one’s logic, it is inevitable that some other powerful logician will eventually refute it. The Vedas enjoin, therefore, that those who seek the Abso- lute Truth should abandon dry logic, but not all logic. Indeed, in GITĀ 10.32, Śrī Kṛṣṇa Himself declares that logic aimed at under- standing the Absolute as it is presented in scripture is one of His opulences: “Among logicians, I am that reasoning which estab- lishes the Absolute Truth” (vadaḥ pravadatām aham). Thus, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi is right in accepting anumana as one of the principal means of gaining valid knowledge. Jīva Gosvāmī next cites two more sutras (vs 1.1.3 and 2.1.27) which state emphatically that one can understand the Absolute Truth only from the revealed scriptures. He then concludes by quoting Srimad Bhagavatam to show that not only human beings but even superhumans like the devas require the transempirical vision provided by the Vedas. Thus, he emphasizes the need for everyone - humans, subhumans, and superhumans - to avail themselves of the guiding light of the Vedas, as the flawless means for understanding the Absolute Truth. In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī begins his demonstra- tion that the Purāņas are even more important for us than the Vedas. 73 Anuccheda 12 Difficulties in Studying the Vedas 12.1 १२ । तत्र च वेदशब्दस्य सम्प्रति दुष्पारत्वाद् दुरधिगमार्थत्वाच् च तदर्थनिर्णायकानां मुनी- नामपि परस्परविरोधाद् वेदरूपो वेदार्थनिर्णायकश्चेतिहासपुराणात्मकः शब्द एव विचार- णीयः । तत्र च यो वा वेदशब्दो नात्मविदितः सोऽपि तद्दृष्ट्यानुमेय एवेति सम्प्रति तस्यैव प्रमोत्पादकत्वं स्थितम् । BECAUSE AT PRESENT it is difficult to study the Vedas in their entirety, and because their meaning is highly abstruse - and further yet, because even the great thinkers who have com- mented on the meaning of the Vedas interpret them in contra- dictory ways, we should study only the Itihasas and Purāņas, since they are Vedic in nature and are conclusive in determining the meaning of the Vedas. Moreover, with the help of the Iti- hāsas and Purāņas we can infer the meaning of the unavailable portions of the Vedas. Thus, at present, only the Itihāsas and Purāņas are the appropriate sources of valid knowledge. 12.2 तथा हि महाभारते मानवीये च " इतिहासपुराणाभ्यां वेदं समुपबृंहयेत्” (म० भा० १|१ | २६७) इति पूरणात् पुराणम्” इति चान्यत्र । न चावेदेन वेदस्य बृंहणं सम्भवति । न ह्यपरिपूर्णस्य कनकवलयस्य त्रपुणा पूरणं युज्यते । This is why Mahābhārata (Adi-parva 1. 267 ) and Manu samhitā’ state, “One should comprehensively fortify one’s understanding 1 This verse is not found in the current version of Manu-saṁhită. 74 12 Difficulties in Studying the Vedas of the Vedas by means of the Itihāsas and Purāņas.” And else- where it is stated, “The Purānas are so-called because they com- plete [pūraṇa].” It is not possible to expand the meaning of the Vedas by means of a non-Vedic source, just as one would certainly not employ lead to finish an incomplete gold bracelet. 12.3 ननु यदि वेदशब्दः पुराणमितिहासं चोपादत्ते तर्हि पुराणमन्यदन्वेषणीयम् । यदि तु नन तर्हीतिहासपुराणयोरभेदो वेदेन । उच्यते - विशिष्टैकार्थप्रतिपादकपदकदम्ब- स्यापौरुषेयत्वादभेदेऽपि स्वरक्रमभेदाद् भेदनिर्देशोऽप्युपपद्यते । But, one might object, if the sound revelation known as the Vedas includes the Puranas and Itihāsas within its fold, there must exist other Purāņas that are yet distinct from the Vedas; otherwise, the literature we call Itihāsas and Purānas could not logically be spoken of as nondifferent from the Vedas. To this we reply that the Itihasas and Purāņas are nondiffer- ent from the Vedas inasmuch as both categories of literature are without human origin [apauruşeya] and delineate the same spe- cific truth. Nonetheless, a distinction between them is also indi- cated by virtue of the difference in intonation and fixity of word order [i.e., the Vedas are intrinsically connected to intonation and a fixed word order, but the Purāņas and Itihāsas are not]. 12.4 ऋगादिभिः सममनयोरपौरुषेयत्वेनाभेदो माध्यन्दिनश्रुतावेव व्यज्यते “एवं वा अरेऽस्य महतो भूतस्य निःश्वसितमेतद् यदृग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेदोऽथर्वाङ्गिरस इतिहासः पुराणम्” (बृ० आ० २।४।१०) इत्यादिना ॥ Mädhyandina-śruti implies the oneness of the Itihāsas and Purāņas with the Ṛg and other Vedas in terms of the transhuman [apauruşeya] nature all these works share: “My dear Maitreyi, itihasa-puraṇābhyam vedam samupabṛmhayet 75 55II Pramāņa the Rg, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva Vedas, as well as the Itihasas and Purāņas, all appear from the breathing of the Supreme Being” (BAU 2.4.10)3 Commentary IN THE PREVIOUS ANUCCHEDAS, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī has established that the Vedas-Ṛg, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva-constitute the means of valid knowing of the Absolute. Here he points out the practical difficulties involved in studying them nowadays. The first difficulty is the unavailability of the complete text of the Vedas. Originally the Veda was one, but at the advent of the current age, Kaliyuga, Śrīla Vyasadeva divided it into four (vyadadhad yajña- santatyai vedam ekam catur-vidham, SB 1.4.19). Then, as explained in Kurma Purāṇa, Vyasadeva’s followers further divided the four Vedas into 1,130 branches: Formerly the Rg Veda was divided into 21 branches, the Yajur Veda into 100 branches, the Sama Veda into 1,000 branches, and the Atha- rva Veda into 9 branches. (Kurma Purana, Purva 52.19-20)* Each of these branches has four subdivisions, called Samhita, Brāhmaṇa, Aranyaka, and Upanisad. So, all together the Vedas con- sist of 1,130 Samhitas, 1,130 Brāhmaṇas, 1,130 Aranyakas, and 1,130 Upaniṣads a total of 4,520 titles. By the influence of time, how- ever, many texts have been lost. At present only about 11 Samhitas, 18 Brāhmaṇas, 7 Āranyakas, and 220 Upanisads are available. This constitutes less than 6% of the original Vedas. 4 — The second difficulty one faces in trying to study the Vedas con- cerns their language. There are two varieties of Sanskrit - vaidika (Vedic) and laukika (current in the world, or ordinary) - and only evam vã are’sya mahato bhutasya nihśvasitam etad yad rgvedo yajurvedaḥ samavedo’tharvängirasa itihasaḥ purāṇam eka-virśati-bhedena rg-vedam kṛtavän pură sakhanam tu Satenaiva yajur-vedam athakarot sama-vedam sahasreṇa śäkhānāṁ prabibheda sah atharvāņam atho vedam bibheda navakena tu 76 12 Difficulties in Studying the Vedas the first of these is found in the Vedas. A scholar of ordinary San- skrit must learn extra vocabulary and rules of grammar, which require years of study, in order to understand Vedic Sanskrit. And even when the language of the Vedic verses is fathomed, their cryp- tic nature makes them impossible to decipher without hearing them explained by a realized teacher in disciplic succession. Another difficulty: Even before studying the Vedas, one must study their six “limbs,” called Vedängas. These six limbs are sikṣā (science of pronunciation), kalpa (the process of performing sacri- fice), vyakarana (the rules of grammar), nirukta (the meanings of difficult words used in the Vedas and their derivations), jyotisa (a branch of astronomy that deals with the influence of luminaries on human actions related to dharma), and chandas (Vedic meters). Each of these limbs is extensive and requires serious study. To further complicate matters, with the advent of Kaliyuga, human memory has grown weaker. In former times, there were no books- a student could assimilate all knowledge from his teacher simply by hearing and remembering. But this is no longer possible. In this age the food, water, air, and even the very ether are all pol- luted, and all these factors have taken their toll on human memory, making it difficult to study even the available 6% of the Vedic texts, not to speak of the entire four Vedas and their branches. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi concludes, therefore, that although the four Vedas are the ideal sabda-pramaņa, in the present age it is impractical to study them thoroughly and thereby ascertain the Absolute Truth. As an alternative, someone may suggest that since only a few of the Vedas are available and even they are difficult to under- stand, why not simply study Vedanta-sutra, the definitive summary of the Vedic conclusions? To this, Jiva Gosvāmī replies that var- ious thinkers differ about the meaning of Vedanta-sūtra, and so this method will likely lead to confusion. Furthermore, important thinkers like Gautama, Kapila, and Jaimini adhere to other philoso- phies, so why should we accept only the Vedanta-sūtra of Vyasa rather than one of their theories? For all these reasons we must admit that even with the help of the Vedas and Vedanta, we will not be able to clearly ascertain 77 II Pramana the truths of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana. To solve this dilemma, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi proposes an alternative: study of the Itihāsas and Purānas. The Itihasas and Purāņas are easier to understand than the Vedas because they are written in laukika Sanskrit, which is spo- ken, rather than Vedic Sanskrit, which is not. Furthermore, the esoteric meanings of the Vedas are more accessible in the Itihāsas and Purāņas, because these works are narrated in story form. And whereas only the dvijas (the twice-born Vedic initiates) are meant to study the Vedas, this restriction does not apply to the study of the Itihāsas and Puranas; anyone may read them. Even the Puranas’ original speaker, Sūta Gosvāmī, was not a twice-born brāhmaṇa. The Itihasas and Purānas convey the same conclusions as the Vedas, and since they come from the same source, Śrī Bhagavan, they are also free from the four human defects and thus qualify as defini- tive sabda-pramana. The Itihasas and Puranas should therefore be considered as reliable as the four Vedas. But although the Itihāsas and Purāņas are one with the Vedas, this does not mean that they are literally identical with them. Oth- erwise, the words Itihasa and Purana would simply be names for certain special parts of the Vedas. The Vedas are written in Vedic Sanskrit, which necessarily involves three different tonal accents: udatta (high), svarita (intermediate), and anudatta (low). In the Vedic language, the meaning of a word can be changed if the accent is changed. We see an example of this in the history of the demon Vrtra, who was generated by the chanting of a mantra (indra-satro vivardhasva) during a sacrifice. This demon was supposed to kill Indra, but during the sacrifice the priests pronounced the mantra with the wrong accent. The result was just the opposite of what was intended Indra killed Vṛträsura. Another significant difference between the four Vedas and the Itihāsas and Puranas is the sequence of particular words. In the Vedas the sequence is rigidly fixed. No one should change even one syllable of the texts, which have maintained their primeval arrange- ment of words since the beginning of creation. Techniques have been devised, such as pada-pāṭha, krama-patha, ghana-patha, and 78 12 Difficulties in Studying the Vedas jaṭä-paṭha, for keeping the word order intact. No rewording or rearrangement of words is allowed in the Vedas. By contrast, the Itihāsas and Purāņas need not be so rigidly preserved; their exact wordings are allowed to vary in different yuga cycles. Because no special techniques are used to keep the word order of the Purāņas and Itihasas intact, we find slight differences in various editions. Śrīla Vyasa compiled the Itihasa called Mahabharata specifically for people of this age because they are not qualified to understand the Vedas. This is explained in Śrimad Bhagavatam: Seeing that women, sudras, and the unqualified among the twice- born classes were prevented even from hearing the Vedas, the great sage [Vyasa], moved by compassion, compiled the great histori- cal narration called Mahabharata so that those who were unaware of how to act for ultimate good might also attain auspiciousness. (SB 1.4.25)5 Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī says that the Purānas are so-named because they complete the Vedas. Does he mean by this that the Vedas are incomplete? No, but the Purāņas are a form of explanatory, supplementary literature that help us understand the terse, cryp- tic message of the Vedas. Like the Vedas, they convey knowledge of the Absolute Truth, and to do so, they must be transcendental like the Vedas. To prove the Vedic nature of the Itihāsas and Purāņas, he offers the example of completing a golden bracelet. If a golden bracelet is incomplete, it can be completed by gold and not by lead. In other words, the metal used to complete the bracelet must also be gold. Similarly, if the Itihasas and Purānas complete or supplement stri-südra-dvija-bandhānāṁ trayi na śruti-gocară karma-Sreyasi müḍhänäm śreya eva bhaved tha iti bharatam akhyanam kṛpaya muninā kṛtam “The word purana should not be confused with the word purana, which means “completing.” Jiva Gosvāmi derives the word purana from the verbal root √pur, which means “to fill” or “to complete.” Thus, etymologically purāņa means “that which completes.” 79 64 80 II Pramāņa the Vedas, then they must also be Vedic in nature. Skanda Purāṇa indicates the equally transcendental status of the Puranas, Itihāsas, and Vedas as follows: In the Vedas, Rāmāyaṇa, the Purānas, and Mahabharata, Śrī Hari is glorified everywhere - in the beginning, middle, and end. (Skanda Purana 4.95.12) The conclusion is that because the Itihasas and Purānas emanate from the same source as the four Vedas and delineate the same specific truth, they are equally authoritative. Next, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī explains further how the Itihasas and Purānas are not inferior to the Vedas. vede rāmāyaṇe caiva purane bhārate tatha adav ante ca madhye ca hariḥ sarvatra giyate Anuccheda 13 The Itihasas and Purāņas Are Vedic 13.1 १३ । अत एव स्कान्दप्रभासखण्डे (स्कान्दे २ । ३-५ ) - THEREFORE, SKANDA PURĀNA states: पुरा तपश्चचारोग्रममराणां पितामहः । आविर्भूतास्ततो वेदाः सषडङ्गपदक्रमाः ॥ ९ ॥ ततः पुराणमखिलं सर्वशास्त्रमयं ध्रुवम् । नित्यशब्दमयं पुण्यं शतकोटिप्रविस्तरम् ॥ १० ॥ निर्गतं ब्रह्मणो वक्त्रात् तस्य भेदान् निबोधत । ब्राह्वयं पुराणं प्रथमम् ॥ ११ ॥ इत्यादि । Long ago, Brahma, the grandsire of the devas, performed severe penances, and as a result the Vedas appeared along with their six supplements and their pada and krama texts. Then the entire Purāņa emanated from his mouth. Composed of eternal sound and consisting of one billion verses, it is the unchanging, sacred embodiment of all scriptures. You should know that of the var- ious divisions of this Purana, the Brahma Purana is the first. (Prabhasa-khanda 2.3-5)’ pură tapas cacārogram amarānāṁ pitämahaḥ ävirbhūtās tato vedāh sasad-ariga-pada-kramāh tataḥ puranam akhilam sarva-sastra-mayam dhruvam nitya-śabda-mayam punyam sata-koti-pravistaram nirgatam brahmano vakträt tasya bhedän nibodhata brahmyaṁ puranam prathamam 81 13.2 11 Pramāņa अत्र शतकोटिसङ्ख्या ब्रह्मलोके प्रसिद्धेति तथोक्तम् । तृतीयस्कन्धे च “ऋग्यजुःसामाथर्वा- ख्यान् वेदान् पूर्वादिभिर्मुखैः " ( भा० ३ | १२ | ३७ ) इति । इत्यादिप्रकरणे ( भा० ३।१२ । ३९ ) - The figure one billion, cited above, refers to the number of verses existing in Brahma’s domain. The Third Canto of Srimad Bhāga- vatam (3.12.37 ) offers a similar description in the passage start- ing with the words “Brahma manifested the four Vedas-Ṛg, Yajur, Sāma, and Atharva - from his four mouths, facing the east, south, west, and north, respectively.”” In this passage we find the statement: इतिहासपुराणानि पञ्चमं वेदमीश्वरः । सर्वेभ्य एव वकत्रेभ्यः ससृजे सर्वदर्शनः ॥ १२ ॥ इति । Then the all-seeing Lord Brahma brought forth the fifth Veda - the Purānas and the Itihāsas – from all his mouths ( SB 3.12.39 ) 3 अपि चात्र साक्षादेव वेदशब्दः प्रयुक्तः पुराणेतिहासयोः । The word veda is directly applied here in reference to the Itihasas and Purānas. 13.3 अन्यत्र च – “पुराणं पञ्चमो वेदः” । “इतिहासः पुराणं च पञ्चमो वेद उच्यते” (भा० १।४।२० ) । “वेदानध्यापयामास महाभारतपञ्चमान्” (म० भा० १२ | ३४० | २१) इत्यादी । अन्यथा “वेदान्” इत्यादावपि पञ्चमत्वं नावकल्पेत समानजातीयनिवेशितत्वात् सङ्ख्या- याः । And elsewhere it is said, “The Purānas are the fifth Veda,” “The Itihāsas and Purānas are called the fifth Veda” (SB 1.4.20) ; and 2rg-yajuḥ-sāmātharvākhyān vedän pārvādibhir mukhaiḥ ’ itihasa-puraṇāni pañcamam vedam isvaraḥ sarvebhya eva vaktrebhyah sasṛje sarva-darśanaḥ itihasaḥ puranam ca pañcamo veda ucyate 82 13 The Itihasas and Puranas Are Vedic “He taught the Vedas along with the fifth of their number, Mahabharata” (MB 12.340.21).5 If the Itihāsas and Purāņas were not Vedic, it would have been inappropriate for the preceding verses to include them as the fifth Veda, since normally one counts together only items of the same kind. 13.4 भविष्यपुराणे “काष्र्णं च पञ्चमं वेदं यन् महाभारतं स्मृतम” इति । तथा च सामकौथुमी- यशाखायां छान्दोग्योपनिषदि च “ऋग्वेदं भगवोऽध्येमि यजुर्वेदं सामवेदमाथर्वणं चतुर्थ- मितिहासं पुराणं पञ्चमं वेदानां वेदम्” ( छा० ७।१।२) इत्यादि । Also, Bhaviṣya Purāņa states, “The fifth Veda, written by Śrī Kṛṣṇa-dvaipayana Vyasa, is called Mahabharata.” Another reference is found in the Chandogya Upanisad of the Kauthumiya School of the Sama Veda: “Venerable Sir, I have stud- ied the Ṛg, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva Vedas, and also the Itihāsas and Purāņas, which are the fifth Veda” (Kauthumiya Chandogya Upanisad 7.1.2)? 13.5 अत एव “अस्य महतो भूतस्य” (बृ० २।४।१०) इत्यादावितिहासपुराणयोश्चतुर्णामेवान्त- र्भूतत्वकल्पनया प्रसिद्धप्रत्याख्यानं निरस्तम् । तदुक्तम् “ब्राह्म्यं पुराणं प्रथमम्” इत्यादि ॥ These statements refute the frequently raised objection that the Itihāsas and Purāņas, which in the Bṛhad-aranyaka Upanisad (2.4.10) are said to emanate from the breathing of the Supreme Being, are included in the four Vedas and therefore have no sep- arate existence. The same distinction is expressed in the words, ⚫ vedän adhyapayāmāsa mahabharata-panicaman “kärṣṇaṁ ca pañcamam vedam yan mahabharatam smṛtam 7 rgvedam bhagavo’dhyemi yajurvedam samavedam atharvaṇam caturtham itihasaṁ puranam pañcamam vedänāṁ vedam 8 asya mahato bhutasya 83 11 Pramana “Brahma Purana is the first of the Purāņas that emanated from the mouth of Brahma [after he first brought forth the Vedas]” (Skanda Purāṇa, Prabhasa-khanda 2.5). Commentary TO SUBSTANTIATE the statement from BAU 2.4.10 that establishes the Vedic nature of the Itihasas and Puranas, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi cites more evidence from the Puranas, Itihāsas, and Upanisads. From these references, the following is clear: The Purāņas and Itihāsas have the same source as the four Vedas and are in fact called the fifth Veda. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi refers to the frequent objection that the Iti- hāsas and Purānas cannot be called the fifth Veda because they are part of the four Vedas. While explaining the above-mentioned state- ment from the Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad, Radhamohana Gosvāmī comments that some followers of the Mimāṁsaka School claim that the words itihasa and purana refer to historical passages found in some parts of the Vedas and not to separate works. Exam- ples of Śruti statements sometimes considered Puranic are, “He from whom these beings take birth” (yato va imani bhūtāni jāya- nte, TU 3.1) and “Lord Hari creates through Brahma and destroys through Rudra, but He Himself is the beginningless Source of all” (sa brahmana srjati rudreṇa vilapayati harir adir anadiḥ). These and similar passages are referred to as Purana because they deal with creation and destruction, which are among the subjects treated in the Purāņas. The Mimämsakas further argue that over an immense span of time, many of these original Puranic portions of the Vedas were lost, and those that remained became difficult to understand. Therefore, the Mimämsakas propose that Śrīla Vyasa mercifully wrote new Iti- hāsas and Purānas for the benefit of the unintelligent people of Kali- yuga, and this is what is described in SB 1.4.25. Hence, the Itihāsas and Purānas mentioned in the Bṛhad-aranyaka Upanisad are part brahmyaṁ puranaṁ prathamam 84 13 The Itihasas and Puranas Are Vedic of the Vedas, not independent books, and therefore, it is incorrect to conclude that they are the fifth Veda. This is the Mimämsakas’ argument. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī refutes this argument with references from the Vedas as well as the Itihasas and Purāņas themselves. These cita- tions confirm the status of the Itihasas and Puranas as the fifth Veda on the grounds that they emanated separately from Śrī Brahma’s mouths. If they were only parts of the Vedas, there would be no rea- son for these authoritative scriptures to call them the fifth Veda. Moreover, there are many statements about the transpersonal (apauruşeya) and Vedic nature of the Itihasas and Purāņas in the Vedic Samhitas, Brāhmaṇas, Aranyakas, Upanisads, Kalpa-sutras, Dharma-sutras, and Gṛhya-sutras, as well as in the Purāņas, Itihāsas, and other Smrti texts. Here are a few of these statements: The Rg, Sama, Yajur, and Atharva Vedas appeared from the mouth of Bhagavan along with the Puranas and all the devas residing in the celestial planets. (Atharva Veda 11.7.24)10 He approached the Brhati meter, and thus the Itihāsas, Purānas, Gāthās, and Nārāśamsis became favorable to him. One who knows this verily becomes the beloved abode of the Itihasas, Purāņas, Gāthās, and Nārāśamsīs. (Atharva Veda 15.6.10-12)11 In this way, all the Vedas were manifested along with the Kalpas, Rahasyas, Brahmanas, Upanisads, Itihāsas, Anvākhyātas, and Puranas. (Gopatha Brahmana, Purva 2.10)12 10 rcaḥ sämäni chandāmsi puranam yajusa saha ucchiştaj jajnire sarve divi deva divi-śritäh 11 sa brhatim disam anu vyacalat 12 tam itihasas ca puranam ca gathas ca itihasasya ca sa vai puranasya ca gathanam ca nārāśaṁsīnāṁ ca priyam dhama bhavati ya evam veda evam ime sarve veda nirmitaḥ sa-kalpäḥ sa-rahasyaḥ sa-brāhmaṇaḥ sopaniṣatkāḥ setihäsäḥ sänväkhyātāḥ sa-puraṇaḥ 85II Pramāņa Indeed, Rg, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva are the names of the four Vedas. The Itihāsas and Puranas are the fifth Veda. (CHU 7.1.4) 13 One who thoroughly studies the Vedas along with their six limbs and the Itihasas and Purāņas becomes a true knower of the Vedas. (Vyasa-smrti 4.45)1* All these references show that the Itihāsas and Purāņas have the same source and subject as the Vedas. In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi explains why the Itihasas and Purānas are counted as the fifth Veda. 13 nama va rg-vedo yajur-vedaḥ sama-veda atharvanaś caturtha itihasa-puraṇaḥ pañcamo vedānāṁ vedaḥ 14 mimamsate ca yo vedän sadbhir angaiḥ sa-vistaraiḥ itihasa-puraṇāni sa bhaved veda-para-gaḥ 86 Anuccheda 14 The Itihāsas and Purāņas Are the Fifth Veda 14.1 १४ । पञ्चमत्वे कारणं च वायुपुराणे सूतवाक्यम् ( वा० १ १६० ११६-१८, २१-२२ ) - IN VAYU PURANA, Sūta Gosvāmi explains why the Itihasas and Purānas are considered the fifth Veda: इतिहासपुराणानां वक्तारं सम्यगेव हि । मां चैव प्रतिजग्राह भगवानीश्वरः प्रभुः ॥ १३ ॥ एक आसीद् यजुर्वेदस्तं चतुर्धा व्यकल्पयत् । चातुर्होत्रमभूत् तस्मिंस्तेन यज्ञमकल्पयत् ॥ १४ ॥ आध्वर्यवं यजुर्भिस्तु ऋग्भिर्होत्रं तथैव च । औद्गात्रं सामभिश्चैव ब्रह्मत्वं चाप्यथर्वभिः ॥ १५ ॥ आख्यानैश्चाप्युपाख्यानैर्गाथाभिर्द्विजसत्तमाः । पुराणसंहिताश्चक्रे पुराणार्थविशारदः ॥ १६ ॥ यच् छिष्टं तु यजुर्वेदे इति शास्त्रार्थनिर्णयः ॥ १७ ॥ इति । Śrila Vyasadeva, the almighty Supreme Lord, accepted me [Süta Gosvāmi] as the qualified speaker of the Itihasas and Purāņas. In the beginning there was only one Veda, the Yajur Veda, which Śrīla Vyasa divided into four parts. These gave rise to the four sacerdotal functions called catur-hotra, by means of which Śrila Vyasa arranged for the performance of sacrifice. The adhvaryu priests perform all their assigned functions with yajur-mantras, the hotā priests with rg mantras, the udgātā priests with sama-mantras, and the brahma priests with atharva- mantras. 87 II Pramāņa [Sūta Gosvāmi further states:] O best of the twice-born, there- after Śrīla Vyasa, master of the meaning of the Purāņas, com- piled the Purānas and the Samhita [Mahabharata]’ by combin- ing various types of narrations and songs, known as akhyānas, upakhyānas, and gāthās. That which remained after Vyasa had divided the Vedas into four parts was also the Yajur Veda. This is the conclusion of the scriptures. (Vayu Purana 1.60.16-18, 21-22)2 14.2 ब्रह्मयज्ञाध्ययने च विनियोगो दृश्यतेऽमीषाम् “यद् ब्राह्मणानीतिहासपुराणानि ” (तैत्तिरी- यारण्यके २ । ९) इति । सोऽपि नावेदत्वे सम्भवति । अतो यदाह भगवान् । मात्स्ये (५३॥८- 8) - The Puranas and Itihāsas are also used in the formal study of the Vedas called brahma-yajña - a practice validated by state- ments such as, “The Itihāsas and Purāņas are Vedas” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 2.9). So, the fact that the Purāņas and Itihāsas are used in the brahma-yajña means that it is impossible for them to be non-Vedic. 1 Baladeva Vidyabhüṣaṇa comments that the word samhita here refers to Mahabharata. Rädhämohan Gosvämi, however, interprets purana-samhită as a singular compound. This would then refer to the Purana as a single compilation that became the basis for the eighteen Purāņas, as supported by the quote from Matsya Purana (53.8-9), cited in Anuccheda 14.2. itihasa-puraṇānām vaktāram samyag eva hi 2 mam caiva pratijagraha bhagavan isvaraḥ prabhuḥ eka asid yajur vedas tam caturdha vyakalpayat caturhotram abhüt tasmims tena yajfiam akalpayat adhvaryavar yajurbhis tu rgbhir hotram tathaiva ca audgatram samabhis caiva brahmatvam capy atharvabhiḥ akhyānais capy upakhyānair gāthābhir dvija-sattamaḥ puraṇa-samhitas cakre puraṇārtha-visäradaḥ yac chiṣṭam tu yajurvede iti sasträrtha-nirnayah Alternate reading of Vayu Purana 1.60.22: yac chiştaṁ tu yajurveda tena yajñamathayujat yunjanaḥ sa yajurvede iti sastra-viniscayaḥ 3 yad brahmananitihasa-puraṇāni 88 14 The Itihasas and Puranas Are the Fifth Veda Therefore, in Matsya Purana the Supreme Lord says: कालेनाग्रहणं मत्वा पुराणस्य द्विजोत्तमाः ॥ १८ ॥ व्यासरूपमहं कृत्वा संहरामि युगे युगे ॥ १९ ॥ इति । O best of the twice-born, foreseeing that the Purana will gradu- ally be neglected, I assume the form of Vyasa and abridge it in every age. (MP 53.8-9 ) 4 पूर्वसिद्धमेव पुराणं सुखसङ्ग्रहणाय सङ्कल्पयामीति तत्रार्थः । In other words, Śrīla Vyasa condenses the pre-existing Purana so that people can easily comprehend it. 14.3 तदनन्तरं ह्युक्तम् (मात्स्ये ५३ ।९-११) - Matsya Purana further states: चतुर्लक्षप्रमाणेन द्वापरे द्वापरे सदा ॥ २० ॥ तदष्टादशधा कृत्वा भूर्लोकेऽस्मिन् प्रभाष्यते । अद्याप्यमर्त्यलोके तु शतकोटिप्रविस्तरम् ॥ २१ ॥ तदर्थोऽत्र चतुर्लक्षः सङ्क्षेपेण निवेशितः ॥ २२ ॥ इति । The Purāņa consisting of four hundred thousand verses is divided into eighteen parts; then, it is passed on by oral recita- tion in every Dvaparayuga here on earth. Even today the original Purana of one billion verses exists in the abode of the immortals [devas]. The essential meaning of that Purana is contained in the abridged version of four hundred thousand verses. ( MP 53.9-11 ) 5 kalenagrahaṇam matva puranasya dvijottamaḥ vyasa-rupam aham kṛtva samharami yuge yuge caturlakṣa-pramāņena dvapare dvapare sadā tad-astādaśadhā krtvā bhar-loke’smin prabhāsyate adyāpy amartya-loke tu śata-koti-pravistaram tadartho’tra catur-laksah sanksepena niveśitah 89 14.4 II Pramāṇa अत्र तु “यच् छिष्टं तु यजुर्वेदः” इत्युक्तत्वात् तस्याभिधेयभागश्चतुर्लक्षस्त्वत्र मर्त्यलोके सते- पेण सारसङ्ग्रहेण निवेशितः । न तु रचनान्तरेण ॥ Sūta’s statement, “that which remained after Vyasa had divided the Vedas into four parts was also the Yajur Veda,” indicates that the remaining portion of the Yajur Veda, which is the prime por- tion (abhidheya-bhāga), forms the abridged version of the orig- inal Purana, containing its essence, and it consists of four hun- dred thousand verses in the world of mortals. It is not a different composition. Commentary THE ITIHASAS AND PURANAS ARE CALLED the fifth Veda because they are derived from the original Veda, the Yajur Veda. This is explained in the section of the Vayu Purana that describes the catur- hotra priests. There are four kinds of ṛtviks (priests) needed to per- form a Vedic sacrifice, and their duties were originally all known from the Yajur Veda. But later on, the Veda was divided into four parts for easy understanding and application. The duties of the four priests-adhvaryu, udgātā, hotā, and brahma- are known from these four corresponding divisions. The adhvaryu priest is associ- ated with the Yajur Veda, and his duties include sanctifying the sac- rificial paraphernalia and measuring the shape and size of the sac- rificial arena. The udgata priest studies the Sama Veda and chants hymns during the sacrifice to propitiate the Lord. The hotă priest decorates the altar, invokes the devas, pours oblations, and chants the Rg Veda. The brahma priest is an expert in the Atharva Veda and acts as the supervisor and coordinator of sacrificial ceremonies. After Śrila Vyasa compiled the four Vedas, there still remained one billion verses from the original Yajur Veda. These verses became the original Purana, which is still available in the celestial plan- ets. Out of compassion for the people of Kaliyuga, Vyasadeva ⚫yac chiştam tu yajurvede 90 14 The Itihasas and Puranas Are the Fifth Veda extracted five hundred thousand essential verses from this origi- nal Purana. Four hundred thousand of these he divided into the eighteen Purānas. The remaining verses formed the Itihasa called Mahabharata. The Itihasas and Puranas are therefore called the fifth Veda because they were produced from the original Veda. Another reason the Itihāsas and Purānas are considered the fifth Veda, dis- tinct from the other four, is that the priests of the four Vedas do not use the Itihasas and Puranas in sacrificial ceremonies, even though these works are studied along with the Vedas, which places them in the category of the Vedas. In his commentary on VP 3.6.1, Śridhara Svami defines the terms akhyāna, upakhyāna, and gāthā: The learned define an akhyāna as the narration of an event wit- nessed by the speaker, while an upakhyana is the narration of an event that is heard about but not witnessed by the speaker. Gāthās are songs about the forefathers and earthly beings? The statement “that which remained was also called Yajur Veda” (yac chiştam tu yajur-vedaḥ, Anuccheda 14.4) indicates that the Iti- hāsas and Purāņas are apauruşeya, without human origin; thus, they share the same authority as the Vedas, having been compiled by Śrila Vyasa from Bhagavan’s very breath. While compiling the Itihāsas and Puranas, He included some of His own statements to make the narration more easily comprehensible. For example, in Bhagavad Gita, the words “Arjuna said” and “Krsna said” are added by Śrila Vyasa to help the reader understand. But we should not con- sider even these added statements to have been written by a mortal being, since Vyasa is an avatara of Bhagavan. This is evident from the verse of Matsya Purana quoted in Anuccheda 14.2. Someone might raise the objection that from the Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad (2.4.10), cited in Anuccheda 12.4, it is clear that the four Vedas individually appeared from Bhagavan. Why, then, is it said that Vyasadeva divided the one Veda into four parts? To this we reply that while it is true that each Veda individually emanated svayam-dṛṣṭartha-kathanam prähur akhyānakaṁ budhāḥ śrutasyarthasya kathanam upakhyānam pracakṣate. gathās tu pity-prthivy-ādi-gitayaḥ. 91 16 92 II Pramāņa from the Lord, originally all four Vedas were collectively called the Yajur Veda, because that Veda is much bigger than the other three. Generally, the largest member of a set can represent the whole set. In Sanskrit this is called adhikyena vyapadeśa bhavanti, or the law that the largest constituent represents the whole. A herd of cows with just a few buffaloes in it is still referred to as a herd of cows, and the four fingers combined with the thumb are still called five fingers. Because the four Vedas had become disordered, Śrī Vyāsa rearranged the Vedic texts to help clearly define the duties of the four sacrificial priests. How the Vedas became mixed up by the curse of Gautama Ṛși will be elaborated in Anuccheda 16. In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi further substantiates his conclusion about the Vedic nature of the Itihāsas and Purāņas, and he also explains the meaning of the name “Vedavyāsa.” Anuccheda 15 The Origin of the Itihāsas, Purāņas, and Vedas Is the Same 15.1 १५ । तथैव दर्शितं वेदसहभावेन शिवपुराणस्य वायवीयसंहितायाम् (शि०१।३७-३८) - SIMILARLY, the Vayaviya-samhita of Siva Purana indicates the Vedic nature of the Puranas by mentioning their appearance along with the Vedas: सङ्क्षिप्य चतुरो वेदांश्चतुर्धा व्यभजत् प्रभुः । व्यस्तवेदतया ख्यातो वेदव्यास इति स्मृतः ॥ २३ ॥ पुराणमपि सङ्क्षिप्तं चतुर्लक्षप्रमाणतः । अद्याप्यमर्त्यलोके तु शतकोटिप्रविस्तरम् ॥ २४ ॥ इति । The ingenious Lord abridged the Veda and then divided it [vyasta] into four. Therefore, He became known as Vedavyāsa. He also condensed the Purānas into 400,000 verses, which still number one billion verses in the immortal realm. (Śiva Purāna 7.1.1.37-38 ) 1 सङ्क्षिप्तमित्यत्र तेनेति शेषः । Here the word sankṣipta (condensed) implies “condensed by Him.” sankṣipya caturo vedamś caturdha vyabhajat prabhuḥ vyasta-vedataya khyāto veda-vyasa iti smrtaḥ puranam api sankṣiptam caturlakṣa-pramāṇataḥ adyāpy amartya-loke tu śata-koti-pravistaram 93 86 II Pramāņa 15.2 स्कान्दमाग्नेयमित्यादि समाख्यास्तु प्रवचननिबन्धनाः काठकादिवत् । आनुपूर्वीर्निर्माण- निबन्धना वा । तस्मात् क्वचिदनित्यत्वश्रवणं त्वाविर्भावतिरोभावापेक्षया । तदेवमितिहा- सपुराणयोर्वेदत्वं सिद्धम् । The names of the various Purāņas - Skanda, Agni, and so on- refer to their original speakers, as with the Katha Upanisad, which was promulgated by the sage Katha. Alternatively, the name may refer to the person who arranged the Purana’s contents. The reason the Purāņas are occasionally described as impermanent is that they are sometimes manifest and sometimes not. In this way, by the arguments and evidence provided in Anucchedas 13, 14, and 15.1-2, the Vedic nature of the Itihāsas and Purānas is established. 15.3 तथापि सूतादीनामधिकारः - सकलनिगमवल्लीसत्फलश्रीकृष्णनामवत् । यथोक्तं प्रभा- सखण्डे - In spite of this fact, Suta and others [who are not twice-born] are eligible to recite the Puranas in the same way that every person is eligible to chant Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s Holy Name, the transcendental fruit of the creeper of all the Vedas. As stated in the Prabhasa-khaṇḍa of Skanda Purāṇa: मधुरमधुरमेतन् मङ्गलं मङ्गलानां सकलनिगमवल्लीसत्फलं चित्स्वरूपम् । सकृदपि परिगीतं श्रद्धया हेलया वा भृगुवर नरमात्रं तारयेत् कृष्णनाम ॥ २५ ॥ O best of the Bhrgu dynasty, the Holy Name of Kṛṣṇa is the sweet- est of the sweet and the most auspicious of the auspicious. It is the transcendental fruit of the creeper of all the Vedas and is purely of the nature of consciousness [eternally self-manifest and self-existing and hence prior to phenomenal existence]. 94 15 The Origin of the Itihāsas, Purānas, and Vedas Is the Same Whoever chants it but once, whether as an intentional act born of faith or inadvertently, is liberated.? 15.4 इति । यथा चोक्तं विष्णुधर्मे- Visņu-dharma Purāna states: ऋग्वेदोऽथ यजुर्वेदः सामवेदोऽप्यथर्वणः । अधीतास्तेन येनोक्तं हरिरित्यक्षरद्वयम् ॥ २६ ॥ इति । A person who chants the two syllables ha-ri has already completed the study of the Rg, Yajur, Sāma, and Atharva Vedas. 3 अथ वेदार्थनिर्णायकत्वं च वैष्णवे- And Vişņu Purana affirms that the Puranas and Itihāsas establish the meaning of the Vedas: भारतव्यपदेशेन ह्याम्नायार्थः प्रदर्शितः । वेदाः प्रतिष्ठिताः सर्वे पुराणे नात्र संशयः ॥ २७ ॥ इत्यादौ । On the pretext of writing Mahabharata, Śrīla Vyasa has explained the meaning of the Vedas. Without doubt, all of the Vedas are firmly established in the Purānas. 15.5 किं च वेदार्थदीपकानां शास्त्राणां मध्यपातिताभ्युपगमेऽप्याविर्भावकवैशिष्ट्यात् तयोरेव वैशिष्ट्यम् । यथा पाद्मे- 2 madhura madhuram etan mangalari mangalānāri sakala-nigama-valli-sat-phalam cit-svarūpam sakrd api parigitam Sraddhaya helaya vä bhrgu-vara nara-mātram tārayet krsna-nāma argvedo’tha yajurvedaḥ samavedo’pyatharvanah adhitästena yenoktam harirityakṣaradvayam bharata-vyapadesena hy ämnäyärthaḥ pradarsitaḥ vedaḥ pratisthitaḥ sarve purane nätra samsayaḥ 95 56II Pramāņa Moreover, even if we count the Itihāsas and Purānas among the revealed texts that illuminate the meaning of the Vedas, they are still unique because of the extraordinary distinction of the one who manifested them [i.e., Vyasa]. Padma Purana says: द्वैपायनेन यद् बुद्धं ब्रह्माद्यैस्तन् न बुध्यते । सर्वबुद्धं स वै वेद तद् बुद्धं नान्यगोचरः ॥ २८ ॥ इति ॥ Brahma and others are unaware of what Bhagavan Vedavyāsa knows. Indeed, He knows everything known to others as well as that which is beyond everyone else’s grasp. Commentary THE WORD SANKṢIPTA in the verse cited here from Śiva Purana 7.1.1.37 is significant. It means “condensed,” not “composed.” Śrīla Vedavyäsa, who is a divine descent of God (avatāra) condensed the already existing Vedas. Then He took unused verses from that abridged portion and compiled them into the Purāņas. Thus, He did not formulate the Puranas as an original composition. This con- firms that the Puranas, by virtue of their transcendental origin, are equal to the four Vedas. They are eternal and apauruşeya. One may protest that since the Puranas have names, such as Skanda and Agni, they must have been composed by these persons, and so they are neither eternal nor apauruşeya. But if this were the case, the Vedas themselves would have to be considered non-eternal compositions, since some parts have names like Katha Upanisad and Aitareya Brahmana, which refer to the sages Katha and Aitareya. The explanation is that portions of the Vedas are named after certain sages not because they wrote those portions, but because they were the main exponents of those portions. Since persons with names like Katha and Aitareya appear in every millennium, one should not dvaipayanena yad buddham brahmadyais tan na budhyate sarva-buddham sa vai veda tad buddham nanya-gocaraḥ This verse is not found in the printed version of Padma Purana. 96 15 The Origin of the Itihāsas, Purāņas, and Vedas Is the Same think that before the appearance of the known Katha and Aitareya, these names were meaningless words in the Vedas. In the same way, several of the Purāņas are named either after their original expounder or the person who rearranged them. It sometimes happens that over the course of time, a certain Vedic work becomes less popular or is completely forgotten on this planet. Eventually, some sage or deva again speaks it, and after that it becomes known by his name. An example of this is given in Śrīmad Bhagavatam, where sage Yajnavalkya is described as receiving the Vajasaneyi-samhita of the Yajur Veda from the sun god: Pleased by such glorification, the illustrious sun god assumed the form of a horse (vaji) and delivered to the sage Yajnavalkya the yajur-mantras previously unknown in human society. (SB 12.6.73) Just as the Lord seems to take birth and disappear like a mor- tal being, the Vedic literature similarly seems to become manifest and unmanifest. According to traditional sources, Srimad Bhaga- vatam had become unmanifest at the end of Dvaparayuga, five thousand years ago. At that time Narada Muni instructed Vyasa to again reveal the Bhagavatam. If the Bhagavatam had not existed before, Purāņas older than the Bhagavatam could not refer to it by name. In Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda, Gautama advises Ambarīṣa Mahārāja, who reigned in Satyayuga, to study Srimad Bhāgavatam. Thus, the Puranas are eternal, but they are sometimes manifest and sometimes unmanifest in human society. As Bhagavan is inde- pendent in His appearance and disappearance, so by His free will He speaks the revealed scriptures through the medium of various sages and gives them various names. Another objection to the Vedic status of the Itihasas and Purāņas may be stated as follows: [In Srimad Bhagavatam, Sūta Gosvāmi says:] Seeing that women, śūdras, and the unqualified among the twice-born classes were prevented even from hearing the Vedas, the great sage [Vyasa], evam stutah sa bhagavän väji-rupa-dharo ravih yajumsy ayata-yämäni munaye’dāt prasaditaḥ 97 46 II Pramāņa moved by compassion, compiled the great historical narration called Mahabharata. (SB 1.4.25)” Since Mahabharata, the foremost of the Itihasas, was written specifically for women and others with no access to the Vedas, how can the Itihasas be a part of the Vedas? Moreover, in the same chapter of Srimad Bhagavatam, Saunaka Rṣi says to Suta Gosvāmï: We consider you to be thoroughly versed in all subjects implicit within the complete range of sacred speech, except for the Vedas. (SB 1.4.13) So, if Sūta Gosvāmī was not exposed to the Vedic speech, yet was being requested to narrate the Puranas (specifically Bhagavata Purana), how can the Puranas be part of the Vedas? Anticipating these objections, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi compares the privilege of studying the Itihasas and Puranas to that of chant- ing Kṛṣṇa’s Holy Name, the choicest fruit of the Vedas. The Holy Name of Kṛṣṇa is purely Vedic, and yet anyone may chant it, includ- ing those who are denied access to study of the Vedas. Similarly, although the Itihāsas and Purāņas are also purely Vedic, even a sincere sudra (outcaste) can approach them, just as he or she may chant the Holy Name of the Lord. In fact, by study of the Vedas alone, one may not comprehend the Ultimate Reality, even if one is a dvija. It is for this reason only that the Itihasas and Purāņas are said to complete the Vedas, and Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi is arguing in favor of studying them rather than the Vedas. So, even if one is eligible to study the Vedas, one should not neglect to study the Itihāsas and Purāņas for proper understanding of Ultimate Reality. As one can gain all perfection simply by chanting Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s Holy Name, which is the ultimate fruit of the Vedas, so by study- ing the Itihasas and Purāņas, one can learn the essence of the Vedas, even without studying the Vedas themselves. If one could not do so, then knowledge of how to attain ultimate value would 7 8 stri-Südra-dvija-bandhunam trayi na śruti-gocară iti bharatam äkhyanam kṛpaya muninä kṛtam manye tvām viṣaye vācām snātam anyatra chandasät 98 15 The Origin of the Itihāsas, Puranas, and Vedas Is the Same be inaccessible to those who are barred from studying the Vedas because they are not twice-born. Finally, even if one were to include the Itihasas and Purāņas among other Smrti scriptures written by saintly sages to explain the meaning of the Vedas, the Itihasas and Purāņas occupy a unique place because of the eminence of their propounder, Śrīla Vyasa- deva, an avatara of Bhagavan. In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi elaborates on how the Itihasas and Purāņas are exceptional by virtue of their compiler’s divinity. 99 66 Anuccheda 16 The Distinctive Illumination of Vyasa, Revealer of the Itihāsas and Purāņas 16.1 १६ । स्कान्दे- SKANDA PURĀNA states: व्यासचित्तस्थिताकाशादवच्छिन्नानि कानिचित् । अन्ये व्यवहरन्त्येतान्युरीकृत्य गृहादिव ॥ २९ ॥ इति । Just as a person picks up items from his own house and uses them, many people have taken knowledge from the sky of Vyasa’s heart for their own use. 16.2 तथैव दृष्टं श्रीविष्णुपुराणे पराशरवाक्यम् (वि०पु० ३।४।२-५ ) - We also find this statement by Parāśara Rṣi in Visņu Purāṇa: ततोऽत्र मत्सुतो व्यास अष्टाविंशतिमेऽन्तरे । वेदमेकं चतुष्पादं चतुर्धा व्यभजत् प्रभुः ॥ ३० ॥ यथात्र तेन वै व्यस्ता वेदव्यासेन धीमता । वेदस्तथा समस्तैस्तैर्व्यासैरन्यैस्तथा मया ॥ ३१ ॥ तदनेनैव व्यासानां शाखाभेदान् द्विजोत्तम । vyäsa-citta-sthitäkäśäd avacchinnäni känicit anye vyavaharanty etäny urikṛtya grhad iva 100 16 The Distinctive Illumination of Vyasa, Revealer of the Itihāsas and Purāņas चतुर्युगेषु रचितान् समस्तेष्ववधारय ॥ ३२ ॥ कृष्णद्वैपायनं व्यासं विद्धि नारायणं प्रभुम् । कोsन्यो हि भुवि मैत्रेय महाभारतकृद् भवेत् ॥ ३३ ॥ इति । Thereafter, during the twenty-eighth manvantara, Bhagavan in the form of my son, Vyasa, took the one Veda, consisting of four sections, and divided it into four separate parts. Just as this illuminated Vyasa divided the Veda, previously all other Vyasas, including myself, also divided it. O best of the twice-born, under- stand that it is precisely in this manner that a Vyasa comes in every cycle of four yugas and arranges the Veda into various branches. But know, O Maitreya, that Śrī Krsna-dvaipāyana Vyasa is Śrī Nārāyaṇa Himself. Who else in this world could have brought forth the great epic Mahābhārata? (VP 3.4.2 - 5 ) 2 16.3 स्कान्द एव- Skanda Purana further states: नारायणाद् विनिष्पन्नं ज्ञानं कृतयुगे स्थितम् । किञ्चित् तदन्यथा जातं त्रेतायां द्वापरेऽखिलम् ॥ ३४ ॥ गौतमस्य ऋषेः शापाज् ज्ञाने त्वज्ञानतां गते । सङ्कीर्णबुद्धयो देवा ब्रह्मरुद्रपुरःसराः ॥ ३५ ॥ शरण्यं शरणं जग्मुर्नारायणमनामयम् । तैर्विज्ञापितकार्यस्तु भगवान् पुरुषोत्तमः ॥ ३६ ॥ अवतीर्णो महायोगी सत्यवत्यां पराशरात् । उत्सन्नान् भगवान् वेदानुज्जहार हरिः स्वयम् ॥ ३७ ॥ इति । tato’tra mat-suto vyāsa astāviniśatime’ntare vedam ekam catuspädam caturdha vyabhajat prabhuh yathātra tena vai vyastä veda-vyäsena dhimată vedas tatha samastais tair vyasair anyais tatha maya tad anenaiva vyāsanara sākhābhedan dvijottama caturyugeşu racitan samasteşv avadharaya kṛṣṇa-dvaipayanam vyasam viddhi narayanam prabhum ko’nyo hi bhuvi maitreya mahabharata-krd bhavet 101 II Pramāņa In Satyayuga the knowledge that emanated from Śrī Nārāyaṇa remained pure. It became somewhat distorted in Tretayuga and completely so in Dvaparayuga. When ignorance had covered that knowledge because of Gautama Rşi’s curse, the devas became perplexed. Led by Brahma and Rudra, they approached Śrī Nārā- yana, the Supreme Person and ultimate shelter for those seek- ing refuge, and told Him why they had come. On the request of the devas, Śri Hari then descended as the great yogi Vyasa, son of Satyavati and Parāśara, and re-established the forgotten Vedas. 16.4 वेदशब्देनात्र पुराणादिद्वयमपि गृह्यते । तदेवमितिहासपुराणविचार एव श्रेयानिति सिद्धम् । तत्रापि पुराणस्यैव गरिमा दृश्यते । Here the word veda also includes the Itihäsas and Purāņas. Thus, it is established that only the study of the Itihasas and Purāņas is supremely beneficial, and of these two, the Purāņas are more excellent. उक्तं हि नारदीये- Lord Siva confirms this in Naradiya Purāṇa: वेदार्थादधिकं मन्ये पुराणार्थं वरानने । वेदाः प्रतिष्ठिताः सर्वे पुराणे नात्र संशयः ॥ ३८ ॥ पुराणमन्यथा कृत्वा तिर्यग्योनिमवाप्नुयात् । सुदान्तोऽपि सुशान्तोऽपि न गतिं क्वचिदाप्नुयात् ॥ ३९ ॥ इति ॥ O lovely one, I consider the Purāņas more important than the Vedas, because the Purānas firmly establish all the Vedic mean- ings. There is no doubt of this. One who disregards the Purāņas näräyanad viniṣpannam jñanam krta-yuge sthitam kiñcit tad anyatha jätam tretäyäṁ dväpare’khilam gautamasya ṛṣeḥ śāpāj jñāne tv ajñānatăṁ gate sankirna-buddhayo deva brahma-rudra-purahsarah saranyam saranam jagmur nārāyaṇam anamayam tair vijñāpita-karyas tu bhagavan purusottamaḥ avatirno mahāyogi satyavatyām parāśarāt utsannan bhagavan vedän ujjahāra hariḥ svayam 102 16 The Distinctive Illumination of Vyasa, Revealer of the Itihasas and Purāņas will take birth as a subhuman; even if his senses are under full control and his mind firmly established in peace, he cannot attain an auspicious destination.* Commentary ONE CAN KNOW a product’s quality by assessing the status of its manufacturer. By this criterion the Puranas and Itihāsas are supremely excellent, since they were compiled by Śrī Nārāyaṇa Himself in the form of Śrīla Vyasadeva. Here Śrīla Vyasa’s heart (citta, i.e., the seat of consciousness) is compared to the unlimited sky, indicating that just as the sky accommodates all objects, so Vyasa’s heart contains all knowledge. Another significance of comparing Vyasa’s awareness to the sky is that both are the medium for sound, which is the basis of all kinds of knowledge. All other thinkers, both on this planet and on higher planets, simply appropriate the knowledge Śrīla Vyasa has given. This estimation is in accordance with the Sanskrit saying, “The whole world tastes the remnants of Vyasa’s knowledge” (vyaso- cchiṣṭam jagat sarvam). Any “new” idea one may find or conceive of already exists in His compilations. According to Parāśara Muni, at the beginning of each Kaliyuga in the cycle of four yugas, a vyasa, or “compiler,” arranges the Vedas. In the present reign of Manu, Parāśara himself was the twenty-sixth vyāsa and Śrī Kṛṣṇa-dvaipayana is the twenty-eighth. Of the twenty-eight vyāsas who have appeared until now, Kṛṣṇa- dvaipayana is special because He is an avatara of Śrī Nārāyaṇa. He appeared on the request of the devas at the end of Dvaparayuga, after a curse by Gautama Muni caused ignorance to cover the Vedic knowledge. Chapter 171 of the Varaha Purana relates how during a famine Gautama Muni underwent severe austerities to please Śrī Brahmā.

• vedärthad adhikam manye puranartham varanane vedaḥ pratisthitaḥ sarve purane nätra samsayaḥ puranam anyatha kṛtva tiryag-yonim aväpnuyāt sudanto’pi susanto’pi na gatim kvacid apnuyat 103 II Pramāņa When Brahma offered Gautama a boon, the sage asked to be able to feed all his guests. The boon was granted, and the benevolent Gau- tama fed his many brahmana guests for the duration of the famine. When rains finally came, the brahmanas wanted to leave his her- mitage. As is the custom, however, Gautama asked them to stay a little longer, and they agreed. After some time they again wished to leave, but once again Gautama prevailed on them to stay a while longer. This happened a few times. Determined to leave, the brahmanas devised a plan. They cre- ated an artificial cow and left it near Gautama’s asrama. In the early morning, when the sage was going to bathe, the animal blocked his path, and to drive her away, he threw a few drops of water at her. At the first touch of the water, the cow fell down dead. The brahma- nas immediately raised a hue and cry, denouncing Gautama as a cow-killer. They declared, “We cannot stay here and accept food from a cow-killer,” and then they left for their respective residences. Later, Gautama performed atonement, but then by his supernatu- ral power he could understand that he had been tricked. He then angrily cursed the brahmanas that they would lose all their Vedic knowledge. In this way Vedic knowledge became covered by igno- rance during Dvaparayuga, and thus it was necessary for Vyasa to bring forth the Vedas again. Lord Siva stated that the Puranas are more important than the Vedas since they explain the Vedas; yet, we should not conclude that absolutely no one should study the Vedas. Still, Vyasadeva’s verdict is that people in Kaliyuga are not intelligent enough to understand the true message of the Vedas, especially since there exists no authentic disciplic succession through which to acquire this understanding. We find, in fact, that nowadays those who attempt to study only the Vedas and Upanisads most often take up either ritual- based, result-oriented action (the karma path) or meditation aimed at absolute identity with unqualified Brahman (the jñāna path). Without the distinct vision provided by the Puranas, which com- pletes the Vedic meaning, it is virtually impossible for a person to 5 In the First Canto, Fourth Chapter of the Bhagavatam. 104 16 The Distinctive Illumination of Vyasa, Revealer of the Itihāsas and Purāņas come to realize the Absolute as Bhagavan, who is not only iden- tical to Brahman but vastly beyond. And it is only by intuition of the Absolute as Bhagavan that one can become situated in the inherently ego-transcending condition of devotional turning to Bhagavan, known as causeless devotion (the uttama-bhakti path). ‘The failure of modern-day students of the Vedas to understand this conclusion is proof that this message is not easy to discern in the present age. As Śrī Kṛṣṇa says in SB 11.3.44, “The Vedas speak indi- rectly” (parokṣa-vado vedo’yam). Therefore, if we wish to learn the true conclusion of the Vedas in this age, it is more practical to study the Purāņas. A serious student who seeks to understand the conclusion of the Purāņas must still approach a qualified teacher in disciplic succes- sion. This basic prerequisite of Vedic study is not waived when one approaches the Purāņas. Indeed, Śrimad Bhagavatam emphatically declares: A person who is profoundly inquisitive about the ultimate good must take shelter of a realized spiritual teacher. (SB 11.3.21) Next, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi explains the three divisions of the Purāņas. “tasmad gurum prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam 105Anuccheda 17 Three Divisions of the Purāņas 17.1 १७ | स्कान्दप्रभासखण्डे (५।३।१२१-१२४ ) - FURTHERMORE, SKANDA PURĀŅA states: वेदवन् निश्चलं मन्ये पुराणार्थं द्विजोत्तमाः । वेदाः प्रतिष्ठिताः सर्वे पुराणे नात्र संशयः ॥ ४० ॥ बिभेत्यल्प श्रुताद् वेदो मामयं चालयिष्यति । इतिहासपुराणैस्तु निश्चलोऽयं कृतः पुरा ॥ ४१ ॥ यन् न दृष्टं हि वेदेषु तद् दृष्टं स्मृतिषु द्विजाः । उभयोर्यन् न दृष्टं हि तत् पुराणैः प्रगीयते ॥ ४२ ॥ यो वेद चतुरो वेदान् साङ्गोपनिषदो द्विजाः । पुराणं नैव जानाति न च स स्याद् विचक्षणः ॥ ४३ ॥ इति । O best of the twice-born, I consider the meaning of the Puraņas to be as immutable as that of the Vedas. Without doubt, all of the Vedas are firmly established in the Puranas. Long ago, the personified Veda became apprehensive of those whose acquain- tance with her is insufficient, and she thought, “This sort of per- son will distort my meaning.” But then the Itihasas and Purāņas helped the Veda by firmly establishing her meaning. What can- not be found in the Vedas, O brāhmanas, is found in the Smrti, and what cannot be found in either is clearly explained in the Purāņas. O learned brahmanas, even if a person has studied the four Vedas along with the Vedängas and Upanisads, he is not con- sidered learned unless he knows the Puranas. (Skanda Purāṇa, Prabhāsa khanda 5.3.121-124 ) 1 1 vedavan niścalam manye puränärtham dvijottamaḥ 106 17 Three Divisions of the Purāpas 17.2 अथ पुराणामेवं प्रामाण्ये स्थितेऽपि तेषामपि सामस्त्येनाप्रचरद्रूपत्वात् नाना देवताप्रति- पादकप्रायत्वादर्वाचीनैः क्षुद्रबुद्धिभिरर्थो दुरधिगम इति तदवस्थ एव संशयः । Although the authority of the Purāņas has been established [in the previous anucchedas], still it is difficult for modern human beings of impoverished intellect to comprehend their ultimate meaning. The reasons for this difficulty are that the Puranas, like the Vedas, are only partially available and that the Purāņas generally tend to establish the supremacy of various deities. Thus, the same doubt [that was encountered with the Vedas ] remains in the case of the Purāņas. 17.3 यदुक्तं मात्स्ये (५३ ६४ ६७-६८) - As stated in Matsya Purana: पञ्चाङ्गत्वं पुराणं स्यादाख्यानमितरत् स्मृतम् ॥ ४४ ॥ सात्त्विकेषु च कल्पेषु माहात्म्यमधिकं हरेः । राजसेषु च माहात्म्यमधिकं ब्रह्मणो विदुः ॥ ४५ ॥ तद्वदश्च माहात्म्यं तामसेषु शिवस्य च । सङ्कीर्णेषु सरस्वत्याः पितॄणां च निगद्यते ॥ ४६ ॥ इति । A history is called a Purana if it has the five defining character- istics; otherwise, it is called an akhyāna. The sättvika Purāņas (kalpas) primarily glorify Śrī Hari; the rājasika Purānas, Lord Brahma; and the tamasika Purāņas, Lord Siva and Goddess vedaḥ pratisthitaḥ sarve purane natra samsayaḥ bibhety alpa-śrutad vedo mam ayam călayiṣyati itihasa-puranais tu niscalo’yam kṛtah pură yan na dṛṣṭam hi vedeşu tad dṛṣṭam smrtișu dvijaḥ ubhayor yan na dṛṣṭam hi tat puranaiḥ pragiyate yo veda caturo vedän sangopanisado dvijaḥ puranam naiva jānāti na ca sa syäd vicakṣaṇaḥ 107 II Pramāņa Durga, along with Agni. The Puranas in the mixed gunas glorify Goddess Sarasvati and the forefathers (pitrs). (MP 53.64, 67-68)2 17.4 अत्राग्नेस्तत्तदग्रौ प्रतिपाद्यस्य तत्तद्यज्ञस्येत्यर्थः । शिवस्य चेति चकाराच् छिवायाश्च । सङ्कीर्णेषु - सत्त्वरजस्तमोमयेषु कल्पेषु बहुषु । सरस्वत्याः - नाना वाण्यात्मकतदुपल- क्षिताया नाना देवताया इत्यर्थः । पितॄणाम् - “कर्मणा पितृलोकः” (बृ०१ | ५ | १६) इति । श्रुतेस्तत् प्रापककर्मणामित्यर्थः ॥ In the above statement, the word agni (fire) refers to the Vedic sacrifices performed by offering oblations into various sacred fires. The conjunction ca (and) in the phrase sivasya ca implies the wife of Lord Siva [Goddess Durgā]. Sankirṇeşu (in the mixed) means “in the various Puranas in the mixed gunas of sattva, rajas, and tamas.” Here sarasvatyaḥ (of Sarasvati) means “of the presid- ing deity of speech” and, by implication, “of the various deities referred to in the numerous scriptural texts she embodies.” The Śruti affirms: “By ritualistic result-oriented action, one can attain the abode of the forefathers” (BAU 1.5.16). According to this statement, the word pitṛṇām (of the forefathers) refers to the result-oriented rituals (Vedic karma) meant for attaining the planet of the forefathers. Commentary THE VERSE FROM MATSYA PURANA cited in Anuccheda 17.3 mentions five subjects that characterize a Purana. Another verse of Matsya Purāņa lists those subjects: 2 pañcargatvaṁ puranam syad äkhyanam itarat smṛtam sättvikeşu ca kalpesu mahatmyam adhikam hareḥ rajaseşu ca mahatmyam adhikaṁ brahmano viduḥ tadvad agnes ca mahatmyam tămaseşu sivasya ca sankirneşu sarasvatyah pitṛṇam ca nigadyate karmană pity-lokaḥ 108 4 17 Three Divisions of the Purāņas The five subjects that characterize a Purana are creation, dissolu- tion, genealogy, the period of reign of the Manus, and the activi- ties of illustrious kings and enlightened sages appearing within the great dynasties. (MP 53.65)* Anucchedas 57 and 61 of Śri Tattva Sandarbha discuss these five subjects in detail. In the verses cited in the text from Matsya Purāņa (Anuccheda 17.3), the word kalpa could mean a day of Brahma, or it could refer to a “scripture” or “Purana.” The various meanings of this word are listed in the Medini Sanskrit dictionary: Kalpa means “scripture,” “rule,” “logic,” “dissolution,” and “a day of Brahma.” (Medini 1.21.2)5 The word kalpa is translated here as Purana based upon the gloss of this word given by Śrī Rādhamohana Gosvāmi. Although the meaning of kalpa as “a day of Brahma” seems natural, it would be illogical to consider that some days of Brahma could be exclusively in sattva, rajas, or tamas. According to LBH 1.4.30, all avatāras appear in every day of Brahma, and it seems that kalpas are similar in nature. The Puranas are divided according to the gunas of material nature that they embody. The list of the Purāņas belonging to each guna is given in Padma Purana: [Lord Siva said:] O beautiful lady, know that the Vişņu, Narada, Bhagavata, Garuda, Padma, and Varaha Puranas embody the per- spective born of sattva-guna (luminosity and being); the Brahma- nda, Brahma-vaivarta, Märkandeya, Bhavisya, Vämana, and Brahma Puranas embody the perspective born of rajo-guna (dynamism and conditional becoming); and the Matsya, Kurma, Linga, Śiva, Skanda, and Agni Puranas embody the perspective born of tamo- guna (ignorance and stasis). (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 236.18- 21) sargas ca pratisargaś ca vamso manvantarāņi ca vamsyanucaritam caiva puranam pañca-lakṣaṇam “kalpa śāstre vidhau nyaye samvarte brahmane dine “vaiṣṇavaṁ naradiyam ca tatha bhagavatam subham → 109 II Pramana This statement makes it exceedingly clear that it is the Purāņas that are predominantly established in particular gunas. The verses Śrīla Jiva cites from Skanda Purana imply that the Purāņas are as good as the Vedas and should be accepted as such by anyone who accepts the authority of the Vedas. There are many commentaries on the Vedas written by Vedic scholars, but the Purānas are the nat- ural commentary, because they were compiled by the very person who compiled the Vedas themselves, Śrīla Vyasa. Therefore, even without directly studying the Vedas, one can understand their mes- sage by studying the Puranas alone. On the other hand, study of the Vedas in this age is incomplete without study of the Purāņas; therefore, studying the Puranas is even more appropriate and prac- tical for us than studying the Vedas. Furthermore, the statement from Skanda Purana quoted in Anuccheda 17.1 (i.e., that no one can be considered learned without studying the Puranas) suggests that the Purāņas are also more important than the Itihāsas. But just as we meet with difficulties in studying the Vedas in this age, we also encounter difficulties in studying the Puranas. The eighteen major and eighteen minor Purānas constitute a vast body of literature, and there are no current disciplic successions or authentic commentaries for most of these works. Portions of some Puranas are not available, and other Purānas have variant readings and interpolations. As with the Vedas, independent study of the Purāņas yields no clear conclusion, because each Purāņa seems to establish a different deity as Supreme. Šiva Purana proclaims Lord Śiva supreme, Visnu Purana proclaims Śrī Visņu, and so on. For one who studies them without proper guidance, the result is confusion. Such a student will not know the distinctions between the worship of Śiva, Vişņu, Devi, or some other deity. 110 garuḍam ca tatha pädmaṁ väräham subha-darśane sättvikāni purāṇāni vijñeyāni subhāni vai brahmandam brahma-vaivartam märkandeyaṁ tathaiva ca bhaviṣyam vamanam brahmam rajasani nibodha me matsyam kaurmaṁ tatha laingam saivam skändam tathaiva ca agneyam ca saḍ etani tamasäni nibodha me 17 Three Divisions of the Puranas Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī offers a solution to this problem in the next anuccheda. 111 Anuccheda 18 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Fulfills the Criteria of Authority in the Matter of Ultimate Truth 18.1 १८ । तदेवं सति तत्तत्कल्पकथामयत्वेनैव मात्स्य एव प्रसिद्धानां तत्तत्पुराणानां व्यवस्था ज्ञापिता । तारतम्यं तु कथं स्यात् येनेतरनिर्णयः क्रियेत ? सत्त्वादितारतम्येनैवेति चेत् “सत्त्वात् सञ्जायते ज्ञानम्” (गीता १४।१७) इति “सत्त्वं यद् ब्रह्मदर्शनम्” (भा० १।२।२४) इति च न्यायात् सात्त्विकमेव पुराणादिकं परमार्थज्ञानाय प्रबलमित्यायातम् । THIS BEING THE CASE [that the Purānas embody different gunas of primordial nature], Matsya Purana classifies the various well- known Purāņas into three divisions based specifically on the descriptions that they contain. But how can we determine the relative importance of the Purāņas so that we can then learn about the other subjects under discussion [namely, sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana]? If we use the three gunas of nature as the basis for categorizing the Purāņas, depending on such statements as, “knowledge is born of sattva-guna” [GĪTĀ 14.17]1 and “sattva-guna leads to realization of the Absolute Truth” [SB 1.2.24], we must conclude that the Puranas and other lit- erature in sattva-guna are more authentic sources of knowledge of the Absolute Truth. 1 sattvät sanjayate jñānam 2 sattvam yad brahma-darśanam 112 18 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Fulfills the Criteria of Authority in the Matter of Ultimate Truth 18.2 तथापि परमार्थेऽपि नानाभङ्ग्या विप्रतिपद्यमानानां समाधानाय किं स्यात् । यदि सर्व- स्यापि वेदस्य पुराणस्य चार्थनिर्णयाय तेनैव श्रीभगवता व्यासेन ब्रह्मसूत्रं कृतं तदवलो- कनेनैव सर्वोऽर्थो निर्णेय इत्युच्यते तर्हि नान्यसूत्रकारमुन्यनुगतैर्मन्येत । किं चात्यन्तगूढा- र्थानामल्पाक्षराणां तत्सूत्राणामन्यार्थत्वं कश्चिदाचक्षीत ततः कतरदिवात्र समाधानम् ? But even then, how can we reconcile the different inconclusive views put forward regarding the Absolute Truth? Someone may propose study of Vedanta-sutra as the solution, claiming that Bhagavan Vyasadeva compiled Vedanta-sutra to present the deci- sive conclusion of both the Vedas and the Purānas concerning the Absolute Truth. But then the followers of sages who wrote other sutras may not concur. Moreover, since the aphorisms of Vedanta are terse and extremely esoteric, and since they are also subject to varying interpretations, a contrary conclusion of the sutras is always likely to be expressed. What, then, can resolve disputes concerning the meaning of Vedanta-sütra? 18.3 तदेवं समाधेयम् - यद्येकतममेव पुराणलक्षणमपौरुषेयं शास्त्रं सर्ववेदेतिहासपुराणाना- मर्थसारं ब्रह्मसूत्रोपजीव्यं च भवद् भुवि सम्पूर्णं प्रचरद्रूपं स्यात् । सत्यमुक्तम् । यत एव च सर्वप्रमाणानां चक्रवर्तिभूतमस्मदभिमतं श्रीमद्भागवतमेवोद्भावितं भवता ॥ [Jiva Gosvāmī employs a literary device here of introducing an apparent objective witness, who responds to the question as fol- lows.] “This problem could be solved if there were one scrip- ture that had the characteristics of a Purana, that was without human origin, that presented the essence of all the Vedas, Iti- hāsas, and Purānas, that was based on Vedānta sūtra, and that was available on earth in its complete form.” [To this Jiva responds : ] “My dear sir, what you have said is an accurate statement of truth, and the specific criteria men- tioned by you particularly brings to mind our revered Śrimad 113 II Pramāņa Bhāgavatam, the emperor of all pramānas [because it fulfills the said criteria].” Commentary MATSYA PURANA, CHAPTER 53, specifies the number of verses in each Purāņa and describes the benefits of donating each of the Purāņas on special days. In that same chapter Süta Gosvāmi speaks two and a half verses containing a formula for dividing the Purānas into three classes, according to which one of the three gunas of pri- mordial nature they predominantly embody. These three classes of Purana glorify various deities, and commentators often try to estab- lish their own favorite among these deities as supreme, arguing on the basis of logic and apparently conclusive scriptural references. One consequence of this partiality is that commentators tend to denigrate Purāņas belonging to a category different from their own: Proponents of tamasika Puranas tend to reject the authority of the rajasika and sattvika Purāņas, and proponents of rajasika and sättvika Purāņas likewise reject the Puranas outside their group. But there cannot actually be several Absolute Truths; therefore, the question of which Puranic deity is the one Supreme Truth remains to be settled. For the unbiased seeker of truth, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi demon- strates how to resolve the matter. He explains that the perspec- tive disclosed through the guna of luminosity and perpetual being (sattva) is clearly superior to that presented through the gunas of conditional becoming (rajas) and ignorance (tamas), as Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms in Bhagavad Gitā: From the guna of perpetual being (sattva), real knowledge develops; from the guna of conditional becoming (rajas) only greed develops; and from the guna of material stasis (tamas) develop negligence, delusion, and ignorance. (GITA 14.17)3 sattvät sañjāyate jñānam rajaso lobha eva ca pramada-mohau tamaso bhavato jñānam eva ca 114 18 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Fulfills the Criteria of Authority in the Matter of Ultimate Truth Srimad Bhagavatam also states: Conditional becoming is superior to stasis, but perpetual being is better yet, because it can lead to direct unmediated vision of the Absolute Truth. (SB 1.2.24) This verse follows a passage (SB 1.2.23) in which Sūta Gosvāmī is explaining which form of worship yields the ultimate good. His opinion is that one can achieve the ultimate good only by worship- ing Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the complete personification of unadulterated being (viśuddha-sattva). The citation from Matsya Purana in the previous anuccheda states that the sättvika Purāņas glorify Lord Hari, Kṛṣṇa. By con- trast, the rajasika and tamasika Purāņas recommend worship of other deities. Such worship embodies the perspectives of the lower gunas of nature, and hence is not by its inherent nature directed toward immediate realization of the Absolute Truth. Thus, one can tell which guna a Purana embodies by taking note of the deity it recommends for worship. Another way to tell is by how it commences. In the sättvika Purāņas, a questioner will approach a learned speaker and inquire from him about the Abso- lute Truth. The questioner may ask the speaker to elaborate on the nature of Ultimate Reality, the supreme path of transcendence for all, the ultimate benefit a human being can aspire for, how one should prepare for death, or similar topics. Such questions then allow the speaker of the Purana full freedom to explain these topics. The speaker who is self-realized, free from all gross and subtle mate- rial desires, and concerned only with the welfare of the inquirer and those who will hear the discourse either in the present or in the future, then replies with answers that are specific and unambigu- ous, leaving no room for misinterpretation or confusion. Examples of such sättvika Purāņas include Padma Purana, Vişņu Purana, and, most prominently, Bhagavata Purana, or Srimad Bhagavatam. In the rajasika and tāmasika Purāņas, however, the questioners inquire about limited topics related to conditional becoming and 4 tamasas tu rajas tasmat sattvam yad brahma-darśanam 11511 Pramāņa material stasis, which do not address the ultimate concern of life, related to eternal or timeless being. For example, in Linga Purana, the sages at Naimiṣāranya ask Sūta Gosvāmī to narrate the glories of Linga, Lord Siva. Although Süta Gosvāmi has fully realized the Absolute Truth and is perfectly competent to explain it, the ques- tions here restrict him to speaking on the particular topic of Linga. He is not requested to explain the deeper meaning of life. Since all rajasika and tāmasika Purāņas share this inherent shortcoming, they cannot be reliable sources of knowledge about the essential topics of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana. The Puranas were arranged according to the different gunas in correspondence with the various desires and psychological dispo- sitions of conditioned human beings. Nevertheless, every Purāņa somewhere contains glorification of Sri Hari, the Absolute Truth. Śrīla Vedavyāsa included this glorification so that, while hearing or reading the tamasika and rajasika Purāņas, even persons situated in the lower material gunas could be offered the possibility of hav- ing their consciousness turned toward its ultimate complete source, Bhagavan. Someone might object that the statement cited above concern- ing the classification of the Puranas according to the gunas does not itself come from a sättvika Purana and so should not be taken as authoritative. We reply that this classification is supported by numerous other statements as well, including some from sättvika scriptures such as Padma Purana, which we have already cited in the previous anuccheda. Nor is it true that the Purāņas in the lower gunas contain no valid knowledge at all; rather, they provide some insight into Absolute Reality, what to speak of the insights they give into lesser topics. In addition, no statement in the Vedic liter- ature specifically contradicts the verses cited here classifying the Purāņas according to the gunas of nature, and so we are left with no compelling reason to doubt the authenticity of this classification. From this analysis we can conclude that in our quest for the ulti- mate śabda-pramāņa we need to consider only the sättvika Purāņas. As Padma Purāņa states, sāttvikā mokṣa-dāḥ proktāḥ: “The Purāņas that embody the guna of perpetual being (sattva) are said to directly 116 18 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Fulfills the Criteria of Authority in the Matter of Ultimate Truth award liberation.” But even these sättvika Puranas have been under- stood in many different ways by great thinkers. Some interpreters have found that they glorify the path of yoga as ultimate, others have concluded that they recommend bhakti as the highest path, and yet others have found that they promote the path of jñana (knowledge) as supreme. For this reason Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi proposes the Vedanta-sutra as a possible basis of reconciliation. As stated earlier, there are four Vedas divided into four parts, the Upanisads being the fourth of these. The Upanisads encompass the essential meaning of the Vedas. They are considered as the cream of the Vedas and are thus called Vedanta. The Upanisads, however, also apparently contain contra- dictions. To solve this problem, Vyasadeva wrote the Vedanta-sutra, also called the Brahma-sutra, in which he incorporates the essential understanding of the Vedas and the principal Upanisads. But we must also consider that the dedicated followers of other sages who wrote philosophical sutras, such as Gautama and Patañ- jali, might not accept the conclusions of Vedanta-sutra. Even if the followers of other philosophers could be somehow convinced to enlarge their stance by logical proof of the greater authority of Vedanta-sutra, the situation is still problematic: The sutras of Vedanta are terse and esoteric, and acāryas of various persuasions have commented on them in such a way that it is difficult to decide whose opinion agrees with that of Śrila Vedavyasa, the author. The main contenders are the adherents of Advaitavada and the Vaiṣṇavas. The debate between these two groups has continued for more than a thousand years. For the seeker who has come this far along the way but finds him- self sinking in the swampy confusion created by the various scrip- tures and their myriad commentators, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī finally points out the high ground of Srimad Bhagavatam. The Bhagava- tam has the ten characteristics of a major Purana (discussed in Anuccheda 56); it is transhuman in nature (apauruşeya); it is the natural commentary on the Vedanta-sütra and thus constitutes the purport of all the Vedas, Itihāsas, and Purāņas; it is available in its entirety; it is respected by all Vaiṣṇava ācāryas and many others 117 II Pramana including the Advaitavādīs; it is the most popular of the Purāņas; it has an intact tradition of Vaisnava commentaries; and it is the culmination of Śrila Vedavyasa’s literary output, being composed in His maturity. By establishing Śrimad Bhagavatam as the last word among Vedic scriptures, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi fulfills the will of Śrī Caitanya Maha- prabhu, who accepted the Bhagavatam as the “spotless Purana,” the supremely authoritative text. In the next anuccheda, Jiva Gosvāmi explains that Śrīmad Bhagavatam has not been composed by a mortal and that it is the natural commentary on the Vedanta-sutra. 118 The Characteristics of Śrīmad Bhagavatam That Establish Its Epistemological Validity Anucchedas 19-26 In the previous anucchedas, Srimad Bhagavatam has been shown to be Vedic in origin, meaning that it is of the same transhuman, and thus transconceptual, nature. Furthermore, it has been shown to embody the essence of the Vedas, containing their innermost mean- ing. As such, it is to be approached in the same manner as the Vedas, that is, as sabda. As discussed already in the previous division on epistemology, this implies the activation of a transphenomenal mode of knowing in consciousness, in which Reality discloses itself through its self-revealing power of sound. In this case, because Śrīmad Bhagavatam embodies not only Reality devoid of phenome- nal distinction, but Reality complete with its own interior plenum, the transcendental knowing that it self-reveals is identical with this complete Reality, known as Bhagavan. The anucchedas in this division delineate a few of the primary characteristics of Srimad Bhagavatam that further specify its episte- mological validity. But again, this is not merely to convince us of the Bhāgavata’s authority as a discursive reference text about Real- ity. The intent, rather, is to actualize the possibility of the direct knowing of that Reality. So the primary characteristics enumer- ated, such as “Śrimad Bhagavatam is the Natural Commentary on Vedanta-sutra and the Essence of Gayatri,” function more as sūtras or keys that turn or unlock consciousness to disclose their own meaning, identical with the Reality they signify. 119 Anuccheda 19 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Is the Natural Commentary on Vedanta-sutra and the Essence of Gayatri 19.1 १९ । यत् खलु सर्वं पुराणजातमाविर्भाव्य ब्रह्मसूत्रं च प्रणीयाप्य परितुष्टेन तेन भगवता निजसूत्राणामकृत्रिमभाष्यभूतं समाधिलब्धमाविर्भावितं यस्मिन्नेव सर्वशास्त्रसमन्वयो दृश्यते । सर्ववेदार्थलक्षणां गायत्रीमधिकृत्य प्रवर्तितत्वात् । INDEED, Lord Vyasa was not satisfied even after compiling all the Puranas and the Vedanta-sutra. He therefore brought forth Srimad Bhagavatam, which was revealed to Him in trance, as the natural commentary on His own sutras. In Srimad Bhaga- vatam we find the consistent reconciliation of all scriptures, as understood from the fact that the Bhagavatam’s truth revelation unfolds directly from the Gayatri mantra, the embodiment of the essential meaning of all the Vedas. 19.2 तथा हि तत्स्वरूपं मात्स्ये (५३१२०-२२ ) - This characteristic of Srimad Bhagavatam is described in Matsya Purāna: यत्राधिकृत्य गायत्रीं वर्ण्यते धर्मविस्तरः । वृत्रासुरवधोपेतं तद्भागवतमिष्यते ॥ ४७ ॥ 121 II Pramāņa लिखित्वा तच् च यो दद्याद्धेमसिंहसमन्वितम् । प्रौष्ठपद्यां पौर्णमास्यां स याति परमां गतिम् ॥ ४८ ॥ अष्टादशसहस्राणि पुराणं तत् प्रकीर्तितम् ॥ ४९ ॥ इति । That Purana is known as Śrimad Bhagavatam which delineates the path of Ultimate Truth (dharma-vistara) with reference to the Gayatri mantra and tells of the killing of the demon Vṛtra. Whoever writes out a copy of Śrimad Bhagavatam, places it on a golden lion-throne, and presents it to a worthy person on the full-moon day of the month of Bhadra (August-September) will attain the supreme destination. This Puräna has eighteen thousand verses. (MP 53.20-22)1 19.3 अत्र गायत्रीशब्देन तत्सूचकतदव्यभिचारिधीमहिपदसंवलिततदर्थमेवेष्यते । सर्वेषां मन्त्राणामादिरूपायास्तस्याः साक्षात्कथनानर्हत्वात् । तदर्थता च “जन्माद्यस्य यतः " ( भा० १।१।१) “तेन ब्रह्म हृदा” इति सर्वलोकाश्रयत्वबुद्धिवृत्तिप्रेरकत्वादिसाम्यात् । धर्मविस्तर इत्यत्र धर्मशब्दः परमधर्मपरः । “धर्मः प्रोज्झितकैतवोऽत्र परमः” (भा० १।११२ ) इत्यत्रैव प्रतिपादितत्वात् । स च भगवद्ध्यानादिलक्षण एवेति पुरस्ताद् व्यक्तीभविष्यति ॥ Here the word gayatri specifically indicates the meaning of the Gayatri mantra, which is connected to the word dhimahi. Dhimahi is a signifier of Gayatri, implying without exception the complete mantra. Because Gayatri is the origin of all Vedic mantras, it would have been improper to utter it directly. The first verse of Srimad Bhagavatam (SB 1.1.1) alludes to the meaning of Gayatri by the phrases janmady asya yataḥ (“by Him this uni- verse is created, maintained, and destroyed”) and tene brahma hṛda (“He revealed the Vedic truth [to Lord Brahma] within the heart”). These phrases express the same meaning as Gayatri by describing Bhagavan as the basis of all the universes and as He who inspires everyone’s wisdom faculty. 1 yaträdhikṛtya gayatrim varnyate dharma-vistaraḥ vṛtrasura-vadhopetam tad-bhagavatam işyate likhitva tac ca yo dadyad dhema-simha-samanvitam praustha-padyam paurṇamasyam sa yati paramam gatim aṣṭādasa-sahasrani puranam tat prakirtitam 122 19 Śrimad Bhagavatam Is the Natural Commentary on Vedanta-sūtra and the Essence of Gayatri The word dharma in the compound dharma-vistara [from the same Matsya Purana verse] refers to the path of Ultimate Truth (parama-dharma), as expressed in the Bhagavatam by the words dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavo’tra paramah (SB 1.1.2): “The Bhagava- tam propounds the way of Ultimate Truth, devoid of all forms of deceit and compromise.“2 And, as will become clear in the upcoming anucchedas, this dharma is indeed characterized by meditation on the Supreme Personal Absolute, Bhagavan. Commentary SRIMAD BHAGAVATAM CONTAINS THE STORY of its own appearance as the crowning achievement of Śrila Vyasadeva’s literary efforts. First, Śrila Vyasadeva arranged the four Vedas, and then He com- posed the great epic Mahabharata for the benefit of women, sudras, and others who are ineligible to study the Vedas, because they do not undergo the sacred thread ceremony (upanayana-saṁskāra), which is considered a prerequisite for the study of the Veda. Next, He compiled the Puranas, the natural commentaries on the Vedas, and then He provided the essence of the Vedas and Purāņas in the Vedanta-sutra. But even after all this literary output, Vedavyāsa felt discontented, although He did not know why. Then His spiritual teacher, Narada Muni, approached Him and identified what was still lacking in His exposition of Ultimate Truth: You have composed a great and extraordinary work, Mahābhā- rata, which elaborately explains the various goals of life. Thus, the investigation of Immanent Truth undertaken by you has been fully realized. (SB 1.5.3)3 You have also inquired into and realized the eternal transcendent Absolute, Brahman. Yet, in spite of all this, O illustrious One, you dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavo’tra paramaḥ jijnäsitam susampannam api te mahad adbhutam kṛtavan bharatam yas tvam sarvartha-paribṛmhitam 123 II Pramāṇa lament your condition as if your efforts have been in vain. (SB 1.5.4)* O best of sages, you have not elaborated the glories of the Sup- reme Personal Absolute, Vasudeva, to the same extent as you have repeatedly described the four human goals beginning with dharma. (SB 1.5.9)5 On Narada Muni’s instruction, Śrila Vyasa ascended the path of meditation, and while in the state of supracognitive trance, Śrīmad Bhāgavatam was revealed to Him. Thus, it is clear that Srimad Bhāga- vatam, which provided final solace to Vyasadeva, is knowledge descended from the transcendental realm. In upcoming anucche- das, Śrī Jiva will show that it is also the natural commentary on Vedanta-sutra. Various Purānas mention the relationship between Śrīmad Bhagavatam and the Gayatri mantra. Gayatri is considered the essence of the Vedas and is supposed to be recited at dawn, noon, and dusk by every twice-born person (brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, or vaisya). According to Śrīdhara Svami in Bhāvārtha-dipika, Śrīmad Bhāgavatam begins with the Gayatri mantra. Commenting on the first verse of the Bhagavatam, he writes: That the Gayatri phrase indicated by the word dhimahi begins this Purana, shows that this work embodies the revealed knowledge of the Absolute (brahma-vidya), known as Gayatri. (Bhāvārtha- dipika 1.1.1) Because Śrimad Bhagavatam is based on Gayatri, the cream of the Vedas, it delineates the path of Ultimate Truth. The Bhagavatam thus calls itself “the ripened fruit of the wish-fulfilling tree of the Vedas” (nigama-kalpa-taror galitam phalam, SB 1.1.3). 5 The recitation of Gayatri and other Vedic mantras is governed by strict rules regarding the person, time, place, and purification jijñāsitam adhitam ca yat tad-brahma sanatanam athāpi śocasyātmānam akṛtārtha iva prabho yatha dharmadayas cartha muni-varyānukīrtitāḥ na tatha vasudevasya mahima hy anuvarnitaḥ ⚫ dhimahiti gayatryä prarambhena ca gayatry-akhya-brahma-vidya-rupam etat puranam iti darsitam. 124 19 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is the Natural Commentary on Vedanta-sūtra and the Essence of Gayatri rites incumbent on the chanter, but such restrictions do not apply to Srimad Bhagavatam. Since anyone may read the Bhāgavatam, strictly speaking it would be improper for the Gayatri mantra to appear there in its original form. Gayatri is considered the most important among the Vedic mantras, but only the twice-born are allowed to chant them. That is why Śrīla Vyasadeva enfolded the form and idea of Gayatri in the Bhagavatam without quoting the actual words of the mantra. Only one word from Gayatri, dhimahi, has been kept to indicate his intention because it is a compulsory word in the mantra and carries its essence. Another reason Vyasa did not write the original Gayatri in Srimad Bhagavatam is that doing so would have invited misinter- pretation. Various schools of thought have explained Gayatri dif- ferently as a meditation on unqualified Brahman, on the sun, on the fire god, on Lord Siva, and so forth. Only rarely is it understood as a meditation on the Supreme Personal Absolute, Vasudeva. But in Srimad Bhagavatam, Śrīla Vyasadeva’s own commentary on the Vedanta-sutra, Vyasadeva delivers the complete and unambiguous meaning of Gayatri in the opening verse. He reveals that Gayatri is a meditation on the original Supreme Person, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and His eternal consort, Śrī Rādhikā. This meditation is indeed the highest dharma. In Anuccheda 105 of Sri Paramatma Sandarbha, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will explain the Gayatri mantra in detail, and in Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha, he will give a thorough analysis of the Bhagavatam’s first verse as a meditation on Śrī Śrī Radha Kṛṣṇa. Here, in the next anuccheda of Tattva Sandarbha, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi further introduces Śrimad Bhagavatam, describing its dis- tinguishing features and supporting his statements with scriptural references. 125Anuccheda 20 The Characteristics of Śrīmad Bhagavatam 20.1 1 २० । एवं स्कान्दे प्रभासखण्डे च “यत्राधिकृत्य गायत्रीम् " ( ७।१।२।४०-४२ ) इत्यादि । IN SKANDA PURANA we find a description of Srimad Bhagavatam similar to the one in Matsya Purana:1 सारस्वतस्य कल्पस्य मध्ये ये स्युर्नरामराः । तद्वृत्तान्तोद्भवं लोके तच् च भागवतं स्मृतम् ॥ ५० ॥ लिखित्वा तच् च यो दद्याद्धेमसिंहसमन्वितम् । पौर्णमास्यां प्रौष्ठपद्यां स याति परमां गतिम् ॥ ५१ ॥ अष्टादशसहस्राणि पुराणं तत् प्रकीर्तितम् ॥ ५२ ॥ The Purana known as Śrimad Bhagavatam recounts the deeds of humans and devas in the Sarasvata-kalpa, explains the way of Supreme Truth in terms of Gayatri, and narrates the slay- ing of Vṛträsura. It has eighteen thousand verses. Whoever writes out a copy of the Bhagavatam, places it on a golden lion- throne, and presents it to a worthy person on the full-moon day of the month of Bhadra, will attain the supreme destination. (Prabhasa-khanda 7.1.2.40-42)2 MP 53.20-22 quoted in Anuccheda 19.2. sarasvatasya kalpasya madhye ye syur naramarāḥ tad-vrttantodbhavam loke tac ca bhagavatam smṛtam likhitva tac ca yo dadyad dhema-simha-samanvitam paurṇamäsyäṁ praustha-padyam sa yati paramam gatim aşṭādasa-sahasrani puranaṁ tat prakirtitam Alternate reading of Skanda Purana 7.1.2.40: sarasvatasya kalpasya madhye ye syur naramarāḥ tad-vṛttantodbhavam punyaṁ punyodvaha-samanvitam 126 20 The Characteristics of Srimad Bhagavatam “लिखित्वा तच् च” इत्यादि । " अष्टादशसहस्राणि पुराणं तत् प्रकीर्तितम्” (अग्निपुराणे २७२।६-७) । These verses are also found in Agni Purāna ( 272.6-7 ) 3 20.2 इति टीकाकृद्भिः प्रमाणीकृते पुराणान्तरं च- YET ANOTHER PURANA, cited by the Bhagavatam commen- tator śrīdhara Svāmī [ Bhāvārtha-dīpikā 1.1.1], confirms the epistemological validity of Srimad Bhagavatam thus: ग्रन्थोऽष्टादशसाहस्रो द्वादशस्कन्धसम्मितः । हयग्रीवब्रह्मविद्या यत्र वृत्रवधस्तथा ॥ ५३ ॥ गायत्र्या च समारम्भस्तद् वै भागवतं विदुः ॥ ५४ ॥ इति । The Purana known as Srimad Bhagavatam contains eighteen thousand verses divided into twelve cantos, begins with Gaya- trī, describes the transcendental knowledge (brahma-vidyā) imparted by Hayagrīva, and narrates the slaying of Vṛtrasura. 20.3 अत्र “हयग्रीवब्रह्मविद्या” इति वृत्रवधसाहचर्येण नारायणवर्मैवोच्यते । हयग्रीवशब्देना- त्राश्वशिरा दधीचिरेवोच्यते । तेनैव च प्रवर्तिता नारायणवर्माख्या ब्रह्मविद्या । तस्याश्वशि- रस्त्वं च षष्ठे “यद् वा अश्वशिरो नाम " ( भा० ६।९।५२ ) इत्यत्र प्रसिद्धम् । नारायणवर्मणो ब्रह्मविद्यात्वं च-

The transcendental knowledge (brahma-vidya) imparted by Hayagriva here refers to the “Armor of Nārāyana” (nārāyana- 3 Śrī Jiva Gosvāmi simply says that these verses are found in another Purana. We have traced them to Agni Purāna (272.6 - 7 ). In the latter source, however, the verses do not appear in complete form nor in the same order as that found in Skanda Purāna.

• grantho’stadaśa sahasro dvādaśa-skandha-sammitah hayagriva brahma-vidyā yatra vrtra-vadhas tatha gayatryă ca samarambhas tad vai bhagavatam viduḥ 127 II Pramāņa varma), since it is narrated in the same context as the killing of Vṛtra. The name haya-grīva here refers to Dadhici, the sage with a horse’s head. He taught the knowledge of Brahman known as nārāyaṇa-varma. His accepting a horse’s head and receiving the fitting name Aśvaśira are mentioned in the Sixth Canto of Śrimad Bhāgavatam, where these words are spoken: “he who has the name Aśvaśirā” […]. The Nārāyaṇa-varma is in fact a teach- ing regarding the Absolute (brahma-vidya), as indicated in the following statement: एतच्छ्रुत्वा तथोवाच दध्यङाथर्वणस्तयोः । प्रवर्ग्यं ब्रह्मविद्यां च सत्कृतोऽसत्यशङ्कितः ॥ ५५ ॥ टीकोत्थापितवचनेन चेति । “Upon hearing this and feeling honored, Dadhici, anxious not to break his promise, instructed the twin Aśvini-kumāras in the knowledge of the Pravargya sacrifice and brahma-vidya.” This verse is cited from Sridhara Svami’s commentary on the above text of the Bhagavatam (6.9.52). 20.4 श्रीमद्भागवतस्य भगवत्प्रियत्वेन भागवताभीष्टत्वेन च परमसात्त्विकत्वम् । यथा पाद्मे अम्बरीषं प्रति गौतमप्रश्नः - Since Srimad Bhagavatam is the beloved of Bhagavan and is cease- lessly longed for by His devotees, it is the scripture of supreme transcendence (parama-sättvika). The Bhagavatam’s dearness to Bhagavan and His devotees is indicated in Padma Purana, in Gautama Rṣi’s question to Mahārāja Ambarīṣa: The entire chapter (SB 6.8) is devoted to this topic. Varma means armor or a protective shield. It is synonymous with the word kavaca. Specific mantras dedicated to a particular deity that are intended as protective spells are generally given these names. They are meant to be recited at times of danger or carried on the body to ward off negative energies. ⚫etac chrutva tathovaca dadhyan atharvanas tayoḥ pravargyam brahma-vidyam ca sat-kṛto’satya-sankitaḥ 128 20 The Characteristics of Srimad Bhagavatam पुराणं त्वं भागवतं पठसे पुरतो हरेः । चरितं दैत्यराजस्य प्रह्लादस्य च भूपते ॥ ५६ ॥ O lord of the earth, do you recite Bhagavata Purāṇa before the Deity of Lord Hari, especially the history of the king of the demons, [the great devotee] Prahlada Mahārāja? (Uttara- khanda 22.115)” तत्रैव व्यञ्जुलीमाहात्म्ये तस्य तस्मिन्नुपदेशः - Again, in the section of Padma Purana glorifying the vow of Vañjuli Mahā-dvādaśī, Gautama further instructs Ambarīṣa: रात्रौ तु जागरः कार्यः श्रोतव्या वैष्णवी कथा ॥ ५७ ॥ गीतानामसहस्रं च पुराणं शुकभाषितम् । पठितव्यं प्रयत्नेन हरेः सन्तोषकारणम् ॥ ५८ ॥ One should keep vigil throughout that ceremonial night, lending full oral reception to the scriptural narrations of Śrī Visņu and His devotees - especially, Bhagavad Gita, the thousand names of Śrī Vişņu, and the Purana narrated by Sukadeva [Śrīmad Bhaga- vatam]. One should recite these with care and attention for they bring delight to Śrī Haris 20.5 तत्रैवान्यत्र- [And the Bhagavatam’s being a scripture that embodies and hence awards supreme transcendence (parama-sättvika), trans- porting one beyond material existence, is indicated in the next two references.] Elsewhere in Padma Purana we find this 2 statement: puranam tvam bhagavatam paṭhase purato hareh caritam daitya-rajasya prahladasya ca bhüpate ratrau tu jāgaraḥ karyaḥ śrotavyä vaiṣṇavi kathā gitanam asahasram ca puranam suka-bhāṣitam pathitavyaṁ prayatnena hareḥ santoṣa-karaṇam This verse is not found in the printed version of Padma Purana. 129 11 Pramana अम्बरीष शुकप्रोक्तं नित्यं भागवतं शृणु । पठस्व स्वमुखेनैव यदीच्छसि भवक्षयम् ॥ ५९ ॥ O Ambarīșa, if you wish to bring to a close your material exis- tence, then every day you should hear the Bhagavatam that was narrated by Sukadeva and let it be uttered too from your very own mouth. स्कान्दे प्रह्लादसंहितायां द्वारकामाहात्म्ये-

Finally, we find the following statement in the Prahlada-samhită of Skanda Purana, in the section describing the glories of Dvārakä: श्रीमद्भागवतं भक्त्या पठते हरिसन्निधौ । जागरे तत्पदं याति कुलवृन्दसमन्वितः ॥ ६० ॥ इति ॥ A person who keeps vigil [on the night of Ekadasi] and recites Srimad Bhagavatam with devotion before the Deity of Sri Hari is transported to the Lord’s abode along with his entire family.” Commentary IN THIS ANUCCHEDA, Jīva Gosvāmī gives special attention to iden- tifying Śrimad Bhagavatam. He does this because some scholars of his time held that Devi Bhagavatam, rather than Srimad Bhagava- tam, was actually the Bhagavatam glorified in the Purāņas. Like Śrimad Bhagavatam, Devi Bhāgavatam is a Purāņa with twelve can- tos, eighteen thousand verses, and an account of Vṛträsura’s death, although its account of how Vṛtra was killed differs from the one in Śrimad Bhagavatam. Also, when some traditional scholars read in the Puranas that on the full-moon day of the month of Bhadra one should donate the Bhagavatam mounted on a golden lion (hema- simha), they take this to mean Devi Bhagavatam. This seems quite “ambarişa suka-proktam nityam bhāgavatam śṛṇu pathasva sva-mukhenaiva yadicchasi bhava-kṣayam Srimad-bhagavatam bhaktyä paṭhate hari-sannidhau jägare tat-padam yäti kula-vṛnda-samanvitaḥ 130 20 The Characteristics of Srimad Bhagavatam fitting, since Devi, or Durgā, rides on a lion. In the case of Śrīmad Bhagavatam, hema-simha is understood to mean “a golden lion- throne.” Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi solves the controversy by citing references that list distinctive features of Srimad Bhagavatam: It begins with the Gayatri mantra, it contains the hayagriva-brahma-vidya, the events it narrates happened in the Sarasvata-kalpa, and it was first spoken by Śrī Sukadeva Gosvämi to Parikṣit Mahārāja. Jīva Gosvāmī further supports his opinion by quoting from the Bhāvārtha-dipikā, Sridhara Svāmi’s commentary on Srimad Bhagavatam. Devi Bhāgavatam opens with a statement that appears to be based on Gayatri: om sarva-caitanya-rupām tām ādyāṁ vidyaṁ ca dhimahi, buddhim ya naḥ pracodayat. There are two reasons this statement should not be equated with Gayatri: First, nothing in it corresponds to the words savituḥ, varenyam, and bhargas from Gayatri, whereas such a correspondence can be shown in SB 1.1.1. Second, this statement is a meditation on Devi, but as Śrī Jīva will show in the next anuccheda, the object of meditation in Gayatri is the Supreme Personal Absolute, Śrī Viṣṇu. Like Srimad Bhagavatam, Devi Bhagavatam also narrates the killing of Vṛtrasura, but in that account, Indra kills Vṛtra with ocean foam empowered by Devi. Vṛträsura performed severe pen- ances for hundreds of years to please Lord Brahma. When Brahmā appeared before him and offered a boon, Vṛtra asked to not be slain by any weapon made of iron or wood, dry or wet. After Lord Brahma granted this boon, Vṛtra attacked Indra and defeated him. Indra subsequently took help from Śrī Vişņu, who entered Indra’s thunderbolt and advised him to take the help of Devi and make a truce with Vṛtra. Indra then apparently befriended Vṛtrāsura. But one day at dusk Indra surprised Vṛtrasura on a beach and slew him with his thunderbolt, which is not a weapon of iron or wood, and was covered with foam, which is neither wet nor dry. Devi Bhagavatam also makes no mention of the hayagriva- brahma-vidya, i.e., the nārāyaṇa-varma. For all these reasons it is clear that the Bhagavatam referred to in the verse cited by Śridhara Svāmī is not Devi Bhagavatam. 131 II Pramāņa Hemādrī, Ballālasena, Govindānanda, Raghunandana, Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi, and Sanatana Gosvāmī have each written note- worthy dharma-śästras, or books and essays on religious duties, in which they quote frequently from Srimad Bhagavatam but never from Devi Bhāgavatam. Ballälasena states in Dana-sägara that only a few verses of the Bhagavatam specifically recommend acts of char- ity. In contrast, the entire thirtieth chapter of Devi Bhāgavatam’s Ninth Canto deals exclusively with the glories of various kinds of charitable giving. In addition, with the exceptions of Rāmānujācā- rya and Nilakaṇṭhācārya, all the great saintly commentators on prasthana-trayī either wrote about Srimad Bhagavatam directly or at least cited it as a standard reference in their books. By contrast, nei- ther Sankara, Madhvacārya, Vallabhacārya, Śrī Caitanyadeva, nor any other notable acarya has ever cited Devi Bhagavatam to support or prove any of their important statements. Chapter 96 of the first part of Naradiya Purāņa lists the topics of all twelve cantos of the Bhagavatam in order. This list fits Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, not Devi Bhagavatam. Padma Purana states: Among all the Purānas, Srimad Bhagavatam is ultimate. In every line great sages sing the glories of Śrī Kṛṣṇa in various ways. (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 193.3)” All this leaves no doubt that the Bhagavatam mentioned in the quoted Puranic verses is Śrimad Bhagavatam. Śrīmad Bhagavatam and other Purāņas mention an asura named Hayagrīva, and there is also an avatara of Śrī Visnu called Hayagriva, who had a horse’s head. But because the Hayagriva mentioned in this section of Tattva Sandarbha is connected with the slaying of the asura Vṛtra, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has identified him as the sage Dadhici. As recounted in the Sixth Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, after Vṛtra had conquered the devas, they approached Śrī Viṣṇu for help. The Lord advised the chief of the devas, Indra, to approach Dadhici and ask him for “purâneșu tu sarveşu śrimad-bhagavatam param yatra prati-padam kṛṣṇo giyate bahudharşibhiḥ 132 20 The Characteristics of Srimad Bhagavatam his body, which had been rendered adamantine by vows, penances, and knowledge of Brahman. The Lord told Indra to fashion from Dadhici’s bones a thunderbolt strong enough to kill Vṛtrāsura. Dadhici had previously taught knowledge of Brahman to the Aśvini-kumāra twins, although Indra had earlier forbidden him to teach them transcendental knowledge on the grounds that their profession as physicians disqualified them. Indra had threatened to behead Dadhici if he disobeyed, but Dadhici had already promised to teach the twins. The Aśvini-kumāras solved Dadhici’s dilemma surgically: They severed his head and grafted a horse’s head in its place, knowing that Indra would eventually cut off that head, after which they could restore the original one. Dadhici then instructed them straight from the horse’s mouth. Because of this, Dadhici also became known as Hayagriva (horse-necked) or Aśvaśira (horse- headed), and the transcendental knowledge he imparted became famous as the hayagrīva-brahma-vidya. As anticipated, Indra did indeed sever Dadhici’s horse head, and the Aśvini-kumāras restored the original one. Then, on the request of the devas, Dadhici offered his body to Indra, who used his bones to fashion the thunderbolt with which he was to kill Vṛtrāsura. Dadhici taught the same knowledge he had given to the Aśvini- kumāras to Tvaṣṭā, who in turn taught it to his son Viśvarupa. Viśvarupa then taught it to Lord Indra as the “Nārāyaṇa Armor,” which was instrumental in helping him defeat Vṛträsura. Thus, the Hayagriva referred to here is Dadhici, and the brahma-vidya is the Nārāyaṇa Armor. This is all described in the Sixth Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, along with the commentaries of the Vaisnava ācāryas. Anuccheda 20.5 contains the term suka-prokta, or “narrated by Śrī Suka.” From this we should not infer that all verses not spoken by Sukadeva Gosvāmi, such as the First Canto, are not part of Srimad Bhagavatam. The Bhagavatam Vyasa revealed was complete, includ- ing future events and future statements by Sūta and Saunaka. Since Srimad Bhagavatam has been identified as having eighteen thou- sand verses and opening with a verse based on the Gayatri mantra, it must be that its first verse begins janmady asya yataḥ and its last one ends with tam namami harim param. 133 II Pramāņa Of the eighteen Puranas, six are meant for human beings predominantly influenced by the guna of inertia (tamas), six are for those influenced by the guna of conditional becoming (rajas), and six are for those influenced by the guna of perpetual being (sattva); but Srimad Bhagavatam occupies a place of honor even among the sättvika Purāņas. It is considered nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personal Absolute, and therefore, it is parama-sättvika, a manifestation of supreme transcendental being without any tinge of the material gunas. Śrīmad Bhagavatam is pleasing to Bhagavan Hari (hareḥ santoșa- karaṇam), the transcendental Lord, who cannot be pleased by any- thing material. It is relished by His devotees, who scoff at the bliss of liberation, not to speak of the pleasure derived from reading some- thing mundane. For this reason, the sage Gautama recommends reciting Śrimad Bhagavatam on Ekadasi, which is also called Hari- väsara, the day of Lord Hari. As Skanda Purana states: Srimad Bhagavatam and the Supreme Personal Absolute, Bhaga- vän, are always exclusively of one inherent nature - that of eternal being, primordial consciousness, and transcendental bliss. (Skanda Purana, Visnu-khanda 6.4.3)12 Padma Purana confirms this: Without a doubt, this Srimad Bhagavatam is directly Śrī Kṛṣṇa. (Uttara-khanda 198.30)13 That Srimad Bhagavatam is nondifferent from Śrī Kṛṣṇa is confirmed in the Bhāgavatam itself, where Süta Gosvāmī states that after Bhagavan’s disappearance, the Bhagavatam appeared as His representative to enlighten the ignorant people of Kaliyuga (SB 1.3.43). Padma Purana also confirms the oneness of the Bhaga- vatam and Bhagavan by comparing the various cantos with Kṛṣṇa’s limbs: 12 Srimad-bhagavatasyatha śrimad-bhagavataḥ sada svarupam ekam evāsti sac-cid-ananda-lakṣaṇam 13 śrimad-bhāgavatakhyo’yam pratyakṣaḥ kṛṣṇa eva hi 134 20 The Characteristics of Srimad Bhagavatam O King, the First and Second Cantos of the Bhagavatam are Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s feet, and the Third and Fourth Cantos are His thighs. The Fifth Canto is His navel, the Sixth Canto is His chest, and the Sev- enth and Eighth Cantos are His arms. The Ninth Canto is His throat, the Tenth His blooming lotus face, the Eleventh His forehead, and the Twelfth His head. I bow down to that Lord, the ocean of mercy, whose color is like that of a tamala tree and who appears in this world for the welfare of all. I worship Him as the bridge for crossing the unfathomable ocean of material existence. Śrimad Bhagavatam has appeared as His very self14 Next, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi points out that Srimad Bhagavatam is the natural commentary on the Vedanta-sutra and that it also elucidates the meaning of Mahabharata. padau yadīyau prathama-dvitiyau tṛtiya-turyau kathitau yad-ürü nabhis tatha pañcama eva şaşṭho bhujäntaram dor-yugalam tathanyau kanthas tu rajan navamo yadiyo mukharavindam daśamam praphullam ekádaso yaś ca lalața-paṭṭam siro’pi yad dvadasa eva bhati namami devam karuna-nidhanam tamala-varṇam suhitavatāram apara-samsara-samudra-setur bhajamahe bhagavata-svarupam 135Anuccheda 21 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Establishes the Meaning of Mahabharata 21.1 २१ । गारुडे च- GARUDA PURANA states:1 पूर्णः सोऽयमतिशयः । अर्थोऽयं ब्रह्मसूत्राणां भारतार्थविनिर्णयः || ६१ || गायत्रीभाष्यरूपोऽसौ वेदार्थपरिबृंहितः । पुराणानां सामरूपः साक्षाद्भगवतोदितः ॥ ६२ ॥ द्वादशस्कन्धयुक्तोऽयं शतविच्छेदसंयुतः । ग्रन्थोऽष्टादशसाहस्रः श्रीमद्भागवताभिधः ॥ ६३ ॥ इति । This [Bhagavatam] is the most complete of the Puranas. It embod- ies the essential meaning of Vedanta-sütra; it establishes the meaning of Mahabharata; it is a commentary on Gayatri; it explains and expands the meaning of the Vedas; it is the Sama Veda of the Purāņas, and it is the direct utterance of the Sup- reme Absolute, Śrī Bhagavan. It has twelve cantos, hundreds of chapters, and eighteen thousand verses; it is called Śrīmad Bhāgavatam? Cited in Bhagavata-tätparya 1.1.1 by Sri Madhvacārya. 2 pürṇaḥ so’yam atisayaḥ artho’yam brahma-sütrāṇāṁ bhāratärtha-vinirnayaḥ gayatri-bhāṣya-rupo’sau vedartha-paribṛmhitaḥ puraṇānāṁ sama-rupaḥ sākṣad-bhagavatoditaḥ dvadasa-skandha-yukto’yam sata-viccheda-samyutah grantho’stadasa-sahasraḥ śrimad-bhāgavatabhidhaḥ 136 21.2 21 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Establishes the Meaning of Mahabharata ब्रह्मसूत्राणामर्थस्तेषामकृत्रिमभाष्यभूत इत्यर्थः । पूर्वं सूक्ष्मत्वेन मनस्याविर्भूतं तदेव सङ्क्षिप्य सूत्रत्वेन पुनः प्रकटितं पश्चाद् विस्तीर्णत्वेन साक्षाच्छ्रीभागवतमिति । तस्मात् तद्भाष्यभूते स्वतः सिद्धे तस्मिन् सत्यर्वाचीनमन्यदन्येषां स्वस्वकपोलकल्पितं तदनुगतमे- वादरणीयमिति गम्यते । In the above statement, the phrase “[Srimad Bhāgavatam]embod- ies the essential meaning of Vedänta-sutra” (brahma-sūtrāṇām arthaḥ) means that it is tantamount to being a natural commen- tary (akrtrima-bhāsya) on Vedānta-sutra. The Bhāgavatam first self-manifested in a subtle form to the awareness of Śrī Vya- sadeva, who then summarized it in the form of Vedanta-sutra and later expanded it into Śrimad Bhagavatam as we know it. Therefore, since Srimad Bhagavatam self-evidently embodies the natural commentary on Vedanta-sutra, all other recent commentaries, sprung from the fertile imagination of their authors, should be honored as authoritative only when they are in resonance with Srimad Bhagavatam. 21.3 भारतार्थविनिर्णयः- Concerning the phrase bhāratārtha-vinirnaya (Srimad Bhaga- vatam establishes the meaning of Mahabharata), the following verses may be cited: निर्णयः सर्वशास्त्राणां भारतं परिकीर्तितम् ॥ ६४ ॥ भारतं सर्ववेदाश्च तुलामारोपिताः पुरा । देवैर्ब्रह्मादिभिः सर्वैऋषिभिश्च समन्वितैः ॥ ६५ ॥ व्यासस्यैवाज्ञया तत्र त्वत्यरिच्यत भारतम् । महत्त्वाद् भारवत्त्वाच् च महाभारतमुच्यते ॥ ६६ ॥ Mahabharata is glorified because it contains the conclusions of all scriptures. Long ago, on the request of Śrila Vyasa, Lord Brahma and the other devas gathered together with all the great 137 11 Pramāna sages and placed Mahabharata on one side of a scale and the entire Vedas on the other. As it turned out, Mahābhārata out- weighed all of the Vedas. Because of its greatness (mahattva) and heaviness (bhāra-vattva), it is called Maha-bhārata. (Adi- parva1.272-274) 3 इत्याद्युक्तलक्षणस्य भारतस्यार्थविनिर्णयो यत्र सः । It [the Bhagavata] is to be understood as that composition in which the meaning of Mahabharata, characterized in the latter verses, is made evident. 21.4 श्रीभगवत्येव तात्पर्यं तस्यापि । तदुक्तं मोक्षधर्मे नारायणीये श्रीवेदव्यासं प्रति जनमेजयेन (म० भा० १२ ॥ ३४३ । ११-१४ ) -

Another reason why Srimad Bhagavatam establishes the mean- ing of Mahabharata is that the message of both culminates in Śrī Bhagavan alone. That this is true of Mahabharata is evinced in the Nārāyaniya section of Mahābhārata’s Moksa dharma portion, where Janamejaya says to Śrīla Vyasadeva: इदं शतसहस्राद्धि भारताख्यान विस्तरात् । आमथ्य मतिमन्थेन ज्ञानोदधिमनुत्तमम् ॥ ६७ ॥ नव नीतं यथा दध्नो मलयाच् चन्दनं यथा । आरण्यकं च वेदेभ्य ओषधिभ्योऽमृतं यथा ॥ ६८ ॥ समुद्धृतमिदं ब्रह्मन् कथामृतमनुत्तमम् । तपोनिधे त्वयोक्तं हि नारायणकथाश्रयम् ॥ ६९ ॥ इति ॥ O brahmana, abode of austerities, just as butter can be extracted from yogurt, sandalwood from the Malaya Mountains, the Upanisads from all the Vedas, and life-giving nectar from herbs, nirnayaḥ sarva-sastrānāṁ bharatam parikirtitam bharataṁ sarva-vedaś ca tulām āropitäḥ purā devair brahmadibhiḥ sarvair rşibhiś ca samanvitaiḥ vyāsasyaiväjñaya tatra tvatyaricyata bharatam mahattvad bhāravattvāc ca mahābhāratam ucyate 138 1 21 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Establishes the Meaning of Mahabharata so by your churning the ocean of the highest knowledge with the rod of your discriminating wisdom, this Nārāyaṇīya has been extracted from the hundred thousand verses of Mahābhä- rata. This Nārāyaṇīya, spoken by you, is the repository of the topics of Śri Nārāyaṇa, which are the nectar of immortality. (Mokṣa-dharma 343.11-14)” Commentary ŚRIMAD BHAGAVATAM is one of the eighteen Puranas, but Śrīla Vya- sadeva wrote it after compiling the essence of the Vedas in Vedanta- sutra and after composing Mahabharata and the Purāņas. But if the eighteen Purāņas had already been compiled, does this make Śrīmad Bhagavatam the nineteenth? In Anuccheda 21.2, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi explains that this is not the case. Śrīmad Bhagavatam appeared first to Śrila Vyasa in a concise form, as one of the eighteen Purāņas, and he composed Vedanta- sütra on the basis of this first edition of the Bhagavatam. Later, when He was absorbed in supracognitive trance in pursuance of Nārada Muni’s order, the expanded form of Srimad Bhagavatam was revealed to Him as the natural commentary on Vedanta-sutra. Srimad Bhagavatam and Vedanta-sutra share the same subject, the Absolute Truth, and they describe the same principles of samba- ndha (the whole-part existential relation between the Supreme Self and the individual self), abhidheya (the means of ultimate attain- ment), and prayojana (the completion stage of the means, uncon- ditional love of God). Many ācāryas and scholars later wrote com- mentaries on Vedanta-sutra, but only those that accord with Śrīmad Bhāgavatam - such as those of Rāmānujācārya, Nimbārkācārya, Madhvācārya, Vallabhācārya, and Baladeva Vidyabhūṣaṇa — are authoritative. idam śatasahasrad dhi bhāratākhyāna vistarāt amathya matimanthena jñanodadhim anuttamam nava nitam yatha dadhno malayac candanam yatha aranyakaṁ ca vedebhya oşadhibhyo’mṛtam yatha samuddhṛtam idam brahman kathamṛtam anuttamam tapo-nidhe tvayoktam hi nārāyaṇa-kathāśrayam 139 II Pramāņa Sūta Gosvāmi alludes to Vedavyasa’s composing two editions of Srimad Bhagavatam: The great sage Vyasadeva, after composing Srimad Bhagavatam and then revising it, taught it to His own son, the sage Śrī Suka- deva Gosvāmi, who delighted in the state of utter non-attachment. (SB 1.7.8)5 Commenting on this verse, Śrīla Viśvanatha Cakravarti Thakura writes, “The word anukramya in this verse means that Vedavyāsa compiled a new (or revised) edition of the already existing Śrīmad Bhāgavatam.” Anuccheda 21.3 relates how Mahabharata was once shown to be literally heavier than the Vedas. This came about because Mahā- bharata, using simple narrations, elaborated upon and lucidly explained the concise and cryptic subject matter of the Vedas. Vyasadeva makes this point in Mahabharata: Lord Brahma, in this great work [Mahabharata] I have included the secret essence of all the Vedas and of all other scriptures as well. It explains in detail the Upanisads, the six corollaries, and the Vedas. (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.62)” Originally, Mahabharata had six million verses, but at present only one hundred thousand are available on earth. The rest can be found on planets of a higher dimension, where people have life spans and memories suitable for absorbing such large amounts of information. The distribution of Mahabharata’s verses is mentioned in Mahabharata itself: Then Śrila Vyasadeva compiled another samhita [Mahabharata], containing six million verses. Of these, three million are present in the celestial planets, one and a half million on the planet of the forefathers, and one million four hundred thousand on the planet sa samhitam bhagavatim kṛtvänukramya catmajam Sukam adhyapayam äsa nivṛtti-niratar muniḥ atas tadaiva purva-nirmitasyaiva śri-bhagavatasyanukramaņam brahman veda-rahasyam ca yac canyat sthäpitam 7 maya sangopanişadam ca vedänām vistara-kriya 140 21 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Establishes the Meaning of Mahabharata of the Gandharvas. The remaining one hundred thousand verses are available among human beings. (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.106- 107)8 Although abridged, the version of Mahabharata on this planet is the longest epic ever written. So, due to the profundity of its topics (mahattva) and its great weight (bhäravattva), it is known as Mahabharata. The Mahabharata is more versatile than the Vedas, because the restrictions that apply to studying the Vedas are omitted in its case. Anyone may read and enjoy Mahabharata, regardless of social posi- tion or gender. However, only the Mokṣa-dharma and a few other sections of Mahabharata directly glorify Śrī Nārāyaṇa as supreme. Other sections mainly deal with a mixture of topics, such as routine religious rituals, politics, and charity. By contrast, Śrimad Bhagava- tam avoids all topics not related to the glories of the Supreme Lord. The entire Bhagavatam speaks only of this, and this exclusive focus is what makes it superior to Mahabharata. Thus, it has been said, “Srimad Bhagavatam establishes the meaning of Mahabharata.” In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī cites further proof that the Bhāgavatam is the essence of all Vedic literature and the topmost pramāņa. B sastim sata-sahasrani cakaranyam sa samhitam trimsac chata-sahasram ca deva-loke pratisthitam pitrye pañcadasa proktam gandharveşu caturdasa ekam sata-sahasram tu manuseşu pratisthitam 141 Anuccheda 22 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature 22.1 २२ । तथा च तृतीये (भा० ३।५।१२ ) - SIMILARLY, the Third Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam confirms that Śrimad Bhagavatam establishes the meaning of Mahābhārata: मुनिर्विवक्षुर्भगवद्गुणानां सखापि ते भारतमाह कृष्णः । यस्मिन् नृणां ग्राम्यसुखानुवादैर्मतिर्गृहीता नु हरेः कथायाम् ॥ ७० ॥ इति । Your friend, the great sage Kṛṣṇa-dvaipayana Vyasa, composed his great work, Mahabharata, with the intention of describing the transcendental qualities of Śri Bhagavan. In this work, he has drawn the attention of the mass of people to the descrip- tions of Śri Hari by embedding them within the framework of mundane topics. ( SB 3.5.12 ) 1 22.2 तस्माद् गायत्रीभाष्यरूपोऽसौ । तथैव हि विष्णुधर्मोत्तरादौ तद्व्याख्याने भगवानेव विस्त- रेण प्रतिपादितः । अत्र “जन्माद्यस्य” इत्यस्य व्याख्यानं च तथा दर्शयिष्यते । [Now the explanation of the remaining part of the verse from Garuda Purāna, cited in Anuccheda 21.1, is being given.] That munir vivaksur bhagavad-gunanam sakhapi te bharatam äha kṛṣṇaḥ yasmin nṛṇam gramya-sukhanuvadair matir grhitä nu hareḥ kathāyām 142 22 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature Srimad Bhagavatam is a commentary on Gayatri is shown in Visnu-dharmottara Purana, which elaborately demonstrates, in its explanation of the Gayatri mantra ( Prathama - khanda 165 ), that the object of meditation in the Gayatri is Śrī Bhagavan. We shall provide similar evidence that Srimad Bhagavatam is a com- mentary on Gayatri when we comment on the Bhāgavatam’s first verse? 22.3 “वेदार्थपरिबृंहितः” वेदार्थस्य परिबृंहणं यस्मात् । तच् चोक्तम् “इतिहासपुराणाभ्याम् ” इत्यादि । “पुराणानां सामरूपः” वेदेषु सामवत् स तेषु श्रेष्ठ इत्यर्थः । अत एव स्कान्दे (विष्णुखण्डे मार्गशीर्ष माहात्म्ये १६।४०-४२, ४४, ३३ ) - The words vedärtha-paribṛmhitaḥ mean that Srimad Bhagavatam explains and expands the meaning of the Vedas, as indicated in Mahābhārata (Adi-parva 1.267 ) : “One should supplement the Vedas with the Itihasas and Purāņas.” The phrase purāṇānāṁ sama-rupaḥ (Srimad Bhagavatam is the Sama among the Puranas) means that just as the Sama Veda is supreme among the Vedas, so Śrimad Bhagavatam is paramount among the Purānas. Therefore, Skanda Purāna says: शतशोऽथ सहस्रैश्च किमन्यैः शास्त्रसङ्ग्रहैः ॥ ७१ ॥ न यस्य तिष्ठते गेहे शास्त्रं भागवतं कलौ ॥ ७२ ॥ कथं स वैष्णवी ज्ञेयः शास्त्रं भागवतं कलौ । गृहे न तिष्ठते यस्य स विप्रः श्वपचाधमः ॥ ७३ ॥ यत्र यत्र भवेद् विप्र शास्त्रं भागवतं कलौ । तत्र तत्र हरिर्याति त्रिदशैः सह नारद ॥ ७४ ॥ यः पठेत् प्रयतो नित्यं श्लोकं भागवतं मुने । अष्टादशपुराणानां फलं प्राप्नोति मानवः ॥ ७५ ॥ इति । In Kaliyuga, what is the value of collecting hundreds of thou- sands of other scriptures if one does not keep Śrimad Bhagava- tam at home? How can a person be considered a Vaisnava in Kali- yuga if Srimad Bhagavatam finds no place in his house? Even if he 2 As in Paramātma Sandarbha 105. 143 11 Pramāņa is a learned brāhmaṇa, such a person should be considered lower than a dog-eater. O learned brahmana Narada, wherever Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is present in Kaliyuga, the Supreme Lord arrives there along with the devas. A person who faithfully recites one verse of Srimad Bhagavatam every day, O sage, attains the fruit of reading the eighteen Purānas. (Visnu-khanda 5.16.40-42, 44, 33)3 22.4 शतविच्छेदसंयुतः - पञ्चत्रिंशदधिकशतत्रयाध्यायविशिष्ट इत्यर्थः । स्पष्टार्थमन्यत् । तदेवं परमार्थविवित्सुभिः श्रीभागवतमेव साम्प्रतं विचारणीयमिति स्थितम् । The phrase sata-viccheda-samyutaḥ (having hundreds of divi- sions) means that the Bhagavatam has three hundred and thirty- five chapters. The meaning of the rest of the passage [quoted in Anuccheda 21.1] is obvious. Thus, we conclude that at the present time, those who aspire to know the highest goal of life should deliberate on Śrimad Bhagavatam alone. 22.5 हेमाद्रेर्व्रतखण्डे १ | २८ ( भा० १।४।२५) - In Catur-varga-cintamani, Vrata-khanda 1.28, Hemädri cites the following verse and attributes it to Srimad Bhagavatam: स्त्रीशूद्रद्विजबन्धूनां त्रयी न श्रुतिगोचरा । कर्म श्रेयसि मूढानां श्रेय एवं भवेदिह । इति भारतमाख्यानं कृपया मुनिना कृतम् ॥ ७६ ॥ 3 satašo’tha sahasrais ca kim anyaiḥ sastra-sangrahaiḥ na yasya tişṭhate gehe śästram bhagavatam kalau katham sa vaiṣṇavo jñeyaḥ śastram bhāgavatam kalau grhe na tişṭhate yasya sa vipraḥ śvapacādhamaḥ yatra yatra bhaved vipra sastram bhagavatam kalau tatra tatra harir yati tridaśaiḥ saha närada yah pathet prayato nityam slokam bhagavatam mune aṣṭādasa-puraṇānāṁ phalam präpnoti mānavaḥ 144 22 Śrimad Bhāgavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature Seeing that women, sudras, and the unqualified among the twice- born classes were prevented even from hearing the Vedas, the great sage [Vyasa], moved by compassion, compiled the great historical narration called Mahabharata so that those who were unaware of how to act for ultimate good might also attain auspiciousness. (SB 1.4.25)* इति वाक्यं श्रीभागवतीयत्वेनोत्थाप्य भारतस्य वेदार्थतुल्यत्वेन निर्णयः कृत इति । तन्म- तानुसारेण त्वेवं व्याख्येयम् - भारतार्थस्य विनिर्णयः । वेदार्थतुल्यत्वेन विशिष्य निर्णयो यत्रेति । Hemādri uses this verse to demonstrate that Mahabharata is as valuable as the Vedas, and the phrase bhāratärtha-vinirnayah (Srimad Bhagavatam establishes the meaning of Mahabhārata) should be explained in accordance with this view as indicating that Srimad Bhagavatam is the book in which Mahabharata’s mes- sage is conclusively defined and shown to be equal to that of the Vedas. 22.6 यस्मादेवं भगवत्परस्तस्मादेव " यत्राधिकृत्य गायत्रीम्” इति कृतलक्षणश्रीमद्भागवत- नामा ग्रन्थः श्रीभगवत्पराया गायत्र्या भाष्यरूपोऽसौ । तदुक्तम् “यत्राधिकृत्य गायत्रीम् ” इत्यादि । तथैव ह्यग्निपुराणे तस्य व्याख्याने विस्तरेण प्रतिपादितः । 1 Since the book named Srimad Bhagavatam, characterized as “a delineation of Ultimate Truth with reference to the Gayatri mantra,” is exclusively focused upon Bhagavan, it serves as a commentary on Gayatri, which is also intent solely upon Bhaga- vän. This same point - that Srimad Bhagavatam is a commen- tary on the Gayatri mantra - is made in such statements as “The Bhagavatam delineates the path of Ultimate Truth with refer- ence to the Gayatri mantra” (Anuccheda 19.2). Furthermore, Agni Purāna describes Bhagavan alone in the course of its exposition of the Gayatri mantra. stri-südra-dvija-bandhunam trayi na śruti-gocară karma-śreyasi müḍhänäm śreya eva bhaved tha iti bharatam akhyanam kṛpaya muninā kṛtam 145II Pramana 22.7 तत्र तदीयव्याख्यादिग्दर्शनं यथा “तज्ज्योतिः परमं ब्रह्म भर्गस्तेजो यतः स्मृतः” (अग्निपु- राणे २१८।३) इति । इत्यारभ्य पुनराह (अग्निपुराणे २१८।७-८) - Here is a concise overview of this explanation from Agni Purana: “That supracosmic light is known as the Supreme Brahman, because the word bhargas [in Gayatri] means [the divine] effulgence” (AP 216.3) 5 Agni Purāna further states: तज्ज्योतिर्भगवान् विष्णुर्जगज्जन्मादिकारणम् । शिवं केचित् पठन्ति स्म शक्तिरूपं पठन्ति च ॥ ७७ ॥ केचित् सूर्यं केचिदग्निं दैवतान्यग्निहोत्रिणः । अग्न्यादिरूपो विष्णुर्हि वेदादौ ब्रह्म गीयते ॥ ७८ ॥ इति । That effulgence is Śrī Visņu, who is the unconditional cause of cosmic creation, maintenance, and dissolution. Some people maintain that “effulgence” here refers instead to Śiva, while oth- ers say it means Sakti. Some claim that it refers to the sun, and still others say Agni. Other devas too are invoked by brahma- nas who perform Vedic fire sacrifices (Agni-hotrīs) at the time of uttering Gayatri. But it is Śrī Viṣṇu who is present in the forms of Agni and the other devas, and the Vedas sing of Him alone as the Absolute Truth, Brahman. (AP 216. 7-8 ) 6 22.8 अत्र “जन्माद्यस्य " इत्यस्य व्याख्यानं च तथा दर्शयिष्यते । “कस्मै येन विभासितोऽयम्” ( भा० १२ | १३ | १९) इत्युपसंहारवाक्ये च “तच्छुद्धम् (भा० १२ । १३ । १९) इत्यादिसमानमेवा- ग्निपुराणे तद् व्याख्यानम् । Later [in Paramātma Sandarbha, Anuccheda 104], while com - menting on the opening verse of the Bhagavatam, we will elabo- rate further on the view that the Bhāgavatam is a commentary taj-jyotiḥ paramam brahma bhargas tejo yataḥ smrtah ● taj-jyotir bhagavān visņur jagaj-janmadi-kāranam Sivam kecit pathanti sma sakti-rupam pathanti ca kecit suryam kecid agnim daivatany agni-hotrinaḥ agny-adi-rupo vismur hi vedadau brahma giyate 146 22 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature on Gayatri. Also, in one of the concluding verses of the Bhāga- vatam (SB 12.13.19), we find the adjectives pure (suddha), spot- less (vimala), free from grief (visoka), and immortal (amṛta), qualifying the Supreme Truth (param satyam) [identified in the subsequent verse as Bhagavan Vasudeva] upon whom we are to meditate (dhimahi). This description exactly echoes the ensuing statement from Agni Purana, which is itself an explanation of Gayatri. This uniformity of description further substantiates the view that the Bhāgavatam is a commentary on Gayatri. The verse from Agni Purana is as follows: नित्यं शुद्धं परं ब्रह्म नित्यभर्गमधीश्वरम् । अहं ज्योतिः परं ब्रह्म ध्यायेम हि विमुक्तये ॥ ७९ ॥ इति । To awake to the post-liberated status, let us meditate (dhya- yema) on the Supreme Brahman (param brahma), who is eternal (nitya), pure (suddha), transcendental (para), ever-effulgent (nitya-bharga), and the final repository of inherent controlling agency (adhiśvara). As we meditate, let us contemplate, “I am that light, the Supreme Truth.” (AP 216.6)” अत्राहं ब्रह्मेति “नादेवो देवमर्चयेत्” इति न्यायेन योग्यत्वाय स्वस्य तादृक्त्वभावना दर्शिता । ध्यायेमेति – अहं तावत् ध्यायेयं सर्वे च वयं ध्यायेमेत्यर्थः । Here, the contemplation of oneself as identical to Brahman is meant to help the meditator attain fitness to worship the com- plete Truth, Bhagavan, following the principle, “One who is not of the nature of the Divine cannot worship the Divine.” The verb form dhyāyema (let us meditate) signifies that “not only I, but all of us are implored to meditate.” 22.9 तदेतन्मते तु मन्त्रेऽपि भर्गशब्दोऽयमदन्त एव स्यात् । “सुपां सुलुक्” (पाणिनि ७ । १ । ३९) इत्यादिना छान्दससूत्रेण तु द्वितीयैकवचनस्य “अमः” सुभावो ज्ञेयः । यत् तु द्वादशे “ॐ “nityam suddham param brahma nitya-bhargam adhiśvaram aham jyotih param brahma dhyayema hi vimuktaye 147 II Pramāņa नमस्ते” (भा० १२।६।६७) इत्यादि गद्येषु तदर्थत्वेन सूर्यः स्तुतः । तत् परमात्मदृष्ट्यैव न तु स्वातन्त्र्येणेत्यदोषः । According to this view, however, the [uninflected] word bharga that appears even in the Gayatri mantra is specifically that which terminates with the vowel a [since it has an alternate unin- flected stem terminating with the consonant s, i.e., bhargas]. The irregular accusative declension of bharga [in the mantra] as bhargas where bhargam might be expected can be explained as an instance of the type given in PANINI 7.1.39, which is intended for the analysis of Vedic texts. The sutra is supām su-luk-pūrva- savarnacche-ya-da-dya-yājālaḥ, “by which the accusative suffix am may be replaced by the nominative su [from which the vowel u is dropped].” In the prose section of the Twelfth Canto of the Bhagava- tam (12.6.67-72), beginning om namas te, the sun is praised as the object of worship in Gayatri. We should understand that this passage refers to Paramātmā (the Supreme Self), who is immanent within the sun, rather than to the sun independently. Understood in this way, the statement is faultless. 22.10 तथैवाग्रे श्रीशौनकवाक्यम् “ब्रूहि नः श्रद्दधानानां व्यूहं सूर्यात्मनो हरेः” (भा० १२।११।२८) इति । न चास्य भर्गस्य सूर्यमण्डलमात्राधिष्ठानत्वम् । मन्त्रे वरेण्यशब्देनात्र च ग्रन्थे परशब्देन परमैश्वर्यपर्यन्तताया दर्शितत्वात् । Later in the Bhagavatam, Saunaka Rși confirms this: “O Sūta, kindly narrate to us, who are firmly established in faith, the glory of Sri Hari’s expansion as the Primal Self immanent within the sun” (SB 12.11.28). Similarly, one should not think that the word bharga (efful- gence) in Gayatri refers only to the presiding deity of the sun globe [i.e., Surya-deva], since the word varenya (transcenden- tal) in the Gayatri mantra and the word para (supreme) in the bruhi naḥ śraddadhānānāṁ vyuham suryatmano hareḥ 148 22 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature Bhāgavatam verses cited above [SB 1.1.1 and 12.13.19] have both been shown to refer ultimately to the transcendental opulence of the Supreme. 22.11 तदेवमग्निपुराणेऽप्युक्तम् (२१६।१६ ) - Agni Purana similarly states: ध्यानेन पुरुषोऽयं च द्रष्टव्यः सूर्यमण्डले । सत्यं सदाशिवं ब्रह्म विष्णोर्यत् परमं पदम् ॥ ८० ॥ इति । This Primordial Person (Puruşa), who is immanent within the sun, is to be directly self-apperceived (draṣṭavya) through the faculty of meditation, but the supreme destination is the tran- scendental abode of Sri Visņu, which alone is eternal and ever- auspicious, being the Absolute Truth, Brahman. (AP 216.16)” त्रिलोकीजनानामुपासनार्थं प्रलये विनाशिनि सूर्यमण्डले चान्तर्यामितया प्रादुर्भूतोऽयं पुरुषो ध्यानेन द्रष्टव्यः - उपासितव्यः । यत् तु विष्णोस्तस्य महावैकुण्ठरूपं परमं पदम् । तदेव “सत्यम्” कालत्रयाव्यभिचारि । “सदाशिवम्” उपद्रवशून्यम् । यतो ब्रह्मस्वरूपमि- त्यर्थः । The meaning of this verse is as follows: This Primordial Per- son (Purusa), who Self-manifests as the Supreme Immanent Self (antaryāmi) within the sun globe, is to be directly self- apperceived (draṣṭavya) through the faculty of meditation. The word draṣṭavya (to be seen) means that the Puruşa is to be imme- diately devotionally recognized (upäsitavya) through medita- tion. The Purusa’s self-manifestation within the sun globe is to afford the inhabitants of the three divisions of the cosmos the opportunity to worship Him. This sun globe is destroyed at the time of dissolution, whereas the transcendental abode of Śrī Vişņu, Mahā-vaikuntha, is eternal, meaning that it is invari- able, being beyond the three phases of conditional time - past, dhyanena puruso’yam ca drastavyaḥ surya-mandale satyam sada-Sivam brahma vişnor yat paramaṁh padam 149 11 Pramāņa present, and future. That this abode is ever-auspicious means that it is utterly devoid of misfortune. The eternality and all- auspiciousness of Śrī Visnu’s abode are due to the fact that it is directly the Absolute Truth, Brahman. 22.12 तदेतद् गायत्रीं प्रोच्य पुराणलक्षणप्रकरणे “यत्राधिकृत्य गायत्रीम्” इत्याद्यप्युक्तमग्निपु- राणे (२७२।६) । तस्मात् - After explaining Gayatri in this way, Agni Purana further elabo- rates on Gayatri in the section dealing with the characteristics of the Purānas, which contains the verse beginning yatradhikṛtya gayatrim. Thus, we say: अग्नेः पुराणं गायत्रीं समेत्य भगवत्पराम् भगवन्तं तत्र मत्वा जगज्जन्मादिकारणम् ॥ ८१ ॥ यत्राधिकृत्य गायत्रीमिति लक्षणपूर्वकम् । श्रीमद्भागवतं शश्वत् पृथ्व्यां जयति सर्वतः ॥ ८२ ॥ Agni Purana explains that the Gayatri mantra is intent exclu- sively upon Bhagavan, therein understood as the non-condi- tional source of cosmic creation, maintenance, and dissolution. Śrimad Bhagavatam, characterized by the phrase, “which delin- eates the path of Ultimate Truth with reference to the Gayatri mantra,” is thus ever-glorious all over the earth.10 तदेवमस्य शास्त्रस्य गायत्रीमधिकृत्य प्रवृत्तिर्दर्शिता । And so we have shown that the unfoldment of this scripture [Srimad Bhagavatam] proceeds with reference to Gayatri. 10 agneḥ puränar gayatrimṁ sametya bhagavat-param bhagavantam tatra matva jagaj-janmadi-karanam yatradhikṛtya gayatrim iti lakṣaṇa-purvakam Srimad-bhagavatam saśvat pṛthvyam jayati sarvataḥ 150 22 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature 22.13 यत् तु सारस्वतकल्पमधिकृत्येति पूर्वमुक्तम् । तच् च गायत्र्या भगवत्प्रतिपादकवाग्विशे- परूपसरस्वतीत्वादुपयुक्तमेव । यदुक्तमग्निपुराणे ( २१६ १-२ ) - Still, the statement made earlier [in Anuccheda 20.1] – that the subject of the Bhagavatam is the Sarasvata-kalpa [a day of Brahmā, or the scripture related to Sarasvati] - is appropriate, because Gayatri is a manifestation of Sarasvati, as a special ver- bal expression establishing the truth of Bhagavan. Thus, Agni Purana says about Gayatri: गायत्र्युक्थानि शास्त्राणि भर्गं प्राणांस्तथैव च । ततः स्मृतेयं गायत्री सावित्री यत एव च ॥ ८३ ॥ प्रकाशिनी सा सवितुर्वाग्रूपत्वात् सरस्वती ॥ ८४ ॥ इति । This mantra is called Gayatri [the singer], because it sings about (gāyati) [or delineates] the Vedic mantras, the scriptures, the effulgent One [the Self-existing and Self- illuminated Lord], and the vital life system. It is called Sāvitrī [the vivifier], because it reveals Śrī Savitā, the animator of all life. And it is called Saras- vati [constituting the flow of speech], because it is the essence of speech. (AP 216.1-2 ) 11 22.14 अथ क्रमप्राप्ता व्याख्या “वेदार्थपरिबृंहितः” इति वेदार्थानां परिबृंहणं यस्मात् । तच् चोक्तम् “इतिहासपुराणाभ्याम्” इति । “पुराणानां सामरूपः” इति वेदेषु सामवत् पुराणेषु श्रेष्ठ इत्यर्थः । पुराणान्तराणां केषाञ्चिदापाततो रजस्तमसी जुषमाणैस्तत्परत्वाप्रतीत- त्वेऽपि वेदानां काण्डत्रयवाक्यैकवाक्यतायां यथा साम्ना तथा तेषां श्रीभागवतेन प्रतिपाद्ये श्रीभगवत्येव पर्यवसानमिति भावः । तदुक्तम् (हरिवंशे ३ | १३२ १९५ ) - Now we will resume our sequential explanation of the terms in the passage quoted above from Garuda Purāna [Anuccheda 21.1]: gayatry-ukthäni sastrani bhargaṁ prānāms tathaiva ca tatah smrteyam gayatri sävitri yata eva ca prakāśini să savitur väg-rupatvāt sarasvati 151 II Pramāņa The phrase vedärtha-paribṛmhitaḥ, which means that Srimad Bhāgavatam explains and expands the meaning of the Vedas, is supported by the following statement from Mahābhārata (Adi- parva 1.267): “One should supplement the Vedas with the Itihasas and Purāņas.” The phrase purāṇānāṁ säma-rupaḥ means that just as the Sama Veda is supreme among the Vedas, so Śrimad Bhagavatam is paramount among the Purāņas. The idea here is as follows: Although each division of the Vedas - karma-kāṇḍa, jñāna-kāṇḍa, and upāsanā-kāṇḍa- propounds its respective path, the Sama Veda reconciles the statements of these apparently conflicting divisions by show- ing that their message is one. Similarly, although some of the Purāņas appear to be tainted with the gunas of conditional becoming (rajas) and stasis (tamas) and hence don’t seem to pro- pound Ultimate Truth, Śrimad Bhagavatam demonstrates that all of the Purānas culminate in Śrī Bhagavan alone, upon whom the Bhāgavatam is exclusively fixed. Thus, it is said: वेदे रामायणे चैव पुराणे भारते तथा । आदावन्ते च मध्ये च हरिः सर्वत्र गीयते ॥ ८५ ॥ इति । Throughout the Vedas, Rāmāyaṇa, the Puranas, and Mahābhā- rata, Śrī Hari is glorified everywhere, in the beginning, middle, and end. (Hari-vamsa Purana 3.132.95)12 प्रतिपादयिष्यते च तदिदं परमात्मसन्दर्भे । This we will demonstrate later, in Paramatma Sandarbha13 22.15 साक्षाद् भगवतोदितमिति “कस्मै येन विभासितोऽयम्” ( भा० १२ | १३ | १९) इत्युपसंहार- वाक्यानुसारेण ज्ञेयम् । शतविच्छेदसंयुत इति - विस्तारभिया न विव्रियते । तदेवं श्रीम- 12 13 vede rāmāyaṇe caiva purane bharate tatha adav ante ca madhye ca hariḥ sarvatra giyate Anuccheda 104 152 22 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature द्भागवतं सर्वशास्त्रचक्रवर्तिपदमाप्तमिति स्थिते “हेमसिंहसमन्वितम्” इत्यत्र हेमसिंहा- सनमारूढमिति टीकाकारैर्यद् व्याख्यातं तदेव युक्तम् । The next phrase from the Garuda Purana verse [Anuccheda 21.1] is “Srimad Bhagavatam is the direct utterance of the Supreme Abso- lute, Śrī Bhagavan” (sākṣād-bhagavatoditaḥ). This is confirmed in the verse near the end of the Bhagavatam, wherein it is said, “We meditate upon the Supreme Lord, who spoke this Śrīmad Bhagavatam to Brahma” (SB 12.13.19). We will not elaborate here on the phrase “Srimad Bhagava- tam contains hundreds of divisions” (śata-viccheda-samyutaḥ) because its discussion may unnecessarily increase the size of this book. In this way, it has been shown that Srimad Bhagavatam is the emperor of all scriptures. It is thus highly appropriate that Śrī- dhara Svāmi has interpreted the phrase hema-simha-samanvita [in his commentary to SB 12.13.13] to mean “mounted on a golden throne” [although literally it would mean “along with a golden lion”]. 22.16 अतः श्रीमद्भागवतस्यैवाभ्यासावश्यकत्वं श्रेष्ठत्वं च स्कान्दे निर्णीतम् “ शतशोऽथ सहस्रैश्च किमन्यैः शास्त्रसङ्ग्रहैः” (विष्णुखण्डे मार्गशीर्षमाहात्म्ये १६।४० ) इति । तदेवं परमार्थवि- । वित्सुभिः श्रीभागवतमेव साम्प्रतं विचारणीयमिति स्थितम् ॥ Therefore, concluding that Srimad Bhagavatam is the preem- inent scripture and the only one that is imperative for us to study, Skanda Purana states, “What need is there of accumu- lating hundreds and thousands of other scriptures” (Vişnu- khanda 5.16.40)?14 It is thus established without any doubt that at present those who aspire to know the Absolute Truth should deliberate on Śrimad Bhagavatam alone. [This is a reconfirmation of the same statement made in Anuccheda 22.4.] 14 Sataśo’tha sahasraiś ca kim anyaiḥ śästra-sangrahaiḥ 153 II Pramaņa Commentary IN THE PREVIOUS ANUCCHEDA, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi quoted three verses from Garuda Purana. The first of the three was explained in that anuccheda, and here he goes on to explain the other two. He first quotes a Bhagavatam verse (SB 3.5.12) and then another (SB 1.4.25), which also appears in Hemadri’s Catur-varga-cintamani, an authori- tative thirteenth century work on Dharma-sastra dealing with such subjects as vratas (vows), dana (charity), śräddha (memorial ritu- als), and kala (sacred time). Jiva Gosvami’s intention in quoting these verses is to show that Mahabharata is equal to the Vedas. In this part of Catur-varga-cintamani, Hemādrī raises a question about the liberation of those who are not twice-born: Since they do not have access to the Vedas, which bestow knowledge of Brahman, and since knowledge of Brahman is required for liberation, how can they attain final release? To resolve this question, he quotes the stri-südra-dvijabandhunam verse (SB 1.4.25), which describes how Vedavyāsa wrote Mahabharata to address this very problem. The first of the two Bhagavatam verses cited also states that Śrīla Vyasa compiled Mahabharata for the benefit of humanity in general: Your friend, the great sage Kṛṣṇa-dvaipayana Vyasa, composed His great work, Mahabharata, with the intention of describing the transcendental qualities of Śri Bhagavan. In this work, He has drawn the attention of the mass of people to the descriptions of Lord Hari by embedding them within the framework of mundane topics. (SB 3.5.12)15 To fulfill His intention, Vyasa included Bhagavad Gita in the Mahabharata. Since Mahabharata is considered equal to the Vedas in purpose as is evident from the second verse (SB 1.4.25), and as corroborated by Hemadri - we can deduce that the Vedas also aim at glorifying Bhagavan. This being the case, the Gayatri mantra, which embodies the essence of the Vedas, should also refer to the Supreme Personal 15 munir vivaksur bhagavad-gunänäṁ sakhäpi te bharatam äha kṛṣṇaḥ yasmin nṛṇām gramya-sukhānuvadair matir grhită nu hareḥ kathāyām 154 22 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature Absolute, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. It is with this understanding that Skanda Purana says that Srimad Bhagavatam, which glorifies Bhagavan at every step, is based on Gayatri. Indeed, this is one of the distinctive characteristics of Srimad Bhagavatam. In Paramätma Sandarbha (Anuccheda 104), Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi will analyze the first verse of Srimad Bhagavatam in terms of its being an explanation of the Gayatri mantra. Gayatri is explained in one of the concluding verses of the Bhagavatam (SB 12.13.19, as claborated in Paramatma Sandarbha, Anuccheda 105) as well. This combination of indications from the beginning and ending verses makes it indisputably clear that the purpose of Srimad Bhāgavatam is to delineate the truth of Bhagavan. The prevalent understanding among traditional Vedic scholars is that Gayatri is meant for worshiping either the sun god or unqual- ified Brahman. Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi here establishes, however, that the real meaning of Gayatri is the worship of Śrī Vişņu, who is non- different from Śrī Kṛṣṇa. To support his view, he cites Agni Purāņa, which gives Śrīla Vyasa’s opinion on the meaning of Gayatri. In Vişņu-dharmottara Purana, King Vajra asks Märkandeya Rṣi why Gayatri is chanted in Vaisnava rituals if its presiding deity is the sun god. Märkandeya replies that Gayatri refers to Śrī Viṣņu and then proceedes to show how each word of Gayatri is related to Him. He concludes with this verse: By chanting Gayatri, a person desirous of material gain achieves the phenomenal object of his desire, while a person aspiring for liberation attains to that essential state. But the worshiper who is devoid of desires attains the supreme abode of Śrī Visnu. (Visnu- dharmottara Purana, Prathama-khanda)16 It would not be possible to attain the Lord’s abode by meditat- ing on Gayatri if it did not in fact imply the worship of Śrī Visņu; this accords with Bhagavan’s statement in GITA 9.25 that “Only My worshiper attains Me.” Thus, Gayatri and the first verse of 16 kama-kamo labhet kämam gati-kāmas tu sad-gatim akāmas tu tad avapnoti yad visnoḥ paramam padam 15511 Pramāņa the Bhāgavatam are in complete agreement, because they are both meditations on the Supreme Personal Absolute, Bhagavan. The verse cited from Agni Purana in Anuccheda 22.8, advising us to meditate on the self as nondifferent from Brahman, is also in agreement with the Bhagavatam and Gayatri. The verse is meant to impress upon us our true spiritual identity and to teach us a meditational process that establishes us in that identity, beyond the empiric or egoic self-reference. This kind of meditation, there- fore, is simply to elicit the fitness, or in other words, the funda- mental state of being, that alone makes possible the true worship of the Supreme Absolute, Bhagavan. Later in Tattva Sandarbha (Anucchedas 53 and 60), Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will discuss in greater detail the qualitative oneness of the jiva-brahman with the Supreme Brahman. In Anucchedas 22.9-11, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī discusses the relation- ship between Gayatri and the sun. Śrimad Bhagavatam (12.6.67-72) records sage Yajnavalkya’s prayers in praise of the sun or sun god, and texts 67-69 explain the three legs of the Gayatri mantra. From these prayers it may seem that Gayatri is also meant for glorifying the sun god, but Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi explains that Yajnavalkya is not worshiping the sun god independently; rather, he is worshiping the Supreme Immanent Self (Paramātmā) dwelling within the sun god. Generally, people hail a taxi driver by calling out “Taxi!” not “Taxi driver!” for they regard the driver and his taxi as one unit. Similarly, Yajnavalkya worships the sun god while considering the “vehicle” (the sun god) and the “driver” (Paramātmā) as one. This explana- tion by Jiva Gosvāmi finds confirmation in Śrī Saunaka’s question to Sūta Gosvāmī that led to the recitation of Yajnavalkya’s prayers. Saunaka explicitly requests “to hear about Śri Hari, the Supreme Self (Paramātmā) immanent within the sun” (SB 12.11.28). Brāhmaṇas customarily chant Gayatri at dawn and at dusk while facing the sun. In this way they meditate on the Supreme Lord through His energies. The logical principle at work here is called candra-śākha-nyaya, or “the example of the branch and the moon.” The idea is that to show someone the moon, you may first ask him to look at a tree branch, from which you may then draw his attention 156 22 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature to the moon beyond the branch. Similarly, the process of meditat- ing on Bhagavan may include allowing one’s attention to be drawn to Bhagavan through His energies, such as the sun. It is not always practical or advisable for a twice-born brahmana to carry an actual image of God, but he must still perform his daily duty of meditat- ing on Him at dawn and dusk. So, the Vedas enjoin that he should meditate on Bhagavan through the medium of the ever-present sun, always remembering that beyond the effulgent sun is Śrī Visņu. This is called pratikopāsana (symbolic worship). Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi concludes his discussion of the relation- ship of Srimad Bhagavatam with Gayatri in Anuccheda 22.13, where he quotes a statement from Agni Purana that Gayatri is so-called because it sings (gayati) or illuminates the glories of the Supreme Lord and protects (trāyate) the chanter by fixing his mind on the Lord. Gayatri is also related with the sun, because one of the words used in Gayatri is Savita, a name for the sun god meaning one who animates all life. Moreover, another name for Gayatri is Sāvitrī, the daughter of the sun god. Additionally, Gayatri is also Saras- vati, the presiding deity of speech, because it is the sound repre- sentation of Bhagavan. Skanda Purana therefore states (quoted in Anuccheda 20.1) that the Bhagavatam is based on Gayatri (Saras- vati); it is the sound representation of Kṛṣṇa, and it recounts events that occurred during the Sarasvata-kalpa. This implies that the Bhagavatam’s narrations glorify only Kṛṣṇa. In Anuccheda 22.14, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī resumes his analy- sis of each phrase of the verses from Garuda Purana quoted in Anuccheda 21. In these verses, Srimad Bhagavatam is described as the Sama Veda among the Purāņas. In GITA 10.22, Śrī Kṛṣṇa says, “Of all the Vedas, I am the Sama Veda.” Here, Kṛṣṇa indicates that since the Sama Veda is the best of all the Vedas, containing beautiful prayers glorifying the Supreme Lord, it therefore represents Him. Such glorification of the Lord is, after all, the ultimate purpose of the Vedas, as SB 1.2.28 states: vasudeva-para vedaḥ. Like the Vedas, the Purāņas also glorify various deities, although their underlying purpose is the glorification of Kṛṣṇa, and Srimad Bhagavatam is the Sama Veda among the Purāņas because it focuses exclusively on 157 II Pramana Kṛṣṇa. The Bhāgavatam reconciles the other Puranas. Thus, Skanda Purana declares that by studying Śrimad Bhagavatam, one derives the benefit of studying all the Purāņas. The very name Śrimad Bhagavatam indicates its paramount posi- tion. Śrīmat means “endowed with beauty, luster, and opulence,” and bhāgavata means “related to (or, ‘of the nature of’) Bhagavan.” Srimad Bhagavatam is thus the most beautiful literary creation because it describes the beautiful pastimes of the Supreme Person. Śrimat also means “opulent.” Srimad Bhagavatam is most opulent because it is identical with Bhagavan, the original Supreme Person, who is replete with all opulences. Sata-viccheda-samyuta literally means that the Bhagavatam “has hundreds of sections.” Although Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi does not com- ment in detail upon this phrase here, we may point out that most editions of the Bhagavatam have 335 chapters, divided into twelve cantos, but some commentators acknowledge only 332 chapters. They claim that chapters 12 to 14 of the Tenth Canto are interpo- lations. However, great authorities such as Śrīdhara Svāmī and Vopadeva have accepted these three chapters and commented on them, and Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī has done so as well. The three chapters in question describe the killing of Aghasura and Śrī Brahma’s bewilderment by Krsna. In Chapter 12 of the Twelfth Canto, Sūta Gosvāmī gives a list of the liläs of Bhagavan, and in the twenty-eighth text of that list, he mentions the killing of Aghasura and Śrī Brahma’s bewilderment. The inclusion of the pastimes from the three disputed chapters clearly indicates that these chapters have a place in the Bhāgavatam. Thus, in the opinion of Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi, the Bhāgavatam contains 335 chapters, since it would otherwise fall short of eighteen thousand verses. Commenting on the phrase hema-simha-samanvita,” which lit- erally means “together with a golden lion,” Śrīla Sridhara Svāmī says that simha (lion) indicates a simha-asana (a deity’s throne in the shape of a lion). In other words, Srimad Bhagavatam recommends “The same phrase is found both in the Matsya Purana verses quoted in Anuccheda 19.2 as well as in SB 12.13.13. Śrīdhara Svami’s gloss is found in the Bhavartha-dipika to the latter verse. 158 22 Śrimad Bhagavatam Is the Essence of All Vedic Literature that one mount the Bhagavatam on a lion-shaped golden throne and then donate it. A golden throne is not recommended for any other Purāņa. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi concludes, therefore, that just as the lion is the emperor of all animals, Śrimad Bhagavatam is the emperor of all scriptures. Consequently, it is also the sovereign ruler among all pramāņas, and, as Skanda Purana recommends, a person wishing to know the Absolute Reality need not study any other scripture. Next, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi describes how all the great ācāryas and scholars of the past held Srimad Bhagavatam in the highest esteem. 159 Anuccheda 23 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Is Luminous Like the Sun 23.1 I २३ । अत एव सत्स्वपि नानाशास्त्रेष्वेतदेवोक्तम् “कलौ नष्टदृशामेष पुराणार्कोऽधुनो- दितः " ( भा० १ | ३ | ४४ ) इति । अर्कतारूपकेण तद् विना नान्येषां सम्यग्वस्तुप्रकाशकत्व- मिति प्रतिपद्यते । यस्यैव श्रीमद्भागवतस्य भाष्यभूतं श्रीहयशीर्षपञ्चरात्रे शास्त्रप्रस्तावे गणितं तन्त्रभागवताभिधं तन्त्रम् । यस्य साक्षाच् छ्रीहनुमद्भाष्यवासनाभाष्यसम्बन्धोक्ति- विद्वत्कामधेनुतत्त्वदीपिकाभावार्थदीपिकापरमहंसप्रियाशुकहृदयादयो व्याख्याग्रन्थाः | तथा मुक्ताफलहरिलीलाभक्तिरत्नावल्यादयो निबन्धाश्च विविधा एव तत्तन्मतप्रसिद्धमहा- नुभावकृता विराजन्ते । THUS, while there are many authoritative scriptures, it is specif- ically śrimad Bhagavatam that has been singled out with the statement, “For those in Kaliyuga whose vision is impaired, this Purāna has now arisen like the sun " ( SB 1.3.43) ! This comparison of the Bhagavatam to the sun indicates that without its light, other scriptures cannot fully illuminate the Absolute Truth. The Hayasirṣa-pañcaratra, in its chapter classifying vari- ous scriptures, describes the Tantra-bhāgavata as essentially a commentary on Srimad Bhagavatam. Among the direct com- mentaries on the Bhagavatam are the Hanumad-bhāṣya, Vāsanā- bhāsya, Sambandhokti, Vidvat-kāmadhenu, Tattva-dīpikā, Bhāvā- rtha-dipikā, Paramahamsa-priyā, and Suka - hrdayā. There are also many essays written about Srimad Bhagavatam, such as Muktā phala, Hari-lilā, and Bhakti-ratnāvali. All these works 1 kalau naşta-dṛśam eşa puränarko’dhunoditaḥ 2 None of these commentaries are available at present except for Bhavärtha-dipika of Śrīdhara Svāmī. 160 23 Śrimad Bhagavatam Is Luminous Like the Sun have been produced by the most eminent thinkers of their respective philosophical schools. 23.2 यदेव च हेमाद्रिग्रन्थस्य दानखण्डे पुराणदानप्रस्तावे मत्स्यपुराणीयतल्लक्षणधृत्या प्रश- स्तम् । हेमाद्रिपरिशेषखण्डस्य कालनिर्णये च कलियुगधर्मनिर्णये “कलिं सभाजयन्त्या- र्याः” (भा० ११।५।३६) इत्यादिकं यद्वाक्यत्वेनोथाप्य यत् प्रतिपादितधर्म एव कलावङ्गी- कृतः । Srimad Bhagavatam is also glorified in the Dana-khanda section of Hemadri’s Catur-varga-cintamani. His chapter entitled “Giv- ing Purānas in Charity” praises Srimad Bhagavatam by noting that it possesses the defining characteristics specified in Matsya Purāna 53.20-22. In the Pariseșa-khanda of the same book, in the Kala-nirnaya section, where Hemadri ascertains the appropriate dharmic path for Kaliyuga, he quotes the Bhagavatam verse beginning kalim sabhājayanty āryā (SB 11.5.36 ). In this way he recognizes as appropriate for this age only that dharmic path that is established in Śrimad Bhagavatam. 23.3 अथ यदेव कैवल्यमप्यतिक्रम्य भक्तिसुखव्याहारादिलिङ्गेन निजमतस्याप्युपरि विराज- मानार्थ मत्वा यदपौरुषेयं वेदान्तव्याख्यानं भयादचालयतैव शङ्करावतारतया प्रसिद्धेन वक्ष्यमाणस्वगोपनादिहेतुकभगवदाज्ञाप्रवर्तिताद्वयवादेनापि तन्मात्रवर्णितविश्वरूपदर्श- नकृतव्रजेश्वरीविस्मयश्रीव्रजकुमारीवसनचौर्यादिकं गोविन्दाष्टकादौ वर्णयता तटस्थीभूय निजवचः साफल्याय स्पृष्टमिति ॥ It is widely acknowledged that Śrī Sankarācārya is a divine descent (avatāra) of Lord Siva. In Srimad Bhagavatam it is revealed that the bliss of [self-radiant unconditional acausal] devotion surpasses even the joy of pure consciousness liberated from subject-object dualism (kaivalya ). Based on such indica- tions, Sankarācārya considered Śrimad Bhagavatam to embody 161 II Pramāņa a truth far beyond even his own doctrine. Consequently, he dared not interpret the Bhagavatam, for he recognized it as an exposition of Vedanta that is beyond human origin. As we shall explain later, Śrī Bhagavan, in order to conceal His own identity, ordered Sankarācārya to propagate his doctrine of rad- ical nondualism (Advaitavada). Yet, to make his own words fruitful [by way of reference to Srimad Bhagavatam], Sankarācā- rya touched on it indirectly, describing in his Govindaṣṭaka and other hymns certain pastimes of Śrī Kṛṣṇa that are related only in the Bhagavatam. These include mother Yasoda’s amazement at seeing Krsna’s universal form and His stealing the clothes of the young damsels of Vraja. Commentary ALTHOUGH THERE ARE numerous works of Vedic literature, when Śaunaka Rşi questioned Śrī Sūta Gosvāmī about where dharma would take shelter now that Śrī Kṛṣṇa had returned to His own abode (SB 1.1.23), Sūta compared Śrīmad Bhagavatam to the sun, because it self-reveals the illuminating Absolute Truth that can dissipate the dense darkness of Kaliyuga. The analogy here is as fol- lows: When the sun rises, rogues and thieves hide, while ordinary people are relieved of fear and become active. Similarly, when con- sciousness is turned in full aural reception toward Śrimad Bhagava- tam, lust and greed, which plunder one’s opportunity to realize the self, find no more standing in the heart, and one becomes qualified to participate in the service of the Supreme Lord. It is because of this self-illuminating power of Srimad Bhagava- tam that it is held in reverence by great saints and thinkers who have written commentaries and essays on it. Most of these com- mentaries listed in this anuccheda are not available at present, likely because they were eclipsed by the most popular commentary, the Bhāvārtha-dipika of Sridhara Svami, written probably in the four- teenth century. Vopadeva wrote Paramahamsa-priya, Muktā-phala, and Hari-lila. Bhakti-ratnavali was compiled by Visnu Puri. These latter works are all still available for interested readers today. 162 4 23 Śrimad Bhagavatam Is Luminous Like the Sun Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī again refers to the Catur-varga-cintamani (Dana-khanda 7) of Hemadri, who recommends that one donate Srimad Bhagavatam after mounting it on a golden throne, and who glorifies it for having the defining characteristics described in the Matsya Purana (see Anuccheda 19). While determining the dharmic path for this age in the fourteenth chapter of Catur-varga-cintamani, Parisesa-khanda, verse 8, Hemadri quotes Srimad Bhagavatam: Those who are cultured in spiritual wisdom, who can perceive virtue within everything, and who thus extract the essence of all things, extol the essential value of this Age of Kali, in which one can attain all goals aspired for by human beings simply by the performance of sarikirtana. (SB 11.5.36)3 Commenting on the word sankirtana, Hemädri declares that hari-sankirtana is the only way to reach perfection. Then he quotes the next verse: Indeed, for human beings wandering in this material world, there is no benefit higher than the singing of Bhagavan’s Names, by which one attains supreme peace and cessation of the cycle of birth and death. (SB 11.5.37)* In this way, Hemädri recognizes the authority of Srimad Bhaga- vatam in the matter of establishing the principles of dharma for Kaliyuga. Sankarācārya respected Srimad Bhagavatam both by not com- menting on it and by composing prayers based on its narrations. One such prayer is his Govindaṣṭaka: satyam jñānam anantam nityam anākāśaṁ paramākāśaṁ gostha-prängana-ringana-lolam anayasaṁ paramayasam mäyä-kalpita-nänä-käram anäkäram bhuvanäkäraṁ kṣamāyā nätham anatham praṇamata govindam paramanandam kalim sabhäjayanty äryä guna-jñaḥ sära-bhaginaḥ yatra sankirtanenaiva sarvah svartho ‘bhilabhyate na hy atah paramo läbho dehinam bhramyatam iha yato vindeta paramam santim nasyati samsṛtiḥ 163 164 II Pramāņa May the self be devotionally offered to Śrī Govinda, who is inher- ently of the nature of transcendental bliss. He is primordial being, consciousness devoid of limit, and eternal. Though beyond the limitations of space, He is the transcendental space of all- accomodation. Though His rolling and frolicking in the courtyards of Vraja involved no exertion at all, it was the transcendental exer- tion of self-manifested play. Though formless, He manifests vari- ous forms fashioned by maya, including the form of the universe. Though fully competent as the shelter of all existence, He appears to need [His mother’s] shelter. (Govindaṣṭaka 1) mytsnäm atsiheti yasoda-täḍana-saiśava-santräsam vyädita-vakträlokita-lokaloka-caturdaśa-lokalim loka-traya-pura-mula-stambham lokalokam anālokaṁ lokeśam parameśam pranamata govindam paramanandam May the self be devotionally offered to Sri Govinda, who is inher- ently of the nature of transcendental bliss. Though He is the sup- reme master of the universe, He seemed to become frightened like an ordinary infant when Mother Yasoda chastised Him for eating a clump of earth. When she asked, “Have You been eating mud?” He opened His mouth to prove He had not- and showed her that He encompassed the fourteen planetary systems, including Lokaloka Mountain. He is the supporting pillar for this city-like universe of the three worlds. Though He is beyond all vision, He is the transcendental source of everyone’s vision. (Govindaṣṭaka 2) trai-vistapa-ripu-vira-ghnam kṣiti-bhara-ghnam bhava-roga-ghnam kaivalyaṁ navanītāhāram anähäraṁ bhuvanähāram vaimalya-sphuța-ceto-vṛtti-viseşäbhasam anabhäsaṁ saivam kevala-santam pranamata govindam paramanandam May the self be devotionally offered to Śri Govinda, who is inher- ently of the nature of transcendental bliss. He relieves the earth of its burden by killing the demonic heroes who are enemies of the devas. He is liberation itself, because He terminates the dis- ease of material existence. Though He is altogether beyond the need to eat, still He eats butter, and He also devours the whole uni- verse at the time of cosmic dissolution. Though distinct from all the shadow manifestations of this world, He manifests in the supracog- nitive functions of pure consciousness, free from material taint. He 23 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is Luminous Like the Sun is all-auspicious and the unalterable peace of liberated existence. (Govindaṣṭaka 3) gopalam bhi-lila-vigraha-gopalar kula-gopalam gopi-khelana-govardhana-dhṛta-lila-lälita-gopālam gobhir nigadita-govinda-sphuta-nämänam bahu-nämänam gopi-go-cara-dúram pranamata govindam paramanandam May the self be devotionally offered to Śri Govinda, who is inher- ently of the nature of transcendental bliss. He is Gopala, the pro- tector of the cows, who appeared in the form of a cowherd boy to enact His pastimes on earth, and who thus lived as one amongst the cowherd clan. He is Gopala who enacts sublime pastimes, such as His amorous dalliances with the youthful cowherd women and His lifting Govardhana Hill to protect the cowherd people. Even the cows called Him by the name Govinda, and so He has unlimited names. He is distinct among the cowherd boys and is beyond sense perception. (Govindaṣṭaka 4) gopi-mandala-gosthi-bhedam bhedavastham abhedabham sasvad go-khura-nirdhütodgat-dhuli-dhūsara-saubhagyam śraddha-bhakti-grhitanandam acintyaṁ cintita-sad-bhavam cintamani-mahimanam pranamata govindam paramanandam May the self be devotionally offered to Śrī Govinda, who is inher- ently of the nature of transcendental bliss. For His divine lilä He becomes the source of the gopis’ division (bheda) into different groups. So, although He is one without distinction (abheda), He is simultaneously the source of all distinction (bhedavastha). He considers it His good fortune to be always smeared with the dust raised by the cows’ hooves. He experiences bliss derived from the intuitive faith and unconditional devotion of His devotees. Though He is beyond the power of cognition, His pastimes are the object of pure contemplation, and so His glories are of the nature of a transcendental thought-gem. (Govindaṣṭaka 5) snana-vyakula-yoşid-vastram upādāyāgam uparüḍham vyäditsantiratha dig-vastra hy upadatum upäkarṣantam A gem that yields whatever desire is held in thought. 165166 11 Pramāņa nirdhuta dvaya-soka-vimoham buddham buddher antaḥ-stham satta-mätra-sariram pranamata govindam paramanandam May the self be devotionally offered to Śrī Govinda, who is inher- ently of the nature of transcendental bliss. He stole the bathing damsels’ clothes and climbed a tree with them, and when the naked maidens asked for their clothes back, He told them to come closer. He dispels the diad of lamentation and delusion. He is wisdom as well as He who is realized through the wisdom faculty. He is the embodiment of pure existence. (Govindaṣṭaka 6) kāntaṁ kāraṇa-kāraṇam adim anädim kalam anabhäsaṁ kalindi-gata-kaliya-sirasi muhur muhuḥ sunṛtyantam kālam kala-kalätitam kalitäśeşam kali-dosa-ghnam kala-traya-gati-hetum pranamata govindaṁ paramanandam May the self be devotionally offered to Śrī Govinda, who is inher- ently of the nature of transcendental bliss. He is all-attracting beauty. He is the transcendental source condition that makes pos- sible the chain of causal arising. He is the beginning, yet is without beginning, for He is altogether free from the superimposition of time. He danced wonderfully on the hoods of the Kaliya serpent in the Yamuna. Though He is time, He is beyond all divisions of time, because the calculation of Him in terms of a single unit of experience is impossible, being without end or limit. He destroys the defects of Kaliyuga, and He is the source of the passage of time as past, present, and future. (Govindäṣṭaka 7) vṛndavana-bhuvi vṛndāraka-gana-vṛndaradhyam vande’ham kundabhamala-manda-smera-sudhanandam suhṛd-anandam vandyaseṣa-maha-muni-mănasa-vandyananda-pada-dvandvam vandyaseṣa-gunadbhim pranamata govindam paramanandam May the self be devotionally offered to Śri Govinda, who is inher- ently of the nature of transcendental bliss. I bow down to Him, who is worshiped in the land of Vṛndāvana by all the devas and by Śrī- mati Vṛndadevi. His pure and beautiful smile emanates bliss like a kunda flower pouring forth nectar. He is the source of transcen- dental ecstasy for His cowherd friends. Unlimited venerable great sages worship His blissful lotus feet within their hearts, for He is 23 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is Luminous Like the Sun the reservoir of endless worshipable qualities. (Govindāṣṭaka 8) govindaṣṭakam etad adhite govindärpita-cetă yaḥ govindäcyuta madhava vişno gokula-nayaka kṛṣṇeti govindanghri-saroja-dhyana-sudha-jala-dhauta-samastaghaḥ govindam paramanandamṛtam antaḥ-sthaḥ sa tamabhyeti A person who has fully imbibed this Govindaṣṭaka [through regular recitation and reflection], whose consciousness has been devo- tionally offered to Govinda, and who sweetly chants, “O Govinda, Acyuta, Madhava, Vişņu, Gokula-nayaka, Kṛṣṇa,” thus cleansing away all his sins with the ambrosial water of meditation on the lotus feet of Śri Govinda- such a person certainly attains Śrī Govinda, the supreme everlasting bliss, present as interior even to consciousness itself. (Govindaṣṭaka 9) Śrī Govinda ordered Śiva to descend as Sankara to propagate radical nondualism. Consequently, Sankarācārya wrote Advaita- väda commentaries on Vedanta-sutra, on eleven of the principal Upanisads, on Bhagavad Gita, and on Sri Vişņu-sahasra-nāma. He did not interpret Srimad Bhagavatam, however, because he considered it very dear to Bhagavan and His devotees, and also nondifferent from Bhagavan. There can be no doubt about Lord Siva’s apprecia- tion of the Bhāgavatam, since in the Twelfth Canto he is described as the greatest Vaisnava (SB 12.13.16). As such, he must have been fully aware that it is the supreme pramana, and so out of respect he did not interpret it. From Padma Purana we learn how Śrī Visnu ordered Śiva to propagate a radical version of nondualism (i.e., a version that can accommodate oneness only and not distinction): O Śiva, by formulating your own speculative scriptures, you must turn people’s attention away from Me to keep Me concealed from their view. By doing so, this creation may be perpetuated on and on. (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 71.107) svagamaiḥ kalpitais tvam ca janan mad-vimukhān kuru mam ca gopaya yena syat sṛṣṭir eşottarottara 167 11 Pramāņa The import of this order is as follows: When Lord Buddha’s teach- ings were predominant in India, people grew contemptuous of the Vedas and Vedic rituals. They became sunya-vādīs, voidists or non- essentialists, and Vedic religious practices decreased almost to nil. In this condition, people were not prepared to hear seriously about the Absolute as a personal God, about His transcendental eternal blissful form, or His variegated abode. They would have simply dis- missed these teachings and thus been deprived of the means to real- ize the self in its true relation with the totality. So, the first task in bridging the wide gap between voidism and theism was to reawaken people’s faith in the Vedas. It was for this purpose that Sankarācā- rya introduced Advaitavada, a version of nondualism that made it possible to bridge this gap. Going from the Buddhist nästi to the Advaitavada neti neti is a simple, incremental move from the categorical negation of the onto- logical or eternal substance underlying momentary appearances (there is no self-existent) to the negation of the ontological reality of individual appearances (the self-existent is not this, not this, not any of this). The difference between these two ideas is hardly notice- able. Still, because Sankara based his philosophy on the Upanisads, Vedanta-sutra, and other Vedic works, that one step was critical in bringing the populace back to accepting the authority of the Vedas. Later in Padma Purāṇa, Lord Siva himself describes Advaitavāda as veiled Buddhism: Advaitavada philosophy is a scriptural interpretation devoid of essentiality [or devoid of the essential existent]; indeed, it is veiled Buddhism. (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 236.7)” Sankarācārya’s propounding of Advaitavada philosophy was intended by his Lord, the Supreme Person, who recognized that until conditioned human beings regained access to the Vedas, they could only speculate about transcendent reality and would be without a self-revealed means of deliverance from material existence. maya-vādam asac-chastram pracchanam bauddham ucyate 168 23 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is Luminous Like the Sun Once Advaita Vedanta had supplanted Buddhism, and faith in the Vedas had been re-established, people could be brought further along the path of knowledge to an appreciation for the glories of the Personal Absolute. This would be accomplished by counter- acting non-theism with true Vaisnava philosophy. Thus, stalwart Vaiṣṇava ācāryas like Rämänujācārya, Madhvācārya, and Vallab- hācārya came one after another to demonstrate the lack of ultimate completion of, and the limitations inherent within, Advaitavada. In its place they re-established the principles of pure devotional service as the true spirit and intent of the Vedas and its corollary scriptures. For his part, Śrīdhara Svāmī made it possible for non- theistic Vedāntists to awaken a taste for Srimad Bhagavatam by writing a commentary that also appealed to them. Still later, the original Complete Person Himself came in the garb of a devotee, as Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahaprabhu, and extended the discussion even further. He taught that even more advanced than vaidhi-bhakti, the path of regulated devotional service, is räga-bhakti, the path of the direct infusion of self-existing and self- radiant devotion to Kṛṣṇa into the core of being (the atmā), which is made accessible by following in the footsteps of Vṛndāvana’s resi- dents. He taught that räga-bhakti, which is elaborately explained in the Tenth Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, is the ultimate expression of prema, love of God. Since Caitanya Mahaprabhu is the original Supreme Absolute, who can contest His siddhanta? Rather, the gradual progression from voidism to radical nondualism to theistic nondualism and finally to räga-bhakti was precisely Bhagavan’s intention for the evolutionary unfolding of the Ultimate Truth of His own being. Through this unfolding, conditioned human beings are offered the possibility not only of liberation, but of participating with Bha- gavän as He is, in His own completion and in His own essential being. Without a doubt, therefore, the Lord was not acting cruelly or capriciously when He instructed Lord Siva to appear as Sankara and spread the misleading doctrine of the individual atma’s abso- lute oneness with the Supreme. To the contrary, He did so out of His limitless mercy. 169 II Pramaņa In later anucchedas, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will point out many incon- sistencies between Sankara’s teachings and the actual conclusion of the Vedas. In the next anuccheda, he shows us the glories of Śrīmad Bhagavatam as the Bhagavatam itself reveals them. 170 Anuccheda 24 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Is the Cream of the Vedas 24.1 २४ । यदेव किल दृष्ट्वा श्रीमध्वाचार्यचरणैर्वैष्णवान्तराणां तच्छिष्यान्तरपुण्यारण्यादिरीति- कव्याख्याप्रवेशशङ्कया तत्र तात्पर्यान्तरं लिखद्भिर्वर्मोपदेशः कृत इति च सात्वता वर्णय- न्ति । DEVOTEES OF SRI VISŅU RECOUNT that Sri Madhvācārya-caraṇa, seeing that [Śri Sankarācārya did not comment on Bhagava- tam out of respect for it] wrote Bhāgavata-tātparya, a gloss on Srimad Bhagavatam that specifies the true nature of the path of pure devotion, because he was concerned that other Vaisnavas might be influenced by the commentaries of other disciplic descendants of Sankara, such as that of Punyaranya. 24.2 1 तस्माद् युक्तमुक्तं तत्रैव प्रथमस्कन्धे ( भा० १।३।४१-४२ ) - For all these reasons, therefore, the following statements in the Bhagavatam are appropriate, as in the First Canto: तदिदं ग्राहयामास सुतमात्मवतां वरम् । सर्ववेदेतिहासानां सारं सारं सुमुद्धृतम् ॥ ८६ ॥ Some editions have added sākṣat tac-chişyatam präptair api after yad eva kila drstva. This reading is supported by Śrī Rādhamohana Gosvāmi, one of the commentators on Tattva Sandarbha. The followers of Madhvācārya, however, do not accept this view. Thus, we have opted for the present reading. 171 II Pramāņa After extracting the cream of all the Vedas and Itihāsas, Śri Vya- sadeva imparted this Srimad Bhagavatam to His son Sukadeva, the best of those established in direct realization of the self. (SB 1.3.41)2 द्वादशे ( भा० १२ ११३ ११५ ) - And in the Twelfth Canto: सर्ववेदान्तसारं हि श्रीभागवतमिष्यते । तद्रसामृततृप्तस्य नान्यत्र स्याद् रतिः क्वचित् ॥ ८७ ॥ Srimad Bhagavatam is indeed the essence of all Vedanta philos- ophy. He who is satiated by the nectar of its unprecedented taste (rasa) experiences no interest in any other literature. (SB 12.13.15)3 24.3 तथा प्रथमे ( भा० १११ ३ ) - And in the First Canto: 3 निगमकल्पतरोर्गलितं फलं शुकमुखादमृतद्रवसंयुतम् । पिबत भागवतं रसमालयं मुहुरहो रसिका भुवि भावुकाः ॥ ८८ ॥ O you devotees, who are able to relish divine taste (rasikas) and who are able to experience transcendental states of awareness and love (bhāvukas), drink again and again up to liberation. and beyond the divine rasa known as Srimad Bhagavatam, the mature fruit of the desire tree of Vedic literature. Being fully ripened and overflowing with immortal nectar, it descended upon the earth [unbroken], issuing from the lips of Sri Sukadeva Gosvāmi. (SB 1.1.3) tad idam grähayāmāsa sutam atmavatām varam sarva-vedetihāsānām saraṁ säraṁ sumuddhṛtam sarva-vedanta-saram hi śri-bhāgavatam işyate tad-rasāmṛta-tṛptasya nanyatra sydd ratiḥ kvacit nigama-kalpa-taror galitam phalam suka-mukhad amṛta-drava-samyutam pibata bhāgavatam rasam alayam muhur aho rasika bhuvi bhāvukāḥ 172 24 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is the Cream of the Vedas अत एव तत्रैव (भा० ११२१३ ) - Also in the same canto: यः स्वानुभावमखिलश्रुतिसारमेकमध्यात्मदीपमतितितीर्षतां तमोऽन्धम् । संसारिणां करुणयाह पुराणगुह्यं तं व्याससूनुमुपयामि गुरुं मुनीनाम् ॥ ८९ ॥ I take refuge of Śrī Sukadeva, the teacher of all sages, the son of Vyasadeva, who, out of compassion for those entangled in the cycle of birth and death and who aspire to cross over the dense darkness of material existence, spoke this most confi- dential Purana [Śrimad Bhagavatam], which is self-endowed with supramundane power, being the essence of all the Vedas, one without compare and the light of supreme transcendence. (SB 1.2.3)5 इति । श्रीभागवतमतं तु सर्वमतानामधीशरूपमिति सूचकम् । सर्वमुनीनां सभामध्यम- ध्यास्योपदेष्टृत्वेन तेषां गुरुत्वमपि तस्य तत्र सुव्यक्तम् ॥ These verses imply that the conclusion about reality embodied in Srimad Bhagavatam presides over all other philosophies. They also clearly indicate that Śrī Sukadeva, by taking the speaker’s seat amidst the assembled sages as the Bhāgavatam’s preceptor, became the guru of everyone present. Commentary HERE, ŚRILA JIVA GOSVAMI explains Madhvacārya’s reason for com- menting on Śrimad Bhagavatam. Śańkarācārya wrote poems glori- fying Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s pastimes as depicted in the Bhagavatam, but some of his followers, not understanding his true intention, took this as a license to try to include the Bhagavatam as part of the Advaita- väda canon. Some of them even wrote commentaries on the Bhāga- vatam and somehow managed to extract an impersonal interpreta- tion. One such commentary was that of Punyaranya, which is now yaḥ svanubhavam akhila-śruti-saram ekam adhyatma-dipam atititirṣatam tamo’ndham samsariņām karunayaha purana-guhyam tam vyāsa-sunum upayāmi guruṁ munīnām 173 II Pramāņa lost. Śrīla Madhvacārya, wanting to protect Vaisnavas from being misled, wrote a gloss called Bhagavata-tātparya. Since Jiva Gosvāmi has already shown that Srimad Bhagavatam is the topmost pramana, he can now cite it directly to demonstrate its own stature. Such citations serve only to increase a sincere reader’s faith in the Bhagavatam, and so from this point on, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi relies on the Bhagavatam itself as the principal source for his analysis. Here, he also reveals the eminence that Srimad Bhaga- vatam enjoys by virtue of the status of its self-realized speaker, Śukadeva Gosvāmi. Vyasadeva taught the Bhagavatam to Suka- deva, His most brilliant student, and Sukadeva chose to study the Bhagavatam, because the reality it discloses supersedes even that of Brahman. Although Śrīla Vyasadeva had many disciples, He gave the Bhagavatam only to Sukadeva. Vyasa did this not because He was partial toward His son, but because Sukadeva was “the best of those established in direct realization of the Self” (ätmavatām varam). In other words, Sukadeva had no ulterior material motives, and could therefore understand the true purport of the Bhagavatam, which is the essence of the Vedas, Vedanta, and Itihāsas. The most important part of a tree is its sweet juicy fruit, and so Śrīmad Bhagavatam has been compared to the succulent fruit of the tree of Vedic literature. And this Bhagavatam fruit is even more exceptional because it has no skin or pit. In other words, there is nothing to discard in the Bhagavatam. In this anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi quotes two texts from the Bhāgavatam, SB 1.1.3 and 1.2.3, to show its importance both for lib- erated devotees and for conditioned human beings, respectively. Because Sukadeva was completely free of selfish motives, he fully realized the Bhāgavatam’s significance and so was elected to speak, even in an assembly of learned sages that included his guru and his guru’s guru. The choice of Sukadeva as speaker implies that his qualifications for reciting Srimad Bhagavatam made him supe- rior to all the other assembled sages. This is one more indication that Srimad Bhagavatam is the foremost of scriptures and that it alone should be analyzed to determine the reality principles of 174 24 Śrimad Bhagavatam Is the Cream of the Vedas sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana. Next, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi fur- ther highlights the importance of the Bhagavata’s primary speaker, Sri Sukadeva Gosvāmi. 175Anuccheda 25 The Speaker of Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī, Is the Crest-Jewel of Illuminated Sages 25.1 २५ । यतः (भा० १।१९।८-१२ ) - THUS, it is said in Srimad Bhagavatam: तत्रोपजग्मुर्भुवनं पुनाना महानुभावा मुनयः सशिष्याः । प्रायेण तीर्थाभिगमापदेशैः स्वयं हि तीर्थानि पुनन्ति सन्तः ॥ ९० ॥ अत्रिर्वसिष्ठश्च्यवनः शरद्वानरिष्टनेमिर्भृगुरङ्गिराश्च । पराशरो गाधिसुतोऽथ राम उतथ्य इन्द्रप्रमदेध्मवाहौ ॥ ९१ ॥ मेधातिथिर्देवल आष्र्ष्टिषेणो भारद्वाजो गौतमः पिप्पलादः । मैत्रेय और्वः कवषः कुम्भयोनिर्द्वैपायनो भगवान् नारदश्च ॥ ९२ ॥ अन्ये च देवर्षिब्रह्मर्षिवर्या राजर्षिवर्या अरुणादयश्च । नानार्षेयप्रवरान् समेतानभ्यर्च्य राजा शिरसा ववन्दे ॥ ९३ ॥ सुखोपविष्टेष्वथ तेषु भूयः कृतप्रणामः स्वचिकीर्षितं यत् । विज्ञापयामास विविक्तचेता उपस्थितोऽग्रेऽभिगृहीतपाणिः ॥ ९४ ॥ At that time, the sages endowed with extraordinary spiritual power, who purify the earth, arrived there, accompanied by their disciples. On the plea of making a pilgrim’s journey, such sages verily sanctify the places of pilgrimage simply by their presence. From different parts of the universe, there arrived great sages like Atri, Vasistha, Cyavana, Saradvān, Aristanemi, Bhrgu, Angirā, Parāśara, Viśvāmitra, Paraśurāma, Utathya, Indrapramada, Idhmabāhu, Medhātithi, Devala, Ārstisena, 176 25 The Speaker of Srimad Bhagavatam, Śrī Sukadeva Gosvāmi, Is the Crest-Jewel of Illuminated Sages Bharadvaja, Gautama, Pippalāda, Maitreya, Aurva, Kavaşa, Kumbhayoni (Agastya), Dvaipayana, and the great personality Narada. There were also many other celestial sages, brāhmaṇa sages, royal sages, as well as sages who preside over particu- lar branches of the Vedas, such as Aruna. When the emperor [Parikṣit] beheld all the various orders of great sages assembled there, he received them with due honor and bowed his head to the ground. After all the rşis were comfortably seated, the king, humbly standing before them with palms joined in supplication, offered obeisance to them once again and informed them of his intention to fast until death. (SB 1.19.8-12)1 इत्याद्यनन्तरम् (भा० १।१९।२४ ) - Then the king inquired: ततश्च वः पृच्छ्यमिमं विपृच्छे विश्रभ्य विप्रा इति कृत्यतायाम् । सर्वात्मना म्रियमाणैश्च कृत्यं शुद्धं च तत्रामृशताभियुक्ताः ॥ ९५ ॥ Therefore, O brahmanas, reposing my faith in you, I ask you about that alone which is worthy of inquiry in the matter of ulti- mate duty. O learned sages, please tell me, after due delibera- tion, of the unalloyed duty of everyone in all circumstances, and specifically of those who are just about to die. (SB 1.19.24) इति पृच्छति राज्ञि ( भा० ११ १९ १२५ ) - Then, after the king’s query: tatropajagmur bhuvanam punāna mahanubhava munayaḥ sa-Sisyah prayena tirthabhigamapadeśaiḥ svayam hi tirthäni punanti santaḥ atrir vasisthas cyavanaḥ śaradvan aristanemir bhrgur angiraś ca parašaro gadhi-suto’tha rama utathya indrapramadedhmavahau medhätithir devala ārṣṭişeṇo bharadvajo gautamaḥ pippalādaḥ maitreya aurvaḥ kavaṣaḥ kumbhayonir dvaipayano bhagavan näradas ca anye ca devarși-brahmarşi-varyä rajarṣi-varyā aruṇādayaś ca nänärşeya-pravaran sametan abhyarcya rājā śirasä vavande sukhopavistesv atha tesu bhūyaḥ kṛta-praṇāmaḥ sva-cikirṣitam yat vijñāpayām āsa vivikta-ceta upasthito’gre’bhigṛhita-pāniḥ 2 tataś ca vaḥ prcchyam imam viprcche viśrabhya vipra iti kṛtyatāyām sarvätmana mriyamanais ca krtyam Suddham ca tatramṛśatābhiyuktāḥ 177 11 Pramāņa तत्राभवद् भगवान् व्यासपुत्रो यदृच्छया गामटमानोऽनपेक्षः । अलक्ष्यलिङ्गो निजलाभतुष्टो वृतश्च बालैरवधूतवेषः ।। ९६ ।। At that moment appeared the venerable son of Vyasadeva, who traveled the earth at will, disinterested in the world and sat- isfied in the self alone. He bore no marks of belonging to any social order or status of life. He was surrounded by women and children, and he appeared like an avadhuta, an ascetic beyond the bounds of conventional moral [or cultural] sensibilities. (SB 1.19.25) 25.2 ततश्च “प्रत्युत्थितास्ते मुनयः स्वासनेभ्यः " ( भा० १।१९।२८) इति । इत्याद्यन्ते ( भा० १।१९।३० ) - After this: “The sages all rose from their seats to honor him” (SB 1.19.28). And finally: स संवृतस्तत्र महान् महीयसां ब्रह्मर्षिराजर्षिदेवर्षिसङ्घैः । व्यरोचतालं भगवान् यथेन्दुर्ग्रहर्क्षतारानिकरैः परीतः ॥ ९७ ॥ इत्युक्तम् ॥ The eminent Sukadeva Gosvāmi, greatest among the great, was then surrounded by brahmana sages, royal sages, and celes- tial sages. He thus appeared extraordinarily resplendent, just like the moon surrounded by planets, constellations, and stars. (SB 1.19.30)5 Commentary AFTER ŚṚNGI CURSED MAHARAJA PARIKṢIT, the king renounced his kingdom and took a vow to fast until death on the bank of the tatrabhavad bhagavan vyasa-putro yadṛcchaya gam atamano’napekṣaḥ alakṣya-lingo nija-labha-tusto vṛtas ca balair avadhuta veşaḥ *pratyutthitas te munayah svasanebhyas 5 sa samvṛtas tatra mahan mahiyasam brahmarṣi-rajarṣi-devarsi-sanghaiḥ vyarocatalaṁ bhagavan yathendur graharkşa-tara-nikaraiḥ paritaḥ 178 25 The Speaker of Srimad Bhagavatam, Śrī Sukadeva Gosvāmi, Is the Crest-Jewel of Illuminated Sages Ganges. At that time, sages of all classes and orders came from various parts of the universe and assembled there. Among them were even avataras of the Lord, like Parasurama and Vyasadeva. When Parikṣit Mahārāja inquired from them about the duties of a human being, especially one who is about to die, no one was able to give him a definitive answer. At that time, the most noble Suka- deva Gosvāmī arrived, and he was unanimously chosen as the right person to answer Mahārāja Parīkṣit’s query. In the previous anuccheda, Jiva Gosvāmī said that all the sages accepted Sukadeva as guru. In this section, Jiva Gosvāmī cites the references to support his claim. Since the sages accepted Sukadeva as guru, and it was Srimad Bhagavatam that he spoke in response to Parīkṣit Mahārāja’s questions, we should understand that the Bhagavatam’s philosophy was accepted by all the assembled sages, who included systematizers and adherents of various other philoso- phies. Just as Śrīla Sukadeva Gosvāmi is like an effulgent moon among the starlike sages, so is Śrimad Bhagavatam among all other scriptures. Next, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi shows that Srimad Bhagavatam is the representation of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personal Absolute. 179 Anuccheda 26 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Is Self-Authoritative 26.1 । २६ । अत्र यद्यपि तत्र श्रीव्यासनारदौ तस्यापि गुरुपरमगुरू तथापि पुनस्तन्मुखनिः- सृतं श्रीभागवतं तयोरप्यश्रुतचरमिव जातमित्येवं श्रीशुकस्तावप्युपदिदेश देश्यमित्यभि- प्रायः । यदुक्तम् “शुकमुखादमृतद्रव्यसंयुतम्” (भा० १ । १ । ३) इति । तस्मादेवमपि श्रीभा- गवतस्यैव सर्वाधिक्यम् । मात्स्यादीनां यत् पुराणाधिक्यं श्रूयते तत् त्वापेक्षिकमिति । अहो किं बहुना ? श्रीकृष्णप्रतिनिधिरूपमेवेदम् । ŚRI VYASADEVA AND NARADA MUNI were present in that assem- bly. Although these two sages were Śrī śuka’s guru and grand- guru, respectively, when they heard Srimad Bhagavatam issuing from his lips, they felt as if they had never heard it before. For this reason it is said here that he taught this most significant wisdom even to them. As mentioned earlier, “The Bhāgavatam is enriched with immortal nectar, having issued from the mouth of Śrī śuka” (śuka-mukhād amrta-drava-sanyutam, SB 1.1.3). Thus, in this sense also Srimad Bhagavatam surpasses all other scrip- tures. Statements about the superiority of other Purāņas, such as the Matsya Purāņa, are relative in scope. What more need be said? Śrimad Bhagavatam is indeed the very representation of Śri Krsna. 26.2 यत उक्तं प्रथमस्कन्धे (भा० १।३।४५ ) -

180 26 Srimad Bhāgavatam Is Self Authoritative This is stated in the First Canto: कृष्णे स्वधामोपगते धर्मज्ञानादिभिः सह । कलौ नष्टदृशामेष पुराणार्को धुनोदितः ॥ ९८ ॥ इति । After Kṛṣṇa’s departure to His own abode, accompanied by reli- gion, knowledge, and so on, this Purāna [ Srimad Bhāgavatam ] has risen like the sun for those bereft of sight in the age of Kali. (SB 1.3.43 ) ’ अत एव सर्वगुणयुक्तत्वमस्यैव दृष्टम् “धर्मः प्रोज्झितकैतवोऽत्र” (भा० १११।२) इत्या- दिना- In this way, it is observed that Srimad Bhagavatam alone is inher- ently endowed with all virtues, as stated in the second verse of the First Canto: “This Srimad Bhagavatam reveals the sup- reme dharma, utterly devoid of all deception or compromise” (SB 1.1.2).2 वेदाः पुराणं काव्यं च प्रभुर्मित्रं प्रियेव च । बोधयन्तीति हि प्राहुस्त्रिवृद् भागवतं पुनः ॥ ९९ ॥ इति मुक्ताफले हेमाद्रिकारवचनेन च । The supremacy of the Bhagavatam is also confirmed by the words of both Muktā phala [of Vopadeva] and Hemādri, its com - mentator: “The Vedas, Purānas, and poetic works instruct one like a master, friend, and beloved, respectively, but Srimad Bhāgavatam enlightens in all three capacities.“3 26.3 तस्मान् मन्यन्तां वा केचित् पुराणान्तरेषु वेदसापेक्षत्वं श्रीभागवते तु तथा सम्भावना 1 krsņe sva-dhāmopagate dharmajñānādibhih saha kalau nasta-dṛśām esa purāṇārko’dhunoditaḥ 2 dharmah projjhita-kaitavo’tra “vedaḥ puraṇam kavyarh ca prabhur mitram priyeva ca bodhayantiti hi prähus trivṛd bhāgavatam punah ‘This verse is found in Hari-hilāmyta (1.9) of Vopadeva and not in Muktā-phala. 181 II Pramāņa स्वयमेव निरस्तेत्यपि स्वयमेव लब्धं भवति । अत एव परमश्रुतिरूपत्वं तस्य । यथोक्तम् ( भा० ११४१७) - Consequently, while some scholars conclude that other Purānas are dependent upon the Vedas to derive their authority, Śrimad Bhāgavatam explicitly refutes the possibility that it may be dependent in this way; rather, the Bhagavatam stands on its own authority. For this reason it is in fact the highest manifestation of Śruti [the original Vedas]. As it is said: कथं वा पाण्डवेयस्य राजर्षेर्मुनिना सह । संवादः समभूत् तात यत्रैषा सात्वती श्रुतिः ॥ १०० ॥ इति । How did King Parīkṣit happen to converse with this great sage, as a result of which this Vedic text (śruti) for the pure Vaisnavas (sātvati) became available? (SB 1.4.7)4 अथ यत् खलु सर्वं पुराणजातमाविर्भाव्येत्यादिकं पूर्वमुक्तं तत् तु प्रथमस्कन्धगतश्रीव्या- सनारदसंवादेनैव प्रमेयम् ॥ That Srimad Bhagavatam was compiled after the other Purāņas, as mentioned earlier (Anuccheda 19), is known from the dialogue between Śrī Vyasa and Narada Muni in the First Canto. Commentary VEDIC TRADITION RECOGNIZES three ways of teaching-like a ruler, like a friend, and like a lover. The Vedas speak in the imper- ative voice, like an overlord: “Speak the truth and uphold dharma” (satyam vada dharmam cara, TU 1.11). The Vedas do not need to offer logical reasons for following their instructions. One is expected to obey without question. The Puranas instruct like a friend, narrat- ing stories with moral conclusions and providing reasoned expla- nations when required. Kavya, or poetic literature, offers counsel in the way of a lover, speaking sweetly but indirectly. Instructions 4 katham vā pāṇḍaveyasya rajarşer muninā saha samvadaḥ samabhūt tāta yatraiṣā sātvati śrutiḥ 182 26 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Is Self-Authoritative are expressed in an aesthetically pleasing way to attract the reader or hearer. Śrimad Bhagavatam uses all three of these methods to convey its teachings. Just as a phrase or song becomes more significant when an eminent person quotes or sings it, so the Bhagavatam has been increased in distinction because the eminent Sukadeva Gosvāmi recited it. He narrated the Bhagavatam in such a marvelous way that both his guru, Śrīla Vyasadeva, and his param guru (the guru of his guru), Śrī Nārada Muni, were amazed. They felt as if they had never heard it before. The customary etiquette is that a disciple should neither accepta higher seat than his teachers nor instruct others as an authority in their presence. Sukadeva Gosvāmi’s speaking Śrimad Bhagavatam in the presence of his gurus is one of the rare exceptions. Because his gurus consented to it, however, Śrī Suka is faultless, as Śrīla Viśvanatha Cakravarti Thakura points out in his commentary on SB 1.17.29, which describes Suka’s accepting the speaker’s seat. From the narrations of the Mahabharata, we learn that Narada and Vyasa were often called upon to address various audiences on the subjects of karma, yoga, and jñāna. They rarely had an oppor- tunity to hear such an extraordinarily pure Bhagavata discourse. So, they were moved to great ecstasy when the nectarlike juice of topics concerning Bhagavan issued from the lips of Śrī Suka, their qualified disciple. Śrimad Bhagavatam’s special greatness is thus due to its unpar- alleled author, its eminent speaker, and its elevated audience. No other scripture in recorded history has ever had such an audience, except perhaps when Grandfather Bhisma, after the Kurukṣetra War, instructed King Yudhisthira from his bed of arrows. Bhisma’s main purpose, however, was to convince Yudhisthira to begin managing his kingdom. By contrast, Śrimad Bhagavatam was spoken in just the oppo- site context: King Parīkṣit, having renounced his kingdom, simply wanted to hear kṛṣṇa-katha and in this way discharge the only duty of a dying man. Śri Sukadeva thus had no need to dilute his nar- ration with talk of lower religious principles. Therefore, Śrīmad 183 II Pramāņa Bhagavatam is the most perfect and complete transcendental scripture. It does not even depend on the support of the Vedas. Indeed, the sunlike Srimad Bhagavatam is the very representa- tion of Śrī Kṛṣṇa. In the opening chapter of the Bhagavata Purāṇa, Śrī Saunaka asked Sūta Gosvāmi: Since Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the master of yoga, the well-wisher of the brahma- nas, and the protector of dharma has departed for His own abode, please tell us where dharma is now sheltered. (SB 1.1.23)5 In response to this, Sūta Gosvāmi spoke verse SB 1.3.44, cited in the text above. The fact that the Bhagavata Purana has arisen like the sun in the absence of Śrī Kṛṣṇa indicates that it embodies the same essential quality of being as Kṛṣṇa. This fact is confirmed in the Skanda Purana (Vişnu-khanda 6.4.3) and the Padma Purana (Uttara- khanda 198.30). Bhagavan possesses all supreme qualities, as Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmi confirms in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: Śrī Kṛṣṇa, who is the original complete Absolute Truth, Svayam Bhagavan, is the crest jewel of all heroes. All wonderful qualities are eternally present in Him. (BRS 2.1.17) Since Srimad Bhagavatam is nondifferent from Krsna, it is also a reservoir of all auspicious qualities. When Śrī Kṛṣṇa appeared, He killed many powerful miscreants of demonic nature and pro- tected His saintly devotees. In the same way, the Bhāgavata Purana uproots the material ungodly desires from the heart and there instills devotion to the Lord through its ambrosial narrations. Other scriptures focus on conventional morality, dualistic or result- oriented religiosity, liberation as merging in unqualified Brahman, or yoga, and they may or may not say something about the transcen- dental path of love of God. But the Bhagavatam kicks out, like refuse, all types of inferior, selfishly motivated, or partial manifestations 5 bruhi yogeśvare krsne brahmanye dharma-varmani svär käṣṭhām adhunopete dharmaḥ kam saranam gataḥ “nayakānāṁ Siro-ratnam krsnas tu bhagavan svayam yatra nityataya sarve virajante maha-gunäh 184 26 Śrīmad Bhagavatam Is Self-Authoritative of the religious urge. Only depictions and explanations of the Absolute Reality find a place in its pages. Having established the Bhagavatam as the supreme pramāņa, in the next anuccheda Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī explains his method of analyzing it. 185Methodology of the Sat Sandarbhas Anucchedas 27-28 This brief section, consisting of just two short anucchedas, is imper- ative for understanding Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi’s strategy for analyz- ing Srimad Bhagavatam, which he has already established as his pramāņa in the matter of the self-disclosure of Ultimate Reality. It informs us of the manner by which the author has arrived at his conclusions throughout the Sat Sandarbhas. The specific meth- ods employed by him in this work serve to further validate his assertions. If Jiva Gosvāmi’s schema is born in mind as we pro- ceed through all six volumes of his anthology, what emerges is a systematic self-revelation of the methaphysics of the Bhāgavata. This master plan is evidently what Jiva Gosvāmi had in mind, and the methodology stated here is the set of techniques by which he intends to bring this vision into clear view. 187 Anuccheda 27 Theoretical Formulations to Be Derived from Śrīmad Bhagavatam 27.1 २७ । तदेवं परमनिःश्रेयसनिश्चयाय श्रीभागवतमेव पौर्वापर्याविरोधेन विचार्यते । तत्रा- स्मिन् सन्दर्भषट्द्वात्मके ग्रन्थे सूत्रस्थानीयम् - अवतारिकावाक्यं विषयवाक्यं श्रीभाग- वतवाक्यम् । भाष्यरूपा तद्व्याख्या तु सम्प्रति मध्यदेशादौ व्याप्तानद्वैतवादिनो नूनं भगवन्महिमानमवगाहयितुं तद्वादेन कर्बुरितलिपीनां परमवैष्णवानां श्रीधरस्वामिचरणा- नां शुद्धवैष्णव सिद्धान्तानुगता चेत् तर्हि यथावदेव विलिख्यते । SO IT IS THAT WE SHALL FOCUS Our investigation specifically on Srimad Bhagavatam to determine, free from any inconsistency between preceding and following statements, the ultimate value for human beings. In these Six Sandarbhas, the statements with which we introduce our explanation of the Bhāgavatam verses will serve as the sutras, the Bhagavatam verses themselves will serve as the scriptural text to be analyzed, and the commentary on the verses will be the explanations of those verses given by the great Vaisnava Śrīdhara Svāmi. Sometimes he inserted rad- ical nondualistic (Advaitavada) conceptions into his writings to immerse the non-theists, who are now quite prevalent, espe- cially in central India, in the glories of the Personal Absolute, Bhagavan. When Śrīdhara Svāmi’s commentary accords with the conclusions of pure Vaisnavism, we shall quote it verbatim. 189 II Pramāņa 27.2 क्वचित् तेषामेवान्यत्रदृष्टव्याख्यानुसारेण द्रविडादिदेशविख्यातपरमभागवतानां तेषामेव बाहुल्येन तत्र वैष्णवत्वेन प्रसिद्धत्वात् । श्रीभागवत एव “क्वचित् क्वचिन् महाराज द्रविडेषु च भूरिशः " ( भा० ११।५ । ३९) इति । इत्यनेन प्रथितमहिम्नां साक्षाच् छ्रीप्रभृतितः प्रवृत्तसम्प्र- दायानां श्रीवैष्णवाभिधानां श्रीरामानुजभगवत्पादविरचितश्रीभाष्यादिदृष्टमतप्रामाण्येन मूलग्रन्थस्वारस्येन चान्यथा च । अद्वैतव्याख्यानं तु प्रसिद्धत्वान् नातिवितायते ॥ Sometimes we shall follow the views Śrīdhara Svāmī has stated in writings other than his Bhagavatam commentary. In other cases, we shall base our explanations on the authoritative opinions of the venerable Śrī Rāmānujācārya Bhagavatpada, expressed in such works as Śrī-bhāṣya. He is the renowned leader of the Vaisnavas of the Śrī-sampradaya, which origi- nated directly from Goddess Lakṣmi. These great devotees are famous throughout India’s southern region (Dravida-deśa) and elsewhere. Śrīmad Bhagavatam itself states that they are well known as devotees of Visņu in the south: “O King, a few Vaiṣṇavas can be seen here and there in this age, but they can be found in abundance in the land of Dravida” (SB 11.5.39). We shall also proffer alternative explanations [from those mentioned above] as per the intrinsic intent of the original book [i.e., the Bhāgavata Purāṇa]. Since the concepts of Advaitavada are already well known, we shall not discuss them at length. Commentary HERE, ŚRILA JIVA GOSVAMI EXPLAINS his method of analyzing Srimad Bhagavatam. He plans to follow a format similar to the one Śrīla Vyasadeva uses in the Vedanta-sutra. The Vedanta-sutra is divided into adhikaranas (topics). Each adhikarana is based upon certain statements from the Upanisads. The Upanisadic statements 1 kvacit kvacin mahārāja draviḍeşu ca bhüriśaḥ 190 27 Theoretical Formulations to Be Derived from Srimad Bhagavatam are called viṣaya-vakya (the statements to be discussed). In the Sandarbhas, the introductory statements are like the sutras in the Vedänta-sutra, the statements of Srimad Bhagavatam constitute the subject to be analyzed, and Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi’s comments on the Bhagavatam’s statements are like the commentary (bhāṣya) on the sutras. Jiva Gosvāmī also indicates that his explanations are not his personal opinion or products of his imagination. He presented the principles of the Bhagavatam supported by the opinions of the previous Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, such as Rāmānujācārya and Śrīdhara Svämi. Although Śrīdhara Svāmī accepted the renounced order of life in Sankara’s sampradaya, which opposes the ontological realism of Bhagavan that is the cornerstone of theistic Vedanta, his commen- taries on Srimad Bhagavatam, Bhagavad Gita, and Visnu Purāna make it obvious that he was a great Vaiṣṇava. He clearly states in his commentaries that Bhagavan’s form, qualities, abode, associates, and names are all transcendental and eternal, and that devotion to Bhagavan continues even after liberation. These key philosoph- ical points stand in opposition to radical nondualism and reveal Śridhara Svāmi’s true stance. Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu also accepted sannyasa in Sankara’s line, but from the beginning, His teachings refuted the Advaita- vāda doctrine. Hence, Śrī Caitanya’s great respect for Śridhara Svāmī and his Bhāgavatam commentary is proof enough that Śrī- dhara Svāmī was not an Advaitavada sannyäsi at heart any more than Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu was. Because Advaitavadīs deny the essential reality of Bhagavan as He is in His own existence, Cai- tanya Mahaprabhu considered all of them to be offenders at the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personal Absolute, and yet, He would not tolerate even mild or indirect criticism of Śrila Śrīdhara Svāmi. We can also be certain that Jiva Gosvāmi, as a loyal follower of Śrī Caitanya, held Śrīdhara Svami’s Bhagavatam commentary, Bhāvārtha-dipika, in high esteem. Thus, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī refers to Śrīdhara as parama-vaiṣṇava, a devotee of the highest order. In this anuccheda, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi explains why Śrīdhara Svāmī inserted some Advaitavada ideas into Bhāvārtha-dipikā. 191 II Pramāņa Some of Sankara’s followers developed an interest in Śrīmad Bhaga- vatam after reading his devotional poems based on the Bhāgavatam, but they still maintained their overall non-theistic outlook. To attract these sannyasis toward the path of devotion, Śrīdhara Svāmi wrote a mixed commentary on the spotless Purana. Just as a fish- erman uses bait to catch fish, occasionally Śrīdhara Svāmi would present monistic opinions about some Bhagavatam verses in order to attract the Advaitavādīs who were drawn to read the Bhagavatam. This was merely part of his teaching strategy; it doesn’t make him an Advaitavādī. Nevertheless, although Jiva Gosvāmī understands Śrīdhara Svāmi’s motives, in the Sandarbhas he chooses not to cite the rad- ical nondualistic explanations found in the Bhavartha-dipikā. In fact, throughout the Sandarbhas, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī takes every opportunity to dismantle the Advaitavada view. Clearly, he does not consider the Advaitavadīs his primary audience, as Śrīdhara Svāmī must have when he wrote his commentary. Jiva Gosvāmi’s intended audience is apparent from his declaration in Anuccheda 6 of the Tattva Sandarbha, where he says that no one who is averse to serving Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s lotus feet should read this book. Jiva Gosvāmi’s intended audience are those persons already on the path of unconditional devotion to Śrī Kṛṣṇa, or who are at least open to its consideration. Naturally, therefore, he says here that he will quote Śrīdhara Svami’s explanations “only when they accord with the conclusions of pure Vaisnavism.” This state- ment has caused some modern scholars to criticize Jiva Gosvāmī for not respecting the liberal sentiments of Śri Caitanya Mahapra- bhu, but this criticism arises from a superficial understanding of Śrī Caitanya’s real attitude. Śrīdhara Svämi was not a radical monist, although he did. present a monistic slant to some parts of his Bhagavatam commen- tary. Taking into consideration the reason why Śrīdhara Svāmi included such views in his Bhāvārtha-dipika, why should Śrïla Jiva Gosvāmī, in an entirely different work meant for an entirely differ- ent audience, cite those explanations that oppose the true conclu- sion of the Bhagavatam and even Śrīdhara Svami’s own convictions? 192 27 Theoretical Formulations to Be Derived from Śrimad Bhagavatam Śrī Jiva has already established Srimad Bhagavatam as the supreme authority, and from this point on, he will not deal with any opinions that contradict it. He makes his policy explicit: He respects the pur- ports of Śridhara insofar as they follow the spirit and intent of the Srimad Bhagavatam itself. In this way, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī remains true to the Vaisnavism of Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī and also to his own Gauḍīya-sampradaya. At the end of this anuccheda, when Jiva Gosvāmi says that he is not going to describe the details of the radical nondualistic doc- trine because they are already well known, he implies that Advaita- väda, though popular, only apparently explains the meaning of the sästras and is not really worthy of discussion. He also implies that he intends to refute it. Next, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī describes the sources of evidence other than Srimad Bhagavatam that he plans to cite in the Sat Sandarbhas. 193 Anuccheda 28 The Sources of Reference 28.1 २८ । अत्र च स्वदर्शितार्थविशेषप्रामाण्यायैव न तु श्रीमद्भागवतवाक्यप्रामाण्याय प्रमा- णानि श्रुतिपुराणादिवचनानि यथादृष्टमेवोदाहरणीयानि । क्वचित् स्वयमदृष्टाकराणि च तत्त्वत्वादगुरूणामनाधुनिकानां प्रचुरप्रचारितवैष्णवमतविशेषाणां दक्षिणादिदेशविख्या- तशिष्योपशिष्यीभूतविजयध्वजव्यासतीर्थादिवेदवेदार्थविद्वराणां श्रीमध्वाचार्यचरणानां भागवततात्पर्यभारततात्पर्यब्रह्मसूत्रभाष्यादिभ्यः सङ्गृहीतानि । HERE, in the Sat Sandarbhas, I will quote from the Vedas, Purānas, and other such scriptures, just as I have seen them. I will quote these passages to verify my own interpretations, not the statements of Srimad Bhagavatam. Some of the verses quoted here I have not seen in their original texts but have gleaned from citations in the Bhāgavata-tātparya, Bhārata-tātparya, Brahma-sutra-bhāsya, and other works by the venerable Śrī Ma - dhvacārya, the prolific teacher of the distinct Vaisnava philoso- phy of Tattvavāda. In his line, such disciples and grand-disciples as Vijayadhvaja Tirtha and Vyasa Tīrtha have appeared; very famous in the south, they are most eminent scholars of the Vedic literature and its interpretation. 28.2 तैश्चैवमुक्तं भारततात्पर्ये-

In Bhārata-tātparya, Sri Madhvācārya states: 194 28 The Sources of Reference शास्त्रान्तराणि सञ्जानन् वेदान्तस्य प्रसादतः । देशे देशे तथा ग्रन्थान् दृष्ट्वा चैव पृथग्विधान् ॥ १०१ ॥ यथा स भगवान् व्यासः साक्षान् नारायणः प्रभुः । जगाद भारताद्येषु तथा वक्ष्ये तदीक्षया ॥ १०२ ॥ इति । Having understood other scriptures along with the Vedas by the grace of the Lord, and having examined various kinds of scrip- ture in different parts of the country, I shall offer my explana- tion in accordance with what Śrī Vyasadeva, who is none other than the Supreme Lord Narayana, has spoken in Mahabharata and other works. In this description I will carefully adhere to his viewpoint. (Bharata-tätparya 2.7-8)1 तत्र तदुद्धृता श्रुतिश्चतुर्वेदशिखाद्या पुराणं च गारुडादीनां सम्प्रति सर्वत्राप्रचरद्रूपमंशादि- कम् । संहिता च महासंहितादिका तन्त्रं च तन्त्रभागवतादिकं ब्रह्मतर्कादिकमिति ज्ञेयम् ॥ The texts we will cite from the works of Śri Madhvācārya will include portions from such Vedic Śrutis as the Catur-veda-sikhā, Puranic texts from unavailable parts of the Garuda Purana and other works, Samhitä texts from the Maha-samhita and similar works, and Tantra texts from the Tantra-bhagavatam, Brahma- tarka, and so on. Commentary SINCE ŚRILA JIVA GOSVĀMI has established Srimad Bhagavatam as the supreme pramana for the purpose of his investigation, it needs no further validation. Therefore, from this point onward, he will quote scripture only to support his explanation. He will cite sources he has read in his own library and elsewhere, and he will also bor- row references from the writings of Sri Madhvācārya, who lived a 1 sastrāntarāņi sanjanan vedäntasya prasadataḥ dese dese tatha granthan dṛṣṭvā caiva prthag-vidhän yatha sa bhagavan vyāsaḥ sākṣān nārāyaṇaḥ prabhuḥ jagada bharatadyeşu tatha vakṣye tad-ikşaya The current edition of Bharata-tatparya (Udupi, 1971) reads vedän ca asya, instead of vedantasya (“Having understood other scriptures and the Vedas by the grace of the Lord”). 195II Pramāņa few centuries before Jiva. Madhvācārya often quotes from books that by Śri Jiva’s time had already been lost. In Madhvācārya’s time (13th century CE), there were no printing presses. He traveled the length and breadth of India collecting scrip- tures and philosophical books and copying them by hand at the var ious temples and libraries he visited. He was renowned for his pho- tographic memory, so when he was not allowed to copy the books he found, he read them and later reproduced them from memory. In this way, he amassed an immense library at his headquarters in Udupi, in Karnataka. Some say that his library had no equal. Unfor- tunately, it was destroyed by fire, and many of the books he refers to in his writings were lost forever. In several places in the Sanda- rbhas, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī has to make do with the references from lost works cited from the books of Madhvācārya. Śrī Baladeva comments that Madhvacārya’s metaphysical view, known as Tattvaväda, is by definition the philosophy that “every- thing is real” (sarvam vastu satyam iti tattva-vädaḥ). The radical monists say that only Brahman is real, while everything else is a manifestation of maya. Both, in his writings and in public debates with the leading Advaitavadīs of his time, Madhvacārya soundly defeated the radical Advaitavada philosophy with his Tattvavāda. By relying on books by Śrīla Madhvācārya and his eminent followers as a principal source of evidence, Jiva Gosvāmī shows his indebtedness to them. Jiva Gosvāmī is, however, a follower of Śrī Caitanya, whose teachings differ from those of Madhvācārya on certain points. In his Sandarbhas, Śrī Jīva plans to draw from those ideas of Madhvacārya that agree with Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s philosophy of acintya-bheda-abheda (the transra- tional coexistence of distinction that interpenetrates the integrated indivisible Whole). The essential point of difference between the two views is that Sri Madhvacārya’s philosophy is devotional dual- ism, whereas Śrī Caitanya’s philosophy is devotional nondualism. These two overarching views lead to both differences and common- ality on specific doctrinal details. A few points of variance are that Madhvacārya advocates that only brahmana devotees can attain mokşa, the devas are held as the topmost devotees, only Brahma can 196 28 The Sources of Reference attain sayujya-mukti, and Laksmi is also placed in the category of a jiva. The points of agreement are that Śrī Visnu is supreme among the trinity of Brahma, Viṣṇu, and Śiva; He has various transcendental qualities; primordial nature (prakṛti) is eternal; the world is a trans- formation of prakyti and thus real; and the jiva is an integrated part of Visnu and distinct from Him. Having established sabda-pramana as the only independent means of valid knowing, and having established Srimad Bhaga- vatam as the topmost form of sabda-pramana, here the pramāņa (epistemological) section of Sri Tattva Sandarbha ends. In the next section, Śrīla Jiva Gosvämi begins discussing prameya (ontology), or the knowable, referring to the categories, constitutions, and interrelations of true existents to be ascer- tained from the ultimate dimension of transphenomenal knowing, through the self-disclosure of revealed sound in the form of Srimad Bhāgavatam. 197 III Prameya 1 Determination of Sambandha, Abhidheya, and Prayojana The Transformation of Consciousness of Śrī Śukadeva Anuccheda 29 In Anuccheda 9, it was stated that the reality principles of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana could be determined only if a means of valid knowing could first be ascertained. So, Jiva Gosvāmi’s expo- sition until now has been to establish Srimad Bhagavatam as his pramāṇa, understood in the sense of sabda. With this step com- pleted, the determination of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana would appear to be straightforward. It must be noted, however, that if sabda is interpreted in its weaker sense, as denoting nothing more than scriptural authority, it would be sufficient to cite any pas- sage of Srimad Bhagavatam that logically identifies the principles to be investigated. On that level, the scriptural argument would be directed merely to the cognitive operation of rational mind, to con- vince rather than elicit direct self-transcending awareness. Such a view is relevant to the stage of practice prompted primarily by scriptural injunction, i.e., vaidhi-bhakti. If, however, sabda is understood in its stronger sense, as imply- ing a transempirical mode of knowing, it would be imperative for Jiva Gosvāmi to cite specific examples in which this is clearly demonstrated. This is precisely what he will now do in presenting the examples of Śrī Śuka and Śrīla Vyasa, the original speaker and 201 111 Prameya the author (or revealer) of the Srimad Bhagavatam, respectively. In both the passages he selects, the operation of the supracognitive mode of knowing is unmistakable. To illustrate this point, since the experience of Vyasa is dealt with in the next section, we will briefly consider here only the experience of Śrī Suka. From SB 12.12.68 and Śrīdhara Svāmi’s commentary, it is under- stood that Śrī Śuka’s consciousness (cetas) was completely filled with the bliss of the Self, and for this reason only (tena eva), all other thoughts and feelings (bhava) were unequivocally dropped (vyuda- sta). The word cetas here should be interpreted as consciousness and not mind, because all thoughts were cast aside. Furthermore, the word bhava implies not only thoughts (cognition), but all fluctu- ating states of the body-mind, including feelings (affect) and desires (conation). So, Śrī Śuka was established in consciousness of the Self, or in other words, in perfect identity with the conscious Source in which even the pure witness self arises. Such was his permanent condition, and so his is an example of open-eyes samadhi. The verse goes on to say that Suka’s essence (sära) was his utter fixity in the bliss of the Self (sva-sukha-gatam dhairyam). Conse- quently, he could not be moved by thoughts, feelings, or percep- tions. The only thing that could possibly move him would be a deeper and more profound self-revelation of Consciousness Itself, superseding the direct apprehension of Atman or Brahman. This is exactly what occurred in Suka’s case. His being drawn out of his exclusive fixity on the bliss of the Self implies that Bhagavan’s līlās embody a deeper and more profound state of illumination, superseding even the realization of Self. On hearing a few select verses from Srimad Bhagavatam, Śrī Śuka directly realized the Reality (Śrī Bhagavan) that is identical with the sound that reveals It. This was direct revelation of the sambandhi-tattva from a dimension of reality (i.e., consciousness) that includes and transcends Brahman. Prema also self-manifested to him at that time, and thus he recognized it directly as the ulti- mate completion (prayojana) of the potential of the self. He also immediately intuited that the direct turning of consciousness to Bhagavan in devotional recognition and worship (bhajana) was the 202 Determination of Sambandha, Abhidheya, and Prayojana facilitating or effecting means (abhidheya), being nondifferent in essence from its completion stage of prema. This whole passage, therefore, points not only to a higher epistemic mode of knowing, but to the certainty of the core truths immediately apperceived from that transphenomenal dimension. 203 Anuccheda 29 Realization of Bhagavan Supersedes That of the Self 29.1 २९ । अथ नमस्कुर्वन्नेव तथाभूतस्य श्रीमद्भागवतस्य तात्पर्यतद्वक्तुर्हृदयनिष्ठापर्यालोचनया सङ्क्षेपतस्तावन् निर्धारयति ( भा० १२।१२।६९ ) - WHILE OFFERING OBEISANCES to the speaker of Srimad Bhaga- vatam, the significance of which has been elaborated above, Sūta Gosvāmi concisely defines its essential message (tatparya) by careful examination of the disposition of the heart of the speaker: स्वसुखनिभृतचेतास्तद्व्युदस्तान्यभावोऽप्यजितरुचिरलीलाकृष्टसारस्तदीयम् । व्यतनुत कृपया यस्तत्त्वदीपं पुराणं तमखिलवृजिनघ्नं व्याससूनुं नतोऽस्मि ॥ 203 11 I offer my obeisances unto Śrīla Vyasadeva’s son, Sri Suka, who destroys all sins. Although his consciousness was completely filled with the bliss of self-realization, and though he had conse- quently cast off all other feelings and thoughts, his essence (sāra) was irresistibly drawn by the beautiful pastimes of Lord Ajita, Kṛṣṇa. Out of compassion he thus delineated this Purāṇa, which illumines Reality. (SB 12.12.68)1 sva-sukha-nibhṛta-cetas tad-vyudastany abhävo ‘py ajita-rucira-liläkṛsta-säras tadtyam vyatanuta krpaya yas tattva-dipaṁ puranam tam akhila-vrjina-ghnaṁ vyasa-sunum nato’smi 20529.2 III Prameya । टीका च श्रीधरस्वामिविरचिता - श्रीगुरुं नमस्करोति । स्वसुखेनैव निभृतं पूर्णं चेतो यस्य सः । तेनैव व्युदस्तोऽन्यस्मिन् भावो भावना यस्य तथाभूतोऽप्यजितस्य रुचिराभिर्लीला- भिराकृष्टः सारः स्वसुखगतं धैर्यं यस्य सः । तत्त्वदीपं परमार्थप्रकाशकं श्रीभागवतं यो व्यत- नुत तं नतोऽस्मीत्येषा | Śrīdhara Svāmi explains in his commentary: “Sūta Gosvāmi offers obeisances to his teacher (Sri Suka), whose consciousness was completely filled only with the bliss of the Self, and who had consequently cast off all other feelings and thoughts. Yet, even in that exalted state, his essence was drawn to the enchanting pastimes of Śri Ajita. The word ’essence’ (sära) here refers to his utter fixity in the bliss of the Self. I offer my obeisances unto him, who delineated Srimad Bhagavatam, which illumines the Supreme Reality.” 29.3 एवमेव द्वितीये तद्वाक्यमेव “प्रायेण मुनयो राजन्” (भा० २।१।७) इत्यादिपद्यत्रयमनुसन्धे- यम् । अत्राखिलवृजिनं तादृशभावस्य प्रतिकूलमुदासीनं च ज्ञेयम् । तदेवमिह सम्बन्धित- त्त्वं ब्रह्मानन्दादपि प्रकृष्टो रुचिरलीलावशिष्टः श्रीमानजित एव । स च पूर्णत्वेन मुख्यतया श्रीकृष्णसञ्ज्ञ एवेति श्रीबादरायणसमाधौ व्यक्तीभविष्यति । तथा प्रयोजनाख्यः पुरुषा- र्थश्च तादृशतदासक्तिजनकं तल्लीलाश्रवणादिलक्षणं तद्भजनमेवेत्यायातम् । अत्र व्यास- सूनुमिति ब्रह्मवैवर्तानुसारेण श्रीकृष्णवराज् जन्मत एव मायया तस्यास्पृष्टत्वं सूचितम् ॥ श्रीसूतः श्रीशौनकम् ॥ Similarly worth examining are the three verses Śrī Śuka speaks in the Second Canto that begin with präyena munayo rajan (SB 2.1.7-9 ) 2 In the verse under discussion (SB 12.12.68), we should 2 prayeņa munayo rajan nivṛtta vidhi-şedhataḥ nairgunya-stha ramante sma gunanukathane hareḥ idam bhagavatam nama puranaṁ brahma-sammitam adhitavan dvaparadau pitur dvaipayanad aham parinişthito’pi nairgunya uttama-sloka-lilaya grhita-cetä rajarse akhyanam yad adhitavă 206 29 Realization of Bhagavan Supersedes ‘That of the Self understand that the words akhila-vrjina (all inauspicious things) indicate everything contrary or irrelevant to pure devotion. Therefore, the subject of this book (sambandhi-tattva) is Śrīmān Ajita, who transcends even the ecstasy of Brahman real- ization and is distinguished by His enchanting divine play (līlā). Later, in the context of our discussion of Śrila Vyasa’s trance, it will be made clear that in His fullest manifestation, this Śrī Ajita is primarily named Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Similarly, the ultimate attainment for conscious beings (puruşartha), which is known as the stage of final completion (prayojana-tattva), is the ecstasy of love for Kṛṣṇa, which leads to the sort of spiritual attraction for Him that Śri Suka expe- rienced. And thus, our means (abhidheya) too is specifically the devotional turning of awareness and all faculties to Him (bhajana), characterized by such practices as hearing His divine pastimes. Such engagement effectuates the self-manifestation of love for Him, as it did in the case of Śrī Suka. The phrase vyāsa-sunu (the son of Śrī Vyasa) [in SB 12.12.68] reminds us that, according to the Brahma-vaivarta Purāṇa, Suka- deva remained untouched by maya from his very birth as a result of Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s benediction. The verse under discussion was spoken by Śrī Sūta to Śrī Śaunaka. Commentary IN THE PRECEDING ANUCCHEDAS, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi compared and contrasted the Vedas, Vedanta, Itihāsas, and Purāņas to show that Srimad Bhagavatam is the most authoritative pramana in the mat- ter of the direct knowing of Ultimate Reality. From this point for- ward, it is possible to shift the focus of the investigation to the know- able (prameya), or in other words, to the truths self-evidently dis- closed from the dimension of direct knowing, coextensive with the self-disclosure of Srimad Bhagavatam. In this case, the truths to be known are sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana. That Śrīmad 207 III Prameya Bhāgavatam as revealed sound implies a higher perceptual mode of knowing, and not mere scriptural or canonical authority, is shown here by citing the example of Sukadeva Gosvāmi. As the topics of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana are to be found throughout the Bhāgavatam, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī could have cited a passage from just about anywhere in the book to illustrate these three topics. Clearly, he had something specific in mind in selecting the examples of Sri Suka’s transformation in conscious- ness treated in this anuccheda and Śrila Vyasadeva’s samadhi, dealt with in Anucchedas 30-49. What stands out in both these exam- ples is that the sound-revelation of Srimad Bhagavatam was directly known, or self-disclosed, to both of them from a transempirical dimension of knowing. Thus, in its highest sense, sabda-pramāņa implies, or is coextensive with, this supracognitive mode of know- ing. Furthermore, since the truths of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana were disclosed to them directly in consciousness, they were not determined as logical constructs but as immediately aes- thetically felt and known realities. There exists an inherent relation between the words (sabda) of the Bhagavatam and their meaning (prameya). Thus, there can be no doubt as to their validity. So, although this anuccheda marks the beginning of the discus- sion of ontology (prameya, i.e., the knowable), the examples given serve to reconfirm the significance of the epistemological view thus far presented. For what is known and to what depth of profundity it is known is intrinsically related to the means or faculty by which it is known. The passages chosen by Jiva Gosvāmi demonstrate the operation of the self-revealing power of sabda-pramāṇa, as well as the transempiric mode of knowing in which it is received, as fully actualized potentials in the case of Sri Suka and Śrila Vyasa. Therefore, as stated in Anuccheda 49.3, Śrī Śuka and Śrīla Vyasa, the original speaker and author of Srimad Bhagavatam, respectively, shared an absolute identity of heart in the matter of the direct know- ing of the essential truths of Srimad Bhagavatam. So, to know these truths in the higher epistemic sense implied is not simply a mat- ter of correct theoretical or conceptual understanding; rather, they must be known in perfect accord with the heart of the author and 208 3 29 Realization of Bhagavan Supersedes That of the Self speaker, as immediately intuited realities. This also confirms that sabda is perceptual in character and is based upon, or coextensive with, the divine perception (vaidușa-pratyakṣa) of God or a realized person. In Jiva Gosvāmi’s prefatory statement to Anuccheda 29.1, he says that in the verse quoted (SB 12.12.68), Sūta Gosvāmi defines the essential message (tätparya) of Srimad Bhagavatam by careful exam- ination of the disposition of the heart of its speaker. The essential message of Śrimad Bhagavatam here refers to the self-disclosure of its own truths of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana. The two questions that naturally arise here are, “what was the disposition of heart of the speaker, Śrī Suka?” and “how does the ‘suchness’ of his heart (i.e., consciousness) self-evidently disclose the true nature of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana?” In answer to the first question, it must be pointed out that the verse refers to two distinct levels of awakening operative in Śrī Śuka - one prior to hearing Srimad Bhagavatam and the other after its reception in consciousness. His prior condition was that of utter fixity in the true Self and in the bliss that such awareness implicitly entails. To leave no doubt in our minds that his condition was fully transcendental, beyond any trace of conditional self-reference, the verse also states he had consequently given up all other fluctuat- ing states of the body-mind complex, including thoughts, affects, and desires. This was direct realization of, or identity with, Atman or Brahman. Such too was his permanent or natural condition, meaning that whatever was perceived or cognized by him was known directly in the openness of consciousness. For this reason, he is described by the following adjectival phrases: “who perceives everything as equal, without any qualitative distinction” (sama-dri nirvikalpakaḥ, SB 1.4.4) and “whose vision is pure and hence beyond the distinction of gender” (vivikta-drsteḥ, SB 1.4.5). We learn elsewhere3 that Sukadeva was self-realized even while in the womb. Indeed, he was so absorbed in the bliss of Brahman ⚫ Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi informs us that this description is found in the Brahma-vaivarta Purana. We have not been able to find it, however, in any of the printed versions of this Purana. 209 III Prameya that he wanted to stay there to avoid being distracted by Māyā. He left the womb only when Śrī Kṛṣṇa personally came to him and assured him that Mäyä would not capture him. Being established in this liberated state, one might well imagine that he had arrived at the final destination. Certainly it was impossible for him to be drawn out of this state by any phenomenal experience. Nonethe- less, the verse goes on to say that his essence (sāra) was irresistibly drawn by the beautiful pastimes of Śrī Ajita, Kṛṣṇa, as disclosed by Śrimad Bhagavatam. As we learn from Chapter 7 of Srimad Bhagavatam, First Canto, as well as SB 1.2.2, and from the texts that Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will quote below, as soon as Sukadeva took birth, he left his father’s hermitage for the forest. Later, when he heard a few of Vyasa- deva’s disciples reciting selected Bhagavatam verses, his conscious- ness became so enthralled that he abandoned his impersonal medi- tation on Brahman and began studying the Bhagavatam under his great father. This extraordinary event was not prompted by an initial shift in conceptual understanding, because Sukadeva was already beyond all reflective ideation. Rather, a new conceptual view ensued as a consequence of the direct transformation in con- sciousness that occurred through the self-revelation of Bhagavan in the form of Srimad Bhagavatam. This new disclosure from a deeper dimension of being was the awakening to the post-liberated sta- tus, beyond identity in Brahman. This transformative potential of the words of the Bhagavatam is stated by Vyasa Himself in the very beginning of the book: As soon as a person free of any offenses (krtibhih) simply wishes to hear the Bhagavatam, the Absolute Reality becomes manifest within his heart immediately. (SB 1.1.2) From the analysis of the disposition of Sukadeva’s heart, there- fore, it can be definitely concluded that his being drawn out of the liberated state could only be possible if the post-liberated condi- tion was oriented to a more substantial and all-encompassing Real- ity, namely Bhagavan. Despite all this, however, some radical non- dualists (Advaitavādīs) insist that because Śrīla Sukadeva Gosvāmi 210 29 Realization of Bhagavan Supersedes That of the Self was established in impersonal Brahman realization even before his birth, he must have remained fixed in this ideal. Therefore, they conclude, Śrimad Bhagavatam in fact promotes impersonalism. The prayer of Süta Gosvāmi quoted here refutes this belief. This brings us to the second point. Once Sukadeva Gosvāmi’s transformation in consciousness is rightly understood, the essen- tial truths of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana become self- evident. Śrī Suka’s immediate knowing of Bhagavan as including and transcending Brahman was direct revelation of the sambandhi- tattva, the subject to be realized. The overpowering spiritual attrac- tion for Bhagavan that self-manifested from within his heart was revelation of the ultimate goal (prayojana) as prema. Since this con- dition was effected in him by hearing Śrimad Bhagavatam, he again directly realized that such practices, involving the whole-bodied turning of awareness toward Bhagavan (i.e., bhajana), were the means of ultimate attainment (abhidheya). In the case of Sukadeva Gosvāmi, these truths were inevitable conclusions drawn from his grounding in direct experience, mean- ing that his experience was primary. So these truths were not oper- ative in the sense of theoretical constructs, leading him into such experience. For sadhakas (practitioners) following in his footsteps, however, clarification and enlargement of metaphysical view sup- ports the shift in consciousness to direct knowing. Ultimately, any- one can achieve the same realization through submission of con- sciousness to the Bhagavata’s truth revelation. This is the meaning of its being the pramaņa in the matter of the direct knowing of the Supreme Reality. It should be noted here that the principles of sambandha, abhi- dheya, and prayojana are intrinsically related, and as such the exis- tential status or the degree of inherent aesthetic value of the means and goal are exactly proportional to that of the subject. This means, first of all, that when the subject (i.e., the Real) is ascertained, the The whole-bodied turning of awareness implies a devotional turning of consciousness that is inclusive of all these modes of awareness. It is a complete turning toward Bhagavan with the body, the vital force, the mind, feeling, and intellect, all grounded in the self’s own root submission. 211 III Prameya means of its attainment and the goal to be attained in relation to it follow as a natural consequence. For example, if the ultimate Real is determined to be Brahman, then the goal in relation to It can be nothing other than identity in Brahman (brahma-sayujya), and the means, therefore, can only be the direct intuition of the self as identical to Brahman (i.e., the path of jñāna). If, however, the ulti- mate Real is determined to be Bhagavan, then the goal in relation to Him is transcendental love (prema), and the means is the direct turning of awareness and all faculties to Him in devotional worship (i.e., the path of bhakti). Similarly, if we examine any other path, such as karma or yoga, the intrinsic connection between sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana is inevitable. From the above analysis of Sri Suka’s transformation in con- sciousness, it was concluded that Bhagavan includes and tran- scends Brahman. So although they are identical in essence, it has to be said that Bhagavan exceeds Brahman in vastitude, complete- ness, substantiality, beauty, and bliss. It is in this sense that we say that Bhagavan’s degree of inherent aesthetic value or ontological completion exceeds that of Brahman. As a further clarification of the topic, it may be relevant to specify exactly what is meant here by inherent aesthetic value and to distinguish it from the idea of ontological completion. Absolute Reality is inherently self-endowed with value (artha). It is not simply that value belongs to the complete personal Absolute, Bhagavan, but it inheres in Him as His very nature. He is identical with value and hence is sometimes implicitly indicated by the word artha, as in the second of the four seed verses of Srimad Bhagavatam (SB 2.9.33). In addition, the value with which He is coextensive is of the highest possible intensity, meaning the ultimate degree of com- pletion (param-artham). And although He is immutable (avyaya), His completion ever unfolds in infinitely new waves of possibility. His inherent value is not only of the nature of being and exis- tence (sat), as well as truth and consciousness (cit), but also and most significantly of the nature of beauty and bliss (ananda). In this sense, it is quite fitting to describe Absolute Reality’s inherent value as being primarily aesthetic in nature. Furthermore, when we 212 29 Realization of Bhagavan Supersedes That of the Self speak of Bhagavan’s aesthetic value, we are referring to something transphenomenal in nature (aprakṛta), and hence, it is identical with His own intrinsic force (svarupa-sakti). It is only the Absolute that is found to embody the ultimate degree of inherent aesthetic value, both in kind and measure. So the degree of inherent aes- thetic value can be spoken of as the highest possible criterion by which the Absolute can be evaluated. On this assessment, Bhaga- van is found to far exceed Brahman, because Brahman, as defined in Advaitavada, is essentially Bhagavan divested of His own intrinsic force, which is to say Bhagavan deprived of His inherent aesthetic value. The degree of ontological completion is primarily a measure of being (sat). Similarly, existential status is essentially in relation to being. The degree of truth-revelation, on the other hand, is chiefly a measure of consciousness (cit). In contra-distinction to these, the completeness of aesthetic value is a measure of beauty and bliss (ananda). Moreover, the ananda potency being referred to is one that naturally encompasses both being and consciousness within its fold. It is in this sense too that the completeness of aesthetic value (artha-pūrṇata) can be held as the most comprehensive mea- sure of the Absolute. In terms of this discussion, it could be said that it was the profusion of Bhagavan’s inherent aesthetic value, self- revealed through Śrimad Bhagavatam, that drew Śrī Śuka out of his absorption in Brahman and established him in prema for Bhagavan. So from the internal connectedness of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana discussed earlier, it must therefore be concluded that the means that discloses Bhagavan (i.e., bhakti) carries greater com- pletion than that which discloses Brahman (i.e., jñāna). Similarly, the goal in relation to Bhagavan (i.e., prema) must carry greater aesthetic value than the goal in relation to Brahman (i.e., brahma- sayujya). Indeed, Süta’s prayer makes it evident that the bliss of transcendental devotion to Bhagavan surpasses all other kinds of bliss, including that experienced through perfect identity in Brah- man. In the Second Canto, Sukadeva Gosvāmi himself confirms the superiority of the bliss of bhakti: 213 III Prameya O King Parikşit, those sages who are beyond the rules and prohibi- tions of scripture and situated on the nirguna platform, free from material influence, generally relish reciting the virtues of Śri Hari. At the end of Dvaparayuga, I studied the Purana known as Śrīmad Bhagavatam, which is equal to the Vedas, from my father, Śrīla Dvaipayana Vyasadeva. O sage among kings, although I was firmly situated in Brahman, which is beyond the three gunas of primor- dial nature, my consciousness became captivated by the enchant- ing pastimes of the glorious Lord. Therefore, I studied this Purana. (SB 2.1.7-9)5 This incident from Sukadeva’s life demonstrates the wonderful potency of Srimad Bhagavatam - that it was able to captivate the heart of a Brahman-realized sage. In the next anuccheda, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī begins analyzing the heart of Śrila Vyasadeva. prayeņa munayo rajan nivṛtta vidhi-şedhataḥ nairgunya-stha ramante sma gunānukathane hareḥ idam bhāgavatam nama puranam brahma-sammitam adhitavan dvăparadau pitur dvaipayanad aham parinişthito’pi nairgunya uttama-sloka-lilaya grhita-cetä rajarse akhyanamh yad adhitavān 214 The Supracognitive Samadhi of Vyasa Anucchedas 30-49 Because this division deals with the samadhi of Vyasa, it implicitly denotes a transmental mode of knowing. In fact, samadhi, as out- lined in the classical yoga system of Patanjali, is the precise term given to designate the supracognitive state. Thus, samadhi implies not only an additional faculty of knowing, distinct from perception and inference, but a dimension of knowing that is direct and hence undoubtable. It is not arrived at through perceptions of objects or the inferences drawn from them. Neither is it mediated through cognitions. It is unmediated knowing, or knowing through iden- tity. Whatever is disclosed in that state is known not in the way of conceptual understanding but as direct feeling-awareness of, or identity with, what is known. So, as in the case of Śrī Śuka, Śrīla Vyasa’s apprehension of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana was a self-disclosure of Consciousness Itself, from the transempir- ical dimension of knowing. The elaboration of these principles, self-manifested to Vyasa, is the subject of extended analysis in the following division. 215Anuccheda 30 Ultimate Reality Disclosed to Śrīla Vyasadeva in Unmediated Gnosis 30.1 ३० । तादृशमेव तात्पर्यं करिष्यमाणतद्गन्थप्रतिपाद्यतत्त्वनिर्णयकृते तत्प्रवत्तृश्रीबादराय- णकृते समाधावपि सङ्क्षेपत एव निर्धारयति (भा० १।७।४-८) -

AGAIN, Śri Sūta Gosvāmi concisely defines the Bhagavatam’s essential message (tätparya) in precisely the same terms, this time by examining the supracognitive trance (samadhi) of its author, Śrīla Vyasadeva. Prior to the writing of Srimad Bhagava- tam, the Ultimate Truth that it intends to elucidate was directly experienced by Vyasadeva in this state of samadhi, as expressed in the following verses: भक्तियोगेन मनसि सम्यक् प्रणिहितेऽमले । अपश्यत् पुरुषं पूर्णं मायां च तदपाश्रयम् || १०४ ।। यया सम्मोहितो जीव आत्मानं त्रिगुणात्मकम् । परोऽपि मनुतेऽनर्थं तत्कृतं चाभिपद्यते ॥ १०५ ॥ अनर्थोपशमं साक्षाद भक्तियोगमधोक्षजे । लोकस्याजानतो विद्वांश्चक्रे सात्वतसंहिताम् ॥ १०६ ॥ यस्यां वै श्रूयमाणायां कृष्णे परमपूरुषे । भक्तिरुत्पद्यते पुंसः शोकमोहभयापहा ॥ १०७ || स संहितां भागवतीं कृत्वानुक्रम्य चात्मजम् । शुकमध्यापयामास निवृत्तिनिरतं मुनिः ॥ १०८ ॥ In His pure heart, which was established in perfect fixity through the yoga of unalloyed devotion, He saw the original 217 III Prameya Complete Person (puruşam pūrṇam) along with His extrinsic potency, māyā, which was apart from and yet supported by Him. Bewildered by this extrinsic potency, the individual self, although transcendental to the three gunas of primordial nature, thinks of itself as consisting of the three gunas and thus undergoes the misery resulting from this identification. Śrila Vyasadeva also saw that the yoga of unalloyed devotion to Bhagavan, who is beyond sense-perception, is the direct means to extinguish this misery. Knowing all this, the wise Vyasa- deva composed this Satvata-samhita [Srimad Bhagavatam] for the people in general who are unaware of this fact. Indeed, in the very act of receptively and attentively hearing this Śrimad Bhagavatam, bhakti to Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Person, self-manifests in a person’s heart, dispelling lamentation, illu- sion, and fear. [Bhakti here refers to devotion in its completional stage, as prema, see Anuccheda 47.1.] After composing and revising Śrīmad Bhagavatam, Śrīla Vyasa- deva taught it to His son, the great sage Śri Sukadeva Gosvāmī, who delighted in the state of utter non-attachment. (SB 1.7.4-8)1 30.2 तत्र ( भा० १।७।९) - Saunaka Rṣi then inquires: ‘bhakti-yogena manasi samyak pranihite’male apasyat puruşam purnam mayam ca tad-apaśrayam yaya sammohito jiva ātmānam tri-guṇātmakam paro’pi manute’nartham tat-kṛtam cabhipadyate anarthopaśamam säkṣad bhakti-yogam adhokṣaje lokasyājānato vidvāmś cakre satvata-samhitam yasyam vai śrüyamāṇāyāṁ kṛṣṇe parama-puruşe bhaktir utpadyate pursaḥ soka-moha-bhayapaha sa samhitam bhagavatim kṛtvānukramya catma-jam sukam adhyapayam asa nivṛtti-niratam muniḥ 218 30 Ultimate Reality Disclosed to Śrila Vyasadeva in Unmediated Gnosis सवै निवृत्तिनिरतः सर्वत्रोपेक्षको मुनिः । कस्य वा बृहतीमेतामात्मारामः समभ्यसत् || १०९ ।। Śrī Sukadeva Gosvāmi delighted in the state of utter non- attachment and was thus indifferent toward everything. He was a sage enraptured in the Self alone, so why did he take the trouble to undergo the study of such a vast book? (SB 1.7.9) 2 इति शौनकप्रश्नानन्तरं च ( भा० १।७।१०-११ ) - Sūta Gosvāmī replies: आत्मारामाश्च मुनयो निर्ग्रन्था अप्युरुक्रमे । कुर्वन्त्यहैतुकीं भक्तिमित्थम्भूतगुणो हरिः ॥ ११० ॥ हरेर्गुणाक्षिप्तमतिर्भगवान् बादरायणिः । अध्यगान् महदाख्यानं नित्यं विष्णुजनप्रियः ॥ १११ ॥ The sages, though freed from the knot of egoic identity, and though delighting in the Self alone, engage in causeless devo- tion to Śrī Krsna, the majestic player ( Urukrama ). Such are the entrancing qualities of Śrī Hari (Kṛṣṇa). His consciousness cap- tivated by Lord Hari’s qualities, Sukadeva, the powerful son of Vyasadeva and ever-beloved of the Lord’s devotees, underwent the study of this great book, Srimad Bhagavatam (SB 1.7.10-11 ) 3 भक्तियोगेन प्रेम्णा- अस्त्वेवमङ्ग भगवान् भजतां मुकुन्दो । मुक्तिं ददाति कर्हिचित् स्म न भक्तियोगम् ॥ ११२ ॥ ( भा० ५। ६ । १८) इत्यत्र प्रसिद्धेः । The phrase bhakti- yogena (through the yoga of unalloyed devo- tion) [in SB 1.7.4] means “through transcendental love of God,” because it is well established in the following statement [that the 2 sa vainivrtti-niratah sarvatropeksako munih kasya va bṛhatim etām ātmārāmaḥ samabhyasat " ātmārāmāś ca munayo nirgrantha apy urukrame kurvanty ahoitukin bhaktim ittham-bhūta-guno hariḥ harer gunakṣipta-matir bhagavän bädarāyaṇiḥ adhyagan mahad akhyanam nityam vişnu-jana-priyah 219 III Prameya compound bhakti-yoga means prema]: “My dear King, the Sup- reme Person, Mukunda, sometimes grants liberation to those engaged in His worship, but He rarely grants bhakti-yoga, pure love for Him” (SB 5.6.18).* 30.3 प्रणिहिते समाहिते “समाधिनानुस्मर तद्विचेष्टितम् " ( भा० १।५ । १३) इति तं प्रति श्रीनार- दोपदेशात् । The word pranihite (fixed) means “established in supracognitive trance (samadhi).” This is corroborated by the fact that Narada Muni had previously instructed Vyasadeva, “You are to experi- ence the supramundane pastimes of Śrī Kṛṣṇa in the state of samadhi” (SB 1.5.13). पूर्णपदस्य मुक्तप्रग्रहया वृत्त्या- भगवानिति शब्दोऽयं तथा पुरुष इत्यपि । वर्तते निरुपाधिश्च वासुदेवेऽखिलात्मनि ॥ ११३ ॥ इति पाद्मोत्तरखण्डवचनावष्टम्भेन (२२६।६८) । The word purna (complete) when understood in its full, unre- stricted sense [indicates Svayam Bhagavan, Śrī Kṛṣṇa], since this conclusion is validated by the following statement of Padma Purāṇa: “The words bhagavan and puruşa, when free from lim- iting modifiers (upadhis), refer to Śrī Vasudeva [Kṛṣṇa], the Supreme Self of all” (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 226.68). तथा ( भा० २।३।९-१० ) - 4 The same conclusion is drawn from the following two verses: astv evam anga bhagavan bhajatām mukundo muktim dadāti karhicit sma na bhakti-yogam 5 samādhinānusmara tad-vicestitam 6 bhagavan iti sabdo’yam tatha puruşa ity api vartate nirupadhiś ca vasudeve ‘khilatmani 220 30 Ultimate Reality Disclosed to Śrīla Vyasadeva in Unmediated Gnosis कामकामो यजेत् सोममकामः पुरुषं परम् ॥ ११४ ॥ अकामः सर्वकामी वा मोक्षकाम उदारधीः । तीव्रेण भक्तियोगेन यजेत पुरुषं परम् ॥ ११५ ।। One who seeks gratification of desire should worship the pre- siding deity of the moon, whereas one who is without material desire should worship the Supreme Person (param puruşam). A person of discriminating insight, whether desireless, full of desire, or desiring liberation, should worship the Supreme Person (param puruşam) with fervent devotion. (SB 2.3.9-10)” इत्यस्य वाक्यद्वयस्य पूर्ववाक्ये “पुरुषं परमात्मानं प्रकृत्येकोपाधिम्” उत्तरवाक्ये “पुरुषं पूर्णं निरुपाधिम्” इति टीकानुसारेण च पूर्णः पुरुषोऽत्र स्वयं भगवानेव उच्यते ॥ In his commentary, Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī states that the word puruşa in the first of these two verses indicates Paramātmā, the Supreme Self immanent within all beings and the cosmos, whose upadhi (apparently limiting qualification) is primordial nature (prakṛti). The same word in the second verse, however, indicates the Complete Person (Purna Purusa), who is free from all upadhis. Thus, according to śrīdhara Svami, the phrase purṇa-puruṣaḥ [in SB 1.7.4, quoted in Anuccheda 30.1] refers specifically to the original Complete Person (Svayam Bhagavan). Commentary THIS SECTION, dealing with the samadhi of Vyasa, exactly paral- lels the previous anuccheda. Whereas the previous section was concerning the determination of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayo- jana from the perspective of the transphenomenal experience of the original speaker of Srimad Bhagavatam, this section deals with the same determination but from the supracognitive experience of the author. What the two experiences share in common is that they both involved direct knowing from a state of higher cognitive “kama-kāmo yajet somam akamaḥ puruşam param akāmaḥ sarva-kāmo vā mokṣa-kama udara-dhiḥ tivrena bhakti-yogena yajeta puruşaṁ param 221 III Prameya awareness. Even though the section dealing with Sri Suka is cov- ered in just one verse and one anuccheda, whereas the section on Vyasa covers five verses in twenty anucchedas, the two experiences are essentially of the same value and confirm the exact same truth. By presenting the experience of both the speaker and author of Śrimad Bhagavatam, Jiva Gosvāmi offers a full circle view of both the essential truths of Srimad Bhagavatam and the precise mode in which they are to be known. This also demonstrates that the experience of the author is verifiable, and this is what affirms the Bhagavatam as the pramaņa in the matter of the subjective Real- ity whose nature is transphenomenal and inconceivable, alaukika- acintya-svabhava-vastu, as referred to in Anuccheda 9. By employing the adjective “subjective” here as a qualifier of Reality, it should not be taken to mean that Reality itself is sub- jective, in the sense of that which is merely arbitrary or mentally perceived to be the case, because how could it then be determined as real? Rather, the adjective implies that Reality is the supreme Subject, purely of the nature of consciousness. In addition, it is subjectivity itself, or the source condition that is inclusive of, and makes possible, the powers of cognition, will, affect, experience, and action. “Subjective” further implies that the Supreme Reality is not objective, because it can never be reduced to an object of percep- tion or thought (a percept or a precept). Consequently, it is beyond the conventional range of subjectivity of the human mind. It is, however, knowable through pure subjectivity, through the higher cognitive mode of knowing made possible only through its own self- revelation, as seen in the case of Sri Suka and Śrīla Vyasadeva. Jiva Gosvāmī introduces this section by saying that the essen- tial message of Śrimad Bhagavatam is defined again in precisely the same terms, this time by examining the supracognitive trance of Śrīla Vyasadeva. This again refers to the determination of samba- ndha, abhidheya, and prayojana. So what was known as well as the transperceptual means by which it was known, were in perfect correspondence in the case of Sri Suka and Śrīla Vyāsa. Jiva Gosvāmi further states that the Ultimate Truth that Śrīmad Bhāgavatam intends to elucidate was directly experienced by 222 30 Ultimate Reality Disclosed to Śrīla Vyasadeva in Unmediated Gnosis Vyasadeva in this state of samadhi. This again confirms that Śrīmad Bhāgavatam was self-revealed to Śrīla Vyasa in the state of pure consciousness, prior to His compilation of the text. To fathom the meaning of a book as profound as Śrīmad Bhagavatam, it is crucial to understand the author’s experience and His internal faith struc- ture, meaning the vision of life in which He is grounded. These two factors guide His writing, and, as in this case, if the subsequent speaker of the book shares the author’s faith and experience, then the author’s ideas will be accurately conveyed. To understand the mind or heart of Śrīla Vyasadeva, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī analyzes Vyasa’s trance, which is the source of Srimad Bhāgavatam and reveals its essential idea. With this analysis accom- plished, Jiva makes it the basis for his explanation of the whole Bhāgavatam. He therefore used twenty anucchedas of the Tattva Sandarbha (30-49) just to explore the inner purpose of Śrīla Vyasa- deva’s heart and to show how Sukadeva Gosvāmi’s heart perfectly reflects it. In the previous anuccheda, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi examined Suka- deva’s heart even before beginning to analyze that of Śrīla Vya- sadeva. Jīva did this to invoke the blessings of Śrī Śuka, from whom even Śrīla Vyasadeva was eager to hear the Bhagavatam. The description of Sukadeva in the previous anuccheda, moreover, was based on a single verse Sūta Gosvāmī spoke in glorification of his guru. By contrast, Vyasadeva’s trance is described in five verses. It was thus also more convenient for Jiva Gosvāmī to discuss the state of consciousness of Sukadeva before that of Vyasadeva. In doing so, he follows the “principle of the needle and the kettle” (sūcī-kaṭāha- nyaya) which means that when faced with a complex undertaking, one should execute the smaller tasks first. In SB 1.7.4 (quoted in Anuccheda 30.1), the term bhakti-yogena means “by prema (pure love of God),” because only in the state of pure love of God can one see the original Complete Person along with His potencies. That bhakti-yogena means “by premat

• The basis of this principle is that a task that takes less time to complete is taken up first to get it out of the way. A metal worker who is given the job to make a kettle and a needle works on the needle first. 223 III Prameya is confirmed by the word amala, meaning “pure,” referring to the condition of Śrila Vyasadeva’s heart. So in this verse, there is clear reference to Vyasa’s unmediated experience of prema as prayojana, or the ultimate completion, because prema alone is coextensive with the self-disclosure of Bhagavän. According to Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmi, in Bhakti-rasămṛta-sindhu there are three varieties of bhakti: “Bhakti is said to be of three types - sadhana, bhava, and prema” (sa bhaktiḥ sadhanam bhavaḥ premă ceti tridhodita, BRS 1.2.1). One who attains prema-bhakti real- izes Krsna both as immanence and as transcendence, and this real- ization vanquishes both his ignorance about the self and his mate- rial miseries. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmi further defines prema-bhakti as follows: “[Prema-bhakti] is of the nature of an altogether unique quality of concentrated bliss and it attracts Śrī Kṛṣṇa” (sandrānanda- viseṣātmā śri-kṛṣṇākarṣiņi ca sa, BRS 1.1.17). Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi concludes, therefore, that it was by the influ- ence of prema-bhakti alone that Śrila Vyasa, while in the state of supracognitive trance, was enabled to directly apperceive bhagavat- tattva along with maya-tattva, jiva-tattva, and bhakti-tattva. In other words, prema-bhakti is the self-manifested liberated condi- tion in which the self-disclosure of Bhagavan becomes possible. In that self-illuminated state of being, He saw the original Com- plete Person, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, along with His extrinsic, intermediary, and intrinsic potencies. As in the case of Śrī Suka, this was direct revelation and hence determination of the subject to be realized (sambandhi-tattva), Bhagavan, who is inclusive of a multitude of potencies. Primordial nature is a manifestation of Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s extrinsic potency, and the living beings constitute His interme- diary potency. The significance of the classification of living beings as intermediary (lit., “situated on the dividing line,” taṭastha), is that consciousness in every arising moment is capable of being drawn toward, attuned to, or identified with, either the extrinsic or the intrinsic potency. In its pure state, the self is consciousness alone, prior to any conditional subject-object divide and completely free from the influence of the extrinsic potency. When, however, consciousness 224 30 Ultimate Reality Disclosed to Śrila Vyasadeva in Unmediated Gnosis becomes identified with maya’s potency, there is non-recognition of original nature and assumption of phenomenal empiric identity. This superimposition of conditional identity upon the self compels it to suffer the repetition of birth and death, an unnatural non- integral disease-like condition for the living being. This state has no beginning. Vyasadeva witnessed in His trance the solution to this predicament - bhakti-yoga, or the devotional turning, or attuning, of consciousness to Śrī Adhokṣaja, in all-dimensional service and worship, beginning with hearing about Him. This is a reference to Vyasa’s direct apperception of bhakti as the means (abhidheya- tattva). Since most of human society is unaware of this solution, Vyasadeva composed Srimad Bhagavatam to make it available. In contrast to its usage in SB 1.7.4, the term bhakti-yoga men- tioned in SB 1.7.6 refers rather to sadhana-bhakti, or devotion in the stage of regulated practice, because this is the stage that is rele- vant to bhakti as the means (abhidheya). This stage is character- ized by strict adherence to devotional theory and praxis. In prema- bhakti, or the completion stage of bhakti-yoga, because the self is free of all material identification, one surely and steadily engages in devotional service with natural affection. The term “natural affection” here should not be misinterpreted as meaning related to, or arising out of, phenomenal or conditional nature. Rather, it implies the existence of transcendental affect, as a manifestation of the potency of bliss, which is the natural condition of consciousness itself, when imbued with the intrinsic potency. The devotee who has reached this stage of realization generally still enacts the sadhana principles, not as a means to an end, but because they are found to accord with his fully awakened internal In psychology, the term apperception refers to the general process or a particular act of mental assimilation of new experience into the totality of one’s past experience. In philosophy, especially in terms of Immanuel Kant’s transcendental apperception, it refers to the perception of an object as involving the consciousness of the pure self as the necessary condition of experience and the ultimate foundation of the unity of experience. In this sense, it signifies the mind’s perception of itself as the subject of its own states, unifying past and present experiences. This amounts to self-consciousness, or perception that reflects back upon itself. 225III Prameya state of being. Śrīla Vyasadeva composed the Satvata-samhita, Śrīmad Bhagavatam, to explain the principles of bhakti-yoga in the sadhana and prema phases, along with the intermediate phase of bhava-bhakti, “devotion in the stage of awakening to transcendental feeling-awareness” (BRS 1.2.2). As in the case of SB 1.7.4, bhakti in the next verse (SB 1.7.7) means prema-bhakti, because, as the verse states, only at that stage is one completely free from lamentation, delusion, and fear. The verb utpadyate (lit., “to fly up,” “jump up,” or “arise”) is usually trans- lated as “is generated,” but here it means “becomes manifest,” because prema-bhakti, being an eternal aspect of the intrinsic potency of Bhagavan, is self-existing and hence cannot be gener- ated; rather, it appears within the heart of an advancing devotee by the blessings of Bhagavan and His pure devotee. The mention here of bhakti as prema is again a reference to prayojana-tattva. In clarification of the subject to be realized (sambandhi-tattva), Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi goes on to explain that although there are vari- ous puruşăvatāras of Bhagavan who are involved, as Immanent Self, in cosmic creation, maintenance, and dissolution, the term puru- şam purnam in SB 1.7.4 specifically indicates the original Complete Person, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Every word in a language has its own potency by which it conveys meaning. Words can take on varied mean- ings depending on whether they exhibit their primary or secondary potencies. Each word has one primary meaning and may have sev- eral secondary meanings. When a word is not restricted by its con- text, one should accept its primary meaning. With the words puru- şam pūrṇam in SB 1.7.4, the unrestricted meaning (mukhya-vṛtti) of the word purna (lit., “complete” or “perfect”) indicates Śrī Kṛṣṇa, who alone is free of all limitations. Śrī Visņu’s puruṣāvatāras are also supreme and perfect, but they appear limited in some ways, and these limitations distinguish them from the Pūrṇa Purușa. This distinction is implied in the Bhāgavatam statement, “All of the above-mentioned avataras [listed in the preceding verses] are either plenary portions or portions of 10 The term satvata has the same meaning as Bhagavata. Samhita means a compilation. 226 30 Ultimate Reality Disclosed to Śrīla Vyasadeva in Unmediated Gnosis the plenary portions of Bhagavan, but Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the original Sup- reme Person” (ete camsa-kalaḥ pumsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavan svayam, SB 1.3.28). In BRS 2.1.43, Śrīla Rupa Gosvāmi explains that Śrī Kṛṣṇa is inher- ently self-endowed with four extraordinary qualities that none of His expansions possess, namely, His astonishing divine play, the unsurpassed love inhering in His dear associates, His enchanting flute-playing, and His unique all-exceeding beauty. This explanation of the word purna is further supported by the use of the phrase kṛṣṇe parama-püruşe in SB 1.7.7. Here, parama- părușe is in apposition to the name Kṛṣṇa, clearly indicating equiv- alence. Commenting on the use of a virtually identical term - puruşam param - in the Second Canto of the Bhagavatam (SB 2.3.10), Śrīdhara Svāmī says that it refers to the Purna Purușa, or the Complete Person. Etymologically, puruşa means “one who lies down in the city,” the city here being a metaphor for the body. Thus, the word purusa indicates Paramätmā, or the Immanent Self, present as interior to every embodied form and interior to consciousness itself. Param- ätma is the regulator of the material energy, but He is never influ- enced by it. Śrī Kṛṣṇa, on the other hand, is never directly involved with material nature at all, though He controls it through His Puruşa expansions.“1 Śrīdhara Svāmi uses the word nirupadhi (free from all limiting adjuncts) in reference to Kṛṣṇa, who is not the mere Puruşa but the Pūrṇa Purușa. Unlike Paramātmā, who is seemingly limited by the upadhi of involvement with the material energy, Kṛṣṇa is free from all upadhis. The term upadhi is difficult to render into English. It is variously translated as “conditioning,” “identification,” “limita- tion or limiting adjunct,” “false designation,” or “modifier.” In its strict philosophical usage, it means “limiting adjunct,” because an upadhi’s effect is to apparently modify the natural state of an object by its proximity or association, though in fact it has no integral or natural relationship with the object. This is explained in great detail in Paramatma Sandarbha. 227 III Prameya For example, a naturally colorless crystal will appear reddish when held before a red flower. The reddish tinge is not part of the crystal’s nature; rather, because the crystal is near the red flower, the flower “conditions” the crystal to appear reddish. In this way, the crystal’s redness is an upadhi, or limiting adjunct, superimposed by the flower. Similarly, the material body is an upadhi superim- posed on the ātmā. The ātmā is like a crystal in that it is essentially neutral and hence easily influenced, or “colored,” by its association with the external energy in the form of the body. Thus, the atma’s proximity to the material body causes it to become mired in mate- rial existence and conditioned by the gunas of primordial nature. In reality, both the ātmā and Paramātmā are nirupadhi, without any limiting adjuncts, just like Bhagavan. One might conclude that this nirupadhi condition of the ātmā implies its absolute identity with the unqualified Absolute, or Brah- man. This conclusion is negated by the word yajeta (should wor- ship) in the statement yajeta puruşam param, “One should worship the Supreme Person” (SB 2.3.10). The root yaj means “to worship a deity.” It would be absurd to advise someone to worship a deity who is an impersonal entity devoid of attributes. Therefore, the mean- ing of puruşam purnam is clear without resorting to the impersonal conception of the Supreme to try to explain it. When Śrīdhara Svāmī says that Paramātmā, the Purușa, has pri- mordial nature as His upadhi, one should not take this statement to mean that primordial nature conditions Paramätmä as it does the jiva. The intended meaning is that although He regulates pri- mordial nature without being influenced by or coming in contact with it, His very involvement with primordial nature seems to be an upadhi. He does not manifest the full transcendental majesty of His intrinsic being because it is not required for the mere play of cosmic creation. Paramātmā is always transcendental to primor- dial nature, even though immanent within it, just as a head of state always remains a free person, even when he or she visits the state prison. In his comment on SB 2.3.10, Śrīdhara Svāmī explains that the word puruşa means the Supreme Person, Bhagavan, and not 228 30 Ultimate Reality Disclosed to Śrīla Vyasadeva in Unmediated Gnosis Paramātmā (puruşaṁ pūrṇam nirupadhim), because that Supreme Person is worshiped by highly self-realized sages desiring to enter the spiritual abode beyond the jurisdiction of even Paramātmā. Thus, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi’s analysis of the significance of the term puruşam purnam, the Complete Person, as well as Śrīdhara Svämi’s comments on a parallel term, make it perfectly evident that the sambandhi-tattva (the subject to be realized) self-disclosed to Śrīla Vyasa was Svayam Bhagavan, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and not Paramātmā. The word adhoksaja in SB 1.7.6 also refers to Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Etymolog- ically this word means “one who is beyond sense perception,” but it is also a name of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, received after killing the demoness Pūtanā. Hari-vaṁśa Purana confirms this: When baby Kṛṣṇa was sleeping in a cradle under the axle of a cart, a demoness came as the flying witch called Putana to kill Him. She offered her poisoned breasts to baby Krsna, but Krsna killed her. The residents of Vraja saw Pütana, who was gigantic, powerful, and terrible to look at, lying dead in the forest. But Krsna was found per- fectly safe, and the people therefore called Him Adhokṣaja, “He who has been awarded new life (lit., ‘another birth’) from under a cart’s axle.” (Hari-vamsa Purana, Vişņu-parva 101.30-32)12 The verses describing Vedavyasa’s trance (SB 1.7.4-7) briefly present the quintessence of Srimad Bhagavatam, and with it the main elements of Gaudiya Vaisnava theology. As in the case of Śrī Suka’s transformation in pure consciousness, Śrīla Vyasa’s samādhi clearly contains the radical self-disclosure of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana from the transempiric dimension of knowing. There- fore, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will analyze these verses in greater detail in the upcoming anucchedas. 12 adho’nena sayanena Sakaṭantara-căriņā rākṣasi nihatā raudra sakuni-veşa-dhāriņī pūtana-nama ghorā sā mahā-kāyā mahā-balā vişădigdham stanam raudram prayacchanti janardane dadṛśur nihatām tatra räkṣasi vana-gocaraḥ punar jato’yam ity ähur uktas tasmäd adhokṣajah 229 Anuccheda 31 The Pūrṇa Puruşa Is the All-Inclusive, All-Transcending Reality 31.1 ३१ । “पूर्वम्” इति पाठे “पूर्वमेवाहमिहासम्” इति “तत्पुरुषस्य पुरुषत्वम्” इति श्रौत निर्व चनविशेषपुरस्कारेण च स एवोच्यते । तमपश्यत् श्रीवेदव्यास इति स्वरूपशक्तिमन्तमेवे- त्येतत् स्वयमेव लब्धम् । “पूर्णं चन्द्रमपश्यद्” इत्युक्ते “कान्तिमन्तमपश्यद्” इति लभ्यते । IN A VARIANT READING [of SB 1.7.4 quoted above], we find the word purvam (primeval) in place of purnam (complete). Yet, even in this instance, it is the exact same reality [the original Complete Person] that is spoken of, as corroborated by the state- ments of Vedic Śruti: “[Śrī Bhagavan said,] I existed here prior (purvam) to everything else,” and “That [i.e., existence prior to everything else] is the essential characteristic of the Supreme Being [lit., the ‘Supreme-Beingness’ (puruşatva) of the Supreme Being (puruşa)].“2 When it is said that Śrī Vyasa saw the original Complete Person, it should be self-evident that he saw Him as being self- endowed with His own intrinsic potency (svarupa-śakti), just as when it is said that a person sees the full moon, the implication is that he sees it accompanied by its effulgence. 2 purvam evaham ihăsam tat-purusasya puruşatvam Taittiriya Aranyaka 1.23.4 230 31 The Purna Purusa Is the All Inclusive, All-Transcending Reality 31.2 अत एव (भा० ११७ २३ ) - Thus, it is said: त्वमाद्यः पुरुषः साक्षादीश्वरः प्रकृतेः परः । मायां व्युदस्य चिच्छक्त्या कैवल्ये स्थित आत्मनि ॥ ११६ ॥ इत्युक्तम् | You are directly the original Person, the controller, witness, and regulator of everything, beyond the material energy. By dint of Your conscious potency (cit-śakti), You have cast away the effects of the material energy and are always situated in Your own Self, the state of absolute transcendence (kaivalya). (SB 1.7.23)3 अत एव “मायां च तदपाश्रयाम्” इत्यनेन तस्मिनप अपकृष्ट आश्रयो यस्याः । निलीय स्थि- तत्वादिति मायाया न तत्स्वरूपभूतत्वमित्यपि लभ्यते । वक्ष्यते च “माया परैत्यभिमुखे च विलज्जमाना” (भा०२।७।४७ ) इति । Therefore, we understand the phrase, “He also saw Bhagavān’s extrinsic potency, which was apart from and yet supported by Him” [in sB1.7.4] ^ to mean that Māyā is sheltered by the Lord from a position of subordination, remaining concealed from His sight; thus she does not constitute His svarupa, or essential nature. As said later on, “Maya, feeling ashamed to stand before the Lord, flees from His direct presence” (SB 2.7.47). 31.3 स्वरूपशक्तिरियमत्रैव व्यक्तीभविष्यति " अनर्थोपशमं साक्षाद भक्तियोगमधोक्षजे” ( भा० १।७।६) इत्यनेन “आत्मारामाश्च” (भा० १।७।१०) इत्यनेन च । पूर्वत्र हि भक्तियोगप्रभावः खल्वसौ मायाभिभावकतया स्वरूपशक्तिवृत्तित्वेनैव गम्यते । परत्र च ते गुणा ब्रह्मान- न्दस्याप्युपरिचरतया स्वरूपशक्तेः परमवृत्तितामेवार्हन्तीति । मायाधिष्ठातृपुरुषस्तु तदंश- त्वेन ब्रह्म च तदीयनिर्विशेषाविर्भावत्वेन तदन्तर्भावविवक्षया पृथङ् नोक्ते इति ज्ञेयम् । अतोऽत्र पूर्ववदेव सम्बन्धितत्त्वं निर्धारितम् ॥ tvam adyaḥ puruşaḥ säkşad isvarah prakṛteḥ parah mayam vyudasya cic-chaktyä kaivalye sthita ätmani mayam ca tad-apäśrayam 231 III Prameya We shall explain Bhagavan’s svarupa-sakti [in Anucchedas 48-49] when we discuss the two verses beginning with anarthopaśamam säkṣād bhakti-yogam adhokṣaje and ātmārāmaś ca [SB 1.7.6 and 1.7.10, respectively]. From the statement in the first of these two verses, that the yoga of unalloyed devotion can subdue the mate- rial energy (māyā), we can infer that the power of pure devotion is specifically a function of Bhagavan’s intrinsic potency. The second verse implies that the qualities of Śrī Hari constitute the svarupa-sakti’s highest function, superior even to the bliss of Brahman. It is to be noted that in the verse under consideration (SB 1.7.4), there is no separate mention of Paramātmā, Bhagavan’s ple- nary portion who oversees mäyä, or of Brahman, Bhagavan’s nondifferentiated aspect. The reason for this omission is that Paramātmā and Brahman were seen to exist within the origi- nal Complete Person (Purna Puruşa) and not separately, a fact we will thoroughly demonstrate later, in the second and third Sandarbhas. Thus here, as before, the sambandhi-tattva, or the essential topic of discussion in Śrimad Bhagavatam, has been defined. Commentary THIS ANUCCHEDA INVOLVES a further specification of the subject (sambandhi-tattva), which is signified in its essentiality, as the Com- plete Person, in the second line of SB 1.7.4. Some editions of Śrīmad Bhagavatam offer an alternate reading of this verse, with the word purvam (prior existence) appearing in place of purņam; this substi- tution does not alter the import of the verse. The word puruşa can also mean, “He who existed prior to the creation” (pura āsīt iti puru- şah). This phrase refers to the Supreme Self as the source of every- thing. And this Supreme Self is Śrī Kṛṣṇa, as He Himself confirms in Bhagavad Gita: “I am the source of everything” (aham sarvasya prabhavaḥ, GITA 10.8). This prior existence as the source is the essential characteris- tic of the Purușa. Since the adjective purvam conveys the idea of 232 31 The Purna Puruşa Is the All-Inclusive, All-Transcending Reality “existing prior to everything else,” the phrase purusaṁ purvam is equivalent to puruşaṁ pūrṇam, insofar as both indicate the original Supreme Person, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. This conclusion is also confirmed by the four seed-verses of the Bhagavatam (Catuḥ-sloki), which will be dis- cussed in Bhagavat Sandarbha (Anuccheda 96). It will also be shown there that these verses were spoken directly by Kṛṣṇa. In the state of unmediated awareness, Śrī Vyasa directly apper- ceived the original Complete Person self-endowed with (or inher- ently inclusive of) His own potencies, just as one always sees the full moon along with its effulgent light. The energies of Bhagavan are always present along with Him, inasmuch as the attributes of a substance are always present along with that substance. In Vişnu Purana, the primary attributes of Bhagavan, the Supreme Person, are enumerated: The word bhagavan indicates that in which there is intrinsic inher- ence, to an unlimited extent, of consciousness, power, strength, opulence, prowess, and valor - with no trace of any portion to be discarded and completely devoid of the material gunas and their effects. (VP 6.5.79)5 The Supreme Person has variegated potencies, of which three are primary. As Visnu Purana states, “The potencies of transcen- dental bliss (hladini), eternal being (sandhini), and consciousness (samvit) inhere only in You [Bhagavan], who are the shelter of every- thing” (hladini sandhini samvit tvayy ekä sarva-saṁśraye, VP 1.12.69). Hladini is the potency of Bhagavan that makes possible the expe- rience of bliss, sandhini is His potency of being and underlying sup- port, and samvit is His potency of consciousness and enlightened cognitive knowing. These three potencies constitute Bhagavan’s svarupa (essential or intrinsic nature). Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will give a detailed explanation of these potencies in Bhagavat Sandarbha. In the state of samadhi, Śrīla Vyasadeva witnessed the Complete Person, Bhagavan, self-endowed with these potencies. In the spir- itual sky, these potencies are inherent in Bhagavan’s own person, 5 jnana-sakti-balaiśvarya-virya-tejämsy aseṣataḥ bhagavac-chabda-vacyäni vina heyair gunädibhiḥ 233 III Prameya but they also have distinct personal forms as His associates. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will establish (in Anuccheda 47) that the form of Bhaga- vän witnessed by Śrila Vyasadeva was Kṛṣṇa in Vṛndāvana, where Bhagavan is always present with His most intimate devotees. Śrī- matī Rādhikā is Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s personified potency of transcendental bliss, and with Her, Śrī Kṛṣṇa performs His most intimate pastimes. It should be understood that in his trance, Śrila Vyasa also saw Śrīmati Radhika along with Her associates, for Bhagavan is never separated from His intrinsic potencies. Besides these three aspects of Bhagavan’s intrinsic potency, Vyasa also saw His extrinsic potency (maya) and His intermediary potency (the jivas). Māyā is not part of the Lord’s svarupa. She is personally present in His entourage, but she chooses to remain out of His sight. This implies that she can never influence Bhagavan or His intrinsic potencies. Generally, a female influences a male by appearing before him, but Mayadevi, the feminine extrinsic energy of the Supreme, cannot influence the Lord. Therefore it is said that she remains out of His view. As it is said, “Maya, feeling ashamed to stand before Bhagavan, flees from His direct presence” (maya paraity abhimukhe ca vilajjamānā, SB 2.7.47). Śrila Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa compares Mäyä to a maidservant who discharges her duties outside the king’s inner quarters. She does not have the same privileges as his queens, who are comparable to the intrinsic potencies of Bhagavan, since they can directly associate with their master at all times. Maya, Bhagavan’s extrinsic energy, is inferior to both His svarupa-sakti and His intermediary energy, the jivas. Still, she can subdue the jivas. The jiva’s vulnerability to illusion is described in the Bhāgavatam: Bewildered by this extrinsic potency, the individual self, although transcendental to the three gunas of primordial nature, thinks of itself as consisting of the three gunas and thus undergoes the misery resulting from this identification. (SB 1.7.5) ⚫yaya sammohito jiva atmānam tri-gunātmakam paro’pi manute’nartham tat-kṛtam cabhipadyate 234 31 The Purna Puruşa Is the All-Inclusive, All-Transcending Reality Although both the individual ātmā and Paramatma are conscious by nature and dwell in the same material body, only the jiva is bewil- dered by Maya and suffers material miseries. Maya cannot affect Bhagavan because He is her master; by His inconceivable power, He remains forever beyond her influence. In GĪTĀ 7.5, Śrī Kṛṣṇa informs Arjuna that His intermediary potency, the jiva, is transcendental to His differentiated, mate- rial potency, maya. One may then ask, how does the superior jiva come under the control of the inferior nature, maya? The answer is twofold: because the jiva is infinitesimal, and also because Maya’ can transcend logic in her actions. In the Third Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, Maitreya Muni responds to a question from Vidura as follows: The extrinsic potency of Bhagavan acts contrary to logic [i.e., her behavior cannot be understood simply through logic]; otherwise, how is it possible that the living entity, who is the ruler of [i.e., supe- rior to] prakṛti, being conscious and liberated, becomes bound and miserable? (SB 3.7.9) Commenting on this verse, Śrīla Viśvanatha Cakravarti Thakura provides an analogy: Although the sun is powerfully effulgent, still a cloud, generated from the sun’s own potency, can cover the sun from the vision of a person on earth. Similarly, although the jiva is by nature transcendental to Mäyä, she still has the power to cover his vision of Bhagavan. Another important point made in this section is that in the description of Vyasa’s samadhi, there is no explicit mention either of Paramātmā or of Brahman. Paramātmā is the expansion of Bha- gavan who presides over the affairs of the material energy. In GĪTĀ 9.10, Śrī Kṛṣṇa says, “This primordial nature is working under “Throughout the Sandarbhas, the word maya is spelled using lower case and italics when referring to maya as the unconscious extrinsic potency. It is capitalized and not in italics when referring to the same as a conscious personified entity, overseeing such power. In general cases, when this distinction is not clearly discernible from the sentence meaning, the former usage has been applied. seyam bhagavato maya yan nayena virudhyate isvarasya vimuktasya kärpanyam uta bandhanam 235III Prameya My direction, bringing forth all moving and non-moving beings” (mayadhyakṣena prakṛtiḥ suyate sa-caracaram). Here, the pronoun “My” means “My expansion as Paramātmā,” since it is through His Paramātmā feature that Śrī Kṛṣṇa regulates the workings of the material world. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi points out that since Paramātmā expands from Kṛṣṇa and is entirely enveloped by Him, Paramātmā was seen by Vyasa to exist within the original Complete Person. Hence, there was no need to mention Paramātmā separately. The same holds true for Brahman, which is nothing but the effulgence emanating from Bhagavan’s transcendental body. This will be elaborated in Paramatma Sandarbha (Anucchedas 1-2) and Bhagavat Sandarbha (Anucchedas 1-4), respectively. Like Param- ätmä, Brahman has no existence independent of Bhagavan. Kṛṣṇa confirms this in GĪTĀ 14.27: “I am the basis of unqualified Brahman” (brahmano hi pratiṣṭhāham). According to the Nirukti dictionary, “pratiṣṭha means ‘shelter’ or ‘basis” (pratisthiyate asmin iti prati- stha). Just as the sun globe is the basis of sunshine, so Kṛṣṇa is the basis of the Brahman effulgence. From this analysis of Vedavyasa’s trance, it is clear that the pri- mary subject (sambandhi-tattva) of Srimad Bhagavatam is Svayam Bhagavan, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and that the means for attaining Him is bhakti- yoga. Brahman and Paramātmā, being holarchically embedded manifestations of Bhagavan, cannot be separated from Him, but these two features are not the integral Whole, self-disclosed to Vyasadeva in the state of trance, and so they cannot be the central subjects of His greatest work, Śrimad Bhagavatam. We should thus conclude that one who realizes Bhagavan, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, automatically realizes Brahman and Paramātmā, in the same way that one who acquires a million dollars automatically possesses all smaller sums. In the next section, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi discusses how the living entity comes to be bound up by māyā. 236 Anuccheda 32 The Individual Self Is Distinct, Conscious, and Subject to Self-Ignorance 32.1 ३२ । अथ प्राक्प्रतिपादितस्यैवाभिधेयस्य प्रयोजनस्य च स्थापकं जीवस्य स्वरूपत एव परमेश्वराद् वैलक्षण्यमपश्यदित्याह ययेति । यया - मायया सम्मोहितो जीवः स्वयं चिद्रू- पत्वेन त्रिगुणात्मकाज् जडात् परोऽप्यात्मानं त्रिगुणात्मकं जडं देहादिसङ्घातं मनुते । तन्म- ननकृतमनर्थं संसारव्यसनं चाभिपद्यते । THE METHOD (ABHIDHEYA ) [ that facilitates ultimate attain- ment] and the stage of completion to be attained (prayojana), as we have defined them, are based on the essential distinction between the Supreme Self and the individual self. That Śrī Vyāsa saw this distinction is demonstrated by the verse beginning yaya [SB 1.7.5]. Although the living being is by nature pure conscious- ness (cid-rūpa), transcendental to the three inert material gunas, when deluded by maya, he considers himself as consisting of those three gunas, or in other words, as a conglomeration of the inert material body, [mind], and so on, which are products of the three gunas. This delusion causes the living being to suffer unwanted consequences, namely, the miseries of repeated birth and death. 32.2 तदेवं जीवस्य चिद्रूपत्वेऽपि “यया सम्मोहितः” इति “मनुते” इति च स्वरूपभूतज्ञानशा- लित्वं व्यनक्ति प्रकाशैकरूपस्य तेजसः स्वपरप्रकाशनशक्तिवत् “अज्ञानेनावृतं ज्ञानं तेन 237 III Prameya मुह्यन्ति जन्तवः " (गीता ५।१५) इति श्रीगीताभ्यः । तदेवम् “उपाधेरेव जीवत्वं तन्नाशस्यैव मोक्षत्वम्” इति मतान्तरं परिहृतवान् । अत्र " यया सम्मोहितः” इत्यनेन तस्या एव तत्र कर्तृत्वं भगवतस्तत्रोदासीनत्वं मतम् । Furthermore, although the living being consists purely of con- sciousness (cid-rupa), it is also inherently conscious (svarupa- bhūta-jñāna-śāli), as implied [in SB 1.7.5] by the words yaya sammohitaḥ (deluded by that [māyā]) and manute (he considers). That the living being is nothing other than consciousness, yet also inherently conscious, is comparable to light, which consists of nothing but illumination, yet also has the capacity to illumine itself and other objects. The living being’s inherent capacity to be conscious [of reality or illusion] is also confirmed by the fol- lowing words from GĪTĀ 5.15-16: “Living beings are bewildered, because their consciousness is covered by ignorance. [But for those whose ignorance has been destroyed by the direct appre- hension of the Self, their consciousness, like the sun, illuminates the Supreme Reality (Sri Bhagavan)].” It is precisely this inher- ent capacity of the living being to be conscious that refutes the contrary opinion that the jiva exists only as an upadhi of Brah- man and that liberation is simply the elimination of this upadhi. Here [in SB 1.7.5], the phrase yaya sammohitaḥ indicates that māyā alone is instrumental in deluding the living being; Bhagavan remains uninvolved. 32.3 वक्ष्यते च (भा० २।५।१३ ) - Later, Srimad Bhagavatam states: विलज्जमानया यस्य स्थातुमीक्षापथेऽमुया । विमोहिता विकत्थन्ते ममाहमिति दुर्धियः ॥ ११७ ॥ इति । 1ajñānenāvṛtaṁ jñānam tena muhyanti jantavah jñänena tu tad ajñānam yeşāṁ našitam ātmanaḥ teṣām adityavaj jñānam prakāśayati tat-param 238 32 The Individual Self Is Distinct, Conscious, and Subject to Self-Ignorance I offer obeisance to Śrī Bhagavan, before whom the external energy is ashamed to stand. Being bewildered by her, those devoid of insight boast of “I” and “Mine.” (SB 2.5.13)2 अत्र “विलज्जमानया” इत्यनेनेदमायाति तस्या जीवसम्म्होहनं कर्म श्रीभगवते न रोचत इति यद्यपि सा स्वयं जानाति । तथापि “भयं द्वितीयाभिनिवेशतः स्यादीशादपेतस्य " (भा० ११ १२ १३७) इति दिशा जीवानामनादिभगवदज्ञानमयवैमुख्यमसहमाना स्वरूपाव- रणमस्वरूपावेशं च करोति ॥ Here, we can infer from the phrase “being ashamed” (vilajjamā- naya) that although Mäyä knows that her work of bewildering the living beings does not please Śri Bhagavan, still she cannot tolerate their perversion of attention (vaimukhya) in the form of beginningless ignorance of Him. SB 11.2.37 illustrates this con- dition: “When the living beings assume a position of separate- ness from Bhagavan, they succumb to forgetfulness, misappre- hension, and fear arising out of identification with that which is secondary to Him [i.e., the external energy].”” As a consequence, Mäyä covers their real nature and entices them to identify with that which they are not (asvarupa). Commentary IN THIS ANUCCHEDA, Śrila Jīva Gosvāmi continues to specify the subject (sambandhi-tattva) so that the means and goal are thereby rendered transparent. As explained earlier (particularly in the com- mentary to Anuccheda 29), the truths of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana share an intrinsic connection, and as such the essential nature of the means and goal must be in full correspondence with that of the subject. That is why Jiva Gosvāmī begins this anuccheda by stating that “the abhidheya and prayojana, as we have defined them, are based on the essential distinction between the Supreme Self and the individual self.” Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi examines this dis- tinction at length beginning in this anuccheda and continuing right vilajjamanaya yasya sthätum ikṣa-pathe’muya vimohitä vikatthante mamăham iti durdhiyaḥ abhayam dvitiyabhiniveśataḥ syad 239 III Prameya through to Anuccheda 43. Thus, Anucchedas 31-43 can be taken as a subdivision of Vyasa’s samadhi dealing with the elaboration of sambandha. The truths of abhidheya and prayojana, which are in per- fect correspondence with the nature of the subject herein revealed, are dealt with in Anucchedas 44-48. The direct witnessing of the distinction between the Supreme Self and the individual self by Śrīla Vyasa was part of what made this revelation so complete. Metaphysically speaking, the vision of the jivas as conscious integrated parts of Bhagavan forms part of the elaboration of the subject. In other words, the jivas themselves are not the subject, but they are one of the conscious energies of the sub- ject. It is precisely this distinction that defines the aesthetic nature of the intrinsic relation between the individual self and the Sup- reme Self, pragmatically enacted as the abhidheya and perfectly real- ized to completion as prayojana. Since love of God is eternal, the Sup- reme Self and the individual self must be eternally distinct, because wherever there is service or love, some particular kind of distinc- tion must be admitted between the server and served or the lover and beloved. As specified earlier, the exact nature of this relation is one of inconceivable unity in diversity (acintya-bheda-abheda), which is the basis of theistic nonduality. According to the Advaitavādīs, this distinction of individual selves is admitted to have empirical reality only (vyavahārika-sattā). From the perspective of ontological reality (päramärthika-sattā), all such distinctions have no basis whatsoever, because from that dimension, Brahman alone exists. Radical monists (Advaitavādīs) insist that since Brahman and the living being are absolutely one and the same, there can be no distinction of identities in the reality of Brahman. They say that when Brahman contacts māyā, māyā acts as an upadhi, superimposing empirical selfhood on Brahman. When the upadhi is of the nature of the sättvika aspect of māyā, Brahman is then known as Iśvara (God), and when the upadhi is of the nature of rajas and tamas, then Brahman becomes the jivas. This state of existence is ultimately false (mithya), because Brah- man is the only reality. Iśvara and the jivas only appear to exist by 4 Pañcadast 1.16.17, Sankara-bhäşya 2.1.14 240 32 The Individual Self Is Distinct, Conscious, and Subject to Self-Ignorance the power of illusion. Apart from these appearances, arising from Brahman’s proximity to maya, neither Isvara nor the jivas exist. Concerning the jivas, featureless Brahman enters into delusion. and displays a masquerade of forms and personalities birth after birth- and all for no reason other than Brahman’s delimitation by māyā. And this same deluded Brahman will be redeemed when he simply gives up his false designations on the strength of acquired knowledge of Brahman. All this contradicts what was directly self-disclosed to Vyasa- deva in the state of enlightened perceptivity (i.e., samadhi). He saw that the jivas are intrinsically eternal spiritual entities, sepa- rate individuals in their own right. He further saw that Māyā over- comes only the jivas, not Brahman or Isvara, the Supreme Lord of Creation; not to speak of her overcoming Bhagavan, Vyasa saw that Māyā could not even bear to face Him. He also saw that God Him- self is not directly involved in deluding the jivas. In sum, Vyasadeva realized that Bhagavan, the jivas, and Maya are all eternal, and that the Lord supports the other two. In SB1.7.5, the words sammohitaḥ (becoming deluded) and manute (he thinks) are applied to the jiva, indicating that delusion and its effects - ignorance and misery - are not part of its origi- nal nature. These two words also indicate that although the jiva is essentially nothing other than consciousness, it is also a conscious knower. As a light bulb, which is nothing other than illumination, simultaneously illuminates itself and the objects in its vicinity, so the jiva is simultaneously conscious of itself and the objects that are presented to consciousness. In other words, cognitive aware- ness is an intrinsic aspect of its nature, not a temporarily acquired capacity, which is what the radical Advaitavada doctrine implies by positing that the jiva’s attributes are only apparently real (as is the jiva himself), and that to gain liberation, he has to intuit the knowledge of his oneness with Brahman. The theistic understanding of the jivas’ situation in this world, gleaned from analyzing Śrīla Vyasadeva’s trance, is that Māyā can- not tolerate the jivas’ perversion of root attention away from the The term “root attention” refers to the root of awareness, or the root of the →→ 241 III Prameya Supreme Lord, due to beginningless ignorance. She thus covers the knowledge of the jivas’ true ontological identity and binds them to empiric identification. Maya’s principal functions are to punish and rectify the jivas who have turned away from Bhagavan. Her motive is not to inflict suffering, but to encourage the ignorant jivas to seek rectification by inquiring into transcendental knowledge. Śri Kṛṣṇa therefore says in GITA 4.37 that transcendental knowledge burns all the bonds of karma in the same way that fire burns fuel, because once a person attains transcendental knowledge, Māyā need no longer restrain him. According to Śrila Jīva Gosvāmi, māyā’s conditioning of the jiva has no beginning; it is anadi. Although statements such as, “she cov- ers the real nature of the jiva” seemingly imply a beginning, in fact there is no beginning to the jiva’s bondage. Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms this: Primordial nature and the living beings should both be understood to be beginningless. Their transformations and the gunas of nature are phenomenal arisings out of primordial nature. (GITA 13.20) Commenting on this verse, both Viśvanatha Cakravarti Thakura and Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa confirm that the conditioning of the jiva is beginningless. Śrīla Viśvanatha Cakravarti Thakura states: “[Śri Bhagavan says] ‘Because both maya and the jiva are My poten- cies, they both are beginningless. Thus their conjunction is also without beginning.’ This is the sense of Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s words.” Here capacity to know-whether through bodily awareness, vital feeling, emotional sensitivity, cognitive perception, logical inference, intellectual determination, or immediate intuition. In the conditioned state, the self’s root attention is misdirected (vimukhya) away from its conscious Source, Bhagavan, becoming identified with and as the phenomenal self. When this occurs, the self’s subsidiary modes of knowing become involved with their corresponding objects, be they external phenomena or internal states. The solution to this dilemma involves the inverse process (sämukhya). Attention, whether it be bodily, vital, emotional, mental, or intellectual, should be traced back to its root, the inherent knowing capacity of the self, and that capacity should be redirected toward its conscious Source, Bhagavan. prakṛtim puruşam caiva viddhy anddi ubhav api vikārāmś ca guņāmś caiva viddhi prakṛti-sambhavan maya-jivayor api mac-chaktitvena anaditvät tayoḥ samsleşo’py anadir iti bhavaḥ. 242 32 The Individual Self Is Distinct, Conscious, and Subject to Self-Ignorance Viśvanatha is employing the nyaya principle that the qualities or potencies of anádi substances are also anadi. Naturally, a begin- ningless substance or entity cannot have a prior state of existence, for it could not be said to be beginningless. In this case, the sub- jects - primordial nature and the jivas - are understood as anadi, and thus their shared quality of apparent separation from Kṛṣṇa, is also anădi. In fact, in the beginning of his comment on the Gita verse, Viś- vanatha says, “In this verse, Śrī Kṛṣṇa is answering two questions- why or how did the conjunction of the jiva and mayä occur? And when did it occur?” He says that both of these are answered by the word anadi. In regard to the first question, anadi implies na vidyate ādi kāraṇam yayoḥ, “the conjunction of maya and the jiva is without prior cause” [and hence there is in fact no “why” as to how it occurred]. The answer to the second question - when? - is also anãdi: It has no beginning, and hence, it did not occur at any moment in time. Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa, commenting on this same verse, writes, “In this way, the conjunction between primordial nature and the living being, who have distinct natures and are both begin- ningless, relates to a period of time that is without beginning.“s He uses the adjectival compound anädi-kalikatva, “a period of time without beginning,” to qualify the phrase prakṛti-jivayoḥ samsargaḥ, the conjunction of the jiva with prakṛti. From this we understand that the jivas and primordial nature are both eternal, although sometimes manifest and sometimes wound up within Mahavisņu. Being eternal, they are beginning- less, and the nature of their conjunction is also beginningless. Just as there was no prior state of existence for material nature, there was also no prior condition of existence for the bound jivas. The com- mon example given is that of a spider, which expands its energy in the form of its web and sometimes withdraws the web back into its body. Similarly, primordial nature and the bound jivas are man- ifested and unmanifested in a cycle that is anadi, beginningless. evam mitho vivikta-svabhavayor anadyoḥ prakṛti-jivayoh samsargasyānādi-kälikatvam. 243 III Prameya Beginningless karmic imprinting and patterning is the nature of the bondage of the beginningless jiva. Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi will explain all this in greater detail in Para- mätma Sandarbha (Anuccheda 47). He will show that, according to the precise criteria pertaining to definitions in the nyaya system of logic, the word anadi is to be taken literally. We should note, however, that the subject at hand transcends conventional logical faculties. Śrimad Bhagavatam confirms: The living entity, who is transcendental and liberated, is yet subject to misery and bondage. Such indeed is Bhagavan’s extrinsic potency (māyā), which defies logic. (SB 3.7.9)” We are advised not to employ empirical logic to comprehend the beginningless bondage of the jiva. Rather, through open receptivity to the verdict of sastra, accompanied by profound contemplation on the truth therein disclosed, there arises immediate intuitive insight of this enigma. This is the way of the self-disclosure of sastric truth, and it is, therefore, the means to resolve this riddle of beginning- less bondage. To not avail of this transempirical mode of knowing is to risk failure in completing life’s essential purpose. Bhagavad Gitä confirms: One who rejects sastra attains neither completion, nor content- ment, nor the supreme destination. (GĪTĀ 16.23)10 Although the jiva is beginninglessly deluded, it eternally retains the inherent capacity to know Bhagavan. This capacity is an unactu- alized potential, comparable to the illuminating power of an unused light bulb. Even when unused, a light bulb retains the capacity to illuminate, but cannot do so until connected to a power source. Sim- ilarly, the conditioned jiva’s capacity to know Bhagavan is unactual- ized, but is ever present as an inherent potential of consciousness itself. When consciousness is attuned to its Source, the inherent seyam bhagavato maya yan nayena virudhyate isvarasya vimuktasya kārpanyam uta bandhanam 10 na sa siddhim avapnoti na sukham na paraṁ gatim 244 32 The Individual Self Is Distinct, Conscious, and Subject to Self-Ignorance capacity to know Bhagavan is made possible, like the illumination that is enabled when a light bulb is connected to a power source. This is why the jiva is described as an eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa, “nityah kṛṣṇa-dasaḥ.” When conditioned, the jiva’s con- stitutional eternal servitorship (dāsatva) remains in a potential state. This potential is actualized when Kṛṣṇa’s intrinsic potency descends to the jiva, dissolving the empirical conditioning through unconditional devotion. In the conditioned state, however, the jiva misdirects root atten- tion into phenomenal identity and appearance. Thus, the self’s instruments of knowing- the mind and senses - are misapplied in service of a separative ego point of reference. In this condition, the self’s inherent potential of consciousness to be devotionally whole-bodily attuned to its Source remains undiscovered, causing the jiva to suffer. But when the jiva redirects the mind and senses to repose in their conscious Source, effected through the transmutational power of sadhana-bhakti, then through the descent or pervasion of divine power, the self’s true potential becomes actualized. If one perse- veres on the path of bhakti, he becomes aware of his original identity and is established in the unending bliss of prema-bhakti. In Parama- tma Sandarbha (Anucchedas 19-47), Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī discusses this and other aspects of the jiva’s nature in greater detail. One may ask why the all-powerful Bhagavan does not stop Māyā from bewildering the jiva. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī addresses this question in the next anuccheda. 245Anuccheda 33 Bhagavan’s Paradoxical Potency, Māyā 33.1 ३३ । श्रीभगवांश्चानादित एव भक्तायां प्रपञ्चाधिकारिण्यां तस्यां दाक्षिण्यं लङ्घितुं न शक्नोति । तथा तद्भयेनापि जीवानां स्वसाम्मुख्यं वाञ्छन्नुपदिशति (गीता ७।१४ ) - FOR HIS PART, Śrī Bhagavan cannot withdraw His favor from Māyā, whom He has delegated as the controlling agent of the material creation and who has been His devotee from time with- out beginning. Still, He wills that the jivas direct their awareness [attention, feeling, and action] toward Him [sva sāmmukhya], even if they happen to do so out of fear of Maya. Therefore, He instructs them in Bhagavad Gitā: दैवी ह्येषा गुणमयी मम माया दुरत्यया । मामेव ये प्रपद्यन्ते मायामेतां तरन्ति ते ॥ ११८ ॥ This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three gunas of pri- mordial nature, is certainly difficult to overcome. Yet, those who have become fully and exclusively sheltered in Me are able to cross beyond it. (GĪTĀ 7.14)1 भा० ३।२५।२५- And: सतां प्रसङ्गान् मम वीर्यसंविदो भवन्ति हृत्कर्णरसायनाः कथाः । तज्जोषणादाश्चपवर्गवर्त्मनि श्रद्धा रतिर्भक्तिरनुक्रमिष्यति ॥ ११९ ॥ इति । daivi hy eṣa guna-mayi mama māyā duratyaya mam eva ye prapadyante māyām etām taranti te 246 33 Bhagavan’s Paradoxical Potency, Mayǎ In the association of pure devotees, the discussions (katha) nat- urally come to focus upon Me [Bhagavan]. Such discussions are not only laden with full awareness of My unlimited majesty but they serve too as inebriating tonic for both the ear and the heart. By service and attention to such discussions, faith, spiri- tual attraction, and divine love quickly and successively unfold for Me [Bhagavan Hari], the very embodiment of the path of liberation. (SB 3.25.25)2 33.2 लीलया श्रीमद्व्यासरूपेण तु विशिष्टतया तदुपदिष्टवानित्यनन्तरमेवायास्यति । अनर्थोप- शमं साक्षादिति । तस्माद् द्वयोरपि तत् तत् समञ्जसं ज्ञेयम् । ननु माया खलु शक्तिः । शक्तिश्च कार्यक्षमत्वम् । तच् च धर्मविशेषः । तस्याः कथं लज्जादिकम् ? उच्यते - एवं सत्यपि भगवति तासां शक्तीनामधिष्ठातृदेव्यः श्रूयन्ते यथा केनोपनिषदि महेन्द्रमाययोः संवादः । तदास्तां प्रस्तुतं प्रस्तूयते ॥ In His divine play in the form of Śri Vyasa, the Lord has very explicitly instructed the living beings in this way [i.e., that surrender unto Him enables the transcendence of māyā]. This we shall see shortly [in Anuccheda 46] in our discussion of the verse beginning anarthopaśamam säkṣād (SB 1.7.6). Thus, it is to be understood that both Bhagavan and Māyā have each acted appropriately. One may, however, object that maya is but a potency, and as a potency it is tied to its functional capacity and its characteristic nature (dharma-viseṣa) [which belongs to and is wielded by its conscious Source (dharmi)]. How then can māyā feel shame or other similar sentiments? The answer is that although māyā is in fact a potency, we do hear from the Vedic scriptures about goddesses who preside over potencies residing in the Supreme Lord [and, hence, such poten- cies display not only functional capacity but cognitive awareness and affect]. We find an instance of this in the dialogue between 2 satam prasangan mama virya-samvido bhavanti hrt-karna-rasayanāḥ kathāḥ taj-joṣaṇād āśv apavarga-vartmani śraddha ratir bhaktir anukramisyati 247 III Prameya Lord Indra and Maya in the Kena Upanisad. In any case, we shall now let this matter stand and return to the main topic of our discussion. Commentary AS SRILA JIVA GOSVAMI EXPLAINED in the previous anuccheda, Bha- gavan is not contented that Mäyä has to delude the jivas; therefore, Māyā feels ashamed to face the Lord. One may ask, “If the Lord is all- powerful, why does He not intervene?” From scripture it is under- stood that Bhagavan empowers Māyā as the agent of the material creation, and she has been performing this service faithfully with- out a beginning point in time. Because she is a devotee of Bhagavan, He respectfully does not interfere with her service. But this reply may lead to a further doubt: Besides being all- powerful, the Supreme Lord is said to be unlimitedly merciful, always disposed to everyone’s welfare. Why then does He fail to intercede in Maya’s apparent harassment of the jivas? The deeper implications of this question involve the existential issues of free- dom and choice, and hence of the inevitability of conditional life as the play of finite existence. Suffice it to say here that for the Abso- lute to be truly complete, finitude must be accommodated no less than infinity, relativity no less than absoluteness, samsära no less than mokṣa. Jiva Gosvāmi points out, however, that even though Bhagavan does not prevent Mäyä from fulfilling her role within the divine plan, He compassionately instructs the jivas on how to get free from her clutches by withdrawing attention from phenomenal appearance and returning it in devotional surrender to Him. Māyā no longer has the power to influence any jiva who has reposed. consciousness fully in Bhagavan. Still, a puzzle remains: Why does Bhagavan allow Māyā to cre- ate obstacles even for a jiva in whom the desire to surrender to Him has been born? Why does He allow her to repeatedly present various allurements that prevent the jiva from discriminating 248 33 Bhagavan’s Paradoxical Potency, Māyā between proper and improper action and in this way baffle his or her attempts to surrender? Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi answers this question by citing the verse beginning satām prasangan mama virya-samvidaḥ, which was spo- ken by Śri Kapila in SB 3.25.25. This verse explains that devotees of Bhagavan associate favorably with one another and always relish speaking about the Lord’s pastimes, which are a tonic for the hearts and ears of the sick and weak jivas. This tonic immunizes them against the disease of material illusion and gradually brings them back to a healthy condition of life, namely, establishment in their constitutional identity of service to Bhagavan. Bhagavan’s only occupation in the spiritual world is relish- ing pure loving exchanges with His unconditional devotees, and this enjoyment would be subject to disruption by the intrusion of unhealthy jivas-i.e., living beings still caught in egoic self- reference and pursuit of self-serving desire, and consequently in whom the pervasion of trans-egoic love for Bhagavan has not yet occurred. Maya therefore employs stringent means to ensure that no unfit beings are allotted even the possibility of intrusion upon the Lord. Because this is her assigned service, He does not inter- fere. On the other hand, because of the obstacles she presents, the jiva becomes reflective, attentive, and insightful, and this sup- ports the fervent turning of attention toward Bhagavan. In this way, one quickly attains the Lord’s feet. Obstacles make one strong, although they seem unpalatable when faced. Obstacles develop one’s character and sharpen intelligence. Bhagavan has not, however, employed Māyā just to inflict mis- eries on the jivas. She does that, but as mentioned earlier, her real purpose is to chasten the jivas, to encourage them to turn to Bha- gavan. The punishment she metes out serves three purposes: to administer reactions to the living beings for their unwholesome deeds, to deter them from further transgressions, and to impel them to seek a solution to this world of suffering. Since this punishment ultimately benefits the jivas by uniting them with God, He gener- ally does not choose to come between the jiva and Maya. The gov- ernor of a state will usually not interfere when the court system 249 III Prameya sends a criminal to prison. On the contrary, he may commend the policemen who captured the wrongdoer. People do not think the governor is cruel to employ such able policemen, and in the end, if the criminal is truly rehabilitated and freed on parole, the former lawbreaker himself may thank the governor. So, misery is in the very nature of material existence, and its inevitability is meant to induce the jivas to seek out their source, Bhagavan, and direct attention skillfully in His loving service. Only in this way can they gain liberation from Maya’s clutches. In Śrimad Bhagavatam, Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmi confirms that this is the purpose of the creation: The Lord created the intellect, the senses, the mind, and the vital force of the living beings for the purpose of apprehending sense objects (mātrā), for taking birth (bhava), for providing a range of experience for the self (atmane), and [ultimately] for transcend- ing the act of filtering experience through the screen of prior assumptions (akalpanaya, i.e., for liberation). (SB 10.87.2)3 One may still object that even if the Supreme Lord is not inten- tionally cruel, He is yet indifferent to the plight of the jivas. This is another mistaken notion. Far from being indifferent to the jivas’ suffering, Bhagavan provided Vedic knowledge at the very begin- ning of the creation cycle. Moreover, He frequently appears in this world to enlighten the fallen populace on the pretext of edu- cating His intimate associates, such as Arjuna and Uddhava. Some- times He descends as Vedavyāsa or as another enlightened instruc- tor to make available the message of bhakti and uplift the suffering jivas. All this He does out of His causeless mercy, because, as we have learned from the pramana portion of Sri Tattva Sandarbha, the jīvas can never directly know anything beyond the empiric range of experience merely by their own self-referencing endeavors. He alone is instrumental in the direct descent of His own intrinsic potency into the atma that is devotionally turned toward Him, mak- ing possible His own self-revelation as Bhagavan and the pervasion 3 buddhindriya-manaḥ-prāṇān janānām asṛjat prabhuḥ mäträrtham ca bhavartham ca atmane’kalpanaya ca 250 33 Bhagavan’s Paradoxical Potency, Māyā of unprecedented love for Him. In His appearance as Śrī Caitanya, He delivers kṛṣṇa-prema, which is not available even to the residents of Vaikuntha. The miseries of the material world are meant to prompt the jivas to direct their consciousness toward their supreme source, and therefore, suffering is recognized as bearing intrinsic value by the far-sighted. It is like a wake-up call for the sleeping self. In this sense, misery can be seen as an aspect of Bhagavan’s inconceivable mercy. Out of His causeless mercy, the Supreme Lord offers the entrapped jivas access to spiritual knowledge through the Vedas. As Kaliyuga began and the jivas all but lost their ability to compre- hend spiritual knowledge, He further helped them by explaining the same message in the Itihasas and Purāņas. Finally, He revealed the essence of all knowledge in the form of Srimad Bhagavatam. So it can hardly be said that Bhagavan is indifferent to the plight of the jīvas. Once a jiva takes advantage of Bhagavan’s arrangement for spir- itual education and comes to the point of transcendental realiza- tion, he need not fear any punishment for his previous misdeeds, no matter how dreadful they were. As Śrī Kṛṣṇa says in Bhagavad Gitā: As a blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities. (GĪTĀ 4.37)+ Thus, Bhagavan confirms that the jivas’ punishment is meant not for inflicting suffering on them, but for awakening them to the knowledge that will lead them to freedom from all suffering and eternal life in the spiritual world. Yet, another doubt may be raised: If the punishment inflicted on the jivas is for their ultimate good, why are they also allowed to enjoy in this world? If they were simply thrown into an ocean of cease- less misery, they would have no choice but to quickly take complete shelter of God. 4 yathaidhamsi samiddho’gnir bhasma-sat kurute’rjuna jñänägniḥ sarva-karmāņi bhasma-sät kurute tatha 251 III Prameya This may be answered as follows: First, ceaseless misery is not possible. Material misery and material pleasure are correlative con- ditions. If one suffers continuously, any decrease in pain will be experienced as pleasure. Moreover, ceaseless misery is not con- ducive to development of transcendental awareness, because the mind then becomes too disturbed to contemplate scriptural truths. Second, ceaseless misery is not necessary because any jiva with even a little rudimentary transcendental insight will realize that there is no real happiness in this material world. Without such knowledge, misery alone is insufficient to awaken a person to real- ity. Without knowledge, one simply becomes acclimatized to mis- ery. Such knowledge is available from sastra. In the Yoga-sutra (2.15), Patanjali says that every phenomenal experience is miserable to a wise person. In GITA 9.33, Śrī Kṛṣṇa characterizes this world as temporary and devoid of real happiness: anityam asukham lokam. The so-called happiness one experiences here is nothing but a temporary cessa- tion or diminution of misery. It is like the pleasure felt by a man who is repeatedly dunked in water and then brought to the surface just before drowning. Upon taking in the life-giving air, he feels great relief and joy, but such happiness is really only the tempo- rary absence of continual misery. Śrī Kṛṣṇa therefore advises us not to strive for the so-called happiness of this material world: “A wise person who remains equipoised in both misery and happiness, considering them to be of the same nature, is eligible for liberation” (sama-duḥkha-sukham dhiram so’mṛtatvaya kalpate, GITA 2.15). Only such a person can taste real happiness; others experience only the illusion of happiness. In conclusion, therefore, Bhagavan has designed a two-part program for both chastening and rehabilitating the jivas: On the one hand, Māyā punishes them, and on the other, the Lord instructs them through various avataras, the Vedic scriptures, and His pure devotees. Thus, Maya’s and Bhagavan’s actions perfectly complement each other. Although mayä is Bhagavan’s material energy, she also exists in her personal form. All the energies of Bhagavan have personal 252 33 Bhagavan’s Paradoxical Potency, Māyā forms with corresponding identity, will, affect, and sphere of action. (Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will discuss this point in greater detail in Bhaga- vat Sandarbha, Anuccheda 99.) That Maya has a personal form is evi- dent from a dialogue between Lord Indra and Māyādevi narrated in the Third Chapter of the Kena Upanisad. Once there was a war between the devas and the asuras. After a long struggle, the devas prevailed by the Supreme Lord’s mercy, but they mistakenly ascribed their victory to their own valor and became proud. To humble them, the Lord appeared before them in the guise of a yakşa. Unable to identify the yakṣa, they appointed Agni, the fire god, to find out who He was. When Agni asked the yakṣa to identify Himself, He placed a straw in front of Agni and said, “Burn it.” With all his power Agni could not burn the straw. Then Vayu, the air god, was sent to identify the yakṣa, but he could not blow the straw away. Next, Lord Indra approached the yakṣa, but the mysterious personality disappeared. Finally, Māyādevi appeared to Indra in the form of Uma and told him that the yakṣa was in fact Bhagavan. Many similar accounts in the Vedas and Purānas demonstrate that māyā and other energies of Bhagavan have their own personal forms. Thus, the description of how Vyasa saw Māyā standing behind the Lord out of embarrassment is not figurative. Māyā expe- rienced shame before Bhagavan due to the nature of her actions. Yet, another question might be asked: If Mäyä, the predom- inating deity of the material energy, can manage all her affairs, what need is there for Paramātmā to regulate this world? Śrī Kṛṣṇa answers this in Bhagavad Gitā: O son of Kunti, whatever forms appear in the various species of life, primordial nature (mahad brahma) is their womb and I am the seed- giving father. (GĪTĀ 14.4)5 Just as a woman cannot conceive a child without the help of a potent man, Māyā cannot manage the material world without the help of Paramātmā. Māyā has her innate potencies for serving the 5 sarva-yonişu kaunteya murtayaḥ sambhavanti yaḥ tāsām brahma mahad yonir aham bija-pradah pita 253 111 Prameya Supreme Lord, but still she needs His help in carrying out her duties. For this reason, Vyasa saw that she was dependent on Bhagavan, a fact Kṛṣṇa confirms in GITA 9.10 when He says that this material nature, which is one of His energies, is ultimately working under His direction. The next anuccheda continues to explain the distinction between the jivas and Bhagavan, as witnessed by Śrī Vyasa in the state of samādhi. 254 Anuccheda 34 The Jiva Is Conscious and Distinct from Iśvara ३४ । तत्र जीवस्य तादृशचिद्रूपत्वेऽपि परमेश्वरतो वैलक्षण्यम् “तदपाश्रयम्” इति “यया सम्मोहितः” इति च दर्शयति ॥ ALTHOUGH THE JIVA is purely conscious (cid-rupa) just like the Supreme Being, it is yet distinct from the Supreme Being. This distinction is clearly shown, on the one hand, by the words, “Māyā is apart from and yet supported by Him - the Supreme Being” (tad-apäśraya, SB 1.7.4) and, on the other hand, by the phrase, “the jiva is deluded by māyā” (yaya sammohito jiva, SB 1.7.5). Commentary IN SB 1.7.4, the words used to describe Maya’s relationship with Bha- gavan are tad-apäśraya. This phrase indicates that in the state of trance, Śrīla Vyasadeva saw that Bhagavan supports Māyā and that she has no influence over Him. The prefix apa implies “separate” and “inferior.” Maya is separate from Bhagavan in the sense that she does not belong to the category of His intrinsic potency. Her separateness, however, in no way implies independence from Him. That she is ashamed to appear in front of the Lord indicates that she is inferior both to Him and His intrinsic potencies. For this reason, she cannot influence Him and is fully subordinate to Him. There- fore, as mentioned earlier, she is compared to a maidservant who works outside the inner apartments of a king. 255III Prameya While unable to influence Bhagavan or His intrinsic potency, Māyā can influence the jiva, as the words yaya sammohitaḥ indicate. Being part of God’s intermediary potency, which is conscious, the jiva is also conscious by nature; yet, it is not all-powerful like God. God’s power is unlimited, while the jiva’s potency is limited. Bhaga- van controls Māyā, but she controls the limited jivas when they are not united with Him in bhakti-yoga. Just as sparks separated from a fire lose their brilliance but not their existence, so the living beings who are psychologically separated from Bhagavan are forgetful of their nature and are absorbed in illusion. Bhagavän, however, is never affected by illusion. Thus, the jivas are distinct from the Lord, even though they share qualitative identity, inasmuch as both are purely of the nature of consciousness (cit-svarupa). Commenting on SB 1.7.4, Śrīla Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa points out that besides witnessing the self-revelation of Bhagavan, Māyā, and the jiva, Śrīla Vyasa also saw the time energy, as indicated by such verbs as apasyat (he saw), sammohitaḥ (the jiva is bewildered), and manute (the jiva considers). How is this? Because all these verbs indicate action, which in turn implies the influence of time. He fur- ther specifies that Vyasa perceived four items in samadhi, i.e., Bha- gavan, the individual living being, Mäyä, and time. These four are eternal, as confirmed in the Bhallaveya-śruti: “The Supreme Lord, primordial nature, the individual conscious being, and time are cer- tainly all eternal” (atha ha väva nityani puruṣaḥ prakṛtir ātmā kālaḥ). Time’s eternality is also mentioned in the Vişņu Purana: [Parasara Muni said] O twice-born Maitreya, supremely power- ful time has no beginning or end. Thus, the cycle of creation, maintenance, and dissolution continues perpetually. (VP 1.2.26)1 And in Bhagavad Gitā, Śrī Kṛṣṇa says: Primordial nature and the living beings should be understood to be beginningless. Their transformations and the gunas of nature are phenomenal arisings out of primordial nature. (GĪTĀ 13.20)2 anadir bhagavan kalo nänto’sya dvija vidyate avyucchinnas tatas tv ete sarga-sthity-anta-samyamah 2 prakrtim puruşam caiva viddhy anadi ubhav api 256 34 The Jiva Is Conscious and Distinct from Isvara In commenting on this verse in Sarartha-varṣini, Śrīla Viś- vanatha Cakravarti Thakura says, “[Śrī Kṛṣṇa says] Because both māyā and the jiva are My potencies, they both are beginningless. Thus, their conjunction is also without beginning” (māyā-jīvayor api mac-chaktitvena anaditvat tayoḥ samsleśo’py anadir iti bhavaḥ). It follows from this that the jiva’s karma has been operative without a beginning as well. Śrīla Vyasadeva acknowledges in Vedanta-sutra that this is the nature of karma: One might object that the law of karma cannot explain the inequal- ity observed in life, because prior to creation there could have been no karmic inheritance that could result in such differentiation. But this objection is not valid, since the cycle of creation has no begin- ning. Inasmuch as creation has no beginning, karma also has no beginning. (vs 2.1.35)3 Apart from karma, which has an end, the other four entities that Śrīla Vyasa saw - Bhagavan, the jiva, primordial nature, and time are all eternal, without beginning or end. Of these four, Bha- gavan and the jiva are both purely of the nature of consciousness, but the Lord is infinite, whereas the jiva is infinitesimal. Time is not conscious, but it is free from the control of the material gunas. It is the basis of the threefold division of past, present, and future. Primordial nature is inert and is composed of three gunas - authentic being, conditional becoming, and stasis (or illumination, dynamism, and ignorance). Matter thus undergoes transforma- tions in time and is the medium through which we infer the three divisions of time. In Paramatma Sandarbha (Anuccheda 99), Śrī Jīva Gosvāmi explains that there are two categories of time. One is a manifestation of maya, and the other is the will of Bhagavan. The time referred to here is the former. Although karma has been subconsciously imprinting and influ- encing every conditioned being without beginning, it can be termi- nated for jivas who become perfectly established in transcendental vikārāmś ca gunams caiva viddhi prakṛti-sambhavan 3 na karmavibhāgad iti cen nänäditvät 257 III Prameya devotion to Bhagavan, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. This too was revealed to Śrīla Vyasadeva, and to enlighten the conditioned jivas about these all-important topics, He compiled the Satvata-samhita, Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. In the next eight anucchedas, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi shows that Śrī Vyasa’s transcognitive experience contradicts the popular radical monistic (Advaitavada) view of Śrī Śankarācārya. 258 Anuccheda 35 Essential Distinction between the Jiva and Iśvara ३५ । यर्ह्येव यदेकं चिद्रूपं ब्रह्म मायाश्रयतावलितं विद्यामयं तर्ह्येव तन्मायाविषयतापन्नम- विद्यापरिभूतं चेत्युक्तमिति जीवेश्वरविभागोऽवगतः । ततश्च स्वरूपसामर्थ्यवैलक्षण्येन तद् द्वितयं मिथो विलक्षणस्वरूपमेवेत्यागतम् ॥ [ACCORDING to the Advaitavada doctrine of Sankaracarya] In the very moment that the one indivisible Brahman, whose nature is pure consciousness, becomes the support of maya and the embodiment of knowledge [as Iśvara], It simultaneously falls under māya’s influence and is overcome by ignorance [as the jiva]. Yet, this is illogical. Thus, we can understand that the jiva and the Supreme Lord are distinct entities. Moreover, since their inherent capabilities are different [Iśvara as the controller of maya and the jiva as subordinated by māyā], the jiva and the Lord are distinct in their essential natures. Commentary ŚRILA JIVA GOSVĀMI has carefully analyzed Śrīla Vyasadeva’s trance, and now, on the basis of that analysis, he presents argu- ments opposing the Advaitavada theory of the absolute oneness of the Supreme Self (Paramätma) and the individual self (jivātma). The ideas of the Advaitavadīs are antithetical to devotion and are therefore one of the greatest obstacles on the path of the self- 259 III Prameya disclosure of Bhagavan and prema-bhakti. Śrila Raghunatha dasa Gosvāmi compared impersonal liberation to a tigress that devours the self: “My dear mind, never listen to talk about impersonal liber- ation, which is like a tigress that swallows everything, including the self” (kathaḥ mukti-vyāghrya na śṛņu kila sarvātma-gilaniḥ, Manaḥ- sikṣā 4). Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu also sternly warned those who aspire to know Bhagavan in truth: “If one hears the Advaitavada inter- pretation everything comes to ruin” (Caitanya-caritămṛta, Madhya- līlā 6.153)! Ultimately, He explained, because the Advaitavadīs strip Absolute Reality of its inherent aesthetic value, distinctiveness, and power, they are the greatest offenders against Svayam Bhagavan, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Śrī Madhvācārya presented forceful refutations of the Advaita- väda theory in a similar vein. One of his most impressive efforts in this line was his Māyāvāda-khaṇḍana. In this and other works, he exposed the Māyāvādīs’ misuse of grammatical analysis and their faulty logic, which they resort to in their vain attempt to prove the absolute nondifference between Brahman and the jiva. In the same spirit, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will refute the Advaitavada theory in the next few anucchedas and conclude by exhorting his readers to fur- ther scrutinize the Māyāvādīs’ “incoherent speculations” (asama- njasā kalpana). The impersonalists headed by Śrī Sankarācārya base their tenets on Vedanta-sutra and the eleven principal Upanisads, and they also try to support their arguments with the statements of Bhagavad Gita. Jiva Gosvāmi contends, however, that their inter- pretations contradict what Śrila Vyasadeva directly experienced in trance, which is narrated in Srimad Bhagavatam, the essence of the Upanisads, the Vedanta-sutra, and the Puranas. Advaitavadīs claim that Ultimate Reality is radically nondual pure consciousness alone, without form or attributes. They try to define Ultimate Reality only in negative terms, and so they repeat the aphorism neti neti? “not this, not that.” To support 1 mayavadi-bhäşya sunile haya sarva-nāśa 2 The real sense of neti neti is that Bhagavan is not limited to this phenomenal world but also exists beyond it. A description of this is given in SB 2.2.18. 260 35 Essential Distinction between the Jiva and Iśvara their arguments, they cite Vedic declarations: “Indeed, all this is Brahman” (sarvam khalv idam brahma, CHU 3.14.1); “Brahman is one alone, without a second” (ekam evadvitiyam, CHU 6.2.1); “Brahman is consciousness and bliss,” (vijñānam anandam brahma, BAU 3.9.28); and “Ultimately no variety whatsoever exists in this world” (neha nānāsti kiñcana, BAU 4.4.19). But then, to account for the inevitable variety in this world, the Advaitavādīs are forced to introduce the idea of some beginning- less entity called māyā, or illusion. The Advaitavādīs claim that this māyā cannot be defined as either existing or not existing. They fur- ther say that māyā has two aspects - vidya (knowledge) and avidya (ignorance). Somehow or other, some part of Brahman comes in contact with mayä, and the result is illusion for that portion of Brah- man. Brahman contacts both vidya and avidya. When the totality of Brahman contacts vidya, Iśvara, the personal God of creation, comes into being. And when small parts of Brahman contact avidya, they become the jivas (Pañcadasi 1.16, 1.236). According to the Advaitavada doctrine, the difference between Iśvara and the jiva is not intrinsic or eternal; it is due only to upadhis, or the apparent limitations of Brahman by maya’s vidya and avidya potencies. When a jiva develops spiritual knowledge and thus tran- scends these upadhis, he realizes himself to be the unlimited, non- variegated Brahman. This attainment is supposed to be the perfec- tion of spiritual life. In support of this concept, the Sankarites quote the Vedic statement, “There is no liberation without direct intuitive insight” (rte jñānān na muktiḥ). A favorite analogy the Advaitavadīs use to explain how the one unlimited Brahman becomes manifold and limited in the form of the jivas is that of open space (ākāśa)3 and clay pots. Just as a por- tion of the indivisible all-pervading space seems to become delim- ited by a pot and is then known as “the space within a pot,” so the unlimited Brahman seems to become limited by the jivas’ subtle and gross material bodies. When a pot is broken, there is no longer 3 The word ākāśa signifies open space, the ether, the sky, and the atmosphere. So, it refers not only to the sky above us, but to that which surrounds and pervades everything, that in which all things stand and through which living beings move. 261 III Prameya a distinction between the space in the pot and the all-pervading space, and similarly when a jiva’s false identity is dissolved, he no longer appears different from Brahman. Actually, the Advaitavādīs explain, the apparent distinction between the space in the pot and the all-pervading space did not really exist even when the pot was intact, and in the same way, the difference between the individual self and Brahman is always illusory. The monists even detect confir- mation for all this in Śrīmad Bhagavatam, as in the final instructions from Sukadeva to Parikṣit Mahārāja: When a pot is broken, the portion of open space that was delimited by the pot becomes simply open space, just as it was prior to delim- itation. In the same way, when the gross and subtle bodies perish, the living entity within again becomes Brahman. (SB 12.5.5)* Later in the same set of instructions, Sukadeva says: “I am Brahman, the supreme abode, and I am Brahman, the sup- reme destination.” Meditating in this way, merge the individual self into the indivisible Absolute Self. (SB 12.5.11)5 These statements require proper explanation, but when the Māyāvadīs interpret them, they do so without regard for the actual context. In fact, it is only by taking them out of context that they seem to support the absolute nondistinction of the jiva and Brah- man, as alluded to above. In Anuccheda 52 of Tattva Sandarbha, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will briefly discuss why such verses seem to have an impersonal slant, and in Paramätma Sandarbha (Anucchedas 72-84), he will give a more detailed discussion. Here, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī begins countering the Advaitavada phi- losophy by establishing the essential distinction between the jiva and Iśvara. His first point is, as we have learned from the account of Vyasadeva’s trance, that maya controls only the jiva and not the Supreme Lord. Indeed, maya is dependent upon Bhagavan and ghate bhinne yathākāśa ākāśaḥ syad yatha pură evar dehe mṛte jivo brahma sampadyate punah 5 aham brahma param dhama brahmaham paramam param evam samikṣann ātmānam ātmany adhaya niskale 262 35 Essential Distinction between the Jiva and Iśvara completely controlled by Him. The same Brahman cannot be the controller as well as the controlled, as propounded by Māyāvāda, because ignorance and knowledge cannot exist simultaneously in the one undivided Reality, just as light and darkness cannot occupy the same point in space. The jiva’s capabilities and qualities are different from those of Bhagavan. This difference, moreover, is not a product of illusion. By constitution, the jiva is atomic in size, and thus he is vulnerable to maya’s inconceivable influence when disassociated from the Sup- reme Lord. But by surrendering to Bhagavan, he can free himself from the shackles of māyā. Śrīla Vyasa witnessed all of this in His trance. In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi states that the differ- ence between the jiva and Iśvara is ontologically real and not just empirical. 263 Anuccheda 36 The Jiva Is Not Merely the Product of an Upadhi of Brahman ३६ । न चोपाधितारतम्यमयपरिच्छेदप्रतिबिम्बत्वादिव्यवस्थया तयोर्विभागः स्यात् ॥ ALSO, the radical nondualist position [of Sri Sankara] cannot explain away this difference between the jiva and the Supreme Being as no more than a division or a reflection of Brahman into a hierarchy of upãdhis. Commentary THE ADVAITAVADA PHILOSOPHERS HOLD that there is only one reality- the formless, attributeless, indivisible, non-variegated, impersonal Brahman- and they have various theories for explain- ing the apparent separate existence of the jiva and Iśvara. The two theories mentioned in this section-pariccheda-vada (the delim- itation of Brahman) and pratibimba-vada (the reflection of Brah- man). - are the most prevalent, and both have been expressed in several modified forms. According to pariccheda-vada, the one indivisible Brahman appears divided into many embodied jivas because of various upadhis, just as the inseparable vast open space (mahākāśa) appears divided by being contained in various pots (ghaṭākāśa). This theory advocates that no real difference exists between the space inside a pot and the space outside. The distinction is assumed 264 1 36 The Jiva Is Not Merely the Product of an Upadhi of Brahman only for practical purposes. Once the pot is broken, the space for- merly contained within becomes one with the vast open space, removing the apparent distinction. Similarly, the proponents of pariccheda-vada claim that there is no difference between Brahman and the embodied jiva. The jiva’s limiting adjunct, the subtle (or psychical) body, is actually a false covering superimposed on the jiva after coming into contact with maya’s avidya potency. It is this material covering alone that makes the jiva appear to be separate from Brahman. Thus, when Brahman is limited by subtle bodies, it becomes the jivas. When, however, it is limited by vidya, it is called Iśvara. This doctrine of the delimitation of Brahman (pariccheda- vāda) was formulated by Vacaspati Miśra, the ninth-century author of the Bhamati commentary on Sankara’s Vedanta-sutra-bhāṣya! The second of the two aforesaid theories, pratibimba-väda, states that when the formless indivisible Brahman is reflected in the var- ious subtle bodies made of avidya, it appears to be many, just as the one sun reflected in various receptacles of water appears to be many. In this analogy, the sun is unaffected by any displacement of the water in which it is reflected, although the reflection is influ- enced. Similarly, Brahman is never affected by the modifications undergone by its reflections, the jivas. Indeed, the happiness and distress experienced by the jivas are merely illusions resulting from their conditioned, or reflected, state. When the jiva is freed from illusion and established in liberation, he reverts to his original Brah- man consciousness. This is one Advaitavada theory to account for the jivas’ apparent individuated existence. According to the proponents of pratibimba-vada, the same Brah- man that becomes the jivas when reflected in maya’s avidya potency, also becomes Iśvara, the creator God, when reflected in her vidya potency. By virtue of this contact with maya, Brahman assumes a personal but temporary form that, unlike the jiva, is immune to ignorance. Nonetheless, Brahman’s manifestation in the personal feature of Isvara is a function of maya and is inferior to the all- pervading Brahman. The pratibimba-vādis say that all the avataras of God described in the Vedic literature are manifestations of Isvara, This theory can be seen in the commentary of Sankara on vs 1.1.5, 1.2.6, and 1.2.20. 265III Prameya resulting from Brahman combining with maya’s vidya potency. Like the jivas, such personal manifestations of God have subtle and gross bodies, but unlike the jivas, they neither acquire their bodies because of past karma nor are they bound by the reactions of their activities. Thus, the jiva and Iśvara are distinct. Padmapādācārya, a disciple of Sankarācārya, is the proponent of pratibimba-vada in his Pañca-pädikā commentary on the Sankara-bhāṣya of Vedanta-sütra? The Advaitavadīs attempt to support their ideas by citing scrip- ture. For example, from Suka-rahasya Upanisad 2.12, they quote, “Brahman apparently modified as maya’s effect is known as the jiva, whereas the same Brahman apparently modified as maya’s cause is known as Iśvara” (karyopadhir ayam jivaḥ kāraṇopādhir isvaraḥ). Another statement they are fond of quoting is as follows: “Just as the one effulgent sun appears as many when reflected in many pots of water, so the one unborn Atma, Brahman, appears to be many beings when reflected in many bodies” (yatha hy ayam jyotir ātmā vivasvän äpo bhittvä bahudhaiko nugacchan upadhina kriyate bheda- rupo devaḥ kṣetreşv evam ajo’yam ātmā). This is quoted by Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa in his Tattva Sandarbha commentary. Some radical nondualists also cite Srimad Bhagavatam in support of their pratibimba-vada and pariccheda-vāda: There is indeed no distinction in the Absolute Truth. If an igno- rant person considers phenomenal difference as ultimately real, his understanding is just like thinking there is a difference between all- pervasive space and the space contained in a pot, or between the sun and its reflection in water, or between the air that surrounds the body and the air within. (SB 12.4.30)5 2 References to pratibimba-vada can be seen in Sankara’s commentary on vs 3.2.20, 2.3.46, and on BAU 2.1.9. “The real meaning of this statement is that the jiva is conditioned by the material body, which is a product (karya) of mayä, whereas Iśvara has māyā (karana) as His upadhi, or sphere of action, but she never influences Him. For the real meaning of this verse, see Anuccheda 44. 5 na hi satyasya nănätvam avidvän yadi manyate nänätvam chidrayor yadvaj jyotiṣor vätayor iva The implication of this verse is that there is only one Absolute Reality that encompasses all variety within its fold. The manifested world is, however, real 266 36 The Jiva Is Not Merely the Product of an Upadhi of Brahman Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi, following in Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s foot- steps, contends that Śrī Vyasadeva’s experience in trance contra- dicts both of these Advaitavada doctrines - pratibimba-vāda and pariccheda-vada. This contradiction is evident from the analysis Jiva Gosvāmi has already presented, but in the upcoming anucchedas, he will further point out the specific defects in these doctrines. and nondifferent from Him, because it has no independent existence without Him. 267 Anuccheda 37 Flaws in Pratibimba-vāda and Pariccheda-vāda ३७ । तत्र यद्युपाधेरनाविद्यकत्वेन वास्तवत्वं तर्ह्यविषयस्य तस्य परिच्छेदविषयत्वास- म्भवः । निर्धर्मकस्य व्यापकस्य निरवयवस्य च प्रतिबिम्बत्वायोगोऽपि । उपाधिसम्बन्धा- भावात् बिम्बप्रतिबिम्बभेदाभावात् । दृश्यत्वाभावाच्च । उपाधिपरिच्छिन्नाकाशस्थज्यो- तिरंशस्यैव प्रतिबिम्बो दृश्यते न त्वाकाशस्य दृश्यत्वाभावादेव ॥ IF WE ASSUME that these upadhis are real (vastava) because of their empirical validity (anavidyaka), still, because Brahman is not subject to any influence, It cannot be delimited by them. Moreover, Brahman can cast no reflection because It is devoid of attributes, all-pervading, and indivisible [i.e., without parts]. Since Brahman has no attributes, It can have no relation with upādhis; since It is all-pervading, It cannot be divided into an object and its reflection; and since It is indivisible and uniform, It cannot be seen. Brahman resembles the sky in this respect: Because the sky is invisible, reflections are cast not by the sky itself but by the heavenly bodies, which are luminous portions of the demarcated sky. Commentary IN SANKARACARYA’S RADICAL NONDUALISM, existence (satta) is understood to be of three different grades - pratibhāsika (illusory existence), vyavahārika (empirical existence), and päramärthika 268 37 Flaws in Pratibimba-vada and Pariccheda-vāda (ontological existence). Pratibhāsika existence is perceived in such states as dreams and illusions but ceases when normal conscious- ness returns. One may, for example, mistake a rope for a snake in semidarkness, but this misperception ceases as soon as light is shed on the rope. Therefore, the rope perceived as a snake was merely an illusory appearance of reality, pratibhāsika-sattā. It is not an empirical reality because it is entirely subjective and lasts only as long as the misperception is not sublated by an ensuing valid per- ception. It is negated by a valid means of knowledge, and thus it is not executable, meaning that it is incapable of being the basis of practical effects. The rope misperceived as a snake, for example, poses no real threat to the viewer. According to the Mayavada conception, empirical reality (vyäva- hārika-satta) refers to our perception of the material world in ordi- nary waking consciousness, which is executable, meaning that the objects perceived are the support for practical action. Ontological reality, pāramarthika-satta, is immanent in all objects of the mate- rial world, pervading them as the conscious, blissful source of all manifest varieties. In Drg-dṛśya-viveka, Śankarācārya writes: Objects in the material world have five characteristics - existence, perceivability, attractiveness, form, and name. Of these, the first three belong to Brahman and the other two to the world. (Drg-dṛśya- viveka 20)1 The last two items, form and name, are products of maya and thus constitute only the empirical reality; they do not exist on the absolute or ontological level. They are manifest only as long as one has not realized Brahman. The other three are Brahman Itself as perceived from the standpoint of empirical reality. The Advaitavadīs claim that the päramärthika-sattä (ontological reality) is unqualified Brahman, which, unlike the other two reali- ties, cannot be negated either by valid perception or by scriptural authority. Illusions are sublated by subsequent valid perceptions, and empirical objects are negated as ontologically real by scriptural asti bhati priyam rupam nama cety amsa-pañcakam adya-trayam brahma-rupam jagad-rupam tato dvayam 269 III Prameya authority. Brahman, however, is negated by neither. Just as dreams cease when one wakes, the material world will cease to exist when one becomes Brahman-realized? There is no higher reality than absolute Brahman, no higher existence that can negate the real exis- tence of Brahman in the past, present, or future. On the level of Brahman existence, there is no distinction between knowledge, the knower, and the object of knowledge. It is as if all three fuse into one absolute reality. The two lower grades of reality, pratibhāsika and vyavahārika, are not perceived on this level of consciousness. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi refutes both pariccheda-vada (the theory of division) and pratibimba-vada (the theory of reflection) by consid- ering the Sankarites’ explanation of the upadhis covering Brahman as pertaining to the two lower grades of reality: These upadhis can never be real aspects of the absolute or ontological reality, since that would introduce duality on the nondual plane. In the case of pariccheda-vāda, the upadhis can be either empirically real (anavi- dyaka), considered in Anucchedas 37-38, or only apparently real (avidyaka), considered in Anuccheda 39. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī shows the fault in both of these alternatives. If the upãdhis are empirically real, Brahman still cannot be lim- ited by them, because pure Brahman is unconditioned by anything else, empirical or otherwise. In Bhagavad Gita, Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms this: I shall now explain the knowable, knowing which you will taste the eternal. Brahman, beginningless and subordinate to Me, lies beyond the cause and effect of this material world. (GĪTĀ 13.13)3 Thus, no upadhis can limit Brahman. But in the opinion of Śankarācārya, this Gītā verse says, “I shall tell you of that which is to be known, knowing which one attains immortality; it is the From the Advaitic point of view, it is technically wrong to say that one becomes Brahman-realized, because there is no distinction between oneself and Brahman. There is no proper or exact way to express the final state of Advaitavada. 3 jñeyam yat tat pravakṣyāmi yaj jñātvāmṛtam aśnute anadi mat-param brahma na sat tan nasad ucyate 270 37 Flaws in Pratibimba-vāda and Pariccheda-vāda beginningless, supreme Brahman, which is said to be neither being nor non-being.” Commenting on this verse, Sankara writes: But this Brahman, which is to be known, lies beyond the reach of the senses, and hence, It can be known only by Its direct intuition in the form of sacred sound revelation. Therefore, unlike a clay pot or other such objects, It is not subject to discriminative analysis and thus cannot be determined either to exist or to not exist. For this reason, It can never be called sat or asat. Objection: But what you said about Brahman, that which is to be known that It is neither existent nor non-existent - is contradictory. Reply: It is not contradictory, because the Śruti states: “That [Brah- man] is other than the known and the unknown, for It is beyond both [KENA 1.3].” (Bhagavad Gita, Sankara-bhāṣya 13.13)* So, according to the Advaitavadīs’ own version, Brahman is beyond sense perception and beyond empirical existence and non- existence. Such being the case, if the upadhis of Brahman are empirically real, they can never limit the undivided and indivis- ible Brahman to produce the jivas. Therefore, the Vedas say, “The indiscernible [Brahman] cannot be perceived” (agrhyo na grhyate, BAU 9.26). Brahman, being indivisible, cannot be separated or delimited into jivas the way one might break a large stone into pebbles. If we hypothetically grant that upadhis can divide Brahman into jīvas, then neither the jivas nor Brahman Itself should be called eternal. But the Bhagavad Gita, which the Advaitavādīs accept as authoritative, describes both the jiva and Brahman as eternal. In GĪTĀ 13.20, Śrī Kṛṣṇa says that the jiva is anadi, beginningless. The same is stated in texts 20-24 of the Second Chapter. Śrīla Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa states that even if the above point is overlooked, other inconsistencies abound in the Advaitavada idam tu jñeyam atindriyatvena sabdaika-pramana-gamyatvan na ghaṭādi-vad ubhaya-buddhy-anugata-pratyaya-visayam ity ato na san na asad ity ucyate. yat tv uktam viruddham ucyate jñeyam tan na sat tan na asad ucyate iti. na viruddham. anyad eva tad viditad atho aviditãd adhi iti śrute. 271 III Prameya conception. One such discrepancy is as follows: The jivas and Isvara move from one place to another, but Brahman is all-pervading. Somehow portions of Brahman become limited by upadhis to mani- fest as the jivas. When a given jiva moves from one place to another, either Brahman also moves along with it or It does not. But Brah- man’s moving from place to place is impossible, because when something moves, it leaves one location and then occupies another, where it was absent before. It is absurd to propose this situation for Brahman, since Brahman is always present everywhere. On the other hand, if Brahman does not move with the jivas, we must assume that when a jiva is moving from place to place, its upadhi constantly delimits new portions of Brahman, simulta- neously releasing the previously delimited portions. This reduces Brahman, the Absolute Reality, to a toy in the hands of Its upadhis, a proposal that is also absurd. If it is instead proposed that all of Brahman is grasped by Its upādhis, the problem of movement can be solved, but then there remains no Brahman free from upadhis, meaning that there is no chance for the jivas’ liberation or for useful discussion of philoso- phy; all of existence would consist of deluded Brahman, and there would be no liberated domain to aspire for. If it is countered that Brahman is not the basis for Its upādhis and thus jivas can move independently of Brahman, this means that even at the liberated level these independent upadhis would con- tinue to exist. Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi concludes that the interpretation of pariccheda-vada in terms of Brahman’s upadhis being empirically real is invalid. He then goes on to refute pratibimba-vada, the theory of reflec- tion. Brahman, Śrīla Jīva states, can cast no reflection in Its upādhis-here referring to the subtle or psychical bodies of the jīvas because Brahman is devoid of all attributes. Only an object possessing attributes like form and color can cast a reflection. If an object is invisible, how can it be reflected in anything? If it is countered that the sky, although invisible, casts a reflec- tion in water, Jiva Gosvāmī replies that it is in fact the stars and plan- ets in the sky that cast reflections in water, not the sky itself. If the 272 37 Flaws in Pratibimba-vada and Pariccheda-vāda sky could cast a reflection, then the wind, direction, and time would also be able to do so. Air would certainly be able to cast a reflec- tion, because according to Sankhya metaphysics, the air element is denser than the sky element. According to modern science, the bluish background seen behind the visible bodies in the firmament is an optical illusion created by refracted sunlight passing through the atmosphere. No concrete underlying object is there to cast a reflection, only the invisible firmament. Hence, the analogy com- paring Brahman to the sky being reflected in water is inappropriate. Furthermore, it was already shown that, according to the Māyāvādīs, Brahman is beyond empirical existence and non- existence and thus also beyond sensory perception. It is nonsen- sical to then propose that Brahman reflects as the jivas. But Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi is willing to grant the opposition a respite and hypo- thetically accept their premise that Brahman can reflect in upadhis, in which case all-pervading Brahman must also exist in the upadhis, in which It supposedly reflects. But if the reflected object, Brahman, is already present in the reflecting medium, the upadhis, how will It reflect there? As a mir- ror cannot reflect in itself, so Brahman cannot reflect in Itself. Even if somehow It manages to reflect in Itself, how will it be possible to distinguish the reflected Brahman from the original Brahman already present in the upadhis? How can the reflected Brahman be singled out to be termed jiva and made to suffer? What was His offense? Why is it that the reflected Brahman becomes affected by upädhis and not the original Brahman, although the reflection is no different from the original? The Advaitavadīs have no consistent reply to these questions. Brahman has no internal parts: “Brahman contains no limbs or parts. It is inactive and of the nature of unalterable peace” (nişkalam nişkriyam santam, śu 6.79). But a formless, indivisible object can- not have a relation with any upadhi, real or imaginary, and thus it cannot reflect in any medium. In response, the Advaitavādīs cite the analogy of a clear crystal that appears red when placed in front of a red flower. Just as the red color, which is formless and indivisible, is reflected in the crystal, 273 III Prameya so it is possible for Brahman to be reflected in Its upädhis. But this is a faulty argument. The red color in this analogy belongs to the flower, which projects its image through the crystal; thus, we per- ceive only the flower’s color in the crystal. The color exists simply as the flower’s attribute and cannot sustain itself independently. A flower, moreover, has shape, parts, and attributes. In sum, neither the color nor the flower compares adequately to Brahman. There- fore, like the analogy of the reflected sky, the Advaitavadīs have also applied this analogy incongruously. The Śruti says, “Brahman is free from any relation or associ- ation” (asango hy ayam puruṣaḥ, BAU 4.3.15). Therefore, Brahman cannot participate in any relationship with a reflecting medium. The Advaitavādīs, however, would interpret the word asanga here as meaning “devoid of real relations.” This implies that Brahman can have non-real relations or associations, created by māyā. As already shown, however, formless Brahman has no ability to mani- fest a reflection in an empirically real medium or to have any other relation with such a medium. This impossibility is even more defi- nite with respect to unreal relations with unreal mediums. Praśna Upanisad 4.10 confirms this, when it states, “That Brahman casts no shadow, has no body, and is colorless” (tad acchāyam aśariram alohitam). We can thus conclude that upadhis - whether real or unreal - can never impose themselves on pure Brahman. They affect only the deluded jivas. In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi presents more argu- ments against the Advaitavada doctrine, hypothetically considering Brahman’s upadhis as real. 274 Anuccheda 38 Refutations of Pratibimba-vāda and Pariccheda-vāda ३८ । तथा वास्तवपरिच्छेदादौ सति सामानाधिकरण्यज्ञानमात्रेण न तत्त्यागश्च भवेत् । “तत्पदार्थप्रभावस्तत्र कारणम्” इति चेदस्माकमेव मतं सम्मतम् ॥ IF, HOWEVER, there were real upadhis delimiting Brahman (pari- ccheda) or acting as the medium of Its reflection (pratibimba), a person could not get rid of them simply by intuitive knowledge of his essential oneness with the Supreme. And if the radical non- dualists propose that freedom from upadhis is due to the influ- ence of the Supreme Entity, referred to by the pronoun tat, then they are in agreement with our own view! Commentary ŚRILA JIVA GOSVAMI HERE exposes further complications that arise from accepting Brahman’s upadhis as empirically real. The radical nondualists advocate that a jīva can become free from the bondage of his upadhis by intuition of his identity with Brahman, assimilated from the Śrutis. Their idea was based on these Śruti statements: Thou art that. (CHU 6.8.7) It [the primal Self] knew only Itself as, “I am Brahman.” (BAU 1.4.10)2 tat tvam asi 2 tad ātmānam eva vedäham brahmasmi 275III Prameya The means to liberation is direct intuitive insight arising from dictums such as, “Thou art that.” (Brhan-naradiya Purāna 35.68)3 He who knows Brahman verily becomes Brahman. (MUU 3.2.9) The knower of the Self transcends grief. (CHU 7.1.3)5 Thus, with the apparent support of Vedic scripture, the Advaita- vada School claims that liberation is achieved through knowledge. Indeed, the Śruti says, “By knowing that [Brahman] alone, one tran- scends death; there is no other way to cross over” (tam eva viditvä ati mṛtyum eti, nanyaḥ pantha vidyate’yanaya, su 3.8, 5.15). And in Bhagavad Gita, Śrī Kṛṣṇa says: As a blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities. (GĪTĀ 4.37) Continuing this idea in the next two verses, Śrī Kṛṣṇa says, “There is nothing as purifying as direct knowing” (na hi jñänena sadṛśam pavitram iha vidyate) and “Having come upon the state of direct knowing, one quickly attains supreme peace” (jñānam labdhvā parāṁ śāntim acirenādhigacchati, GĪTĀ 4.38-39). In effect, the Advaitavadīs think that the jiva is like an infant from a wealthy family who has gotten lost in a busy public place and is then found and raised by some poor man. As a result of this misfortune, compounded by ignorance of his true identity, the baby grows up in a humble setting as the child of the poor man. Later, the child may be recognized by a servant of his father. As soon as he comes to realize that he is the son of a wealthy man, all his poverty vanishes. He does not have to toil hard to get rid of this poverty. In fact, he was never really poor, just unaware of his actual state, and thus simply coming to a proper understanding of his real identity was sufficient to reverse the situation. tat tvam asy-adi-väkyebhyaḥ jñānam mokṣasya sadhanam 4 brahma veda brahmaiva bhavati
• tarati sokam atma-vit “yathaidāmsi samiddho’gnir bhasma-sāt kurute’rjuna jänägniḥ sarva-karmāņi bhasma-sāt kurute tatha 276 38 Refutations of Pratibimba-vada and Pariccheda-vāda Another example: A person forgets that he put his watch in his pocket and searches for hours without any luck. Finally, a friend comes along and sees the watch strap sticking out of his pocket and tells him, “Your watch is in your pocket.” At once the person realizes that he has the watch and his anxiety is gone. Knowledge alone was sufficient to relieve his distress. Similarly, the Advaitavādīs say, the jiva is nothing but deluded Brahman. As soon as he realizes this by properly hearing and reflecting upon the Vedic instructions, he becomes liberated. He then understands that Brahman is not distant from him, for in fact he himself is Brahman. His only obstacle was ignorance, which was subsequently removed by hearing the Vedas. Of course, for the process to be effective one’s heart must be pure, and to achieve this purity, Śrīpāda Sankarācārya recommends the “fourfold prac- tice” (sadhana-catuṣṭaya) consisting of discriminative insight, dis- passion, “the six accomplishments,” and a fervent urge toward liberation. According to Sankara, one of the four maha-vākyas (essential statements of all Vedic instructions) is tat tvam asi: “You are that [Brahman].” This statement underlines the oneness of the jiva with Brahman. But, we have to ask, since Brahman is all-pervading and all-knowing while the jiva is atomic and limited in knowledge, how can they be identical? To this, the Advaitavadīs reply that tat tvam asi should not be understood in its primary literal sense but only in a secondary sense. One can recognize the actual oneness between the jiva and Brahman only when one sets aside their contrasting qualities - omnipresence and omniscience versus atomic size and limited knowledge- and recognizes only their mutual quality of consciousness. This process is called bhaga-tyäga-lakṣaṇa, or applying a meta- phorical meaning to a phrase by discarding part of a word’s literal meaning or some of its qualifications. This is used in Bhagavad Gitā when Śrī Kṛṣṇa addresses Arjuna as purusa-vyäghra, a tiger among “The six accomplishments are control of the mind (sama), restraint of the senses (dama), dispassion (uparati), forbearance (titikşa), fixity of mind (samadhana), and faith in scriptures (śraddha). 277 III Prameya men. Arjuna is not a tiger. But to call him a tiger implies that he has some characteristics of a tiger, such as bravery. But he does not have other qualities, such as ferociousness. Thus, one can realize the true identity of Brahman and the jiva only when one sets aside the upadhi that limits Brahman into becoming a jiva. To support this realization, the guru instructs the disciple, “You are that.” Since the Śruti statements cannot be meaningless, Sankara contends, this is the only way to understand this mahā-vākya. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi answers this whole argument by pointing out that even when a jiva is absorbed in hearing the Vedic sound conveying the knowledge that he is one with Brahman, the upadhi covering the jiva, which is empirically real, will not magically dis- solve. A man bound by chains will not become free just by med- itating that his fetters are cut. A rabbit will not turn into an ele- phant just by meditating, “I am an elephant, I am an elephant.” Such achievements would be possible only if the upadhis were merely apparent. An intoxicated office clerk may think he is the President of the United States, but when he becomes sober, he understands that he is just an office clerk. If the upadhis cover- ing Brahman are real, the task of removing them is not so easy. Mere knowledge is not sufficient to liberate the jiva from māyā. If knowledge alone were actually sufficient for liberation, why do the scriptures recommend various austerities, penances, and rituals for self-purification? The Advaitavādīs can only maintain that these are preliminary steps for purifying the heart, which qualifies a candidate to under- stand the meaning of the Śrutis’ maha-vakyas. But according to the sastras accepted by them, knowledge (vidya) and ignorance (avidya) are both products of maya. So, even if a jiva, by studying Vedic texts, surmounts his avidya with the help of vidya, he will still be bound by vidyä. How will he do away with this other upadhi, vidya? Until he is free from all upadhis, he cannot realize Brahman, which is beyond both vidya and avidya. Śrī Kṛṣṇa discusses this point with Uddhava in the Eleventh Canto of the Bhāgavatam: 278 38 Refutations of Pratibimba-vada and Pariccheda-vāda O Uddhava, understand that both knowledge (vidya) and ignorance (avidya), which lead to liberation and bondage [respectively] for embodied beings, are two primordial energies of Mine, generated by My maya. (SB 11.11.3) Here, Bhagavan explicitly states that vidya is also a product of māyā. When He says that vidya leads to liberation, He does not mean that vidya alone can grant it, because no one can become free from mäyā without the unequivocal submission of consciousness to its original source, Śrī Bhagavan. He emphatically declares this to Arjuna: This divine energy of Mine, maya, consisting of the three gunas of primordial nature, is certainly difficult to overcome. Yet, those who have become fully and exclusively sheltered in Me are able to cross beyond it. (GĪTĀ 7.14)” The term vidya means “knowledge” and also “aesthetic knowing in the form of devotion.” In Upanisadic statements, such as “having known [Him alone]” (tam eva viditva ati mṛtyum eti), the word vidi- tva really means “by devotionally recognizing Him, unmediatedly knowing His essence.” It does not mean having knowledge devoid of devotion. Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms this: O Arjuna, My birth and activities are transcendental. One who knows them in reality is not reborn after giving up the body, but comes to Me. (GĪTĀ 4.9) 10 Here, the same root, vvid (to know), is being used, and in this context it means “knowing that is of the nature of devotion.” Empirical knowledge is a feature of maya, whereas transcendental knowledge of Bhagavan is manifested by the illuminating power of bhakti, an aspect of Bhagavan’s intrinsic potency. Spiritual knowl- edge is inseparable from bhakti. The process of hearing - or, in vidyavidye mama tanu viddhy uddhava saririņām mokşa-bandha-kari ādye mayaya me vinirmite " daivi hy eşa guna-mayi mama maya duratyaya mam eva ye prapadyante māyām etam taranti te 10 janma karma ca me divyam evam yo vetti tattvataḥ tyaktva deham punar janma naiti mäm eti so’rjuna 279 III Prameya other words, receiving knowledge - is in fact listed first among the nine primary means of devotion. A passage from the Bṛhad- aranyaka Upanisad bears out the conclusion that vidya indicates knowledge coextensive with devotion: “Upon knowing, wisdom is to be enacted” (vijñāya prajñaṁ kurvita, BAU 4.4.21). Here, the word used for wisdom, prajñā (enlightened perspectivity), conveys the same meaning as vidya, and so the sentence indicates, “Upon knowing Him, devotion is to be enacted.” Also, in GITA 9.2, the Lord says, “This is the king of knowledge,” raja-vidya. From the context it is evident that here vidya means “devotion.” Thus, it is devotion and not mere knowledge that cuts the bonds of māyā, as stated in GITA 7.14 (daivi hy eṣa guna-mayi) and confirmed later on: I cannot be seen in the manner that you are now seeing Me, by studying the Vedas, by undergoing penances, by charity, or by wor- ship. O conqueror of enemies, Arjuna, it is only by complete and unalloyed devotion that I can be authentically known, directly per- ceived, and taken shelter of, exactly as I am. (GĪTĀ 11.53-54)11 If the Advaitavadīs respond by suggesting that it is possible for the jiva to remove all upadhis and become Brahman by the mercy of the all-powerful and benign Brahman, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī is glad to accept this idea, since it amounts to acquiescence to the Vaisnava view. The radical nondualists insist that Brahman is devoid of all attributes and potencies, but if that same Brahman is now required to bless the jiva, then It has to have some potency, namely, mercy. By allowing featureless Brahman to have any potency at all, the Advaitavādīs conform to the Vaisnava definition of Parabrahman as Bhagavan, the Supreme Personal Absolute. In that case, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi says, “Their view then agrees with ours” (asmākam eva mata-sammatam). näham vedair na tapasă na danena na cejyaya sakya evam-vidho drastum dṛṣṭavan asi mam yatha bhaktyä tv ananyaya sakya aham evar-vidho’rjuna jñātum draştum ca tattvena praveşturn ca parantapa 280 38 Refutations of Pratibimba-vada and Pariccheda-vāda In Bhagavat Sandarbha, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi will establish that even for Brahman realization, one must take shelter of Bhaga- vān. Next, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī exposes the fallacies of the second alternative, that Brahman’s upadhis are unreal (avidyaka). 281 Anuccheda 39 Further Refutations of Pratibimba-vāda and Pariccheda-vāda ३९ । उपाधेराविद्यकत्वे तु तत्र तत्परिच्छिन्नत्वादेरप्यघटमानत्वादाविद्यकत्वमेवेति घटाकाशादिषु वास्तवोपाधिमयतद्दर्शनया न तेषामवास्तवस्वप्नदृष्टान्तोपजीविनां सिद्धा- न्तः सिध्यति घटमानाघटमानयोः सङ्गतेः कर्तुमशक्यत्वात् । ततश्च तेषां तत् तत् सर्वम- विद्याविलसितमेवेति स्वरूपमप्राप्तेन तेन तेन तत् तद् व्यवस्थापयितुमशक्यम् ॥ CONVERSELY, if the upadhis are only apparently real (avidyaka), then Brahman’s delimitation (pariccheda-vāda) and reflection (pratibimba-vada) are also only apparently real, since these pro- cesses do not in fact occur. Since the Advaitavādīs’ doctrine is based on the analogy of an unreal dream state, such analogies as that of the pot and open space (ākāśa), which involve real upādhis, cannot serve to establish it. No proper analogy can be drawn between real and unreal things. Therefore, the Advaita- vādīs’ theories of division and reflection are nothing but the play of illusion, unprovable due to their inherently faulty application of analogies. Commentary IN THE PREVIOUS TWO ANUCCHEDAS, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has shown that if Brahman’s upadhis are understood as empirically real (vyāva- hārika), one cannot satisfactorily explain the existence of either the jivas or Isvara. Now he considers the Sankarites’ second option, 282 39 Further Refutations of Pratibimba-vada and Pariccheda-vāda that Brahman’s upadhis are only apparent (pratibhāsika). In this anuccheda, the upadhis are called avidyaka, or “illusory,” a specific reference to the prätibhäsika grade of reality as defined in Advai- tavāda theory. In this context, the Sankarites do not intend “illu- sory” to mean altogether non-existent, for non-existence can never give rise either to the jiva or to Isvara. Rather, they say, Brahman’s upadhis are “illusory,” in the sense that they exist on neither the empirical nor the ontological level. They are an intangible apparent reality, akin to dreams, misperceptions, and hallucinations. The objects one perceives in dreams, misperceptions, or hallu- cinations are intangible. In a dream, one may eat a big feast, for example, but upon waking up, one will still feel hungry; the feast appears real only while dreaming. Sublation (badhaka) and support (sadhaka) of prior perceptions are possible between things belong- ing to the same grade of reality. Thus, hunger on the vyavahārika level cannot be appeased by eating a feast on the pratibhāsika level. Similarly, intangible, misperceived, or imagined objects, such as a “snake” that is in fact a rope, will cause fear, but that fear of the snake will persist only as long as the misperception or hallucination continues. This kind of illusory reality (pratibhasika-satta) is infe- rior to both empirical existence and ontological existence. Nonethe- less, the Advaitavadīs may posit that such apparent upadhis can cause Brahman to take on the characteristics of the jivas and Isvara. The first step in refuting this erroneous theory is to point out that an effect is always dependent on its cause and that specific effects arise from specific causes. For example, one cannot make water taste sweet by adding salt. It follows, therefore, that if the upadhis imposed on Brahman are only apparent realities, then they cannot produce empirical reality. A daydream may be a pleasant reverie, but no one gains any real benefit by imagining he has been crowned emperor of the world. Instead, as the daydreamer whiles away the time, he may lose an opportunity for gaining some practical benefit in the real world. However much he dreams, his apparent reality will never become empirically real. In the context of discussing real upadhis, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī has already refuted the two analogies the Advaitavādīs use to 283 III Prameya explain pratibimba-vada and pariccheda-vada - the analogy of the sun reflecting in many water pots and that of open space (ākāśa) becoming delimited by a pot. These analogies are also inappropri- ate here. The Advaitavadīs may justifiably presume open space to be empirically real and thus delimitable by such an upadhi as a pot. But Brahman is neither empirical nor divisible, and therefore, it is impossible for empirical upadhis to delimit It. Any delimitation of Brahman can occur only on the level of mere appearance, not in empirical reality. Such a pratibhāsika delimitation, unreal in the empirical sense, will not help explain how the jivas and Isvara come into being on the empirical plane. This leaves no consistent expla- nation of how indivisible formless Brahman can be divided into the jīvas and Iśvara, either by empirical or apparent upadhis. An adequate analogy must be as similar as possible to what it illustrates the greater the correspondence, the more pertinent the analogy. But in the analogy of all-pervading space and the pot, there is insufficient correspondence to the actuality depicted by the Māyāvādis: While all-pervading space and Brahman are simi- lar, the former’s upadhi, the pot, is empirical, whereas Brahman’s upādhis must be merely apparent. The impersonalists compare this world to a dream to show its illusory nature, that it does not really exist. But it is unjustifiable to equate the dream world (apparent reality) with the external world (empirical reality) in order to reach this conclusion. Dreams are pri- vate. No one can enter into and participate in another’s dream. The empirical world, on the other hand, is a shared reality. After wak- ing from a dream, we cannot go back into it. But after dreaming, we wake up to the same empirical reality experienced prior to enter- ing the dream state. So, it is improper to say that the world is just a dream. Virtuous and unwholesome deeds, which purify or pollute the heart of an agent, are not applicable to acts performed in dreams; they deliver their bitter and sweet fruits only in the empirical world. A crime committed in a dream is not punishable in the waking state grade of empirical reality. The analogy of a dream, therefore, is not adequate for explaining the appearance of the material world from 284 39 Further Refutations of Pratibimba-vada and Pariccheda-vāda Brahman. The Vedic scriptures present the dream analogy only to illustrate the temporary nature of this world, and thus inspire a sense of detachment from phenomenality in those desiring to walk the path of transcendence. The Advaitavadis’ only other alternative is to assign Brahman to empirical (vyavahārika) reality by placing It in the same class as all- pervading space, to which the Vedas compare It. But that leaves us with no ontological reality, in which case, the whole idea becomes absurd. Logically, ontological reality must exist, and the Vedas and numerous sages and enlightened mystics confirm this. All these arguments fail to establish the doctrines of pariccheda and pratibimba, which are thus left as nothing more than men- tal exercises for impersonal speculators. They provide no sound explanation of how pure Brahman, by adulteration with upadhis, manifests as many, namely, as Iśvara and the jivas. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi offers still more refutations of impersonalism in the next anuccheda. 285Anuccheda 40 Inconsistencies in Radical Nondualism, Advaitavāda ४० । इति ब्रह्माविद्ययोः पर्यवसाने सति यदेव ब्रह्म चिन्मात्रत्वेनाविद्यायोगस्यात्यन्ताभा- वास्पदत्वाच् छुद्धं तदेव तद्योगादशुद्ध्या जीवः । पुनस्तदेव जीवाविद्याकल्पितमायाश्रय- त्वादीश्वरस्तदेव च तन्मायाविषयत्वाज् जीव इति विरोधस्तदवस्थ एव स्यात् । तत्र च शुद्धायां चित्यविद्या । तदविद्याकल्पितोपाधौ तस्यामीश्वराख्यायां विद्येति तथा विद्याव- त्त्वेऽपि मायिकत्वमित्यसमञ्जसा च कल्पना स्यादित्याद्यनुसन्धेयम् ॥ IN THIS WAY, by basing their ideas on Brahman and avidyă (igno- rance) alone, the Advaitavadīs contradict themselves when they say that the one undivided Brahman, pure by virtue of being unadulterated consciousness and thus altogether free from con- tact with avidya, is nonetheless polluted by contacting avidya and thus becomes the jiva. Then again, the Advaitavādīs claim that the same Brahman becomes the Supreme Being (Iśvara) owing to His being the shelter of māyā [the phenomenal world appearance], which is itself a fabrication from the jiva’s avidya. And yet, that very Brahman supposedly again becomes the jiva due to the influence of Iśvara’s maya. These two states, however, are clearly incompatible. The inevitable contradictions implicit in this view are that avidya is able to infiltrate pure conscious- ness [Brahman], that vidya (knowledge) is present within Iśvara, who is nonetheless an upadhi [upon Brahman] fabricated out of that avidya, and that although Iśvara is the proprietor of vidya, He is yet illusory in nature. We should carefully analyze how these and other speculative ideas are simply incoherent. 286 40 Inconsistencies in Radical Nondualism, Advaitavada Commentary IN THE PREVIOUS ANUCCHEDAS, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī has refuted the two main theories of radical nondualism, pariccheda-vāda and pratibimba-vāda. He showed that neither of these consistently explain the empirical world and the presence of the jivas and God within it. Now, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī points out in greater detail the fallacies in these theories. He argues that even if we accept either pariccheda-vada or pratibimba-vada as a description of how Brah- man becomes divided into the many jivas, still the contradiction between Brahman’s utter transcendence and the superimposition of avidya will remain unresolved. How can Brahman, which is indivisible pure consciousness, have portions that fall under the sway of maya and think of them- selves as jivas? How can knowledge and delusion share the same location? How can light and darkness coexist in one place? Being indivisible, Brahman cannot become fragmented to manifest the jivas. Moreover, ontological existence cannot include māyā (avidya), only Brahman. For māyā to be involved with Brahman, either Brahman would have to be downgraded to maya’s empirical level so It could be adulterated by upadhis, or else māyā would have to be upgraded to the ontological level of Brahman so that she could influence It. The first of these alternatives is impossible, because Brahman is without attributes and cannot change. The second alter- native amounts to dualism, because then maya and Brahman would have equal status on the plane of ontological reality. This, of course, contradicts the basic principles of nondualism. Under pressure of these arguments, the impersonalists may try to placate us with the claim that the vital issue at hand is not pre- cisely how the jiva came under the influence of mayā, but simply that he is now suffering in illusion. The house of material existence is now on fire; we do not have time to search out maya’s origin but should try to escape the fire quickly before it devours us, before we lose the opportunity of human life. Even if we grant this point, the Advaitavadīs must still convince us that the end they would have us seek, impersonal liberation, is 287 III Prameya in our best interest. This they cannot do. Our house may be on fire, but it does not follow that we should panic and jump out the nearest window to our certain death. As Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī indicates here, the Advaitavadīs say that after Brahman comes under the influence of avidya, it is called jiva. Then this jiva creates māyā by his imagination. A portion of Brah- man next gives shelter to maya and becomes known as Iśvara, the Supreme Lord. From that point on, mäyă follows Iśvara’s dictates and controls the jiva, who is Brahman covered by māyā. So, Ïśvara is the basis of maya, and the jiva is her viṣaya, or object of action. This is self-contradictory. This explanation is plagued with the logical fault called anyonyaśraya-dosa, or “the defect of mutual dependence.” Maya’s existence supposedly originates from the jiva, and the jiva’s existence also originates from māyā. This means that without maya there is no jiva and without jiva there is no māyā. In addition, a part of Brahman supposedly becomes Iśvara by contact- ing mayä, but then maya becomes subordinate to this Iśvara. In this view, even God cannot come into existence without the involve- ment of the finite living beings, who are themselves dependent manifestations of māyā. So, ultimately Iśvara is dependent on māyā for His existence and yet is her controller. Another absurdity in the pariccheda-vada and pratibimba-vāda presentations is the claim that maya has two features - vidya and avidya. The upadhi delimiting Brahman as Iśvara is supposedly maya’s vidya portion, which is predominantly of the nature of sattva- guna (illumination), while the upadhis limiting Brahman as the jivas constitute her avidya portion. In this way, Iśvara is the basis of the jivas’ illusion despite His being the embodiment of perfect knowl- edge, but the Advaitavādīs cannot explain how maya’s division into vidya and avidya comes into existence. Certainly, Brahman, being devoid of qualities, cannot create this division. The gunas of pri- mordial nature are always mixed with each other. There are no pure (i.e., unmixed) gunas anywhere. This is confirmed in Sankhya- kārikā: 288 40 Inconsistencies in Radical Nondualism, Advaitavada The gunas have the nature to subdue each other, to support each other, to produce material objects by combining with each other, and to remain mixed with each other. (Sankhya-kärikä 12)1 Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī advises us to carefully analyze other incon- sistencies like these in Advaitavada philosophy. For example, we should consider the following questions: If originally only feature- less Brahman and nothing else exists, where does avidya come from? Or, if avidya can bind Brahman, isn’t it more powerful than Brahman? The Advaitavadīs compare Brahman to a spider that weaves its own web and somehow gets bound by it, but this analogy presents Brahman as possessing attributes and potencies, reveal- ing a tacit acceptance of the Vaisnava theistic nondualism, i.e., a transrational wholism inclusive of transphenomenal distinction. We should also consider the following conundrums:

1. Since Brahman is unlimited and devoid of parts, It cannot possibly cast a reflection.
2. Brahman is described as pure awareness, but in order to func- tion, awareness needs an object apart from Itself. There is no meaning to knowledge without a known object. And when there is an object, absolute oneness is negated, because then there is the multiplicity of knower, knowledge, and known.
3. Brahman’s existence proves that It is potent, because anything that exists necessarily has some kind of energy or attributes. Thus, if nondualism is to be maintained, it cannot be of the rad- ical variety that acknowledges the ontological existence only of the subject, Brahman, devoid of all attributes. It can only be a wholistic nondualism or even a “holarchism” (involving a hierar- chy of nested holons), in which the subject, Bhagavan, includes and transcends His holarchically embedded parts, which are then understood as one with yet distinct from Him. From Sankhya philosophy we understand that the primeval pradhana generates the mahat-tattva, which then gives rise to the empirical ego. Granted that, as the Advaitavādīs say, a jīva can dis- solve his empirical ego by cultivating spiritual knowledge, but even anyonyabhibhaväśraya-janana-mithuna-vṛttayah 289 III Prameya so, the other two basic elements of primordial nature-mahat- tattva and pradhana - will remain undissolved. How will the ego- less jiva transcend the mahat-tattva and pradhana to realize Brah- man? The absence of material ego is not automatically equivalent to liberation, since at the time of cosmic dissolution, when the con- ditioned jīvas merge into the body of Mahaviṣṇu, they are devoid of material ego but still bound by their karma. Absence of empiric ego will make one a jīvan-mukta, liberated while living, but not award atyantika-mukti, the ultimate and final liberation. A word has an inherent relationship with its meaning. Accord- ing to Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī in Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyakarana 2.1, a word that refers to something denotes either a substance, a quality, a class, or an activity. Certainly the word brahma represents neither a class nor an activity. If Brahman were a quality, there would have to be another substance which possessed that quality, since no quality can exist without belonging to some substance. If, as the last alternative, Brahman is a substance, then It must possess quali- ties, because an eternal substance cannot exist without qualities. In either case, Brahman becomes involved in dualism. To circumvent this problem, the radical nondualists reply that Brahman is not the primary or direct meaning of the word brahma, but It is the lakṣya (indicative meaning). But such an occurrence is not possible. No word can have a lakṣya-artha without having a mukhya-artha (primary meaning). Laksya-artha comes into play only when the primary meaning is not appropriate. For example, the word ganga refers to the famous holy river in India, but in the phrase gangayam ghoṣaḥ (lit., “a hamlet in the river Ganga”), the primary meaning of the word ganga is dropped and the indicative meaning, “on the bank of the Ganga,” is accepted. Advaitavadīs explain this material world on the basis of māyā, which is neither sat (real) nor asat (unreal). They say that maya is thus inexplicable (anirvacaniya). But in Bhagavad Gita, Śrī Kṛṣṇa recognizes only two categories, sat and asat: The unreal (asat) has no existence and the real (sat) has no non- existence. The definite conclusion regarding these two grades 290 40 Inconsistencies in Radical Nondualism, Advaitavāda of being has been directly apperceived by seers of the truth. (GĪTĀ 2.16)2 There is no mention here or in any other genuine scripture of an inexplicable third category of being. Thus, there is no founda- tion for the Mayāvādīs’ concept that maya and the material world generated from it belong to some inexplicable third category. To prove their contention that the material world is inexplicable (anirvacaniya or mithya), neither real nor unreal, the Sankarites cite the well-known example of the rope and the snake. In semidark- ness, a rope may be mistaken for a snake. They say that if the snake perceived in the rope were completely non-existent (asat), no one would ever mistake a rope for a snake in semidarkness, because an utterly non-existent thing can never be perceived. So, the “snake” is not non-existent, but still it cannot be considered real (sat) either, because in sufficient light no snake will be seen. Thus, there must be a third category of being, separate from both sat and asat. This third category is anirvacaniya, or inexplicable, and to it the Sankarites assign māyā. The truth, however, is that one need not resort to the Advaita- vada philosophy to explain the rope being mistaken for a snake. The snake and the rope are both real. A person who mistakes a rope for a snake must have previously experienced a real snake, or known of it from reading, hearing, seeing a photo, or watching a video, and the environmental conditions must be insufficient for correct per- ception. The person’s prior experience of snakes, therefore, will cause the mind to superimpose the impression of a snake on the rope in semidarkness. By contrast, someone who has no experi- ence of snakes will never mistake a rope for a snake. An infant, for example, will never mistake a rope for a snake. Thus, there is no inexplicable third category of being in material existence, as the Advaitavadīs claim. Moreover, it is not only that a rope is mistaken for a snake. Sometimes a snake can also be mis- taken for a rope. So, in keeping with this analogy, it should not be nasato vidyate bhavo nabhavo vidyate sataḥ ubhayor api dṛṣṭo’ntas tv anayos tattva-darśibhiḥ 291 III Prameya evidenced only that Brahman is mistaken for the world; rather, it should also be seen at times that one mistakes the world for Brah- man. But that never happens. One mistakes a rope for a snake because of the existence of some identifiable similarity between them, i.e., they both are long, slender, and curving. But there is no similarity between the world and Brahman. Thus, it is impossible to mistake Brahman for the world or to superimpose Brahman upon the world. Since Advaitavādīs accept Brahman alone as the ontological real- ity, they say that even scriptures that teach such statements as tat tvam asi (“You are that”) are true only empirically. Although such declarations have the power to uplift those who hear them, they are not absolutely true in the ontological sense. In this way, the Sankarites reveal yet another inconsistency in their system. If the scriptures are only empirically real, how can they elevate anyone beyond maya? By this logic, even the enlightened writings of such liberated sages as Yajnavalkya and Sankara are unable to liberate their readers, for, not being ontologically real, they must be full of relative imperfections. In truth the jiva is not, as the Advaitavadīs claim, merely an adul- terated version of Brahman. As Śrī Kṛṣṇa states in Bhagavad Gitā, “The living being (jiva) in this conditional world is an eternal inte- grated part of Me alone” (mamaivāmśo jiva-loke jiva-bhūtaḥ sanata- naḥ, GITA 15.7). Thus, the jiva can never lose his eternal inherent identity of being an integrated part encompassed by the conscious Whole by merging back into the Brahman it supposedly really is. When wheat berries and rice grains are mixed, they do not merge into one another and lose their separate identities. We can easily distinguish the wheat from the rice. If, however, we mix papaya seeds with similar-looking black peppercorns, we may have diffi- culty distinguishing between them. Still, this does not mean that they have lost their distinct identities. Likewise, when water and ink are mixed, each substance retains its separate identity. Only because it is difficult for us to distinguish between them do the two liquids appear to have merged. The water molecules and the ink molecules have not merged to become all ink, 292 40 Inconsistencies in Radical Nondualism, Advaitavāda all water, or something else. One indication that the substances do not merge is that when a glass of ink is poured into a pail of water, the total volume of liquid increases by one glass, and the same hap- pens when a glass of water is poured into a pail of ink. In neither case do the substances merge, which would require that the final volume be identical to the prior one. Similarly, the jivas cannot merge into Brahman and lose their identity. Of course, if a jiva aspires for absolute identity in Brahman and undergoes the appropriate spiritual discipline directed toward that end, the all-merciful Bhagavan will self-manifest to that jiva merely as unqualified Brahman and support the imaginal experi- ence of attaining literal oneness with Him. In reality, God and the jivas are always distinct, and Bhagavan and His pure devotees are always aware of this distinction. Having established that the Advaitavadīs’ conclusions are opposed to the truths directly revealed in Vyasadeva’s supracogni- tive samadhi, and having highlighted some of the prominent defects in their logic, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī next argues that the monistic con- clusion also contradicts the experience of Sukadeva Gosvāmi, the principal speaker of Srimad Bhagavatam. 293 Anuccheda 41 Śrīla Vyasadeva’s Direct Experience Does Not Support Absolute Nondistinction ४१ । किं च यद्यत्राभेद एव तात्पर्यमभविष्यत् तर्ह्येकमेव ब्रह्माज्ञानेन भिन्नं ज्ञानेन तु तस्य भेदमयं दुःखं विलीयत इत्यपश्यदित्येवावक्ष्यत् । तथा श्रीभगवल्लीलादीनां वास्तवत्वा- भावे सति श्रीशुकहृदयविरोधश्च जायते ॥ FURTHERMORE, if the absolute oneness of the jivas with Brah- man were the actual purport of Srimad Bhagavatam, Sūta Gosvāmi would have reported that what Śrīla Vyasadeva wit- nessed in the state of samadhi was how the one Brahman becomes divided due to ignorance, and how knowledge dispels the suffer- ing caused by this duality. And if Bhagavan’s divine play and qualities were unreal, it would contradict what Sri Sukadeva experienced in his heart. Commentary HAVING PRESENTED his logical refutations of radical nondualism, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī now proceeds to disprove it by reference to śabda- pramāņa, or divine sound revelation. This is the Vedic system. Logic by itself cannot self-evidently disclose the Absolute Truth, Bhaga- vän. In transcendental matters such as this, the final authority is always self-authoritative scripture. Scriptural evidence is so deci- sive that even if a certain claim defies conventional logic but is sup- ported by sabda-pramana, it should be accepted as conclusively true. 294 41 Śrila Vyasadeva’s Direct Experience Does Not Support Absolute Nondistinction Any standard of truth lower than this would be inconsistent with Vedantic epistemology, which is based on the axiom that the Vedas emanate from the Absolute and are thus infallible. Earlier, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī demonstrated that Srimad Bhagava- tam is the supreme pramana in the matter of the direct knowing of Reality. Now, he subjects the radical nondualist view to the author- itative criteria established by Srimad Bhagavatam’s disclosure. The essential message of the Bhagavatam, or in other words, the self- disclosure of its essential truths of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayo- jana, is found in the verses narrating what Śrīla Vyasa witnessed in the state of unmediated trance-beginning with the supreme sub- ject, Bhagavan, who was seen to be inclusive of His own intrinsic potency as well as His subordinate extrinsic potency, māyā. What was disclosed to Vyasa was not a nondifferentiated Brah- man being overpowered by maya and turning into many jivas. Rather, He saw that the jiva is distinct from Bhagavan and is capti- vated by māyā because of misidentifying the self as independent of the Lord. Vyasadeva thus saw that the cause of the jiva’s suffering is this false sense of independence born of misplaced identity. In one and the same vision, the means corresponding to the inherent dis- tinction between the jiva and Bhagavan was revealed to Vyasa. He saw that the solution to the jiva’s predicament is the total offering of the self in devotion to the Supreme Person (bhakti-yogam adhokṣaje), not imagining a state of oneness with Him. Sūta Gosvāmi’s prayers to Sukadeva Gosvāmī, his spiritual teacher, confirm that identity in unqualified Brahman involves a state of lesser ontological completion or a lesser intensity of aes- thetic value. While speaking Srimad Bhagavatam to the sages at Naimiṣāranya, Sūta Gosvāmī specifically mentions that originally Śukadeva was firmly established in the bliss of Brahman. Later, when he heard selected Srimad Bhagavatam verses describing the divine play and attributes of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personal Abso- lute, his heart was irresistibly drawn out of this fixity in Brahman and captivated by Bhagavan. Sukadeva was so entranced by this all-exceeding self-disclosure of Reality that he thoroughly studied the description of Bhagavan’s lila in Srimad Bhagavatam, and later 295111 Prameya he excelled at narrating the Bhāgavatam. Therefore, it is said that the Bhāgavatam, which is the ripened fruit of the tree of Vedic lit- erature, became even more relishable when it emanated from the mouth of Sukadeva. Suka means “parrot,” and Sukadeva’s name alludes to the poetic symbolism that fruits become sweeter after being pecked by parrots. When the fruit of the Bhāgavatam was touched by Sukadeva Gosvāmi’s lips and then tasted by Parīkṣit Mahārāja, it became sweeter than ever. Śrīla Sukadeva Gosvāmi’s attraction to the Bhagavatam indicates that the divine play and attributes of Bhagavan are both real and completely transcendental (beyond even Brahman); otherwise, a liberated sage like Sukadeva, who was beyond all mundane desires, would have never taken an interest in them. Sukadeva Gosvāmi, the most eminent of all Brahman-realized transcendentalists, demon- strated by his own experience and behavior the falsity of the idea of absolute oneness between Bhagavan and the jivas. Thus, we can conclude that the keys to the doctrine of radi- cal nondualism - pariccheda-vada and pratibimba-vada - are sup- ported neither by logic nor by the scriptures, at least not by the sup- reme scriptural pramana, Śrimad Bhagavatam. Advaitavādīs derive their opinions only from misinterpretations of scriptural truths, with the result that the innocent who hear their explanations become confused. Next, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī explains the purpose of the monistic statements found in the Vedic scriptures. 296 Anuccheda 42 The Valid Interpretation of Pratibimba-vāda and Pariccheda-vāda ४२ । तस्मात् परिच्छेदप्रतिबिम्बत्वादि - प्रतिपादकशास्त्राण्यपि कथञ्चित् तत्सादृश्येन गौण्यैव वृत्त्या प्रवर्तेरन् । “अम्बुवदग्रहणात् तु न तथात्वम्” (ब्र० सू० ३।२।१९ ) “वृद्धिहा- सभाक्त्वमन्तर्भावादुभयसामञ्जस्यादेवम्” (ब्र०सू० ३ | २ | २०) इति पूर्वोत्तरपक्षमयन्या- याभ्याम् ॥ THEREFORE, Scriptural passages that appear to support such doc- trines as pariccheda-vada and pratibimba-vada must be under- stood in a secondary sense - that is, as describing Brahman in terms of Its partial correspondence with the ordinary processes of division (pariccheda) and reflection (pratibimba). Vedānta-sūtra confirms this idea: “But there is no ‘such- ness’ (tathātva) [of Brahman, i.e., no state of Brahman being like the reflected sun or the demarcated earth], because of the non-apprehension (agrahanat) [of Brahman’s remoteness from the reflecting medium or delimitability by any circumscrip- tion], as in the case of water [which is remote from the sun or which demarcates the earth]. There is, however, participation in [apparent] increase and decrease on account of [Brahman’s] immanence [within everything], because there is then compati- bility between both [i.e., the thing illustrated (Brahman) and the illustration (the increase or decrease of the sun’s reflection or of demarcated land)] and thus [the purport of scripture is thereby fulfilled]” (vs 3.2.19-20). The first of these sutras presents the 1ambuvad agrahanat tu na tathatvam → 297 III Prameya opponent’s objection (pūrva-pakṣa), and the second replies to that objection (uttara-paksa). Commentary THE ADVAITAVĀDĪS ACCEPT THE VEDAS as the supreme author- ity and cite them profusely in support of their opinions. Indeed, many of the Vedic references they quote may seem to support their theories, but here Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi explains how to correctly understand the apparently monistic statements in the Vedas. In Sanskrit, words have two kinds of meaning-primary, called mukhya-vṛtti, and secondary, called gauņi-vṛtti. Vedic scholars say that each word has some particular potency, which creates a spe- cific relationship between the word and its meaning. For example, the word “cow” has a potency by which it refers to a particular entity having four legs, a tail, two eyes, a dewlap, an udder, and other features. Sometimes, however, in a particular context, a word’s primary meaning fails to convey a relevant sense. In such cases we should conclude that the expression is figurative and accept some appropriate secondary meaning. Whenever the primary meaning of a scriptural statement is inappropriate, there must be a sec- ondary meaning intended, because scriptural statements, being apauruşeya and thus free of defects, cannot be meaningless. In Bhagavad Gita, Śrī Kṛṣṇa addresses Arjuna as “a tiger among men” (puruşa-vyaghra). In its primary sense, the word “tiger” refers to a ferocious animal with claws and fangs. Arjuna was certainly not such an animal, but since Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s words cannot be mean- ingless, the need arises for a figurative interpretation of purușa- vyäghra. Here, the phrase is a metaphor, in which Kṛṣṇa is calling Arjuna a tiger only to indicate his courage and prowess as a warrior. The word “tiger” in this phrase applies to these two characteristics that the tiger and Arjuna have in common, not to the primary sense of a tiger’s form, nature, and so forth. vrddhi-hräsa-bhaktvam antar-bhavad ubhaya-sämañjasyädevam 298 42 The Valid Interpretation of Pratibimba-vada and Pariccheda-vāda In the same way, Vedic texts that appear to support the radi- cal nondualist view should not be abandoned as ambiguous bab- blings just because their primary meaning contradicts the con- clusion of Śrīla Vyasa’s trance. Rather, we should interpret these statements in a way consistent with the underlying purport of the Vedas. Accepting them literally would lead to confusion and con- tradiction, while rejecting them outright may lead to contempt for the apauruşeya-sabda. In the opinion of Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi, one must explore secondary meanings that agree with Śrīla Vyasa’s experience. To support this judgment, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī refers us to VS 3.2.19-20. Vedānta-sutra is divided into four chapters (adhyayas), each having four sections (pādas). These are further divided into adhikaranas (topics). Each adhikarana includes a topic statement from the Upanisads, followed by a doubt concerning that statement, then an opponent’s position (purva-paksa), then the right conclu- sion (siddhanta), and finally sargati, a demonstration of how the adhikarana relates to the preceding and the succeeding adhikara- ņas. Some sutras are simply antitheses that represent the opinions of various sages and philosophers. These are always followed by siddhanta-sutras. Sutra eighteen of Chapter Three, second pada, establishes that the intent of referring to the jiva as a reflection of Paramātmā is not to show that Paramātmā becomes the jiva by reflection, but to show that Paramātmā is distinct from the jiva, just as any real object is different from its reflection. If an object and its reflection were absolutely nondifferent, they could not be distinguished from each other. Thus, the metaphor of the sun and its reflection in water is used to establish not the oneness of Paramātmā and jivātmā, but just the opposite. Vedanta-sutra states, “And for that very reason [i.e., because the jiva is distinct from Brahman], the analogy is upheld, just like the sun and its reflection” (ata eva copamā suryakādi-vat, VS 3.2.18). A doubt may then be raised: “This very analogy proves that Paramātmā reflects in avidya and appears to become the jiva. Where is the fault in this interpretation?” 299 III Prameya The next sutra (vs 3.2.19) answers this doubt. It establishes that there is no “suchness” of Brahman that could make possible Its reflection. This means that it is contrary to Brahman’s very nature to be capable of reflection. Furthermore, even if Brahman could be reflected, Its reflecting medium would have to be remote from It, just as water is remote from the sun. While commenting on this sutra in Govinda-bhāṣya, Śrīla Baladeva Vidyabhūṣaṇa explains that since Brahman is all-pervading, no object can possibly be dis- tant from It. Therefore, while the sun can cast a reflection in water because it is distant from the water, Brahman can cast no reflection in anything because It is all-pervading. Therefore, the jiva cannot be a reflection of Brahman. Although the claim of this sutra is valid, it does not support those scriptural statements that seem to indicate that the jiva is but a reflection of Brahman. It is in this sense that Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi calls this sūtra a pūrva-paksa, an opponent’s argument. But if Brahman does not reflect as the jiva the way the sun reflects on water, what do the Śruti statements to that effect actually mean? They must have some reasonable purpose. In vs 3.2.20, Vyasadeva responds with the siddhanta (conclusion). Although the comparison of the sun and its reflection with Brah- man and the jiva is inaccurate when interpreted literally, it is valid in regard to the secondary characteristics of the analogy: The sun is comparable to Brahman, because they both share the quality of immensity, whereas the sun’s reflection is comparable to the jiva because of the shared quality of minuteness. Why is it necessary to supply this secondary meaning? It is necessary in order to uphold the scripture’s conclusions, the overarching consistent message of the Vedas and corollary literature. Taking all this into considera- tion, the two sutras of this anuccheda could be rendered as follows, when considered in reference to the theory of reflection: The comparison of Brahman to the sun is appropriate not in its primary sense [of something capable of reflection] but in its sec- ondary sense, that of Brahman apparently participating in increase or decrease due only to the greatness or smallness of the adjuncts in which It is reflected. This interpretation fulfills the purpose of 300 42 The Valid Interpretation of Pratibimba-vada and Pariccheda-vāda the scriptural passages, and thus there is appropriateness of the thing illustrated [i.e., Brahman] and the illustration [the increase or decrease of the sun’s reflection, depending on the increase or decrease of water]. Other valid meanings of this analogy are as follows:
4. The jivas’ pains and pleasures do not affect Brahman, just as disturbances in a reflection of the sun do not affect the sun itself. 2. As a reflection of the sun is dependent on the sun, so the jivas are dependent on Brahman.
5. The jivas are localized like the sun’s reflections, while Brahman extends everywhere, just as the sun pervades space through its heat and light. If we were to similarly analyze the remaining Brahma-sutras, as well as the Vedas and Puranas, we would discover that all the scrip- tural statements indicating nondifference between God and the liv- ing entity, when understood in such a secondary sense, prove to be based on some common attributes between the analogy and its subject, and are faithful to the conclusion of the Vedas. The Vedic texts never propose absolute nondistinction of the jiva and Brah- man. Such a proposal would make the whole body of Vedic scripture self-contradictory; it would reduce the Vedas to babble, a waste of time for anyone wanting to study them for spiritual enlightenment. One may here raise the objection, “Instead of rejecting the pri- mary sense of the monistic statements found in sastra, why not accept them and instead reinterpret those statements that support theistic nonduality (i.e., a transrational nonduality that accom- modates ontological distinction within the nondual Whole)?” The answer is that the understanding derived from such an approach. would contradict Śrī Vyasa’s direct experience, which is the nucleus for the Srimad Bhagavatam, the topmost pramāņa. Next, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi explains the nondifference of Bhaga- vän and the jiva from the Vaisnava point of view, i.e., from the perspective of theistic nonduality. 301 Anuccheda 43 Valid Interpretation of Nondistinction as Inconceivable Oneness and Distinction ४३ । तत एवाभेदशास्त्राण्युभयोश्चिद्रूपत्वे जीवसमूहस्य दुर्घटघटनापटीयस्या स्वाभावि- कतदचिन्त्यशक्त्या स्वभावत एव तद्रश्मिपरमाणुगुणस्थानीयत्वाद् तद्व्यतिरेकेणाव्यति- रेकेण च विरोधं परिहृत्याग्रे मुहुरपि तदेतद्व्याससमाधिलब्ध सिद्धान्तयोजनाय योजनी- यानि ॥ THEREFORE, Scriptural statements referring to the jivas as non- different from Brahman should be consistently reconciled so as to concur with the conclusions Vyasa came to in the state of samă- dhi. This is accomplished by first removing the apparent contra- diction in the jivas’ being both different and nondifferent from Brahman. We should understand from the statements teaching nondifference that the jivas are one with Brahman in that both are pure consciousness (cid-rupa); yet, by Brahman’s inherent inconceivable potency, which renders possible even the [other- wise] impossible, the jivas are also innately distinct from Brah- man in terms of their being His parts, like the infinitesimal rays of the sun’s light. Commentary HERE, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī gives his definitive opinion about the rela- tion between the jivas and Bhagavan. Both Bhagavan and the jivas are inherently of the nature of consciousness, and it is primarily 302 43 Valid Interpretation of Nondistinction as Inconceivable Oneness and Distinction this common trait that the Vedic literature refers to when it speaks about their nondistinction. The purpose of these statements is to provide us a reference to understand the Supreme Personal Abso- lute, who is otherwise beyond our experience. Through simple reflection we know that we are conscious, so to give us some idea of the nature of Bhagavan, the Vedas employ various analogies and metaphors to illustrate that the Lord is conscious like us. Thus, in these descriptions, the jivas are sometimes depicted as nondifferent from Him. We should never misunderstand the Vedic statements about identity to mean that Bhagavan and the jiva are absolutely one in all respects. When we read, “He was a tiger in battle,” we do not think that a man actually turned into a tiger. Rather, we acknowledge a secondary meaning and understand that in battle the man was as ferocious as a tiger. We must accept similar secondary mean- ings for the statements in the Vedic literature about the oneness of the jiva and Brahman. Our conclusion must be consistent with the principles self-evidently revealed in Śrila Vyasadeva’s trance. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī is an advocate of Srimad Bhagavatam’s philos- ophy of acintya-bheda-abheda, which he alludes to in the last sen- tence of this anuccheda. Acintya-bheda-abheda means “inconceiv- able simultaneous oneness and difference” between Bhagavan and the living being, or in other words, between the conscious energetic Source and Its conscious energy. Energy cannot exist without the energetic and is thus in one sense identical to it. At the same time, energy can be said to be different from its energetic source, because energy is dependent on the energetic and because its actions are per- ceived to be separate from the energetic. Logically, such a relation of simultaneous oneness and distinction is ultimately inconceivable or transrational. The jivas are like atomic particles of light in relation to Bhaga- vän, who is like the sun. As the Svetāśvatara Upanisad states, “The Supreme Lord is inherently self-endowed with manifold energies” (parasya saktir vividhaiva śruyate, śu 6.8). Just as the rays of sun- light are neither completely different from nor exactly the same as the sun, so the jivas are simultaneously one with and different 303 III Prameya from Bhagavan. The Vedas’ descriptions of nondifference refer to the qualitative oneness of Bhagavan and the jivas (i.e., their shared essential identity of consciousness), and the Vedas’ descriptions of difference refer to their quantitative difference. The Bṛhad- aranyaka Upanisad offers an analogy to help us understand: Just as sparks emanate from a fire, so all these vital airs, plan- ets, devas, and living beings issue forth from the Supreme Self. (BAU 2.1.20)1 Sparks are obviously different from the fire that manifests them, but because they possess in minute quantity such fiery qualities as heat and light, they can be said to be “one with” the fire as well. In the same way, the jivas can be said to be simultaneously differ- ent from and one with the Supreme Self, Bhagavan. Any appar- ent inconsistency in this relationship is resolved by the inconceiv- able creative energy of Bhagavan, which can render the seemingly impossible possible. One should not confuse this inconceivable nature of Bhagavan with the inexplicable (anirvacaniya) nature that the Advaitavādīs ascribe to māyā. They claim that māyā is neither sat (real) nor asat (unreal) and is, hence, indescribable. Vaisnavas, however, do not say that Bhagavan and His energies are indescribable, for the scrip- tures clearly describe the nature of both. Instead, Vaisnavas empha- size that because Bhagavan’s nature and qualities are inconceivable to our limited mind and intellect, He can be understood and known only through sabda-pramaņa. Some of Bhagavan’s inconceivable features are mentioned in Isa Upanisad: The Supreme Lord walks and does not walk. He is far away but is very near as well. He is within everything, and yet He is outside of everything. (ISA 5)2 Śrīla Baladeva Vidyabhūṣaṇa gives us another analogy to help us yathägneḥ visphulinga vyuccaranti evam eva asmad ātmanaḥ sarve praṇaḥ sarve lokaḥ sarve devāḥ sarvāni bhūtāni vyuccaranti 2 tad ejati tan naijati tad düre tad v antike tad antarasya sarvasya tad u sarvasyasya bahyataḥ 304 43 Valid Interpretation of Nondistinction as Inconceivable Oneness and Distinction understand acintya-bheda-abheda-tattva: Two brāhmaṇa boys, one fair-skinned and one dark-skinned, share an identity in terms of class but are different as individuals. Similarly, Bhagavan and the jiva are one in that both are essentially of the nature of conscious- ness, but they are different in that Bhagavan is all-pervading, all- knowing, independent, and the controller of maya, whereas the jiva, in the state of conditional identification, is localized, ignorant, dependent, and subservient to māyā. Sometimes the Vedas equate the jiva with Brahman because he is subordinate to Brahman. The principle behind this idea is not unfamiliar. An ambassador, for example, is in one sense equal to the chief of state he represents, and because of this, any respect or disrespect shown to him reflects upon his chief of state. The rea- son people accept a rough equivalence between the two is that the ambassador has some of the chief of state’s power, but no one would ever foolishly consider them identical in all respects. The Advai- tavādīs err by choosing to acknowledge only one side of the Inte- grated Whole and emphasizing only the nondifference between the jiva and Brahman. This is why their version of nonduality may be termed as radical, because they accept only the subject, Brahman, denying Its inherent potencies, qualities, and attributes to the very root (from the Latin radix). 3 One should not treat the Vedas according to the logic of ardha- kukkuti, accepting only statements favorable to one’s viewpoint and rejecting opposing ones. The Vedas contain statements declaring both the difference and the nondifference between Brahman and the jiva. These seemingly contradictory views can most naturally be reconciled by application of the acintya-bheda-abheda metaphysics. This theistic view does not contradict any Vedic scripture or authen- tic point of view; rather, it resolves the apparent contradictions in the Vedic literature in accordance with the Vedas’ final conclusions. It is the natural and direct explanation of the Vedic literature. Ardha-kukkuṭi-nyaya refers to the logic of a foolish farmer who cut his hen in two parts and kept only the back part. He thought that in so doing, he would not have to bear the expense of feeding her but would still get the eggs that she laid from the hind part. 305306 III Prameya In summary, what follows are the ideas underlying the Vedic statements that speak of the oneness of Brahman and the jivas, employing the analogies of reflection and delimitation:
6. The jiva, like Brahman, is by nature purely conscious.
7. The jiva, like Brahman, is distinct from phenomena.
8. The jiva is one of Brahman’s energies.
9. The jiva is eternally dependent on Brahman.
10. The jiva can never be absolutely one with Brahman.
11. The jiva is constitutionally an eternal servitor of Brahman.
12. The analogies of reflection and delimitation help us understand the purely spiritual nature of Brahman. In the Paramatma Sandarbha, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi will further describe the living being and its relationship with Bhagavan. In the next anuccheda, he summarizes the facts concerning abhidheya, the means for directly realizing the subjective Reality, Bhagavan. Anuccheda 44 Acausal Devotion Is the Abhidheya ४४ । तदेवं मायाश्रयत्वमायामोहितत्वाभ्यां स्थिते द्वयोर्भेदे तद्भजनस्यैवाभिधेयत्वमाया- तम् ॥ SINCE THE SUPREME BEING and the individual being thus have distinct identities, the Supreme Being as the foundation and sup- port of maya and the individual being as deluded by her, it is con- cluded that devotional worship (bhajana) of the Supreme Being is specifically the means (abhidheya) that effectuates the stage of ultimate attainment. Commentary AFTER REFUTING RADICAL NONDUALISM, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi contin- ues to analyze Śrīla Vyasadeva’s trance. Śrīla Vyasadeva saw that the original Supreme Person, Svayam Bhagavan, is the foundation of māyā (māyām ca tad-apäśrayam, SB 1.7.4). He also saw that only the living entity is deluded by maya (yaya sammohito jivaḥ, SB 1.7.5). Thus, Bhagavan and the jiva are naturally distinct, for Bhagavan never comes under maya’s spell. God can never turn into a jiva, and the jiva can never turn into God. In correspondence with this directly perceived distinction, Śrīla Vyasadeva also saw that the means for the jiva’s release from bondage is the unconditional devo- tional turning of awareness to Bhagavan (bhakti-yogam adhokṣaje, SB 1.7.6). 307 In Prameya In this anuccheda, the word eva in the phrase tad bhajanasya eva means “only” and indicates that no process other than bhakti-yoga (i.e., bhajana) can cut the bonds of maya. No other method, not even jñāna-yoga or aşṭänga-yoga, is potent enough to permanently relieve the jivas’ miseries. As Śrī Kṛṣṇa declares in Bhagavad Gitä: This divine energy of Mine, maya, consisting of the three gunas of primordial nature, is certainly difficult to overcome. Yet, those who have become fully and exclusively sheltered in Me are able to cross beyond it. (GITA 7.14)’ Other paths may at best elevate a person to sattva-guna by puri- fying his heart of the lower gunas of rajas and tamas, but they can- not elevate him to full transcendence without the merciful help of bhakti. Narada Muni confirms this in his teachings to Yudhisthira Mahārāja: The sole purpose of all the injunctions in the scriptures is to conquer the six enemies in the form of lust, anger, greed, delusion, pride, and envy, or to control the five senses along with the mind. Yet, even after accomplishing this, if one does not engage in the yoga of devotion [to Bhagavan], then all his endeavors are merely labor and thus fruitless. (SB 7.15.28)2 Sage Camasa declares that without devotional worship of Bha- gavän one will fall down from one’s position (na bhajanty avajana- nti sthänad bhraṣṭaḥ patanty adhaḥ, SB 11.5.3). In this anuccheda, the word bhede (difference) is also significant. By using it, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi emphasizes that unless the jiva clearly understands that he is both distinct from and subordinate to Bhagavan, he will not become interested in pursuing devotional service. This conviction. is essential for advancement in spiritual life. The natural tendency of a conditioned being is to think him- self the controller, the lord of all he surveys, and this delusion 1daivi hy eşă guna-mayi mama mayă duratyaya mam eva ye prapadyante mayam etam taranti te sad-varga-samyamaikantāḥ sarva niyama-codanaḥ tad-anta yadi no yogan avaheyuḥ śramavahah 308 44 Acausal Devotion Is the Abhidheya makes him loathe the very idea of surrendering to God. Indeed, this tendency to control remains a great peril even for those actively engaged in bhakti-yoga, because the jivas’ desire to control is deep- rooted and can sprout forth whenever circumstances are conducive to it, choking off the tender creeper of devotion. Unless a candidate for unalloyed bhakti vigilantly guards against residual desires to be the master of all, these desires will likely manifest themselves and slow his progress toward pure awareness of and devotion to Śrī Kṛṣṇa. In the next anuccheda, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi concludes this part of his discussion with a reference to the prayojana, or final goal, of prema-bhakti-yoga. 309 Anuccheda 45 Love of God Is the State of Ultimate Completion, Prayojana ४५ | अतः श्रीभगवत एव सर्वहितोपदेष्टृत्वात् सर्वदुःखहरत्वात् रश्मीनां सूर्यवत् सर्वेषां परमस्वरूपत्वात् सर्वाधिकगुणशालित्वात् परमप्रेमयोगत्वमिति प्रयोजनं च स्थापितम् ॥ FROM THE ABOVE DISCUSSION it is definitely concluded that Śrī Bhagavan, the original Complete Person, is the most deserving recipient of supreme transcendental love, because He instructs all people about their ultimate welfare, because He removes all sorrows, because He is the Supreme Self of everyone like the sun in relation to its rays, and because He is perfectly endowed with all wonderful qualities. This being the case, it naturally also follows that love for Him is the final attainment (prayojana). Commentary THE VEDAS PROVIDE education in socio-religious integrity (dharma), prosperity (artha), wholesome fulfillment of desire (kama), and ulti- mately liberation from the cycle of birth and death (mokşa). These four are known as the puruşarthas, or aims of human life (deontol- ogy)! On the basis of logic or scriptural authority, every school of The puruşarthas are human aims not merely because they bring about beneficial consequences for human beings but, more primarily, because there is a moral imperative to perform them. On this account, the puruşärthas can be classed as deontology, which has been summarized in these words: “The term denotes an 310 45 Love of God Is the State of Ultimate Completion, Prayojana Indian philosophy and theology intends to direct the jivas toward liberation, which puts an end to all miseries. Śri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s teachings, however, lead beyond liberation. When Sanatana Gosvāmi approached Śrī Caitanya to inquire about the spiritual path, his first question was, “What is my duty after liberation?” This question was revolutionary. Before this, almost no one would even have thought to inquire about a fifth puru- ṣārtha; liberation was considered the ultimate aim. But Śrī Caitanya explained to Sanatana that prema, love of God, is the fifth and all- transcending aim of life (pañcama-puruṣārtha): preman pum-artho mahan. That prema is described as the fifth puruşărtha indicates that it belongs to an altogether distinct category of intrinsic value (artha), beyond the four traditional human aims. Śri Caitanya established this puruşartha with reference to the Vedas, and in the course of doing so, He relied especially on “the spotless Purana,” Srimad Bhagavatam, propounding it as the ulti- mate scriptural authority. Along with the final goal of pure love of God, Śrī Caitanya also established that Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the most com- plete manifestation of Absolute Reality and, therefore, the most worthy recipient of loving devotional service. Prior to Śri Caitanya, Vaisnavas generally rendered reverential devotion to Bhagavan in His majestic form of Vişņu. Śrī Caitanya Mahaprabhu, however, revealed to all His followers the fifth aim love of God. If a person realizes prema as the ultimate purpose of life, he will not deny the world’s reality, as radical nondualists are prone to do, because he will recognize the world as the real phe- nomenal power of his beloved Lord. A devotee perceives everything in this world in relation to God and uses whatever is available in His devotional service, directly or indirectly. One who adopts this integral outlook will quickly be endowed with the luminous qual- ities of Spirit. The egoic traits of lust, greed, envy, and so on will depart from him. Treating every living being as part of God, he will understanding of Ethics in which an ethics of duty or obligation is primary. The agent of moral decision and moral action is motivated by a duty to do what is right, in contrast to consequentialism, or an ethic based on the calculation of optimum consequences” (Thiselton 2005). 311 III Prameya become a well-wishing friend to all beings and not think of harming or exploiting anyone. These teachings are the most sublime, practical, and versatile of all spiritual philosophies. Although these teachings seem to empha- size transcendence of this world and ascension to the post-liberated spiritual domain, their real essence is to give up the misidentifica- tion with self and world as independent of God. Thus, by aligning awareness to the eternal consciousness that is prema, all aspects of ordinary life are radically transformed, revealing their intrin- sic value as manifestations of Divinity. Śrī Caitanya’s teachings are thus suitable for all people to study and practice, regardless of caste, creed, or nationality. By contrast, when a spiritual practitioner’s final objective is lib- eration, he will almost never develop a loving relationship with Bha- gavan. Rather, he is likely to reduce Bhagavan to a mere instru- ment for achieving his goal. Spiritual aspirants who are intent solely on liberation, such as the radical monists, may at first wor- ship the deity forms of Radha-Kṛṣṇa and then discard these forms at a supposedly higher stage when they imagine they have advanced to the level of Brahman realization. They think that because they have achieved oneness with the Supreme, they no longer require the deity forms. To such spiritualists, God is nothing more than a means to lib- eration, just as one uses a boat to cross a river and then leaves the boat on the river bank and walks away. From the perspective of the- istic Vedanta, such a view is in the ultimate sense a form of selfish- ness, and a denial of relationship with the Supreme Personal Divin- ity. Based on detachment and introversion, their doctrine doesn’t readily lend itself to the extension of warmth, sympathy, compas- sion, and serenity in human society. It tends, rather, to deperson- alize human life. A pure devotee advancing on the path of loving devotional service is not inclined to demand anything of his Lord, not even liberation. He desires only to please his worshipable Lord eternally. To that end he cheerfully tolerates any tribulation. Such unconditional love is in fact the prayojana, or goal of life, promoted by Srimad Bhagavatam. 312 45 Love of God Is the State of Ultimate Completion, Prayojana Although in the previous anuccheda Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī pro- posed that a jiva should worship Bhagavan as the means to get free from the clutches of maya, here he proceeds a step further: He rejects liberation as the prayojana and hints at a higher purpose- unconditional love of God, prema-bhakti. Śri Jiva will present a full discussion on prema-bhakti in Priti Sandarbha. In this anuccheda, Jiva offers four reasons why Svayam Bhaga- van is the most worthy recipient of love. First of all, Bhagavan is always concerned for the welfare of all sentient beings. Therefore, He repeatedly offers teaching both for the relative and ultimate ben- efit of conditioned beings. He personally avatarically descends to offer direct instruction, as He did when He taught Arjuna on the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, and, as Vedavyāsa, He compiled the Vedic literature. To make known the inherent mystery of being, He also sends His devotees to this material world as good-will ambassadors. Even on the material level, Bhagavan takes care of all living beings by impartially supplying them with such essentials as light, air, water, and food. Even atheists and agnostics are provided for. The second reason is that He relieves the miseries of the con- ditioned beings by helping to liberate them from illusion. To take advantage of this help, however, the jivas must surrender to Him: Abandon [dependence on] all forms of dharma and just surrender unto Me alone. I shall free you from all suffering. Do not grieve. (GĪTA 18.66)2 The third reason is that Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personal Abso- lute, is the ultimate svarupa, or Self, of all beings, just as the ulti- mate basis of the sun’s rays is the sun globe. The sun’s rays always depend on the sun, and they are glorious only in relation to the sun. In the same way, the jivas perpetually depend on God and become glorious only when established in inherent relatedness to Him through bhakti-yoga. Just as rivers naturally seek the ocean and become finally calm when they reach that destination, or as an 2 sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranaṁ vraja ahaṁ tvām sarva-papebhyo mokṣayiṣyami mã śucaḥ 313 III Prameya object thrown into the air will spontaneously return to the earth, so Kṛṣṇa is the ideal person in whom all jīvas may repose their love. The fourth reason is that Krsna is inherently self-endowed with all wonderful matchless qualities to their fullest extent. Of all the Supreme Lord’s own direct manifestations, His original two- handed form as a cowherd boy is the most beautiful and attractive. Thus, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī writes in Bhakti-rasämṛta-sindhu: Although from an ontological perspective, there is no difference in the essential nature of Śrī Kṛṣṇa and Lord Narayana, the husband of the Goddess of Fortune, still from the perspective of aesthetic relish or completion (rasa), Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s form is unparalleled. This, indeed, is the law of rasas. (BRS 1.2.59)3 This same Śrī Kṛṣṇa, along with all His personal attributes and potencies, self-manifested to Śrīla Vyasa in the state of supracogni- tive awareness. Vyasa also saw that love of Krsna is the ultimate completion of life (krsne parama-puruşe bhaktiḥ, SB 1.7.7). Thus, Śrī Jiva concludes through logic and scriptural analysis that Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the supreme object of love. He is the prayojana, the ultimate goal of life. Next, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi explains the importance of sadhana- bhakti, devotion in the stage of regulated practice. 314 siddhantatas tv abhede’pi kṛṣṇa-śrisa-svarupayoḥ rasenotkṛsyate kṛṣṇa-rupam eşa rasa-sthitiḥ Anuccheda 46 Direct Apperception of Abhidheya from the State of Samadhi 46.1 ४६ । तत्राभिधेयं च तादृशत्वेन दृष्टवानपि यतस्तत्प्रवृत्त्यर्थं श्रीभागवताख्यामिमां सात्व- तसंहितां प्रवर्तितवानित्याह- अनर्थेति । भक्तियोगः - श्रवणकीर्तनादिलक्षणः साधनभ- क्तिः । न तु प्रेमलक्षणः । अनुष्ठानं ह्युपदेशापेक्षं प्रेम तु तत्प्रसादापेक्षमिति । IN THE STATE OF SAMADHI, Śrīla Vyasadeva also directly per- ceived the means of ultimate attainment (abhidheya), as depicted above (in Anuccheda 44 ). Then, in order to propagate it, He com - posed this scripture called Srimad Bhagavatam, which is meant for those on the path of Ultimate Truth [the satvatas, or in other words, the true Vaiṣṇavas]. Śrī Sūta Gosvāmi describes all this in the verse beginning with the word anartha (SB 1.7.6). In this verse, the word bhakti-yoga refers to sādhana-bhakti, devotion in the stage of regulated practice, which is characterized by hear- ing, chanting, and other forms of worship, and not to prema- bhakti, devotion in the perfected stage of pure love of God. This is concluded because devotion as a practice depends on instruction, while love of God depends solely on the grace of Bhagavan. 46.2 तथापि तस्य तत्प्रसादहेतोस्तत्प्रेमफलगर्भत्वात् साक्षादेवानर्थोपशमनत्वं न त्वन्यसापे- क्षत्वेन । “यत् कर्मभिर्यत् तपसा ज्ञानवैराग्यतश्च यत्” इत्यादौ ( भा० ११ | २० | ३२) “सर्वं मद्भक्तियोगेन मद्भक्तो लभतेऽञ्जसा । स्वर्गापवर्गम्” (भा० ११ | २० | ३३) इत्यादेः । ज्ञाना- 315III Prameya देस्तु भक्तिसापेक्षत्वमेव “श्रेयः सृतिं भक्तिम्” (भा० १० | १४।४) इत्यादेः । अथवा अनर्थ- स्य - संसारव्यसनस्य तावत् साक्षादव्यवधानेनोपशमनं सम्मोहादिद्वयस्य तु प्रेमाख्य- स्वीयफलद्वारेत्यर्थः । अतः पूर्ववदेवात्राभिधेयं दर्शितम् ॥ Even so, sadhana-bhakti, being the means for gaining Bhagavan’s grace, has love of God implicit within it as its mature fruit. Thus, it is said that sadhana-bhakti directly removes the jiva’s miseries (anarthopaśamaṁ säkśäd), without dependence on anything else. As Bhagavan states in Srimad Bhagavatam: “Whatever may be attained by execution of prescribed duties, penances, culti- vation of wisdom, renunciation, practice of yoga, offering of charity in accordance with scripture, or any other means of ulti- mate welfare, is easily attained by My devotee through engage- ment in bhakti-yoga to Me. If at any time My devotee should desire heaven, liberation, or My abode, he can also attain these” (SB 11.20.32-33).1 By contrast, methods such as the intuition of the self’s iden- tity with Brahman (jñāna) depend on bhakti for their fulfillment, as shown in such statements as the following: “O almighty Lord, those who undergo pains to attain realization of oneness with the Absolute, giving up the most beneficial path of bhakti, gain only labor and nothing else, like those engaged in threshing coarse husk devoid of grain” (SB 10.14.4)? Another meaning of anarthopaśamam sākṣād is that sadhana- bhakti directly counteracts the miseries of material existence, meaning that it does so without obstruction or without any intervening agent. However, it is only pure love of God, the mature fruit of sadhana-bhakti, that can counteract the two fundamental faults of bewilderment and misidentification [bewilderment being forgetfulness of inherent self-identity, and yat karmabhir yat tapasă jñāna-vairagyatas ca yat yogena dama-dharmena śreyobhir itarair api sarvam mad-bhakti-yogena mad-bhakto labhate’njasā svargāpavargam mad-dhama kathañcid yadi vāñchati 2 śreyaḥ-sṛtim bhaktim udasya te vibho klisyanti ye kevala-bodha-labdhaye teṣām asau klesala eva sisyate nanyad yatha sthula-tuṣavaghātinām 316 46 Direct Apperception of Abhidheya from the State of Samadhi misidentification being the assumption of a phenomenal self tied to the material body]. Thus, abhidheya is expressed here (SB 1.7.6) as it was before [in Anucchedas 32 and 44]. Commentary IN ANUCCHEDA 44, Jiva Gosvāmi concluded from his analysis of Śrila Vyasa’s trance that Srimad Bhagavatam’s abhidheya-tattva is unalloyed devotion to the Supreme Lord. Vyasadeva also saw in His trance that the miseries of the jivas can be vanquished by bhakti- yoga alone, and this culture of bhakti-yoga will further lead to pure love of God, which is the transcendental state in which direct real- ization of Bhagavan is brought into being. To make this reality- insight available, Vyasadeva compiled the beautiful Bhāgavatam and taught it to His son, Sukadeva Gosvāmi. The compound bhakti- yoga is used twice in the Bhagavatam verses describing Śrīla Vya- sadeva’s trance. Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi says that the first occurrence of this word (SB 1.7.4) refers to devotion as the natural display of God’s own inherent potency in full realization of prema, because it is only in the state of transcendental awareness as pure love that direct personal realization of Bhagavan is self-effectuated. The second occurrence (SB 1.7.6) refers to devotion in the stage of regulated practice, sadhana-bhakti. Unlike prema-bhakti, sädhana- bhakti must be imbibed systematically from scriptural revelation and by aligning the self in full correspondence with realized devo- tional transcendentalists. Sadhana-bhakti, being the stage in which empirical selfhood is not yet fully transcended, is prompted primar- ily by the authority of scriptural injunctions. As the devotee enacts the regulated practice of bhakti, the heart is gradually purified of egoic identification, and as the pure self emerges, it attains fitness to receive the self-revelation of devotion of the nature of love of God. Only in this sense can it be said that sadhana-bhakti matures into prema-bhakti. But in fact, prema, the inherent potency of God, self-manifests in the aspiring devotee’s heart only by the grace of Bhagavan and His pure devotee. 317 III Prameya In Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī states that devo- tional service, which is enacted through the senses and which matures into bhāva-bhakti, is called sadhana-bhakti: Devotion which is enacted through the senses and which leads to the self-manifestation of bhava-bhakti, is called sadhana-bhakti. The self-manifestation within the heart [of the practitioner] of the eternally existing transcendental affect of devotion (bhava) is known as the completion stage of devotion. (BRS 1.2.2) When bhāva-bhakti intensifies, it is called prema-bhakti. The only difference between the two is in the degree of intensity: Bhava- bhakti is the state of the initial onset of prema-bhakti. For this rea- son, bhava-bhakti is compared to the dawn, whereas prema-bhakti is like high noon. Thus, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmi defines prema-bhakti as follows: When bhāva attains to the very essence of intensity, completely melting the devotee’s heart and marked by a profusion of the trans- egoic sense of “Myness” [in relation to one’s beloved Lord], it is called prema by the wise. (BRS 1.4.1)* Because devotion belongs to the intrinsic potency (svarupa- śakti) of God, it is as potent as He is and can certainly fulfill all aspirations for which it is undertaken. A pure devotee, of course, has no desire except to render service to Bhagavan, but if some- how some other desire may arise, no process other than bhakti is required to fulfill it. This is the supreme independence of the intrin- sic potency of pure devotion. On the other hand, other processes, such as jñāna-yoga or aṣṭanga-yoga, depend on the grace of bhakti for success. Without the merciful glance of devotion, none of these processes can ever award the practitioner the goal for which they aspire, not to speak of love of God. Just as the body and senses. remain lifeless without the ātmā, so these paths are empty of effec- tuating essence without devotion. After listing various devas who 3 a kṛti-sädhya bhavet sadhya-bhāvā sā sadhanabhidha 4 nitya-siddhasya bhavasya prakatyam hṛdi sadhyata samyan-masṛnitaḥ svanto mamatvātiśayānkitaḥ bhavaḥ sa eva sändrātmā budhaiḥ prema nigadyate 318 46 Direct Apperception of Abhidheya from the State of Samadhi may be worshiped to fulfill material desires, Śrimad Bhagavatam concludes: A wise person, whether desireless, full of desire, or desirous of lib- eration, should worship the Supreme Person with fervent devotion. (SB 2.3.10)5 This statement reveals that bhakti-yoga is the key to fulfilling all aspirations, whether spiritual or mundane. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmi confirms this in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: On the other hand, the goals to be attained through the paths of intuitive insight (jñāna), dispassion (virakti), and so on, are in fact effectuated only through devotion. (BRS 1.2.251) The intuitive insight and dispassion mentioned here are not those related with Bhagavan and His devotion. Indeed, SB 10.14.4, quoted in this anuccheda, makes it explicit that realization of iden- tity with Brahman is certainly among those items not directly related to Bhagavan and His devotion. Srimad Bhagavatam states, “Bhakti-yoga directly mitigates the miseries of the conditioned beings” (anarthopaśamam sākṣād bhakti- yogam, SB 1.7.6). Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi offers two explanations of the word sākṣāt (direct) in this context. He says that sadhana-bhakti unaided by any other process directly removes all worldly miseries such as mental and physical disturbances caused by the dualities of heat and cold. In the second sense, he says that sadhana-bhakti directly removes material miseries, because it naturally matures into prema-bhakti without external aid. Thus, it is not wrong to say that sadhana-bhakti directly mitigates all miseries. In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi discusses the prayojana- tattva as Vyasadeva realized it. akāmaḥ sarva-kāmo vā mokṣa-kama udara-dhiḥ tivrena bhakti-yogena yajeta purusaṁ param “kintu jñāna-virakty-adi-sädhyam bhaktyaiva sidhyati 319 Anuccheda 47 Prema for the Pūrṇa Puruşa Self-Manifests Out of Its Own Prior State as Effecting Means 47.1 ४७ । अथ पूर्ववदेव प्रयोजनं च स्पष्टयितुं पूर्वोक्तस्य पूर्णपुरुषस्य च श्रीकृष्णस्वरूप- त्वं व्यञ्जयितुं ग्रन्थफलनिर्देशद्वारा तत्र तदनुभवान्तरं प्रतिपादयन्नाह - यस्यामिति । “भक्तिः” प्रेमा श्रवणरूपया साधनभक्त्या साध्यत्वात् । “उत्पद्यते” आविर्भवति । तस्यानु- षङ्गिकं गुणमाह- शोकेति । अत्रैषां संस्कारोऽपि नश्यतीति भावः । “प्रीतिर्न यावन् मयि वासुदेवे न मुच्यते देहयोगेन तावत्” (भा० ५।५।६) इति श्रीऋषभदेववाक्यात् । NEXT, to make evident the ultimate attainment (prayojana), as discussed previously [in Anuccheda 45], and to affirm that the Pūrṇa Puruşa mentioned above [in SB 1.7.4] is in fact Śrī Kṛṣṇa, Sūta Gosvāmi reveals another of Srila Vyasadeva’s direct percep- tions in the state of samadhi, which is specified by Suta as the ultimate fruit of hearing Śrimad Bhagavatam. This is spoken of in the verse beginning yasyam (SB 1.7.7). In this verse, the word bhakti refers to pure love of God, because it is the final attain- ment (sadhya) to be brought about through its effecting means (sadhana), the devotional practice of hearing. The verb utpadyate (is generated) here means “[love of God] self-manifests.” Sūta Gosvāmi also describes a concomitant consequence of the appearance of divine love, namely, that it destroys all lamen- tation, illusion, and fear, the implication being that even the sub- conscious psychic imprints (samskaras) of these mind states are destroyed. That this is so is implied in the statement of Sri Rṣabha- deva: “Therefore, until one has love for Me, Śrī Vasudeva, he 320 47 Prema for the Purna Purusa Self-Manifests Out of Its Own Prior State as Effecting Means is certainly not delivered from identification with material embodiment” (SB 5.5.6). 1 47.2 परमपूरुषे पूर्वोक्तपूर्णपुरुषे । किमाकारः ? इत्यपेक्षायामाह कृष्णे – “कृष्णस्तु भगवान् स्वयम्” इत्यादि शास्त्रसहस्रभावितान्तःकरणानां परम्परया तत्प्रसिद्धिमध्यपातिनां चासाङ्ग्यलोकानां तन्नामश्रवणमात्रेण । यः प्रथमप्रतीतिविषयः स्यात् तथा तन्नाम्नः प्रथमा- क्षरमात्रं मन्त्राय कल्पमानं यस्याभिमुख्याय स्यात् - तदाकार इत्यर्थः । आहुश्च नामकौ- मुदीकारा: “कृष्णशब्दस्य तमालश्यामलत्विषि यशोदायाः स्तनन्धये परब्रह्मणि रूढिः " इति ॥ 1 In this verse [SB 1.7.7], the words parama-puruse (unto the Sup- reme Person) refer to the same Pūrṇa Puruşa (the Complete Per- son) mentioned earlier [in SB 1.7.4]. And what is the specific form or identity of the Purna Purușa? Anticipating this question, Śri Sūta Gosvāmī replies, “He is Kṛṣṇa.” In other words, the Com- plete Person is expressly identified as Śrī Kṛṣṇa, as He who is immediately present interior to consciousness for particular individuals as soon as they simply hear His name; and also as He whose attention is immediately drawn to the same individuals as soon as they utter the first syllable of His name in mantra-yoga. Those for whom Śrī Kṛṣṇa is immediately present, or drawn to, through such hearing or chanting of His name include those [great souls, like Sūta Gosvāmi] whose psyches have been imprinted with, and transformed by, thousands of scriptural statements, such as kṛṣṇas tu bhagavan svayam (“Kṛṣṇa is the original Complete Person,” SB 1.3.28), and also those innumer- able celebrated [and highly realized] individuals, descending in an authorized line of disciplic succession. So again, to the question what is the identity of the Complete Person, it is said, “He is Śrī Kṛṣṇa, having the characteristics. described above” [which are implied in the statement of the verse that Krsna is the one for whom divine love becomes established pritir na yavan mayi vasudeve na mucyate deha-yogena tavat 321 III Prameya in certain individuals simply by hearing Śrimad Bhagavatam]. That Śrī Kṛṣṇa is specified in this way is made evident by the author of Nama-kaumudi: “The conventional meanings of the name Kṛṣṇa are ‘He who is black like a tamāla tree,’ ‘He who was breast-fed by Śrī Yasoda,’ and ’the Supreme Brahman.” Commentary 332 IN ANUCCHEDA 45, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī summarized Śrīla Vyasa- deva’s realizations concerning prayojana-tattva. Süta Gosvāmi reaf- firms these realizations in SB 1.7.7, wherein he states that simply by attentively hearing Srimad Bhagavatam, love of God (i.e., bhakti) self-manifests in a person’s heart. The word bhakti here can refer only to prema-bhakti and not sadhana-bhakti, devotion in the stage of practice, since hearing Śrimad Bhagavatam is itself the sadhana. In this verse, the verb utpadyate (is generated) does not mean that love of God is created anew, but that it becomes manifest in the heart. Because prema is an aspect of God’s intrinsic potency, it exists eternally in the heart of perfected devotees, siddha-bhaktas, and, hence, it is never created. This is confirmed in Caitanya-caritamṛta (Madhya-lila 22.107), “Krsna-prema is eternally existent. It is never a generated event.“2 For the same reason, prema does not stand in a causal relation with sadhana, meaning that sadhana does not pro- duce prema. If sadhana were the cause of the appearance of prema, then prema would not be a prior existing, self-manifested condition. Rather, being a conscious potency of Bhagavan, prema manifests of its own accord in the heart which is devotionally turned to Bhaga- vän through the medium of sadhana. Thus, sadhana is not the cause of prema; yet, it is normally the prior condition for prema’s own self- manifestation. Sadhana is itself the same conscious intrinsic potency of Bhaga- vän in its immature aspect, revealing itself but partially in corre- spondence to the eligibility of the performer. In that sense, sadhana is not something distinct from or exterior to prema that causes its 2 nitya-siddha kṛṣṇa-prema’sādhya’kabhu naya 322 47 Prema for the Purna Puruşa Self-Manifests Out of Its Own Prior State as Effecting Means appearance. Rather, there is but one essential potency of bhakti revealing itself in two different stages of completion. Hence, the relevance of the statement, “Bhakti [in the form of prema] is born of bhakti [in the form of sadhana]” (SB 11.3.31) As a concomitant effect of love of God, the devotee is freed from all lamentation, delusion, and fear. Indeed, even the sub- conscious psychic imprints (samskäras) of these conditional states are destroyed, so powerful is love of Kṛṣṇa. The root cause of a jiva’s misery is forgetfulness of the Lord, but when love of God is wholly submitted to, i.e., when it is unobstructed and, hence, self-revealed, forgetfulness of the Lord becomes impossible. One who attains love for Krsna loses interest in all other kinds of pleasure, including even the bliss of impersonal realization. For such a person, all doubts are vanquished and all aspirations are com- pletely fulfilled. Nothing can disturb him or deviate his mind from devotional service. In this regard, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmi writes in Bhakti-rasamṛta-sindhu: Even among the single-minded devotees of Śrī Hari, the best are those whose hearts have been captured by Śrī Govinda. Indeed, even the favor of Śrī Nārāyaṇa, the husband of the supreme Goddess of Fortune, cannot steal away their hearts. (BRS 1.2.58)* A concomitant result of such pure love of Kṛṣṇa, as Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi mentions in Anuccheda 47.1, is that even the seeds (samskäras) of lamentation, delusion, and fear are destroyed. These seeds are rooted deeply in the soil of bodily attachment, and by quoting Śrī Ṛṣabhadeva here, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi emphasizes that there is no way to eradicate this bodily attachment other than by the self-manifestation of love for Śrī Kṛṣṇa. One easily attains this prayojana of love for Kṛṣṇa by hearing Srimad Bhagavatam. Vyasadeva witnessed all this in the state of samadhi. Śrī Kṛṣṇa, referred to in SB 1.7.7 as Parama Pūrușa, the Sup- reme Person, is identical with the Purna Purușa, the Complete bhaktyä sañjätaya bhaktyä 4 tatrapy ekantinām śreṣṭhā govinda-hṛta-manasāḥ yeşăm śrisa-prasãdo’pi mano hartum na saknuyat 323 III Prameya Person, whom Vyasa saw along with His potencies. In Anuccheda 30, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī has already explained that this Pūrņa Puruşa is the original Complete Person. Now he identifies that Complete Person as Bhagavän Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Immediately following this, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī specifies who that Kṛṣṇa is, because history records various Kṛṣṇas. For example, Arjuna was also called Kṛṣṇa, as shown in SB 1.8.43, where Śrīmati Kuntidevi addresses Śrī Kṛṣṇa as Kṛṣṇa-sakha, “the friend of Krsna [Arjuna].” And Vyasadeva was also sometimes called Kṛṣṇa. Nonetheless, as soon as Vaisnavas coming in the authorized lines of disciplic succession hear the name “Krsna,” the form that immediately comes to mind is Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s, not Arjuna’s or Vyasa’s or that of any other person or object of the same name. According to Śrīla Baladeva Vidyabhusana, this is the spontaneous experience of eminent sages like Sūta Gosvāmi, Śaunaka Ṛși, and Jayadeva Gosvāmi. Thus, the conventional meaning of the name Kṛṣṇa is the two-handed Śrī Kṛṣṇa who appeared as a cowherd in Vraja. As described earlier, words may have various secondary mean- ings in addition to their primary ones. The primary meaning of a word is the image that springs to mind upon first hearing or read- ing the word, before any related thought or analysis can modify its meaning. Thus, the primary meaning of the name “Kṛṣṇa” is Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Person. Śri Lakṣmidhara Pandita, while commenting on the meanings of various names of Bhagavan in Nama-kaumudi, defines Kṛṣṇa as, “He who is black like a tamala tree.” In Vaisnava literature, Kṛṣṇa’s bodily hue is often likened to the color of the tamala tree, which is commonly found in the Vṛndavana area. Just defining Krsna in terms of His complexion, however, leaves open the possibility that the Kṛṣṇa referred to could be the son of Devaki in Mathura and Dvaraka. Therefore, Lakṣmidhara further specifies the meaning as, “He who was suckled by Śrīmati Yasoda.” This fixes the primary meaning of Kṛṣṇa as the young cowherd son of Yasoda in Vṛndāvana, since the grown-up Kṛṣṇa of Mathura does not drink mother Yasoda’s breast milk. If doubts still linger 324 47 Prema for the Purna Puruşa Self-Manifests Out of Its Own Prior State as Effecting Means that this Kṛṣṇa is Bhagavan - since there could always be someone else named Kṛṣṇa from Vṛndāvana who has a blackish complexion and a mother named Yaśodā - Lakṣmidhara further distinguishes the meaning of Kṛṣṇa as “the Supreme Brahman,” the Complete Personal Absolute Reality. In Sanskrit, words have a derived, or etymological meaning (yaugika), which may sometimes differ from its conventional usage (rūdhi). The rudhi, or conventional meaning, is always the pri- mary meaning. In cases where the primary meaning differs from the derived meaning, the former always takes precedence over the latter: yogad rüḍhirbaliyasi. In the case of the name “Kṛṣṇa,” the derived meaning is also the Supreme Person, as Mahabharata explains: The syllable krs denotes existence, and the syllable na denotes bliss. When affiliated with these two meanings, the name “Visnu” signi- fies the eternal Śrī Kṛṣṇa. (Mahabharata, Udyoga-parva 70.5)5 The Amara-kosa Sanskrit dictionary (1.18) states, “The names Viṣṇu, Nārāyaṇa, Kṛṣṇa, and Vaikuntha are synonymous” (visnur nārāyaṇaḥ kṛṣṇo vaikuntha vistara-śravāḥ). One may claim that these are names of Visnu, but after listing thirty-nine such names, the Amara-kosa states, “His father is Vasudeva” (vasudevo’sya jana- kah). By way of further confirmation that Kṛṣṇa is Supreme, the author then immediately lists the names of Śrī Balarama, Kṛṣṇa’s brother. Śrīla Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa quotes the following verse in his commentary on Śri Vişņu-sahasra-nama 20, while defining the name “Kṛṣṇa”: The syllable krs means “existence,” and the syllable na means “bliss.” The combination of these two is kṛṣṇa, the name of the Supreme Personal Absolute 5 kṛşir bhu-vācakah Sabdo naś ca nirvṛti-vacakaḥ visņus tad-bhava-yogac ca kṛṣṇo bhavati sasvataḥ 6 kṛşir bhu-vacakaḥ sabdo naś ca nirvṛti-sanjñakaḥ tayor aikyam param brahma krsna ity abhidhiyate 325III Prameya In this way, both the conventional and the derived meanings of the name “Kṛṣṇa” are identical - the two-handed cowherd boy who is the son of mother Yasoda and the Supreme Personal Abso- lute Truth. Since Vyasadeva directly perceived this specific form of Kṛṣṇa in the supracognitive state of samadhi, the ultimate goal of life is self-evidently disclosed as unconditional love for Kṛṣṇa. The next point Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi makes is that when the word kṛṣṇa is uttered in a mantra, as in the Hare Kṛṣṇa maha-mantra, this sound attracts the attention of Śrī Kṛṣṇa Himself the very moment the first syllable is vibrated. This is so because the name “Krsna” is identical with the person Krsna, the Supreme Person. This is veri- fied by the experience of many realized devotees who attained per- fection by chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra. The Viṣṇudūtas stated this to the Yamadūtas: When a person chants the name of Sri Vişņu, the Lord’s attention is drawn toward the chanter. (SB 6.2.10)” In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi explains that the bliss inherent within love of God far exceeds that innate to Brahman realization. 326 näma-vyäharanam vişnor yatas tad visaya matiḥ Anuccheda 48 Love of God Transcends the Bliss of Brahman ४८ । अथ तस्यैव प्रयोजनस्य ब्रह्मानन्दानुभवादपि परमत्वमनुभूतवान् । यतस्तादृशं शुकमपि तदानन्दवैशिष्ट्यलम्भनाय तामध्यापयामासेत्याह - स संहितामिति । कृत्वा - नुक्रम्य चेति - प्रथमतः स्वयं सङ्क्षेपेण कृत्वा पश्चात् तु श्रीनारदोपदेशादनुक्रमेण विवृत्ये- त्यर्थः । अत एव श्रीमद्भागवतं भारतानन्तरं यदत्र श्रूयते यच् चान्यत्राष्टादशपुराणानन्तरं भारतमिति तद्द्वयमपि समाहितं स्यात् । ब्रह्मानन्दानुभवनिमग्नत्वात् निवृत्तिनिरतम्- सर्वतो निवृत्तौ निरतं तत्राव्यभिचारिणमपीत्यर्थः । ŚRILA VYASADEVA EXPERIENCED the preeminence of this ulti- mate attainment [the bliss of pure love of God] - that it includes yet transcends even brahmananda, the bliss of Brahman aware- ness. This we know because Vyasadeva taught Sukadeva Gosvāmi Śrīmad Bhagavatam so that the unique bliss inherent in love of God could be made available to him, even though Sukadeva was already absorbed in brahmananda. Sūta Gosvāmī states this in the verse beginning sa samhitam (SB 1.7.8). In this verse, the phrase kṛtvānukramya (after composing and revising) indicates that Vyasadeva first wrote Śrimad Bhaga- vatam in an abbreviated form and that later on, after being instructed by Śri Narada Muni, He expanded and rearranged it. Thus, two apparently contradictory statements are recon- ciled one found here (in the Bhagavatam) saying that the Bhagavatam was composed after Mahabharata, and the other found elsewhere (in Skanda Purana, Prabhasa-khanda 2.94), stat- ing that Mahabharata was compiled after the eighteen Purāņas. The compound nivṛtti-nirata (delighting in the state of utter — 327 III Prameya non-attachment) implies that because of his absorption in the bliss of Brahman, Śrī Sukadeva was deeply established in the total absence of attachment for anything whatsoever, and that was his perpetual state, without the slightest interruption or intervention. Commentary ONE OF ŚRILA VYASADEVA’s most profound realizations described in Srimad Bhagavatam was that bhakty-änanda, the bliss inherent within divine love for Śrī Kṛṣṇa, is superior to brahmananda, the bliss innate to Brahman realization. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmi confirms this superiority in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: Even if the inherent joy of Brahman realization were multiplied tril- lions of times, it would not equal even a single drop of the ocean of the bliss of pure devotion. (BRS 1.1.38)’ Indeed, the bliss of pure devotion always diminishes the joy of Brahman realization. A father is naturally inclined to offer his child the best thing he has. Thus, Śrīla Vyasadeva taught Śrīmad Bhāgavatam to Sukadeva Gosvāmi. But being Vyasadeva’s son was not Sukadeva’s only qualification. Perfectly established in the state of utter non-attachment, he had no material desires (nivṛtti-nirata). In other words, he had no ulterior motive that would have led him to misconstrue the meaning of Srimad Bhagavatam for material gain, either gross or subtle. It is for this reason that Śrīla Vyasa- deva regarded Sukadeva as the most qualified of His disciples to hear the Bhagavatam, and by choosing him for this great honor, Vyasadeva set the standard for all future students and speakers of Srimad Bhagavatam. Only such a person can truly grasp the real message of Srimad Bhagavatam. This episode also implies that one who truly understands the essence of Srimad Bhagavatam will become unattached to material pleasures. 1 brahmanando bhaved esa cet parardha-guni-kṛtaḥ naiti bhakti-sukhambhodheḥ paramāņu-tulām api 328 48 Love of God Transcends the Bliss of Brahman In this anuccheda, Śrila Jīva Gosvāmi also resolves a controversy concerning the order in which Srimad Bhagavatam and the Maha- bharata were composed. In the passage beginning with the follow- ing two verses, the Bhagavatam itself states that it was composed after the Mahabharata: Seeing that women, sudras, and the unqualified among the twice- born classes were prevented even from hearing the Vedas, the great sage [Vyasa], moved by compassion, compiled the great historical narration called the Mahabharata so that those who were unaware of how to act for ultimate good might also attain auspiciousness. O dvijas, although Śrīla Vyasa was always engaged in this way, endeav- oring even with the entirety of the self for the welfare of all living beings, His heart was still not satisfied. (SB 1.4.25-26)2 When Vyasa was thus feeling dissatisfied, Narada Muni visited Him and requested Him to compose Śrimad Bhagavatam. Elsewhere, however, it is stated that the Mahabharata was spoken after all eigh- teen Purāņas. Śrī Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa, commenting on this anuccheda, cites the Matsya Purāṇa: After compiling the eighteen Puranas, Vyasadeva, the son of Satya- vati, composed the great history called the Mahabharata, which serves as a commentary on the Vedas. (MP 53.70) To resolve this apparent contradiction in the chronology, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi explains that Śrīla Vyasadeva originally composed the Bhāgavatam in an abbreviated form. Later He compiled the Maha- bharata out of compassion for those who cannot study the Vedas. But even after completing this great epic, Vyasa still felt a void in His heart. Thereafter, Narada Muni instructed Him to produce a new 2 stri-südra-dvija-bandhunam trayi na śruti-gocară karma-śreyasi müdhānāṁ śreya evam bhaved iha iti bharatam äkhyanam krṛpaya munina krtam evam pravṛttasya sada bhutanam śreyasi dvijaḥ sarvātmakenäpi yada natuşyad dhṛdayam tataḥ aṣṭādaśa-puraṇāni kṛtvä satyavati-sutaḥ 3 cakre bharatam akhyānam vedärthair upabṛmhitam 329 III Prameya expanded edition of Srimad Bhagavatam, which is the one currently available. Moreover, from SB 1.3.43, quoted below, we can understand that this later edition was composed after Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s disappearance from the earth. Earlier Vyasa had composed the Mahabharata for the welfare of people in the grip of Kali. Parikṣit Maharaja’s chas- tisement of Kali occurred after the dialogue between Narada Muni and Śrīla Vyasadeva, since it was the spread of Kali’s influence that had saddened Vyasa. Prior to Kali’s appearance Vyasadeva had no reason to feel dissatisfied, since Śrī Kṛṣṇa was still present along with all religious principles. The Bhagavatam confirms that this later edition of Srimad Bhagavatam manifested before the brahmana boy Śrigi had cursed Mahārāja Parīkṣit, an event that occurred after the disappearance of Sri Kṛṣṇa: After Kṛṣṇa’s departure to His own abode, accompanied by dharma, knowledge, and so on, this Purana [Śrimad Bhagavatam] has risen like the sun for those bereft of sight in the age of Kali. (SB 1.3.43)* In this connection, by referring to the statements of Sūta Gosvāmī in the First Canto, Chapter 4, one can summarize the chronology of the Vedic literature in Kaliyuga as follows: First, Śrīla Vyasadeva edited the one Veda, the original Yajur Veda, into four Vedas. He then abridged the one billion verses of the Puranas into eighteen Puranas consisting of a total of about four hundred thousand verses. These included Śrimad Bhagavatam in its original abbreviated form. Then Vyasa composed His epic work, Mahābhā- rata, after which He distilled its essence along with that of the Vedas and Purāņas into Vedanta-sutra. Finally, He composed His most sig- nificant work, the full Śrimad Bhagavatam, which is Vyasadeva’s own commentary on Vedanta-sutra. This He witnessed in the state of samadhi through bhakti-yoga. Some traditional scholars believe there were two versions of Mahabharata. They say that it was first compiled soon after the Vedas in one hundred sections, and later Vedavyāsa reduced it to a krsne sva-dhämopagate dharma-jñānādibhiḥ saha kalau naşta-dṛśam eşa puraṇārko’dhunoditaḥ 330 48 Love of God Transcends the Bliss of Brahman hundred thousand verses in eighteen sections after compiling the eighteen Purāņas. In Mahabharata, Adi-parva 10.5, it is said that Śrila Vyasa compiled a samhita with six million verses, of which He gave one hundred thousand to human beings. This Mahabha- rata was first recited by the sage Vaisampayana to King Janamejaya, Parikṣit’s son. Another reference traditional scholars give to support their contention that there were two versions of the Mahabharata is the Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad verse cited in Anuccheda 12 (BAU 2.4.10). This verse mentions the scriptures that appeared from the breath of the Supreme Lord, including the Itihasas, which are listed before the Purāņas. If this version is accepted, then the reconciliation would be that although the Mahabharata was compiled before the Purāņas, it was made popular after them. This is known from the Mahabharata itself. Janamejaya was the first to hear Mahabharata from Vaisampayana. The Puranas were recited much before this. Śrī Balarama killed Roma-harṣaṇa Suta while he was reciting the Puranas at Naimiṣaranya. This happened even before Janamejaya’s father was born. Next, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi shows that Śrīla Vyasadeva’s realization in samadhi constitutes the epitome of all philosophies, as confirmed by Sūta Gosvāmi. 331 Anuccheda 49 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Attracts Even Ātmārāmas 49.1 1 ४९ । तमेतं श्रीवेदव्यासस्य समाधिजातानुभवं श्रीशौनकप्रश्नोत्तरत्वेन विशदयन् सर्वात्मा- रामानुभवेन सहेतुकं संवादयति - आत्मारामाश्चेति । निर्ग्रन्थाः “विधिनिषेधातीताः” निर्ग- ताहङ्कारग्रन्थयो वा । अहैतुकीम् “फलानुसन्धिरहिताम्” । अत्र सर्वाक्षेपपरिहारार्थमाह “इत्थम्भूतः” आत्मारामाणामप्याकर्षणस्वभावो गुणो यस्य स इति । IN REPLY TO A QUESTION posed by Śrī Saunaka (SB 1.7.9), Sūta. Gosvāmī speaks the verse beginning ātmārāmaś ca ( sB1.7.10 ), further expanding the meaning of what Śrīla Vyasadeva experi- enced in samadhi and demonstrating its logical consistency with the direct experience of all ātmārāmas, the sages who delight in the Self alone. In this verse, the word nirgranthāh (free from bonds) means either “beyond the stipulations and prohibitions of scripture” or “free from the knot of egoic identity.” The adjec- tive ahaituki (causeless ) [ qualifying bhakti] means “devoid of seeking or anticipating any particular outcome or result.” And to put an end to all doubts, Śrī Sūta declares, “Indeed, the nature of Lord Hari is such that even ātmārāmas feel attracted to Him.” 49.2 तमेवार्थं श्रीशुकस्याप्यनुभवेन संवादयति - हरेर्गुणेति । श्रीव्यासदेवाद् यत्किञ्चिच्छु- तेन गुणेन पूर्वमाक्षिप्ता मतिर्यस्य सः । पश्चादध्यगात् महद्विस्तीर्णमिति । ततश्च तत्सङ्कथा- सौहार्देन नित्यं विष्णुजनाः प्रिया यस्य तथाभूतो वा तेषां प्रियो वा स्वयमभवदित्यर्थः । अयं

• ब्रह्मवैवर्तानुसारेण पूर्वं तावदयं गर्भमारभ्य श्रीकृष्णस्य स्वैरितया मायानिवार- कत्वं ज्ञातवान् । ततः स्वनियोजनया श्रीव्यासदेवेनानीतस्य तस्यान्तर्दर्शनात् तन्निवारणे 332 49 Śrimad Bhagavatam Attracts Even Atmārāmas सति कृतार्थं मन्यतया स्वयमेकामेव गतवान् । तत्र श्रीवेदव्यासस्तु तं वशीकर्तुं तदनन्य- साधनं श्रीभागवतमेव ज्ञात्वा तद्गुणातिशयप्रकाशमयांस्तदीयपद्यविशेषान् कथञ्चिच्छ्रा- वयित्वा तेन तमाक्षिप्तमतिं कृत्वा तदेव पूर्णं तमध्यापयामासेति श्रीभागवतमहिमाति- शयः प्रोक्तः । In the next verse (SB 1.7.11, beginning harer guna), Suta reiter- ates this same point by relating Sukadeva Gosvāmi’s experi- ence. First, after hearing from Śrīla Vyasadeva a few select Bhāgavatam verses describing Lord Hari’s attributes, Sukadeva Gosvāmi’s attention was drawn away from and beyond the bliss of Brahman and his heart was captivated. Later, Sukadeva stud- ied the complete Bhagavatam, despite its vast size. Thereafter, because Sukadeva daily relished discussing Bhagavan’s entranc- ing qualities [and divine play] with Sri Visņu’s devotees, they became very dear to him. Alternatively, the compound visņu- jana-priya can be taken to mean that he himself became dear to them. The purport is as follows: The Brahma-vaivarta Purāņa1 relates how previously, even in the prenatal state within the womb, Śrī Sukadeva realized Śrī Kṛṣṇa as the dispeller of māyā by virtue of His absolute independence. Subsequently, on Suka- deva’s request, Vyasadeva brought Śrī Kṛṣṇa to His hermitage, and when Sukadeva saw Śrī Kṛṣṇa before him, even from within the womb, he became free from maya’s influence. Considering his life perfectly fulfilled, Sukadeva at once emerged from his mother’s womb and departed alone. Thereafter, Śrīla Vyasadeva, knowing that Sukadeva could be subdued by Srimad Bhagava- tam alone and not by any other means, somehow induced him. to hear a few select Bhagavatam verses depicting Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s all- exceeding qualities. In this way He caused Sukadeva’s heart to become captivated, and later He taught him the entire narrative. This episode speaks of the supreme glory of Srimad Bhagavatam. This story is not found in the printed editions of this Purāņa. 333 49.3 III Prameya तदेवं दर्शितम् - वक्तुः श्रीशुकस्य वेदव्यासस्य च समानहृदयम् । तस्माद् वक्तुर्हृदया- नुरूपमेव सर्वत्र तात्पर्यं पर्यालोचनीयं नान्यथा । यद् यत् तदन्यथा पर्यालोचनं तत्र तत्र कुपथगामितैवेति निष्टङ्कितम् ॥ श्रीसूतः ॥ From the above it is clearly evident that the speaker of Srimad Bhāgavatam, Śrī Sukadeva, and [its author] Śrīla Vyasadeva shared an absolute identity of heart. Consequently, one should thoroughly investigate the essential truth (tatparya) of Srimad Bhāgavatam that is in perfect accordance with the heart of its speaker and not otherwise. By implication, all explanations that do not accord with the speaker’s heart simply lead one astray from the proper conclusion. The verses under discussion (SB 1.7.4-11) were spoken by Śrī Sūta Gosvāmi. Commentary IN ANUCCHEDA 29, to explain the essence of Srimad Bhagavatam, Jiva Gosvāmī first analyzed Sukadeva’s heart as described in the Bhagavatam. In the next anuccheda, he analyzed Śrīla Vyasadeva’s experience in trance, on the basis of which Vyasa wrote Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. Jiva Gosvāmi concludes the discussion of the present anuccheda by confirming the outcome of these analyses with the words of Śri Sūta Gosvāmī in SB 1.7.10, the famous ātmārāmā verse. What follows is a list of the major points to be derived from his analysis:

1. Bhagavan is eternally self-endowed with variegated potencies in three categories - intrinsic, extrinsic, and intermediary. 2. The primary and original form of God (Svayam Bhagavan) is Śrī Kṛṣṇa, but Kṛṣṇa also manifests countless other expansions.
2. Neither Bhagavan’s Paramātmā manifestations nor unqualified Brahman are independent of Him. 334 49 Śrimad Bhagavatam Attracts Even Atmärāmas
3. The finite living beings are distinct from Bhagavän inasmuch as they are integrated conscious parts of Bhagavan; they can never be one with Him in an absolute sense.
4. Maya is the extrinsic potency of God, deluding those living beings whose attention is turned away from Him.
5. Mäyä is a devotee of Bhagavan and is always subservient to Him. 7. Māyā cannot influence Bhagavan and His intrinsic potencies. 8. The jivas can become free from the bondage of maya only by sur- rendering to Bhagavan and engaging in His devotional service. 9. Hearing the Srimad Bhagavatam is devotional service to Bhaga- van and can thus end the jivas’ miseries.
6. The bliss inherent within pure devotion to God is so superior to the happiness innate to Brahman realization that even highly self-realized sages (ätmarāmās) become attracted to the Lord’s attributes and pastimes.
7. The ultimate purpose of human life is to attain love of God, the mature fruit of devotional service in practice (sadhana-bhakti). 12. Devotion is supremely independent, just like Bhagavan, and, hence, it does not require the support of any other method. When Sūta Gosvāmī finished describing Śrila Vyasadeva’s trance, Śaunaka Rşi asked him, “If Sukadeva Gosvāmī was com- pletely devoid of attachment, having no interest in anything by virtue of being absorbed in the bliss of the Self, what caused him to study this lengthy Bhagavata Purana?” Sūta Gosvāmī replied with these two verses: The sages, though freed from the knot of egoic identity, and though delighting in the Self alone (atmaramäs), engage in causeless devo- tion to Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the majestic player (Urukrama). Such are the entrancing qualities of Śrī Hari (Kṛṣṇa). His consciousness capti- vated by Lord Hari’s qualities, Sukadeva, the powerful son of Vyasa- deva, and ever-beloved of the Lord’s devotees, underwent the study of this great book, Srimad Bhagavatam. (SB 1.7.10-11) With this answer, Sūta Gosvāmi confirms all the realizations of Śrīla Vyasadeva and Sukadeva Gosvāmī. First, Sūta states a general principle, that many self-realized sages, although liberated from material bondage, are still drawn to engage in causeless devotion 335III Prameya to Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Then he mentions Sukadeva Gosvāmi as a specific instance of a realized sage in whom this principle was clearly evi- dent. Thus, Sūta Gosvāmī establishes that Sukadeva Gosvāmī was not the only liberated person in whom unconditional devotion to God superseded the realization of Brahman. On the contrary, Sukadeva’s experience is corroborated by many other ātmārāmas, demonstrating that the only reason an enlightened sage could be drawn out of the bliss of Brahman realization and take up causeless devotion to God must be that the wonderful all-attractive attributes of Lord Hari embody a profounder, more substantial dimension of being than that of unqualified Brahman. By this explanation, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi shows conclusively that Sukadeva Gosvāmi, Śrīla Vyasadeva, and Sūta Gosvāmi shared the same realizations, or in other words, the same direct unmediated experience. Therefore, these realizations should form the basis of any genuine study and explanation of Srimad Bhagavatam. Inter- pretations that do not accord with this direct experience must be considered a departure from the scripture’s intended meaning. Pre- viously, in Anuccheda 27, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī disclosed that Sridhara Svami had inserted some monistic ideas into his commentary on Srimad Bhagavatam. Śrīdhara Svāmī did this as a teaching strat- egy to attract the Advaitavadīs to the Bhagavata philosophy. Jīva Gosvāmi said there that in such instances, he would present his own explanations. Some scholars have critized Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī for this policy, labeling him an opportunist who accepted only those statements of Śrīdhara Svāmi that supported his opinion and belittled other state- ments by declaring that they were made with ulterior motives and were not actually the Svami’s own opinion. These scholars suggest that Jiva Gosvāmī is not a true follower of Śri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, who highly revered Sridhara Svami’s Bhāvārtha-dipikā. In this anuccheda, however, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi further clarifies his policy: He accepts any explanation that complements the real- ization of Śrila Vyasadeva, Sukadeva Gosvāmi, and Sūta Gosvāmī - that pure devotion to Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the ultimate goal of life. That this policy reflects the real desire of Śrī Caitanya will be recognized by 336 49 Śrimad Bhagavatam Attracts Even Atmärāmas anyone who knows that He was the leading opponent of imperson- alism. In debate He refuted two of the leading Advaitavādīs of His time, Prakāśānanda Sarasvati and Vasudeva Särvabhauma. He fre- quently condemned the Advaitavada interpretation of the Vedanta- sutra. In light of His teachings and example, for Him to embrace an Advaitavadi commentary on Śrimad Bhagavatam is unlikely and not at all credible. Śrī Caitanya revered Śrīdhara Svāmī as a great Vaiṣṇava and considered his commentary preeminent, because he maintained the natural sense of the Bhagavatam and his conclusions support the Vaisnava siddhanta. Therefore, it should be obvious to anyone who reads Śridhara Svami’s commentary that whatever impersonal explanations were given by him did not express his true heart. For example, while commenting on the first verse of the Bhaga- vatam, he states, “Srimad Bhagavatam is a scriptural revelation on Bhagavan in which prominence is given to the descriptions of His qualities” (śrimad-bhagavad-gunanuvarṇana-pradhanam bhāgavata- śāstram). In the next verse, while commenting on the word vastava (ontologically real), he writes: The word vastava indicates that the jiva is an integrated part of the substantive Reality (vastu), maya is the potency of the substantive Reality, and the cosmos is the manifested creation of the substan- tive Reality. All of this is nothing other than the substantive Real- ity [meaning that the ontological Reality is inclusive of all this]. (Bhāvārtha-dipika 1.1.2)2 This and many similar statements throughout Sridhara Svāmi’s Bhagavatam commentary dispel any doubt about his status as a pure Vaiṣṇava. It is important to note that what an author says in the opening and concluding parts of his book or commentary plays a significant role in understanding what his intention is. Thus, it is inappropriate to criticize Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī for not using the imper- sonal portions of Sridhara’s commentary here in the Sat Sandarbhas. One can fathom the true essence of Srimad Bhagavatam only from 2 vastava-śabdena vastuno’mso jivaḥ, vastunaḥ śaktir maya ca. vastunaḥ karyam jagat. tat sarvam vastv eva. 337 III Prameya the viewpoint of Śrī Vyasa and Sukadeva Gosvāmi. Because Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi realized the significance of this point and gave special attention to its development here in Tattva Sandarbha, he is a true past master of the Bhagavatam and a genuine follower of Śrī Cai- tanya, who desired to see the Bhagavatam established as the final word in theology and philosophy throughout the world. We learn from Śrimad Bhagavatam that Sukadeva Gosvāmï left his father’s house immediately after his birth (SB 1.2.2). Accord- ing to the Brahma-vaivarta Purana, when Sukadeva was still in his mother’s womb, he could understand the peril of material existence and the risk of being captivated by maya. He also knew that Kṛṣṇa can counter maya’s charms, and, therefore, he had his father bring Śrī Kṛṣṇa from Dvaraka. He agreed to take birth only when the Lord Himself promised to protect Sukadeva from māyā, and even then he immediately left home to enter the forest. Out of natural affection, Śrīla Vyasadeva followed him, calling him to come back, but Suka- deva was completely unattached to material life and paid his father no heed. Vyasadeva was deeply disappointed, since He had hoped to teach Sukadeva Śrimad Bhagavatam. This was the only reason He wanted Sukadeva back, not that He was attached to him as His son. Śri Vyasa knew that only a person like Suka, who is completely detached from sense enjoyment, is qualified to understand the true message of Srimad Bhagavatam and would not misuse it for mate- rial gain. To entice him to return home, Vyasa had some of His disciples recite verses from the Bhāgavatam whenever they went to the forest to collect firewood. Once, when they were singing these verses, Sukadeva Gosvāmī heard them. At once his heart was capti- vated, and he followed the students back to Śrī Vyasa’s asrama. Then Śukadeva, who had already transcended his former absorption in unqualified Brahman, learned the complete Srimad Bhagavatam from Śrīla Vyasadeva. At present, there is no clear scriptural reference indicating which verses captivated Śrī Sukadeva, but some Vaisnava scholars have singled out the following three: 338 49 Srimad Bhagavatam Attracts Even Ätmärämas O King, the most confidential glory of that personality [Śrī Kṛṣṇa] whom you thought to be your maternal cousin, your very dear friend and your well-wisher, and whom out of affection you made your counselor, messenger, and charioteer [is known only to Lord Siva, the celestial sage Närada, and Lord Kapila Himself]. (SB 1.9.20)3 How astonishing indeed! Although the unvirtuous demoness Pūtana, the sister of the demon Baka, applied deadly poison to her breast and suckled Śrī Kṛṣṇa with the intent of killing Him, she was granted the position appropriate for a foster-mother. Conse- quently, could there be anyone more merciful than Him, whom we should approach for shelter? (SB 3.2.23) Wearing a peacock-feather ornament upon His head, a blue Karnikāra flower on His ears, a yellow garment as brilliant as gold, and a Vaijayanti garland, Śrī Kṛṣṇa exhibited His transcendental form as the greatest of dancers as He entered the forest of Vṛnda- vana, beautifying it with the marks of His footprints. He filled the holes of His flute with the nectar of His lips, and the cowherd boys sang His glories. (SB 10.21.5)$ These verses describe Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s intimate love for His devotees, His mercy even toward His enemies, and His incomparable charm and beauty. The history of Sukadeva Gosvāmi described in the Mahabharata differs from that narrated above. Baladeva Vidyabhu- şana explains that the two accounts describe events from different days of Śri Brahmā. Having ascertained the prameya of Srimad Bhagavatam - that is, the truths to be directly known from it -Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi next introduces the elaboration of those truths, beginning with sambandha-tattva, the subjective Reality. The remainder of Tattva yam manyase mätuleyam priyam mitram suhrt-tamam akaroḥ sacivam dütar sauhrdad atha sarathim aho baki yaṁ stana-kala-kūtam jighamsayapayayad apy asādhvi lebhe gatim dhatry-ucitām tato’nyam kam va dayalum saranam vrăjema ⚫ barhāpīḍam nata-vara-vapuḥ karnayoh karnikāram bibhrad vasaḥ kanaka-kapiśar vaijayantim ca malām randhran venor adhara-sudhayapurayan gopa-vṛndair vṛndaranyam sva-pada-ramaņam praviśad gita-kirtiḥ 339 III Prameya Sandarbha, as well as the following three books in the anthology (Sri Sat Sandarbha), deal exclusively with the topic of sambandha. Abhidheya and prayojana are examined in Bhakti Sandarbha and Prīti Sandarbha, respectively. 340 2 Elaboration of Sambandha Intuition of the Subject through Reference to the Individual Anucchedas 50-55 The previous two divisions have dealt with the determination of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana in general terms. These were said to have been directly apprehended through a transempirical mode of knowing in the case of Sri Suka and Śrīla Vyasa. This means that they were not arrived at through philosophical reasoning or any sort of logical cognitive process. They were immediately known in consciousness. From this point forward, Jiva Gosvāmī begins the elaboration of sambandha based on Srimad Bhagavatam, which con- tinues right through to the end of Krsna Sandarbha, the fourth book of the series. Abhidheya is discussed in book five, Bhakti Sandarbha, and prayojana in book six, Priti Sandarbha. The first thing to note about sambandha is that it involves the relation between the Reality to be known (the signified, väcya) and the sound revelation that discloses it (the signifier, vācaka), in this case, Śrīmad Bhagavatam. Out of the entire text of Srimad Bhāgavatam, Jiva Gosvāmi identifies verse SB 1.2.11 as the defini- tive statement that specifies the fundamental nature of that Reality as Nondual Consciousness (advaya-jñāna). But how can Nondual Consciousness be intuited for those who have not had the direct experience of Sri Suka and Śri Vyasa? 341 III Prameya In the investigation of anything unknown, knowledge systems generally begin with reference to what is already known or avail- able to conscious examination. The first thing available to the exam- iner is his or her own consciousness. So this division deals with the intuition of the Totality (i.e., Nondual Consciousness) with refer- ence to individual consciousness. This is known as vyaṣṭi-nirdeśa, as stated by Jiva Gosvāmi in the beginning of Anuccheda 56, his conclud- ing remark about this division. From the careful inspection of indi- vidual consciousness through the self-illuminating light of Śrīmad Bhagavatam, the nature of the Supreme or Source Consciousness is made evident. Looking ahead for a moment, the next thing available to the examiner is the cosmos, or in other words, phenomenality. This involves the operation of universals, or the laws that determine the cosmic order. So, Ultimate Reality may also be intuited with refer- ence to these universals (samaşți-nirdeśa), as being their ultimate Source and Shelter. This perspective will be explored in the final division of Tattva Sandarbha (Anucchedas 56-63), which delineates the ten topics (universals) of Srimad Bhagavatam. 342 Anuccheda 50 Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Identifies Its Subject ५० । अथ क्रमेण विस्तरतस्तथैव तात्पर्यं निर्णेतुं सम्बन्धाभिधेयप्रयोजनेषु षङ्गिः सन्दर्भे- निर्णेष्यमाणेषु प्रथमं यस्य वाच्यवाचकतासम्बन्धीदं शास्त्रं तदेव “धर्मः प्रोज्झितकैतवः” इत्यादिपद्ये । सामान्याकारतस्तावदाह “वेद्यं वास्तवमत्र वस्तु” (भा० १ १ २ ) इति । टीका च - अत्र श्रीमति सुन्दरे भागवते वास्तवं परमार्थभूतं वस्तु वेद्यं न तु वैशेषिका- दिवद् द्रव्यगुणादिरूपमित्येषा ॥ श्रीवेदव्यासः ॥ HEREAFTER, to systematically and thoroughly delineate this same essential truth (tätparya) of Srimad Bhagavatam, we shall explain in these Six Sandarbhas the principles of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana, one after the other. The first of these three refers to that [subjective Reality] of which the relation (sambandha) of signified and signifier pertains. The signified (vācya) is the subject to be described (sambandhi-tattva), and the signifier is the text describing it (this scripture). The object of this relation is mentioned in general terms in SB 1.1.2 in the statement vedyam vastavam atra vastu: “The one truly-abiding Substantive is the truth to be investigated [i.e., the knowable] here [in Śrimad Bhāgavatam].” Commenting on this part of the verse, Śrila Śrīdhara Svāmi writes, “Here in this beautiful Bhagavatam, reality is to be known in its supreme transcendent capacity, not reality reduced merely to the categories of material substance (dravya), quality (guna), and the like, as taught by the Vaiseṣikas and others.” This verse (SB 1.1.2) is spoken by Śri Vedavyāsa. 343 III Prameya Commentary HERE, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi informs us that in the Six Sandarbhas, he will explain in detail the very same reality principles of sambandha-, abhidheya-, and prayojana-tattvas directly realized by Śri Vyasadeva and Sukadeva Gosvāmī in the transempirical mode of knowing. He briefly mentioned these principles in Anucchedas 8 and 9 as the truths to be ascertained through a means of valid knowing. He then established Srimad Bhagavatam as the most authoritative pramāņa in regard to the direct knowing of Ultimate Reality. So, after clearly determining these principles, he will now elaborate on them on the basis of Srimad Bhagavatam. The Tattva, Bhagavat, Paramātma, and Kṛṣṇa Sandarbhas treat sambandha-tattva. Bhakti Sandarbha dis- cusses abhidheya-tattva, and Priti Sandarbha deals with prayojana- tattva. From here on through to the end of Tattva Sandarbha, the discussion is exclusively focused on sambandha. Tattva Sandarbha introduces the subject matter of the Six Sanda- rbhas by first establishing the authority of Srimad Bhagavatam as the valid epistemological means by which Ultimate Truth can be directly ascertained. As mentioned earlier, the relationship of a subject with its signifier is technically called the vacya-vācakatā- sambandha. The subject of Srimad Bhagavatam is revealed in its very second verse: “The one truly-abiding Substantive is the truth to be inves- tigated [i.e., the knowable] here [in Srimad Bhagavatam]” (vedyam vastavam atra vastu). As we have discussed already, reality man- ifests on various dimensions of being, but Srimad Bhagavatam is specifically concerned only with the self-disclosure of the Ultimate Reality, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, who encompasses and reconciles all other grades of reality. In contrast to Śrīla Vyasadeva’s presentation in the Bhāgava- tam, the philosophies formulated by other ancient sages, such as Gautama and Kanāda, describe reality from a partial perspective. Gautama, in his system of Nyaya philosophy, says that by under- standing the empirical means and objects of knowledge, one can be 344 50 Śrimad Bhagavatam Identifies Its Subject freed from material miseries (Nyaya-sutra 1.1.1)! And Kanāda, in his system of Vaiseṣika philosophy, which was briefly alluded to at the end of this anuccheda, recognizes seven ontological categories: dravya (substance), guna (attribute), karma (motion or action), sämanya (generality), viseșa (particularity), samavaya (inherence), and abhāva (non-existence) (Vaiseṣika-sutra 1.1.4)? The Vaiseṣikas attempt to explain all of reality in terms of these seven categories. But although the scientific study embodied in philosophies like Nyaya and Vaiseṣika may lead to realization of the underlying principles of phenomenal existence, this is far differ- ent from realization of the Absolute Reality that Srimad Bhagava- tam makes available. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi explains the nature of this Reality in the next anuccheda. 1 pramaņa-prameya-samsaya-prayojana-dṛṣṭanta-siddhäntävayava-tarka-nirnaya- vada-jalpa-vitaṇḍa-hetvabhasa-cchala-jati-nigraha-sthānānāṁ tattva-jñānān nihśreya-sadhigamaḥ 2 dharma-viseșa-prasutad dravya-guna-karma-samanya-višeṣa-samavāyānāṁ padarthanam sadharmya-vaidharmabhyam tattva-jñānän niḥśreyasam 345Anuccheda 51 Absolute Reality Is Nondual Consciousness ५१ | अथ किं रूपं तद्वस्तुतत्त्वमित्यत्राह “वदन्ति तत् तत्त्वविदस्तत्त्वं यज् ज्ञानमद्वयम्” ( भा० १ । २ । ११) इति । “ज्ञानम्” चिदेकरूपम् | अद्वयत्वं चास्य स्वयंसिद्धतादृशातादृश- तत्त्वान्तराभावात् स्वशक्त्येकसहायत्वात् । परमाश्रयं तं विना तासामसिद्धत्वाच् च । “तत्त्वम्” इति परमपुरुषार्थताद्योतनया परमसुखरूपत्वं तस्य बोध्यते । अत एव तस्य नित्यत्वं च दर्शितम् ॥ श्रीसूतः ॥ “WHAT IS THE NATURE of this Substantive (vastu), which is the Absolute Reality (tattva)?” This is disclosed in the following state- ment: “All those who have realized Absolute Reality (tattva) refer to that Reality as nondual consciousness (advaya-jñāna)” (SB 1.2.11). Here the word jñāna indicates that the Absolute is purely of the nature of consciousness. Additionally, the nondual nature of this Reality is established on the following grounds: (1) There is no other Reality (tattva), either similar or dissimilar, that is self- existent; (2) The nondual Absolute is supported only by its own inherent potencies; (3) These potencies can have no existence without it as their absolute foundation. The term tattva, implying here the ultimate good of all that may be attained by human beings, makes it apparent that this tattva, or Absolute Reality, is the embodiment of supreme bliss and is, therefore, also eternal. Śrī Sūta spoke the verse under discussion. 346 Commentary 51 Absolute Reality Is Nondual Consciousness IN THE LAST ANUCCHEDA, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi stated that the Abso- lute Reality is to be known from Srimad Bhagavatam. This natu- rally raises the question, “What is the essential nature of this Abso- lute Reality?” In reply, Jiva Gosvāmi quotes SB 1.2.11, which declares that Absolute Reality is nondual (advaya), or in other words, “one without a second.” There cannot be more than one Absolute Real- ity, because if there were a second, the first would no longer be Absolute, since hypothetically speaking, the second reality could be determined as inferior, equal, or superior to the first one. If it were either superior or inferior to the first, then only one of them would be Absolute. If both of them were equal, they would com- pete for supremacy, unless they were found to be always in agree- ment, which would then make them effectively one for all practical purposes. That the Absolute Reality is nondual, however, does not mean that nothing else exists. Rather, the word “nondual” indicates two things: First, the Absolute Reality is self-existent, meaning that it is grounded in itself and depends on no external support; sec- ond, nothing else can exist independent of this nondual Reality’s support. In Vedantic logic, an object is considered nondual if it is free of three kinds of difference - that among objects of the same class, that among objects of different classes, and that between an object and its parts. A difference between objects of the same class is called sajätiya-bheda. Even though two chairs may look the same, have the same function, and belong to the class called “chair,” they still dif- fer as individual chairs. A change in one will not directly affect the other. A difference between objects of different classes is called vijätiya-bheda. For example, a chair is different from a table in its appearance and function. Finally, a difference between an object and its parts is called svagata-bheda. If all the parts of a chair are scattered, the chair no longer exists. For example, the various parts of a chair can be removed and replaced without changing the chair’s 347 III Prameya identity. Thus, the parts are independent from each other and from the object, the chair. In this way, it is evident that the chair is not self-existent. These three kinds of difference give rise to the duality we observe throughout material nature. They do not exist, however, on the absolute plane; thus, Sūta Gosvāmī defines the Absolute Reality (tattva) as nondual consciousness (jñānam advayam). The Lord’s body and its limbs are each fully conscious and potent, and, therefore, nondifferent from Him. For this reason it is said that in Śrī Kṛṣṇa there exists no difference of the svagata-bheda type. Even when the original Supreme Lord (Svayam Bhagavan) expands into forms such as Ramacandra and Balarama, these sväṁśa (selfsame) expansions remain nondifferent from Bhaga- van’s original Self. Still, while He is not dependent on Them, They are dependent on Him. Since Bhagavan and His svāṁśa expansions belong to the same class, no difference of the sajatiya-bheda type is found in Him. Material nature, being inert, belongs to a class of existence dif- ferent from that of the transcendent Personal Absolute. This might lead one to conclude that there is vijätiya-bheda between Him and material nature. Nevertheless, since material nature’s existence is not independent or separate from Him, there is ultimately no difference of vijätiya-bheda between Him and His material expan- sions. Energy cannot exist without its source, nor is it completely different from its source. The finite living beings belong to the intermediary potency of Bhagavan. Thus, one may view them in two ways, as belonging to the same class as Bhagavan, because they are conscious like Him, or as belonging to a different class, because their magni- tude and potency are infinitesimal. From both viewpoints, the jīvas are fully dependent on Bhagavan, so there exists none of the three types of difference between them and the Lord. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi concludes, therefore, that although Bhagavan’s energies serve Him in various ways, they have no existence separate from Him (tam vinā tāsām asiddhatvät). Just as a spider weaves a web with a special substance it produces from its mouth and then makes the 348 51 Absolute Reality Is Nondual Consciousness web its home, so Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the personal nondual Absolute Reality, employs His own energies to manifest the spiritual realm, where He resides. These energies are part of His intrinsic nature and have no independent existence. In the Bhagavatam verse under discussion (SB 1.2.11), the word jñāna, which ordinarily means “knowledge,” refers to “conscious- ness.” Here, however, consciousness does not imply devoid of con- tent, i.e., without the divisions of subject and object. Its significance here is that Nondual Reality is purely of the nature of consciousness and is also conscious, just as the sun is entirely of the nature of light and is also luminous. Because the word jñāna refers to Absolute Reality, this nondual consciousness must have perpetual existence (sat) as a characteristic. And because the word tattva indicates the supreme objective of life, it follows that this Nondual Reality must also be characterized by bliss (ananda), since all living beings seek pleasure, whether they know it or not. From direct perception, logical analysis, and scriptural author- ity, we can understand that the ultimate motivation in all activi- ties is the pursuit of joy. This is the basic purpose underlying cre- ative and destructive processes and all personal relationships. As the Bṛhad-aranyaka Upanisad states, “My dear, the husband is not loved for his own sake, but for the sake of the Self” (na vă are patyuḥ kāmāya patiḥ priyo bhavaty atmanas tu kāmāya patiḥ priyo bhavati, BAU 2.4.5). Here the word “Self” refers either to the individual self (the ātmā) or to the Supreme Self (Paramātmā). The verse is saying that in reality it is the Self alone that is dear. In the conditioned state, the self we perceive is the empirical self, the jiva. We become attached to someone or something not primarily because of their own dear- ness, but because we derive happiness from loving that person or thing. This feeling of happiness comes from our egoic sense of self- appropriation - the notion that the object of love is “ours” - not from the person or the object itself. The truth of this principle is shown by the common sense observation that the intensity of plea- sure derived through material experience naturally decreases as the degree of identity with those experiences diminishes. 349 III Prameya By contrast, in the liberated state, one realizes the true self as a servant of Bhagavan. When we act solely on the basis of this under- standing, we become pure devotees of Bhagavan, and then we ren- der service only for His pleasure, desiring nothing in return. Even if the all-attractive Lord treats us roughly, we remain established in devotion, abandoning all fears and cares in our loving relation- ship with Him. Śrī Caitanya demonstrated this standard when He prayed: Kṛṣṇa may embrace me or trample me under His feet, or He may break my heart by being away from me. He, a debauchee, may treat me as He likes, yet He alone is my very life and no one else. (Śikṣā- staka 8)1 In conditioned life, we do not know that Krsna is the supreme object of love and the source of all bliss. Rather, we mistake our- selves for the source of bliss. To enlighten us about Himself, Kṛṣṇa instructs us in Bhagavad Gitā: I am the source of everything. All things and actions emanate from Me. Knowing this, the wise, full of love for Me, worship Me. With their attention focused exclusively on Me and their lives entirely submitted to Me, they derive great satisfaction and relish always enlightening one another and conversing about Me. (GITA 10.8-9)2 Thus, there is an inherent relationship between jñāna (con- sciousness), sat (eternal existence), and ananda (bliss). This relationship is clearly indicated in such Śruti statements as, “Brahman is pure consciousness and bliss” (vijñānam anandam brahma, BAU 3.9.34). Thus, the nature of the nondual consciousness described in this verse has been designated sat-cit-ananda, “eternal being, consciousness, and bliss.” 1aślisya va pada-ratam pinastu mam adarśanan marma-hatāṁ karotu vā yatha tatha va vidadhatu lampato mat-prana-nathas tu sa eva näparaḥ 2 aham sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvam pravartate iti matva bhajante mam budha bhava-samanvitaḥ mac-cittă mad-gata-prānā bodhayantaḥ parasparam kathayantaś ca mam nityam tuşyanti ca ramanti ca 350 51 Absolute Reality Is Nondual Consciousness In this anuccheda, Jiva Gosvāmi presented his thesis that jñāna is eternal. In the next anuccheda, he will state the purva-paksa, or the opponent’s objection that consciousness is momentary. He will then present the rebuttal to this view. 351 Anuccheda 52 Consciousness Is Primary and Distinct from Its Content - Identity and Distinction of the Jiva and Brahman 52.1 ५२ । ननु नीलपीताद्याकारं क्षणिकमेव ज्ञानं दृष्टं तत् पुनरद्वयं नित्यं ज्ञानं कथं लक्ष्यते यन्नि- ष्ठमिदं शास्त्रम् ? इत्यत्राह (भा० १२ | १३ | १२) ONE MAY QUESTION: But events of consciousness (jñāna) are seen to exist for just an instant, taking the shape, say, of a blue object one moment and a yellow object the next. How then can consciousness (jñāna) be characterized as nondual and eternal, which is the subject of this scripture [Srimad Bhagavatam]? Süta Gosvāmī replies: सर्ववेदान्तसारं यद् ब्रह्मात्मैकत्वलक्षणम् । वस्त्वद्वितीयं तन्निष्ठमिति ॥ १२० ॥ इति । This Bhāgavatam is the essence of all Vedanta philosophy, because its subject matter is the Absolute Truth, which is one without a second, as characterized by the oneness [in love] of the individual living being with Brahman. The one ultimate attainment (prayojana) proclaimed in this book is kaivalya [lit., “aloneness,” which here implies pure devotion alone unto that Supreme Truth, devoid of any extraneous element]. (SB 12.13.12)1 sarva-vedanta-saram yad brahmätmaikatva-lakṣaṇam vastv advitiyam tan-nistham kaivalyaika-prayojanam 352 1 52 Consciousness Is Primary and Distinct from Its Content - Identity and Distinction of the Jiva and Brahman “सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं ब्रह्म” (तै० २।१।१) इति यस्य स्वरूपमुक्तम् “येनाश्रुतं श्रुतं भवति” ( छा० ६ |१| ३) इति । यद्विज्ञानेन सर्वविज्ञानं प्रतिज्ञातम् । “सदेव सौम्येदमग्र आसीत्” ( छा० ६।२।१) इत्यादिना निखिलजगदेककारणता । “तदैक्षत बहु स्याम्” ( छा० ६।२।३) इत्य- नेन सत्यसङ्कल्पता च यस्य प्रतिपादिता । तेन ब्रह्मणा स्वरूपशक्तिभ्यां सर्वबृहत्तमेन सार्धम् । अनेन “जीवेनात्मना ” ( छा० ६।३।२) इति तदीयोक्ताविदन्तानिर्देशेन ततो भिन्न- त्वेऽप्यात्मतानिर्देशेन तदात्मांशविशेषत्वेन लब्धस्य बादरायणसमाधिदृष्टयुक्तेरत्यभिन्न- तारहितस्य । जीवात्मनो यदेकत्वम् “तत् त्वमसि’ ( छा० ६।८।७) इत्यादी जात्या तदंश- भूतचिद्रूपत्वेन समानाकारता । तदेव लक्षणं प्रथमतो ज्ञाने साधकतमं यस्य । तथाभूतं यत् सर्ववेदान्तसारमद्वितीयं वस्तु तन्निष्ठम् - तदेकविषयमिदं श्रीभागवतमिति प्राक्तन- पद्यस्थेनानुषङ्गः । The Śruti has defined the nature (svarupa) of this Absolute Truth (Brahman) : “Brahman is truth, consciousness, and without end or limit” (ru2.1.1 ). It is said to be that by knowing which all knowledge becomes known in statements like, “By hearing about [Brahman] the unheard of becomes heard” (CHU 6.1.3). That It is the sole foundation of the entire creation is established in such Śruti statements as, “My dear boy, prior to all this, there was only sat, the eternal reality” (CHU 6.2.1). That It is endowed with infallible will (satya-sankalpa) [i.e., that He accomplishes everything through His mere intention] is indicated by the state- ment, “He glanced [with the intention], ‘Let Me become many !” (CHU 6.2.3). In the statement, “Entering primordial nature along with this individual living being, I shall manifest names and forms” (CHU 6.3.2), the living being ( jiva) is mentioned along with this selfsame Brahman, which exceeds all, both in essence ( svarūpa) and potency (śakti). This amounts to saying that the jiva belongs to Brahman. Here, although the demonstrative pronoun idam (this) [qualifying the word jiva] differentiates the jiva from Brahman, the word ätmană (self) indicates that the jiva is an integrated part of the Complete Whole that is Brahman. From the logic of what was revealed in the samadhi of Śrīla Vyasadeva, the oneness of the living being with Brahman in no way implies absolute nondistinction of the jiva and Brahman. Rather, Śruti statements, such as tat tvam asi (“You are that,” 353 III Prameya CHU 6.8.7) disclose that the jiva’s oneness with Brahman consists of its partaking of the same identity as Brahman, by virtue of being pure consciousness and an integrated part thereof. This particular understanding is helpful in precipitating preliminary knowledge of the Supreme Brahman. The entity thus designated as the Supreme Brahman, who is the essence of all the Upanisads and is one without a second, is the focus of interest and the exclusive subject of this Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. This verse [SB 12.13.12] shows a clear connection to another statement from another verse [SB 1.1.2] that we looked at above [Anuccheda 50]? 52.2 यथा जन्मप्रभृति कश्चिद् गृहगुहावरुद्धः सूर्यं विविदिषुः कथञ्चिद् गवाक्षपतितं सूर्यांशुकणं दर्शयित्वा केनचिदुपदिश्यते “एष सः” इति । एतत् तदंशज्योतिःसमानाकारतया तन्महा- ज्योतिर्मण्डलमनुसन्धीयतामित्यर्थस्तद्वत् । जीवस्य तथा तदंशत्वं च तच्छक्तिविशेषसि- द्धत्वेनैव परमात्मसन्दर्भे स्थापयिष्यामः । The following analogy may help to clarify the purpose of describ- ing the jiva’s oneness with Brahman, referred to above. Suppose a person is kept in a dark room from birth without ever seeing the sun. When curiosity is aroused in that person to know what the sun is, another person may point to a ray of sunlight pass- ing through a window grating and say, “This is the sun.” In other words, the ray is but a tiny portion of the sun. That which the person must come to know is an immense orb of light, having the same basic constitution. In Paramätma Sandarbha (Anucche- das 18-46), we will establish that the jiva is similarly an inte- grated portion of the Supreme Brahman, manifested by one of His inconceivable potencies. 2 The earlier verse stated that the one truly-abiding Substantive (vastavam vastu) is the truth to be investigated in Srimad Bhagavatam, while this verse states that the Bhagavatam’s subject is the nondual Absolute (advitiyam vastu). Thus, the connection between the verses is evident, and together they affirm that the nondual consciousness (advaya-jñāna) that is the subject of Srimad Bhagavatam does not refer to momentary consciousness in the form of successive cognitions. 354 52.3 52 Consciousness Is Primary and Distinct from Its Content- Identity and Distinction of the Jiva and Brahman तदेतज्जीवादिलक्षणांशविशिष्टतयैवोपनिषदस्तस्य सांशत्वमपि क्वचिदुपदिशन्ति । निरं- शत्वोपदेशिका श्रुतिस्तु केवलतन्निष्ठा । अत्र “कैवल्यैकप्रयोजनम्” इति चतुर्थपादश्च कैवल्यपदस्य शुद्धत्वमात्रवचनत्वेन । शुद्धत्वस्य च शुद्धभक्तित्वेन पर्यवसानेन प्रीतिसन्द- भें व्याख्यास्यते ॥ श्रीसूतः ॥ Thus, the Upaniṣads sometimes teach that Brahman is also an Integrated Whole inclusive of parts, specifically because He is endowed with parts, such as the living beings and other poten- cies. Conversely, when the Śrutis speak of Him as devoid of parts, they are focusing on His unqualified essence. In the fourth line of SB 12.13.12, namely, kaivalyaika-prayojana, the word kaiva- lya (aloneness) [proclaimed in the verse as the ultimate attain- ment of Srimad Bhagavatam] means “establishment in the state of utterly pure existence [devoid of all material adjuncts].” By extension of understanding, the state of utterly pure existence finds its culmination in the state of utterly pure devotion. This will be shown later in Priti Sandarbha (Anuccheda 1). The verse under discussion (SB 12.13.12) was spoken by Śrī Sūta Gosvāmi. Commentary IN THE LAST ANUCCHEDA, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī established that the Absolute Truth is eternal nondual consciousness. One sect of Buddhists, the Kṣaṇika-vijñāna-vādīs, raise an objection to this conclusion. Their doctrine states that there is only one reality, con- sciousness, which is changing at every moment, and that there is no difference between knowledge and the object of knowledge. Exter- nal objects have no existence outside of cognitions. Consciousness is like a river whose water is always flowing, or it is like the flame of a candle that is changing at every moment. A new flame succeeds the previous one as the old wick and wax are consumed. There is nothing in this world that is not transitory. An object, like a flame, 355III Prameya appears unchanging only because of the similarity between our prior and successive cognitions of it. Just as the objects we see in our dreams do not exist outside our consciousness, so the distinctions between knowledge and the object of knowledge in our waking life do not exist. When we see a blue object, our consciousness is blue. If we next see a yellow object, the blue consciousness is dissolved and replaced by yellow consciousness. How, then, can consciousness be called eternal? This is their objection to Jiva Gosvāmi’s conclusion that the Absolute Truth is eternal. The Vijñāna-vādīs reason that an eternal object cannot be the cause of anything since a cause generally transforms into its effect. For example, since milk transforms into yogurt, it cannot be eternal. Similarly, nondual consciousness, being the cause of every- thing, must undergo transformation and, therefore, cannot be eter- nal. Further, they say, everything is changing at every moment, although we may not notice the moment-by-moment change, just as we do not notice the moment-by-moment growth of plants or of our bodies. To the Vijñāna-vādīs’ argument, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī replies not with a logical refutation but by quoting Srimad Bhagavatam, the supreme pramaņa. The Bhagavatam verse given here (SB 12.13.12) explains that the nondual Reality is characterized by the oneness of the individual self with the Supreme Self, Brahman. This oneness of Reality is not the Buddhists’ oneness of momentary consciousness and its objects. This Reality is advaya-jñāna, nondual conscious- ness, which is the essence of the Upanisads and the subject matter of Srimad Bhagavatam; it is not momentary, but eternal, conscious, and blissful by nature. In the technical philosophical sense, nondual consciousness is not the immediate cause of creation, which would imply its entan- glement in cause-effect conditionality. Rather, it is the source con- dition that makes possible the actualization of everything in the cos- mos out of the field of infinite possibility. This is the actual signif- icance of its being often referred to as sarva-karaṇa-kāraṇam (lit., “the ultimate cause of all causes”). In this respect, it can accomplish 356 52 Consciousness Is Primary and Distinct from Its Content- Identity and Distinction of the Jiva and Brahman everything simply by its will, which is to say - in the language of quantum physics that by mere intention, it precipitates the col- lapse of the wave function that leads from potentiality to actuality. All this implies that the advaya-jñāna is inherently self-endowed with variegated potencies. That very Brahman is to be understood as Supreme, because It is the ultimate vastitude, and because It propels others into the vastness of being (bṛhattvad bṛmhaṇatvāc ca yad brahma paramam viduḥ, vP 3.3.21). The various Śruti statements cited in this anuccheda describe all these characteristics of Brahman. So, the theory of consciousness of the Kṣanika-vijñāna-vādīs does not agree either with Śruti or with Srimad Bhagavatam. The Vijñāna-vādīs’ theory of reality is based on their assump- tion that there is no absolute pure consciousness. The Vijñāna- vādīs do not know that the Absolute Reality in Its innermost essence is personal, possessing inconceivable potencies (acintya-sakti) by virtue of which It is the support and shelter of everything, while yet remaining unaffected. As Devahūti said in her prayers, “You, who are the Supreme Regulator (Iśvara) of all living beings, have countless inconceivable powers” (atmeśvaro’tarkya-sahasra-saktiḥ, SB 3.33.3). The Vijñāna-vādīs’ view is based on a material conception of changing consciousness. They adopt momentariness a priori as the reference frame through which to view subject and object, and hence, what is disclosed to them is how subject and object appear from that limited perspective. Their understanding does not apply to the absolute realm of being. While in our ordinary experience, material energy is in a constant state of flux, the Lord and His intrinsic energies are not under the same system of natural laws that govern material nature. The example of the spider cited in the previous anuccheda also applies here: The spider produces a special substance within itself, weaves its web with it, and later draws the substance back into itself, all without undergoing any transformation. It was already established in the beginning of this book that knowledge of the Absolute can be accessed only through its own self- disclosure in the form of revealed sound (i.e., scriptural revelation). 357 III Prameya To understand the Absolute Truth, we must first shed all our pre- conceived notions based on material conditioning and simply hear from authentic spiritual authorities in disciplic succession. This is to say that knowingness of the Absolute is not in reality some- thing to be obtained but rather something to be wholeheartedly submitted to. The Vijñāna-vādīs, being followers of Lord Buddha, reject the Vedas. Buddha’s own rejection of the Vedas was primarily a reaction to the misuse of Vedic authority by the brahmanas. The Vedas were never meant to serve merely as dictums of God to be blindly carried out or used for personal gain, but as self-revealing truths identical with Reality. In others words, they are meant to support the direct knowing of that Reality as seen in the case of Śrī Vyasadeva and Śukadeva Gosvāmi. But by rejecting the Vedic authority outright, the Buddhists have no alternative other than striving to understand the inconceivable with their own minds. They thus end up with a hopelessly muddled explanation of transcendental reality. They say that consciousness is momentary. If this were true, then consciousness could not be the cause of anything, because according to the Nyaya school of logic, a cause has to exist for at least two moments. It must exist as the cause for the first moment and then transform or produce the result in the next moment. And if our consciousness existed for only one moment at a time, we could not remember our past experiences, since there would be no continuity from one moment’s consciousness to another moment’s conscious- ness. A person who has experienced an activity can recall it later on, but if consciousness is momentary, there is nothing to recall in the next moment’s consciousness. Indeed, there is no one to recall it. This is certainly contrary to everyone’s experience. Nor can the Vijñāna-vādīs’ idea of the external world with- stand the test of logic. They say that the external world is a manifestation of momentary consciousness. Here, the question may be asked whether things perceived as external are one with momentary consciousness or different from it? If they say that external objects are separately real, then they are agreeing with the Vaisnava opinion and are contradicting their own statement that 358 52 Consciousness Is Primary and Distinct from Its Content- Identity and Distinction of the Jiva and Brahman the apparently external objects are only manifestations of internal consciousness. If they say that the external objects are one with internal consciousness, in practice there would be no way to dis- tinguish between the momentary internal consciousness and the objects it perceives. Also, there would be no standard to separate, say, blue consciousness from yellow consciousness, and thus there would be rampant confusion in our perceptions. And why would a common reality be perceived at all? As in dreams, which are private in nature, there would be no common or simultaneous experience of objects since no two individuals’ consciousness or cognitions are the same. As is known from both reason and direct experience, conscious- ness always has a subject (one who is conscious) and an object (what one is conscious of). If momentary consciousness alone is real, where are its subject and object? To this the Vijñāna-vādīs offer no satisfactory answer. If neither external objects nor the inter- nally perceived objects, such as happiness and distress, are differ- ent from the perceiver, then who is the subject of the act of per- ception? Everyone’s common experience is that the perceiver, the perceived, and the perception are distinct. In this anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī again clarifies that the one- ness of the jiva and Brahman spoken of in the Śruti is not meant to be understood as absolute oneness. After all, Śruti contains such statements as, “Entering primordial nature as Paramātmā along with this jiva, I shall manifest names and forms” (anena jivenātma- nänupraviśya nama-rupe vyakaravani, CHU 6.3.2). Here the pronoun anena (this) implies that the jiva is different from “I,” the speaker, Paramātmā. Nonetheless, the jiva is described elsewhere as an inte- grated part of Brahman, a conclusion confirmed by Śrīla Vyasa’s trance. The reconciliation of this apparent contradiction is, as we have discussed before, that the jiva and Brahman are one in the sense of their sharing the common characteristic of consciousness, but are different in their individual identities and potencies. If a person says that Texans and New Yorkers are one, we understand him to mean that they are from the same country, not that they have no separate identities. 359 III Prameya The jivas are integrated parts of Brahman, the Complete Whole. This is the oneness of Brahman with Its parts, or in other words, with Its energies, which is the fundamental teaching of the Upanisads and Srimad Bhagavatam. The idea is that in general, the part is dependent on the whole and supports its function. When separated from the whole, the part becomes as useless as a finger lopped off the hand. In the same way, the relation between the jivas and Bhagavan, who is known as Brahman in the Upanisads, is that of the servants and the served. The jivas have no independent exis- tence. All their problems arise from their misconstrued sense of independence and separation from God. Correctly understanding the oneness between Brahman and the jivas is a fundamental step in intuiting the nature of Brahman. Every jiva directly experiences his own consciousness, and the Upanisads, on the basis of the oneness of Brahman and the jivas, instruct the jivas to extrapolate from that experience some idea of the nature of Brahman. To illustrate this, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi offers the analogy of a man born and brought up in a cavelike room who has never seen the sun. To educate this man about the sun, someone may point to a ray of sunlight seeping into his dark room through a tiny opening and tell him, “This single ray of light is from the sun, an enormous sphere that emanates countless similar rays.” From this information the man can get some idea of what the sun is like. The Upanisads use this same method to instruct the jivas about Brahman’s status as pure consciousness. Indeed, the jivas are like infinitesimal rays of light emanating from the sunlike Brahman. The sun’s rays are not completely different from the sun because they originate from it; but they are also not absolutely one with the sun, because they can be seen apart from it and because they do not have its complete potency. Similarly, the jivas are neither completely one with Brahman nor completely different from Brah- man. In Sarva-samvadini, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi calls this relation- ship between the jiva and Brahman acintya-bheda-abheda, “incon- ceivable, simultaneous oneness and difference.” Owing to this relationship, Brahman is described as advaya-jñāna, or nondual consciousness, which is the subject of Srimad Bhagavatam. 360 52 Consciousness Is Primary and Distinct from Its Content - Identity and Distinction of the Jiva and Brahman Thus, the word brahma - as used in the Upanisads and Śrimad Bhagavatam should not be misunderstood as meaning Brahman utterly devoid of qualities. The Advaitavadīs insist on such an understanding. But logically such an impersonal Brahman can- not exist, because to exist would require the attribute of existence, which implies potency, which in turn implies duality - Brahman plus attributes. So, in spite of their abhorrence of duality in the absolute realm, Māyāvādīs cannot escape it without acknowledg- ing the nonduality of the Absolute and Its potencies. From this understanding it is evident that nowhere in Vedic literature does the word brahma mean impersonal Brahman in the sense that they intend. To clarify this, Sūta Gosvāmī says, “This nondual consciousness is called Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavan” (brahmeti parama- tmeti bhagavan iti sabdyate, SB 1.2.11). Here Sūta Gosvāmī does not say that the Absolute Truth is also called jiva. He includes only these three names of that nondual consciousness, which Śrīmad Bhagavatam identifies as Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personal Absolute. The one Absolute Truth manifests differently to the adherents of dif- ferent spiritual processes in accordance with their core disposition of faith, but the Absolute Truth Itself does not change. This is the significance of the word sabdyate (it is designated). The Brahman described in the Vedic scriptures is Bhagavan, the Supreme Person, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. In the Śruti we find two types of statements concerning the rela- tionship between the jivas and Brahman: those designating the jiva as part of Brahman and those that indicate his oneness with Brah- man. The real distinction between these two kinds of statements is only one of emphasis on either difference (bheda) or nondifference (abheda). Statements in the Vedic scripture, such as, “That one eternal conscious being is the support for the many eternal con- scious beings” (nityo nityanam cetanaś cetanānām, KU 2.2.13) belong to the bheda class. Statements such as, “Indeed, all this is Brahman” (sarvam khalv idam brahma) belong to the abheda class. The word kaivalya (lit., “aloneness,” or in other words, con- sciousness alone, freed of all limiting adjuncts) in SB 12.13.12 361 III Prameya properly implies “pure devotion.” Although impersonalists com- monly use this term to mean final emancipation, or merging into Brahman, their usage is absurd, because there is no real merging into impersonal Brahman. Kaivalya means liberation, but the real mark of liberation is the final and complete establishment of the pure self in the intrinsic potency of pure devotion, not merging into Brahman. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi will explain this more fully in Priti Sandarbha, Anucchedas 1 ff. To summarize, statements in the Vedic scriptures describing the oneness of Brahman and the jivas serve one or more of the following purposes:
8. To distinguish both Brahman and the jivas from inert matter by pointing to consciousness as their common quality.
9. To show that the jivas are integrated parts of Paramātmā.
10. To teach that the jivas are dependent on Paramātmā.
11. To indicate that by becoming an unalloyed devotee, a jiva actual- izes his ultimate potential, becoming in a sense as powerful as the Supreme Lord.
12. To show that conditional life in the material world under the influence of a separatist view and ego is not the natural, healthy condition of the jiva.
13. To show that the jiva, whether in conditioned life or in liberation, has no independence from God.
14. To establish that Brahman is the only self-existent Reality. No statements in the Vedic scriptures about the oneness of Brah- man and the jivas assert absolute oneness between them. To know Paramātmā, one must first understand the nature of the individual self, the jiva. Thus, in the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī begins explaining the characteristics of the self. 362 Anuccheda 53 Intuition of the Supreme Self through Analysis of the Characteristics of the Individual Self 53.1 ५३ । तत्र यदि त्वम्पदार्थस्य जीवात्मनो ज्ञानत्वं नित्यत्वं च प्रथमतो विचारगोचरः स्यात् तदैव तत्पदार्थस्य तादृशत्वं सुबोधं स्यादिति । तद् बोधयितुम् “अन्यार्थश्च परामर्शः " ( ब्र० सू० १ । ३ । २० ) इति न्यायेन जीवात्मनस्तद्रूपत्वमाह (भा० ११ । ३ । ३८ ) - THE JIVA is designated by the pronoun tvam (you) in the state- ment tat tvam asi (“You are that”). If it is first grasped through proper deliberation that the jivätma is conscious and eternal, one can easily understand that the Supreme Brahman, des- ignated by the pronoun tat, is of the same essential nature. VS 1.3.20 states: “The deliberation upon the jiva is in order to know the other [the Supreme Brahman].” So, to impart an under- standing of the Supreme (tat) in accordance with this reasoning, Pippalayana Yogendra describes the jiva as being of the same nature as the Supreme when he says to King Nimi: नात्मा जजान न मरिष्यति नैधतेऽसौ न क्षीयते सवनविद् व्यभिचारिणां हि । सर्वत्र शश्वदनपाय्युपलब्धिमात्रं प्राणो यथेन्द्रियबलेन विकल्पितं सत् ॥ १२१ ॥ Because it is the witness of the different states [childhood, youth, and so on] of the transient material body, this ātmā is without birth, growth, decay, or death. Although the atma is exclusively of the nature of consciousness, present everywhere, eternal, and invariable, it appears to assume various forms under the influ- ence of sense perception and cognition, just as the vital force 363 III Prameya (prāna) within the body, although one, appears as if many in contact with the various senses. (SB 11.3.38)1 53.2 “आत्मा” शुद्धो जीवः । “न जजान” न जातः । जन्माभावादेव तदनन्तरास्तितालक्षणो विकारोऽपि नास्ति । “नैधते” न वर्धते । वृद्ध्यभावादेव विपरिणामोऽपि निरस्तः । “हि” यस्मात् । “व्यभिचारिणाम्” आगमापायिनाम् । बालयुवादिदेहानां देवमनुष्याद्याकारदे- हानां वा । सवनवित् तत्तत्कालद्रष्टा । न ह्यवस्थावतां द्रष्टा तदवस्थो भवतीत्यर्थः । निरव- स्थः कोऽसावात्मा ? अत आह— उपलब्धिमात्रं ज्ञानैकरूपम् । कथम्भूतम् ? “ सर्वत्र” देहे । “शश्वत् ” सर्वदा अनुवर्तमानमिति । The word ātmā here refers to “the pure self,” and the clause na jajäna means “the pure self was never born.” Since it is with- out birth, the self is also free from the ensuing transformation, namely, subsistence (astita) [i.e., sustained existence]. The verb naidhate means “the self does not increase.” Since it is without increase, it does not undergo transformation. The word hi means “because” [with its conjoining clause supplying the reason why the self is free from the above transformations, as explained hereafter]. Vyabhicāriņām means “of everything that undergoes appear- ance and disappearance,” namely, the various states of the phys- ical body, such as childhood, adolescence, and so on, or alter- natively the various forms of bodies [temporarily inhabited], such as celestial (deva), human, and others. [The reason for the self’s freedom from transformation is now specified.] The self is savana-vit, the witness of each of these different bodily states or forms. What this signifies is that the witness is certainly not subject to the varying conditions which it merely observes. To the question “What is the nature of this unchanging self?” Pip- palayana says, “It is exclusively of the nature of consciousness (upalabdhi-matram).” 1nātmā jajāna na marisyati naidhate’sau na kṣiyate savana-vid vyabhicariņam hi sarvatra śaśvad anapayy upalabdhi-matram prano yathendriya-balena vikalpitam sat 364 53 Intuition of the Supreme Self through Analysis of the Characteristics of the Individual Self How does it exist? “It is present everywhere (sarvatra), mean- ing that it pervades the body, and it is eternal (śāśvat), meaning that it is present at every moment.” 53.3 ननु नीलज्ञानं नष्टं पीतज्ञानं जातमिति प्रतीतेर्न ज्ञानस्यानपायित्वम् ? तत्राह - इन्द्रियबलेनेति । सदेव ज्ञानमेकमिन्द्रियबलेन विविधं कल्पितम् । नीलाद्याकारा वृत्तय एव जायन्ते नश्यन्ति च न ज्ञानमिति भावः । अयमागमापायितदवधिभेदेन प्रथमस्तर्कः । द्रष्टृदृश्यभेदेन द्वितीयोऽपि तर्कों ज्ञेयः । व्यभिचारिष्ववस्थितस्याव्यभिचारे दृष्टान्तः प्राणो यथेति ॥ “But how can consciousness be considered invariable (anapayi), since conventional experience dictates that upon the disap- pearance of the cognition of something blue, there arises the cognition of something yellow?” Pippalayana answers, “by the power of the senses” (indriya- balena), indicating that although consciousness is one and ever- present, the influence of the senses [of sense perceptions and cog- nitions] makes it appear variegated. In other words, it is not consciousness itself that appears and disappears; rather, what appears and disappears are the various mental modes (vṛttis) assuming the forms of cognitions of something blue and so on [i.e., it is only the content of consciousness that is variable and not primordial consciousness itself]. Thus, the first logical argument [presented to help distin- guish the ātmā from the body] is based on the difference between that which appears and disappears and that which is beyond such transformations. The second argument [presented to dis- tinguish consciousness from cognitions] is based on the differ- ence between the seer and the seen. The example of the vital force (prāna) shows how something unchanging can exist in the midst of ever-changing phenomena. 365III Prameya Commentary THE VEDIC STATEMENTS that imply the nondifference between the jiva and Brahman do so in reference to the common attributes of both. One popular example of such a statement is “You are that” (tat tvam asi). Here the pronouns tat and tvam signify Brahman and the jiva, respectively, both of whom possess the attribute of consciousness. The idea is that if the jiva’s spiritual nature is understood, then the nature of Brahman is easily grasped. This is the idea behind the analogy that Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī gave in the previous anuccheda, in which the man in the cave learns about the nature of the sun by being instructed about the sun’s ray. This technique of intu- iting transcendent truth through similarity has also been used in Vedanta-sutra, “The deliberation upon the jiva is in order to know the other [Paramātmā]” (anyārthaś ca parāmarśaḥ, vs 1.3.20). In his commentary on this section of Tattva Sandarbha, Śrīla Baladeva Vidyabhūṣaṇa writes: This sutra refers to the dahara-vidya portion of the Chandogya Upani- şad (CHU 8.1), which describes meditation on Paramātmā within the tiny space (dahara) in the inner recess of the heart. The body of the worshiper is considered to be the city of Brahman, within the dahara of which lies Paramātmā. The worshiper is meant to med- itate on the eight qualities belonging to Paramätma. These eight qualities are listed in CHU 8.7.1, “Paramātmā is free from sin, old age, death, sorrow, hunger, and thirst. He has infallible desires and infallible will.” But further along (CHU 8.12.3), mention is made of “a blissful one who rises up out of the body, attains to the divine light, and becomes established in his own real nature. He is called the uttamaḥ purusaḥ, the most exalted person.” This uttamaḥ puruṣaḥ, according to Baladeva Vidyabhūṣaṇa, is 2 atmäpahata-papma vijaro vimṛtyur visoko vijighatso’pipäsaḥ satya-kāmaḥ satya-sankalpaḥ 3 evam evaişa samprasado’smac charirat samutthaya param jyotir upasampadya svena rupenābhiniṣpadyate sa uttamapuruṣaḥ 366 53 Intuition of the Supreme Self through Analysis of the Characteristics of the Individual Self the jiva who has attained perfection by acquiring transcendental knowledge of Bhagavan. This raises an obvious doubt: Why is the jiva mentioned in the midst of this description of the dahara, dealing with meditation on Paramätmä? To answer this doubt, the above sutra supplies the answer, “The reference to the jiva in the dahara-vidya is not simply to convey knowledge about the jiva, but to lead to knowl- edge of Paramātmā, for by knowing Paramātmā, the jiva attains his real nature” (anyarthaś ca paramarśaḥ, vs 1.3.20). In SB 11.3.38, Pip- palāyana Yogendra similarly instructs King Nimi about the jiva to educate him about the nature of the Lord. The purpose of the verse by Pippalayana is to distinguish the self from the body. The body undergoes six types of change. These are listed in Niru- kta 1.1.2, “The body takes birth, subsists for some time, grows, under- goes changes, dwindles, and finally dies” (jayate’sti vardhate vipari- namate’pakṣiyate nasyati ca). The ātmā, however, does not undergo any of these changes, as Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms in Chapter Two of Bhaga- vad Gitä. Pippalāyana’s argument for the atma’s not undergoing the six changes is that it is the constant witness of all these changes. A person sitting in a moving airplane and unable to look out the window cannot fathom its speed, but someone on the ground can observe it. The objection of the Kṣanika-vijñāna-vādīs discussed in the previous anuccheda - namely, that consciousness is only momen- tary is repeated here (in Anuccheda 53.3) and answered differ- ently. The momentary consciousness of which they speak actu- ally consists of changes in a person’s mental modes (vrttis), or in other words, in the content of consciousness, not primordial consciousness itself. This variation in the content of conscious- ness is produced by the senses interacting with the external world. Consciousness itself remains constant. The Vedanta explains that when a person observes an object, there arises a particular mental mode, called a vṛtti, which the ātmā perceives. The mental mode itself is not the perceiver. But the Bud- dhists, who deny the existence of an eternal conscious being, mis- construe this temporary ever-changing vṛtti, which is non-eternal, 367 III Prameya for real consciousness, which is the invariable context in which the fluctuating content arises. This point is further clarified with the analogy of the vital force (prāna). Universal prana is one, but the prana within the body has various names, such as prana, apana, and samana, according to the function it performs. Similarly, the atma is one, but while in the body, it manifests consciousness, which appears many-branched and ever-changing. For example, sweetened cow’s milk gives rise to different mental modes when perceived through the different senses: to the eyes it is white, to the tongue sweet, and so on. So, it is only the mental modes, affected by varieties of sense perception, that appear and disappear. The living entity is an inte- grated part of the intermediary potency of Paramātmā, which is conscious and eternal, and so the living entity must have these qual- ities as well, in as much as a gold nugget shares the qualities of the mother lode. The purpose of explaining the conscious and eternal quality of the atma through logic and direct experience is to help us intuit the true nature of Paramātmā. Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi derives two arguments from the words of Pip- palāyana (SB 11.3.38), both of which serve to distinguish the ātmā from the material body. The first argument is based on the changes occurring in the material body. We notice these changes as time pro- gresses, but upon reflection we can understand that we ourselves (i.e., the conscious self) have not changed. We know ourselves to be the same person. Since the attributes of changelessness and trans- formation cannot simultaneously be attributed to the same object, the unchanging ātmā must be distinct from the changing body. The second argument is based on the distinction between the seer and the seen. The body and mind cannot be the seer, because they are objects of perception. Thus, the perceiver, the ātmā, must be different from them. In the next anuccheda, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi gives further logical arguments to help distinguish the self from the body. 368 Anuccheda 54 The Changeless Self Is the Witness 54.1 ५४ । दृष्टान्तं विवृण्वन्निन्द्रियादिलयेन निर्विकारात्मोपलब्धिं दर्शयति (भा० ११ | ३ | ३९ ) - TAKING THIS EXAMPLE of the invariable prana within the vari- able body [discussed in Anuccheda 53.3] a step further, Pip- palayana Ṛși points out that the changeless self (nirvikāra-ātmā) can be intuited from the state of deep sleep in which the senses and mind have been deactivated [and, hence, have no bearing on the ātmā at that time]: अण्डेषु पेशिषु तरुष्वविनिश्चितेषु प्राणो हि जीवमुपधावति तत्र तत्र । सन्ने यदिन्द्रियगणेऽहमि च प्रसुप्ते कूटस्थ आशयमृते तदनुस्मृतिर्नः ॥ १२२ ॥ Just as the vital force (prana) remains unchanging as it accom- panies the individual living being (jiva) in whichever different species it may appear, whether born from eggs, wombs, seeds, or perspiration, the atmä is unchanging in the state of deep sleep when the senses and ego are deactivated and there is freedom from the subtle body, which is the cause of transformation. Yet, upon awakening, the remembrance comes to us that we slept peacefully without awareness of anything [and this indicates that in deep sleep the self is present as pure witness devoid of the content of sensory, mental, or egoic awareness]. (SB 11.3.39)1 “अण्डेषु ” अण्डजेषु । “पेशिषु” जरायुजेषु। “तरुषु” उद्भिज्जेषु । “अविनिश्चितेषु” स्वेदजेषु । “उपधावति” अनुवर्तते । 1andesu pesisu taruşv aviniścitesu prano hi jivam upadhavati tatra tatra sanne yad indriya-gane’hami ca prasupte kuṭastha asayam ṛte tad anusmṛtir nah 369 III Prameya Here, andeşu means " among those born from eggs, ” pesisu means “among those born from wombs,” taruşu means “among those born from the seeds of plants,” and aviniściteşu means “among those born from perspiration or heat.” The verb upadhāvati [which has the vital force as its subject and the jiva as its object] means “accompanying repeatedly.” 54.2 एवं दृष्टान्ते निर्विकारत्वं प्रदर्श्य दान्तिकेऽपि दर्शयति । कथम् ? तदैवात्मा सविकार इव प्रतीयते यदा जागरे इन्द्रियगणः । यदा च स्वप्ने तत्संस्कारवानहङ्कारः । यदा तु प्रसुप्तं तदा तस्मिन् प्रसुप्त । “इन्द्रियगणे सन्ने” लीने । कूटस्थो ? निर्विकार एवात्मा । कुतः ? “आशयमृते” लिङ्गशरीरमुपाधिं विना विकारहेतोरुपाधेरभावातित्यर्थः । Having thus illustrated through simile the changeless nature of the vital force, sage Pippalayana points out that the self (ātmā) is also changeless, by mentioning it as analogous to the vital force. How so? The self appears as if subject to change during the waking state when in contact with the senses and during the dream state when in contact with the ego, which is filled with subconscious impressions from the waking state. But when the ātmā is in deep sleep, the senses and ego become temporarily submerged or deactivated, and so the ātmā alone is present, free from all transformation. How is it free from transformation in this state? āśayamrte: “Because it is without its vessel of contain- ment,” which here refers to the limiting or conditioning adjunct ( upādhi) of the subtle body. That is to say, the ātmā is then free from the specific upadhi that is the cause of all transformation. 54.3 नन्वहङ्कारपर्यन्तस्य सर्वस्य लये शून्यमेवावशिष्यते । क्व तदा कूटस्थ आत्मा ? अत आह “तदनुस्मृतिर्नः” । तस्याखण्डात्मनः सुषुप्तिसाक्षिणः स्मृतिः नः – अस्माकं जाग्रद्रष्टृ- णां जायते । एतावन्तं कालं सुखमहमस्वाप्स न किञ्चिदवेदिषमिति । अतोऽननुभूतस्य तस्यास्मरणादस्त्येव सुषुप्तौ तादृगात्मानुभवः । विषयसम्बन्धाभावाच् च न स्पष्ट इति भावः । 370 54 The Changeless Self Is the Witness But, one may object, when everything up to and including the ego is dissolved, only emptiness (śunya) remains. So how can you conclude that the changeless self is present at that time? Pip- palayana answers, “Because the remembrance comes to us” (tad- anusmṛtir nah). Upon awakening from deep sleep, the remem- brance comes to us [i.e., the observer in waking state conscious- ness]: “I slept peacefully for so long without awareness of any- thing.” [This amounts to remembrance of the indivisible ātmā as pure witness in the state of deep sleep.] Since there can be no remembrance of that which has not first been experienced, the ātmā must be present then as witness to perceive the experience of deep sleep, though this experience is indistinct because of the absence of contact with any content or object of awareness. 54.4 अतः स्वप्रकाशमात्रवस्तुनः सूर्यादेः प्रकाशवदुपलब्धिमात्रस्याप्यात्मन उपलब्धिः- स्वाश्रयेऽस्त्येवेत्यायातम् । तथा च श्रुतिः " यद् वै तन् न पश्यति पश्यन् वै द्रष्टव्यान् न पश्यति न हि द्रष्टुर्दृष्टेर्विपरिलोपो विद्यते” (बृ० आ०४ । ३ । २३) इत्य । अयं साक्षिसाक्ष्य- विभागेन तृतीयस्तर्कः । दुःखिप्रेमास्पदत्वविभागेन चतुर्थोऽपि तर्कोऽनुगन्तव्यः ॥ We can, therefore, conclude that just as a self-luminous entity like the sun, which is in essence nothing other than light, also naturally contains the power of illumination, so the ātmā, though nothing other than consciousness, is also the ground of consciousness [by virtue of its own essential nature]. We find the following confirmation in Śruti, “It is true that he [the atmā in the state of deep sleep] does not see - or rather, although seeing, he does not perceive the observables [i.e., the objects of exter- nal or internal awareness]. Furthermore, it is never possible to remove the seer’s sight altogether” (BAU 4.3.23). So, the third logical argument [presented to distinguish the ātmā from the body, as well as to distinguish Paramātmā from yad vai tan na pasyati pasyan vai draṣṭavyān na pasyati na hi drastur drstervipari-lopo vidyate 371 III Prameya the individual ātmā] is based on the distinction between the wit- ness and that which is witnessed. A fourth argument is also to be understood based on the distinction between the entities who undergo suffering [the jivas] and the entity who is the exclusive object of transcendental love [Bhagavan]. Commentary IN THE PREVIOUS ANUCCHEDA, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi cited the anal- ogy of the vital force (prana) given in SB 11.3.38 to show the change- less nature of the ātmā. The following verse (SB 11.3.39) develops the analogy further. Here, Pippalayana explains that the vital force per- petually accompanies the ātmā into various species of life, which fall into four categories based on their source of birth. The vital force enters the various bodies and seems to undergo transforma- tions, but in fact, it remains unchanged. For example, the vital force may occupy the body of an ant in one life and that of an ele- phant in a different life, and yet all the while the vital force remains unchanged. Similarly, the atma appears to undergo changes in asso- ciation with the many states and shapes of its successive bodies, but in fact it remains unchanged. The ātmā experiences three states of consciousness while in the body- the waking state, the dream state, and the state of deep dreamless sleep. During the waking state a jiva is conscious of his gross body, the gross instruments of the senses (golaka), and the mind, and his consciousness seems divided and channeled by the mind and outward senses. In the dream state, the gross instruments of the senses become inactive, or, to be more precise, the mind is disconnected from them, and thus the jiva is also not aware of the outward senses or the body. Through dreams, the jiva perceives var- ious impressions imprinted upon the subconscious mind during the waking state, and because of the jiva’s attachment to these impres- sions, his consciousness seems to undergo transformation. In the state of deep dreamless sleep, the ātmā loses contact even with the mind, and thus it is not conscious of either the gross or subtle body. 372 54 The Changeless Self Is the Witness According to Śruti, in dreamless sleep the mind enters into the purītat-nādi (the psychosomatic flow channel in the region of the pericardium) in the heart: When fast asleep, the atma does not know anything. At that time the mind removes itself from the seventy-two thousand nādis, known as hită (beneficial), which extend from the heart, and enters into the nădi called puritat, where it rests. (BAU 2.1.19) Feelings of happiness and distress are modes of the mind and, therefore, part of the subtle body. This is described in Bhagavad Gitä: Desire, hatred, happiness, distress, the aggregate [the phys- ical body], mentation, and will-all these, along with their fluctuations, constitute the field. (GĪTĀ 13.6)* As mentioned above, in deep sleep the ātmā is disconnected from the mind and feels no material happiness or distress, no desires or hatred. It is then submerged only in the bliss of the self. But this does not mean that the atmā becomes liberated in deep sleep. It is still bound by its subtle desires, which propel it to return to the dreaming and wakeful states. The Buddhists object that the atma cannot exist in deep sleep. When there is no experience of the senses or the mind, why not assume that only “void” remains during deep sleep? The answer is, “because we recollect the experience of deep sleep.” After wak- ing from deep sleep, a person may declare, “I have slept happily and wasn’t aware of anything.” Since no one can recollect anything without having experienced it, the person who perceived himself in deep sleep and the person who remembers this experience must be identical. Thus, the happiness of deep sleep along with the igno- rance of all else is experienced by the same person who recalls it atha yada suşupto bhavati yada na kasyacana veda hitā nāma nadyo dva-saptatiḥ sahasrani hṛdayat puritatam abhipratisthante tabhiḥ pratyavasṛpya puritati Sete iccha dveṣaḥ sukham dukham sanghatas cetana dhṛtiḥ etat kṣetram samasena sa-vikaram udahṛtam 373 III Prameya upon awakening, but this recollection is indistinct because dur- ing deep sleep the link with the mind and senses is temporarily dissolved. The implication here is that although the material ego is not present during deep sleep, the atma’s inherent authentic selfhood remains, for this is its true and inseparable identity. So, there is no possibility of voidness during deep sleep, as the Buddhists claim, or that the atma remains as mere consciousness without individual- ity, as the radical nondualists claim. Jiva Gosvāmi’s argument estab- lishes that the atma’s inherent capacity of cognition is an essential aspect of its nature. Thus, it is not true that the atma acquires cog- nition only when conditioned, nor is it true that it remains solely as pure consciousness in the unconditioned state. As the sun illuminates both itself and other objects as well, the ātmā is always capable of self-knowing and the cognition of objects within the presentational field. The atma does not need help from the gross external senses to know itself, just as one does not need a lamp to see the sun. This quality of cognition is intrinsic to the ātmā throughout all states of existence, even when it inhab- its lower species, just as a light bulb continues to emit light even when enveloped by a nearly opaque covering. The covering simply limits and distorts the light’s diffusion. Of course, it is the Supreme Self, or Paramātmā, who is the source of the atma’s self-luminous nature, and so we should not wrongly consider the jiva a completely independent entity. The passage from the Bṛhad-aranyaka Upanisad quoted in this anuccheda states, “He [the atma] certainly does not see.” This state- ment refers to the ātmā in the state of deep sleep. At that time, the ātmā does not perceive anything because it is disconnected from the mind and senses. This does not mean, however, that its power of perception is lost. Thus, the passage further says, “Although see- ing, he does not perceive the observables [i.e., the objects of exter- nal or internal awareness].” This means that he retains the ability to perceive but there is nothing to witness except his own existence. In the previous anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi demonstrated that the ātmā is distinct from the body. He substantiated this conclusion 374 54 The Changeless Self Is the Witness by citing the analogy of the vital force. Here he has further shown that the ātmā is distinct both from the body and from Paramātmā. So, altogether he has presented four arguments, the first two of which were discussed in the commentary to Anuccheda 53. The third argument is based on the difference between the witness and the witnessed. During deep sleep, when the atma ceases to identify with the mind and senses, he witnesses his own self and the non- occurrence of any empirical perceptions. He can recollect this expe- rience of his own sustained existence upon awakening. This phe- nomenon proves the changeless nature of the atma by showing that it is distinct from the ever-changing body and senses. It may be noted, however, that the atma is not independent even in this state of deep sleep. Its existence and functions depend upon the support of Paramātmā, as stated, “All this functions by His potency” (tasya bhäsä sarvam idam vibhāti, MUU 2.2.10). The fourth argument is based on the fact that it is not Paramātmā but the jiva who suffers material tribulations, although both dwell in the same body. Paramātmā is the witness of both the atma and the functions of the material body in which the ātmā resides. As we have pointed out, in the state of dreamless sleep, the atmā becomes temporarily dissociated from its subtle and gross bodies, but still the body does not die. This indicates that the breathing, heartbeat, blood circulation, and other vital functions continue by the grace and supervision of Paramātmā. Another inference we can draw is that the atmä is dependent on Paramātmā, because if the atmä were completely independent, he would never choose to revert to a state beset with suffering; but in fact he cannot stop this reversion, being caught up in the states of material existence - waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. There- fore, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi concludes, Bhagavan is the sole entity truly worthy of transcendental love, since He is totally free from mate- rial bondage. In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī summarizes these points. 375376 36 Anuccheda 55 Summary of Śrī Pippalāyana’s Teachings ५५ | तदुक्तम् - THESE ARGUMENTS can be summed up as follows: अन्वयव्यतिरेकाख्यस्तर्कः स्याच् चतुरात्मकः । आगमापायितदवधिभेदेन प्रथमो मतः ॥ १२३ ॥ द्रष्टृदृश्यविभागेन द्वितीयोऽपि मतस्तथा । साक्षिसाक्ष्यविभागेन तृतीयः सम्मतः सताम् ॥ १२४ ॥ दुःखिप्रेमास्पदत्वेन चतुर्थः सुखबोधकः ॥ १२५ ॥ The logic presented here, which is known as positive and neg- ative concomitance (anvaya-vyatireka) [i.e., affirmation and negation], is fourfold in nature. The first argument is based on the difference between that which appears and disappears and that which is beyond such transformations. The second is based on the difference between the seer and the seen [i.e., between primordial consciousness and its phenomenal content]. The third is based on the difference between the witness and the witnessed. The fourth argument, given as an aid to understand- ing, is based on the difference between the entities who undergo suffering [the jivas] and the entity who is the exclusive object of transcendental love [Bhagavan]. इति श्रीपिप्पलायनो निमिम् ॥ The verses under discussion [SB 11.3.38-39, cited in Anucchedas 53.1 and 54.1] were spoken by Śri Pippalayana to King Nimi. Commentary 55 Summary of Sri Pippalayana’s Teachings HERE, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī summarizes the conclusions of the last two anucchedas. According to Śrīla Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa, in this anuccheda, the word tarka (lit., “reasoning” or “logical argument”) means “inference,” which is one of the sources of valid epistemo- logical knowing. In the reasoning presented in this anuccheda, Jīva Gosvāmi uses inference both affirmatively and negatively. From the logic of affirmation, there is the general principle that when the ātmā is in the conditional state of association with a material body, changes occur that the ātmā perceives while the ātmā itself remains changeless. From the logic of negation, one never perceives either alterations in the atma or changelessness in the body. Thus, by both affirmative and negative analysis, we can infer that the body and the atma are distinct. We can apply a similar analysis to the other three arguments set forth in this anuccheda. Here we use logic to infer the difference between the body and the ātmā. Understanding this difference is the first rung on the ladder of transcendental realization. We can also use logic to infer the difference between the ātmā and Param- ātmā, which is the necessary foundation of bhakti-yoga. In this case, we are not employing linear logic, which is based on limited human perception, but rather nonlinear, or transcendental logic, which is founded on the authority of Srimad Bhagavatam. The scripture and sages encourage sincere seekers to distinguish reality from illusion. by utilization of the intellect in accordance with revealed truth. Only the body takes birth, grows old, becomes diseased, and dies. The ātmā sees all these changes, and when identified with the body, it experiences them as miseries. Although distinct from the body, the jiva, because of egoic identification, becomes attached to the body and its by-products and thus experiences the body’s happiness and distress. Paramātmā witnesses the embodied being’s miseries but does not experience them Himself. Unperturbed by the actions and reactions of material bodies, Paramātmā is always distinct from the jivas and is thus the entity truly worthy of their love. We can infer the existence of Paramātmā from the fact that the aātmā does 377 378 111 Prameya not create the elements needed for the maintenance of the body, and that material nature, being inert, cannot create anything without the help of a sentient being. What’s more, the ātmā takes no part in maintaining the material body during deep sleep, when completely aloof from it. In this way, knowing the characteristics of the jiva and its rela- tionship to the body can help us understand something of Param- ātmā and Brahman. Moreover, taking into account the common quality of consciousness shared by the jiva and Brahman, the lat- ter can be identified as the nondual Reality, the subject of Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. All these conclusions regarding the Ultimate Reality are based on an analysis of the individual jiva’s situation (i.e., the intuition of Reality from the microcosm). Now Śrīla Jiva Gosvämï begins a new analysis, based on the consideration of the cosmic order (i.e., the intuition of Reality from the macrocosm). Intuition of the Subject through Reference to the Universal - The Ten Topics of Srimad Bhagavatam Anucchedas 56-63 In the previous division, the Source Consciousness (tattva) was intuited with reference to individual consciousness. Now, in this division, the same Source Consciousness is intuited with reference to the universal order, as being its ultimate foundation and shel- ter. This discussion addresses such fundamental problems as the world and creation, causality, and the nature of the living being in both its conditioned and liberated statuses. Through such anal- ysis, we come to know how the Absolute is both the ground and support of creation without undergoing transformation and with- out becoming implicated in cause-effect conditionality. We learn that “creation” is in reality evolutionary unfolding, from its most subtle principle of mahat-tattva, or cosmic intellect, right down to the maha-bhūtas, or the gross physical elements. From an alternate perspective, this can be described as the involution of Spirit into phenomenality. The sustenance and regulation of the world order implies Bha- gavan’s immanence in the form of the interior Self as well as the underlying pervasion of His intrinsic potency. The discussion of the conscious beings includes both the psychic matrices by which they are tied to material nature and the conditioned life of samsära, and the sad-dharma of integral relation with the nondual Personal Whole (Bhagavan). As creation is disclosed as nothing more than 379 III Prameya “manifestation” from out of the womb of eternal being, dissolution amounts to no more than “concealment” or reabsorption into the conscious Source, Paramātmā. Liberation is understood as ulti- mate dissolution or permanent establishment in authentic being. The delineation of all these topics self-evidently discloses the tenth topic - the Ultimate Shelter, aśraya. This division contains two subdivisions, the first (Anucchedas 56- 60) being an analysis of the ten topics of Srimad Bhagavatam from the Second Canto, and the second (Anucchedas 61-63), an analysis of the same from the Twelfth Canto. Although the two lists include different terminology, they are shown to be identical both in spirit and content. With some allowance for poetic license, the ten univer- sals may be expressed as follows: Primordial creation, cosmic cre- ation, sustenance of life-systems, the operation of Grace, the matrix of phenomenality, the enactment of dharma for rational (thought- based) beings, the power of the self-revealing word (coextensive with the Reality it signifies), dissolution of life-systems, liberation, and the Ultimate Shelter of all. 380 Anuccheda 56 The Ten Topics of Śrīmad Bhagavatam Identify Their Subject as the Ultimate Shelter 56.1 ५६ । एवम्भूतानां जीवानां चिन्मात्रं यत् स्वरूपं तयैवाकृत्या तदंशित्वेन च तदभिन्नं यत् तत्त्वं तदत्र वाच्यमिति व्यष्टिनिर्देशद्वारा प्रोक्तम् । तदेव ह्याश्रयसञ्ज्ञकम् । महापुराणलक्ष- णरूपैः सर्गादिभिरर्थैः समष्टिनिर्देशद्वारापि लक्ष्यत इत्यत्राह द्वाभ्याम् (भा० २।१०।१-२ ) - THUS, by describing the essential nature of the living beings (jivas), which is pure consciousness, the Absolute Truth (tattva) that is the subject of Srimad Bhagavatam has also been described through individual reference (vyaşți-nirdeśa) [i.e., by intuiting the totality from the individual]. This is so because the Sup- reme Brahman is nondifferent from the ātmā, partaking of the same [conscious] aspect ( ākrti ), and being the Complete Whole that encompasses all of its integrated parts (arśitvena). Indeed, He is called the aśraya, the source and shelter of all existence. The same nondual Reality, Brahman, is defined in universal terms (samaşṭi-nirdeśa) as well through the ten topics that form the characteristics of a major Purana, beginning with primary creation. These ten topics are mentioned in the following two verses: अत्र सर्गो विसर्गश्च स्थानं पोषणमूतयः । मन्वन्तरेशानुकथा निरोधो मुक्तिराश्रयः ॥ १२६ ॥ दशमस्य विशुद्धयर्थं नवानामिह लक्षणम् । वर्णयन्ति महात्मानः श्रुतेनार्थेन चाञ्जसा || १२७ || 381 111 Prameya In this book, Śrimad Bhagavatam, ten subjects are discussed: sarga [the original setting in motion of primordial nature by the Lord, i.e., primary creation], visarga [the secondary creation of the primal cosmic being, Brahma], sthana [the sustenance of living beings], poşana [the mercy displayed by the Lord in nur- turing His devotees], uti [the subconscious imprints and desires that promote engagement in goal-oriented action], manvantara [the religious path enacted by the Manus], iśānukatha [narra- tions of the Lord and His devotees], nirodha [dissolution of the creation], mukti (liberation), and aśraya [the substratum, or ultimate shelter, of individual and collective being]. (SB 2.10.1)1 To clarify the meaning of the tenth subject depicted here, the highly elevated souls [mentioned in this book, such as Vidura and Maitreya] describe the characteristics of the first nine sub- jects - sometimes directly, by offering prayers of glorification, using words that graphically depict their intended object, and sometimes indirectly, by pointing out the intended meaning (artha) [i.e., tätparya] implicit in various narrations. (SB 2.10.2)2 56.2 मन्वन्तराणि चेशानुकथाश्च मन्वन्तरेशानुकथाः । अत्र सर्गादयो दशार्था लक्ष्यन्त इत्यर्थः । तत्र च दशमस्य विशुद्ध्यर्थं तत्त्वज्ञानार्थं नवानां लक्षणं स्वरूपं वर्णयन्ति । नन्वत्र नैवं प्रती- यते ? अत आह— “ श्रुतेन” श्रुत्या कण्ठोक्त्यैव स्तुत्यादिस्थानेषु । “अञ्जसा” साक्षाद् वर्णयन्ति । “अर्थेन” तात्पर्यवृत्त्या च तत्तदाख्यानेषु ॥ The compound manvantareśānukathaḥ is formed from the sin- gle words manvantara (the period of reign of the Manus) and iśānukathāḥ (narrations of the Lord’s pastimes). atra sargo visargas ca sthanam posanam utayaḥ manvantaresanukathā nirodho muktir áśrayaḥ 2 daśamasya viśuddhy-artham navanam iha lakṣaṇam varnayanti mahātmānaḥ śrutenärthena căйjasă 382 56 The Ten Topics of Srimad Bhagavatam Identify Their Subject as the Ultimate Shelter The Srimad Bhagavatam discusses ten topics, beginning with primary creation, but the sages’ real purpose in describing the characteristics of the first nine is to provide us systematic lucid knowledge of the tenth item, the ultimate shelter of all being. One might object here that it is not apparent exactly how the dis- cussion of the other nine topics elucidates the tenth. To this we reply that in the Bhāgavatam, the sages describe the tenth topic both directly, by the explicit utterance of prayers and other state- ments, and indirectly, through the implied purport (tätparya) of various historical accounts. Commentary IN PREVIOUS ANUCCHEDAS, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi defined the cen- tral topics to be known from Srimad Bhagavatam by examining the disposition of the heart and transrational cognition of Sukadeva Gosvāmi and Śrila Vyasadeva. In the course of this exposition, he explained the nature of the jiva to clarify its distinction from the subjective Reality. He then went on to analyze the second verse of Srimad Bhagavatam, which declares that the Absolute Reality is the subject to be realized in Srimad Bhagavatam. To further define that Reality, he also referred to the Bhagavatam verse beginning with vadanti tat tattva-vidaḥ (SB 1.2.11), which identifies the three main aspects of the one nondual supreme consciousness (advaya-jñāna). He proposed that the intuition of this nondual consciousness could be made available through reference to individual consciousness, and, therefore, he discussed the jiva’s nature on the basis of two Bhāgavatam verses (SB 11.3.38-39) by Pippalayana Rṣi. The basic axioms established so far concerning the jiva are that it is conscious, capable of self-knowledge and knowledge of objects other than the self; it is distinct from the material energy and free of the six types of physical transformation. This analysis is from the individual perspective (vyaşți-nirdeşa), which sheds light on the nature of the totality, or in other words, the subjective Reality (tattva) known as nondual consciousness. 383 III Prameya Now, Jiva Gosvāmi begins explaining the Absolute Reality, tattva, from the viewpoint of the aggregate (samaşți-nirdeşa). In doing so, he bases his explanation on the ten primary topics treated in the Bhagavatam’s twelve cantos. First, he quotes two verses by Śukadeva Gosvāmi (SB 2.10.1-2), the second of which states that the reason scripture describes such topics as creation, maintenance, dissolution, and liberation is to help us understand the ultimate topic, Bhagavan, who is the substratum (asraya) of individual and collective being. Indeed, these other topics are but descriptions of Bhagavan’s manifold potencies. He is the fountainhead of all these phenomena, and Srimad Bhagavatam explains them just to illustrate His special characteristics. In some places, the Bhagavatam introduces prayers to Bhaga- vän in the course of describing one or more of the other nine top- ics, and in these prayers, the Supreme Person Himself is the object of description. In other places, Bhagavan is described directly, as in the dialogues between Vidura and Maitreya and between Kapila and Devahūti. In yet other places, the Bhagavatam glorifies Bhaga- vän indirectly through historical episodes, such as the accounts of how Śrī Kṛṣṇa saved Parīkṣit Mahārāja from Aśvatthāmā and of how Śukadeva Gosvāmi was transcendentally captivated when he heard verses about Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s attributes. In this way, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi shows that the purpose of the nine preliminary subjects discussed in the Bhagavatam is to explain the tenth, the advaya-jñāna, which is also called the aśraya, the fountainhead of all existence. Every individual has two types of characteristics - svarupa (intrinsic) and taṭastha (extrinsic) - and the original Supreme Per- son is no exception. The intrinsic characteristics are permanent, whereas the extrinsic features are incidental. In our present con- ditioned state, we have no experience of God’s personal attributes. If we hear these described without proper commentary, we may misunderstand them owing to our stringent material conditioning. But we can more easily understand - either from the aggregate or the individual viewpoint -God’s extrinsic features manifested within material nature, for they are within the scope of our personal experience. 384 56 The Ten Topics of Śrīmad Bhāgavatam Identify Their Subject as the Ultimate Shelter Śrīla Vyasadeva uses the same approach in Vedanta-sutra. After designating Brahman as the subject of the book in the first sütra- “Now, therefore, inquiry should be made into Brahman” (athāto brahma-jijñāsā) - he begins discussing Bhagavan’s extrinsic char- acteristics in the next sutra- “From Him proceed the creation, maintenance, and dissolution of the universe” (janmady asya yataḥ). Because God creates within specified time cycles and because the creation takes place exterior to Him or His intrinsic nature, the characteristic of world creation is considered as taṭastha (extrinsic). Śrimad Bhagavatam discusses the ten topics in a similar way; the first nine - Bhagavan’s extrinsic characteristics - are presented to help us understand the tenth, the aśraya. This aśraya will be iden- tified as Śrī Kṛṣṇa later in the Sandarbhas. The first nine topics of Śrimad Bhagavatam deal with various potencies of Bhagavan, such as His creative potency (sarga-sakti). Understanding these topics helps us fathom the Supreme Lord as the possessor of these poten- cies. This foundational understanding helps us to properly com- prehend His personal features and pastimes, which are narrated in the Tenth Canto. Without studying the nine preliminary topics of the Bhagavatam, we run the risk of viewing His form and pas- times superficially and concluding that Krsna is an ordinary human being endowed with some extraordinary powers. But this is far from the truth. Śrī Kṛṣṇa, therefore, says in Bhagavad Gitā: “Being unacquainted with My ontological identity as the Supreme Ruler of all existence, the bewildered misconceive Me as having accepted a [perishable and limited] human body” (GĪTĀ 9.11). Therefore, with the intent of leading us to the highest plane of transcendence through a proper understanding of the Bhaga- vatam’s tenth subject, the summum bonum, Sukadeva Gosvāmī explains the first nine items. We should study the Bhagavatam in the order Sukadeva Gosvāmi presented it from the first verse onward. avajānanti mäm mudha manuşim tanum asritam param bhāvam ajananto mama bhūta-maheśvaram 385386 III Prameya In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi begins explaining each of the ten topics by quoting their definitions from Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. Anuccheda 57 The First Nine Universals Culminate in the Tenth 57.1 ५७ । तमेव दशमं विस्पष्टयितुं तेषां दशानां व्युत्पादिकां सप्तश्लोकीमाह ( भा० २1१०1३)- TO ELUCIDATE THE TENTH SUBJECT, Śrī Sukadeva Gosvāmī speaks seven verses that define each of the ten subjects [show- ing how they culminate in the tenth]. [The first four of the seven verses, covering the first nine topics, are presented in Anucchedas 57.1-3, beginning with this verse:] भूतमात्रेन्द्रियधियां जन्म सर्ग उदाहृतः । ब्रह्मणो गुणवैषम्याद् विसर्गः पौरुषः स्मृतः ॥ १२८ ॥ The topic of sarga (primary creation) deals with the generation of the five gross elements (bhūtas), the five subtle sense objects (matras), the five cognitive senses (indriyas), the universal or collective wisdom faculty (dhi or mahat-tattva), and the ego [ahankara, the “I” principle, or the principle of individuation], resulting from the displacement of the equilibrium of the three gunas [i.e., primordial nature’s three interdependent consti- tuting principles of psychic and physical force], brought about through the intent of the Supreme Controller (Parameśvara). The topic of visarga (secondary creation) is about the creative act (paurusa) of the primal cosmic being (purusa), Brahma [who, being but an intermediary, implies a transcendent source, i.e. Bhagavan]. (SB 2.10.3)1 1 bhūta-mätrendriya-dhiyam janma sarga udahṛtaḥ →→ 387 111 Prameya “भूतानि” खादीनि । “मात्राणि च ” शब्दादीनि । “इन्द्रियाणि च” धीशब्देन महदहङ्कारौ । " गुणानां वैषम्यात् " परिणामात् । “ब्रह्मणः ” परमेश्वरात् कर्तृभूतादीनां जन्म सर्गः पुरुषो वैराजो ब्रह्मा । तत्कृतः पौरुषः । चराचरसर्गो विसर्ग इत्यर्थः । The bhūtas mentioned here are the five gross material elements, beginning with ether. The matras are the subtle aspects of the material elements - sound and so on. The indriyas are the cogni- tive senses (the eyes, ears, and so on). The word dhi (the faculty or instrument of knowing) refers to mahat-tattva, the collective wisdom faculty, and ahankära, the principle of individuation. All of this is brought about through displacement of the equilib- rium of the three gunas leading to transformations. So, the gen- eration of these physical elements and psychic faculties, a pro- cess set in motion by the Supreme Controller (Parameśvara), is called sarga (primary creation). The word puruşa (the primal cos- mic being) refers to Vairāja, or Brahma. Since the word pauruşa literally means “derived from the puruşa,” the creation effected by him is appropriately called paurușa. This specifically refers to the sending forth of moving and non-moving living beings known as visarga (secondary creation). 57.2 भा० २।१०।४-५- Śuka continues: स्थितिर्वैकुण्ठविजयः पोषणं तदनुग्रहः । मन्वन्तराणि सद्धर्म ऊतयः कर्मवासनाः ॥ १२९ ॥ अवतारानुचरितं हरेश्चास्यानुवर्तिनाम् । पुंसामीशकथाः प्रोक्ता नानाख्यानोपबृंहिताः || १३० ॥ The topic of sthiti [the support of life and existence] deals, rather, with the supreme excellence of the Lord of Vaikuntha [Bhaga- vān], in His sustenance of all created beings. The topic of poşana brahmano guna-vaisamyad visargaḥ paurusaḥ smrtah 388 57 The First Nine Universals Culminate in the Tenth [the nurturing of living beings] deals with the grace that Bhaga- vän bestows on His devotees who are in the midst of life within the world. The topic of manvantara is about the path of true reli- gion (sad-dharma) [or the religious path of “the true”], while uti is about the subconscious imprints and desires (karma-vāsanās) that promote engagement in result-oriented action. Īsānukatha deals with the descriptions of the Lord’s pastimes, expanded with various stories, in His different avataras and also the narrations of those devotees who are in perfect attunement with Him (tad-anuvartinäm). (SB 2.10.4-5)2 वैकुण्ठस्य भगवतो विजयः - सृष्टानां तत्तन्मर्यादापालनेनोत्कर्षः । “स्थितिः” स्थानम् । ततः स्थितेषु स्वभक्तेषु तस्यानुग्रहः “पोषणम्” । मन्वन्तराणि तत्तन्मन्वन्तरस्थितानां मन्वादीनां तदनुगृहीतानां सतां चरितानि तान्येव धर्मस्तदुपासनाख्यः सद्धर्मः । तत्रैव स्थितौ नानाकर्मवासना “ऊतयः” । स्थितावेव हरेरवतारानुचरितमस्यानुवर्तिनां च कथाः - ईशानुकथाः प्रोक्ता इत्यर्थः । The topic of sthiti (the support of life and existence) is actually about vaikuntha-vijaya, “the victory of the Lord of Vaikuntha,” Bhagavan. In other words, sthiti, which is a synonym for sthāna, indicates the supreme excellence of Bhagavan in His preserva- tion of the universal laws that govern the fundamental natures of all created beings and of all creation [all of which He effort- lessly accomplishes from the transcendent realm of Vaikuntha]. The topic of posana (the nurturing of living beings) is specifically about the grace that Bhagavan bestows upon His devotees who are in the midst of life in the world. The topic of manvantarani (the period of reign of the Manus) deals with the histories of the Manus [and other saintly kings who ruled during the Manus’ reigns] and also the histories of enlightened beings who lived during those periods and were blessed in some unique way by the Supreme Lord. Whatever was enacted by all of them is itself dharma [the fundamental way of sthitir vaikuntha-vijayah posanam tad-anugrahaḥ manvantaraņi sad-dharma utayaḥ karma-vāsanāḥ avatārānucaritaṁ hares casyanuvartinām pumsam isa-kathaḥ proktä nänäkhyānopabṛmhitaḥ 389 III Prameya being in perfect harmony with the whole]. So, the topic here is true dharma known as worship of Bhagavan, as exhibited by the enlightened Manus, kings, and sages. The topic of uti (the impetus for action) deals with the sub- conscious imprints and desires (karma-vāsanās) that promote engagement in result-oriented action for living beings who exist within the world. The topic of isänukathaḥ (narrations about God) covers historical accounts of Bhagavan’s pastimes in His various avatāras who appeared within the world, as well as nar- rations of those devotees who are in perfect attunement with Him (tad-anuvartinām). 57.3 भा०२।१०१६- Suka continues: निरोधोऽस्यानुशयनमात्मनः सह शक्तिभिः । मुक्तिर्हित्वान्यथा रूपं स्वरूपेण व्यवस्थितिः ॥ १३१ ॥ The topic of nirodha (the dissolution of the manifest cosmos) is actually about the reabsorption of the living beings, along with their psycho-energetic matrices of unconscious impressions and complexes, into their conscious source, Paramātmā, at the time of His lying down in yogic sleep. The topic of mukti (liberation) is about the establishment of the living being in its true essential nature (svarupa), after abandoning identification with all that it is not [i.e., the body, mind, and other evolutes of primordial nature]. (SB 2.10.6)3 स्थित्यनन्तरं चात्मनो जीवस्य शक्तिभिः स्वोपाधिभिः सहास्य हरेरनुशयनं हरिशयनानुग- तत्वेन शयनं निरोध इत्यर्थः । तत्र हरेः शयनम् - प्रपञ्चं प्रति दृष्टिनिमीलनम् । जीवानां शयनम् - तत्र लय इति ज्ञेयम् । तत्रैव निरोधेऽन्यथारूपमविद्याध्यस्तमज्ञत्वादिकं हित्वा स्वरूपेण व्यवस्थितिः - मुक्तिः ॥ nirodho’syanuśayanam atmanaḥ saha saktibhiḥ muktir hitvanyathā rūpam sva-rupeņa vyavasthitiḥ 390 57 The First Nine Universals Culminate in the Tenth After the period of cosmic subsistence is completed, Lord Hari lies down [in supraconscious yogic sleep]. So, the laying down [i.e., reabsorption] of the living beings, along with their psycho- energetic matrices of unconscious impressions and complexes, that occurs in immediate and direct response to the lying down of the Lord is known as nirodha (dissolution). The “sleep” of Lord Hari consists of His closing His eyes to the material creation, whereas the “sleep” of the jivas consists of their reabsorption into Lord Hari. Mukti (liberation) is the establishment of the living being in its true essential nature, occurring at the time of dissolu- tion (nirodha), after first abandoning all identification with its false acquired nature (anyatha-rupa) - in other words, the superimposition of inauthentic identity (adhyasta), absence of real knowing (ajñatva), and so on, that arise out of ignorance (avidyā). Commentary COMPREHENSIVE KNOWING OF THE SUPREME LORD means to know Him along with His potencies, just as understanding the sun means to know it along with its potency, sunshine. So, in this anuccheda, the first nine topics of Srimad Bhagavatam are being explained to elucidate the nature of Ultimate Reality, the tenth topic. The first topic is called sarga, or primary creation. According to the Sec- ond Canto of Śrimad Bhagavatam, Tenth Chapter, the material world is a creation of God and thus a signifier of His personhood. This world perpetually undergoes cycles of creation, maintenance, and dissolution. During the period of dissolution, all the material ele- ments are unmanifest, because they have been reabsorbed back into the original dormant state of primordial nature, called prakṛti, or pradhana. In this phase the three gunas of nature are in balance and thus inactive. At the end of the period of dissolution, the Supreme Lord dis- places the equilibrium of the gunas by glancing upon them, and then the first phase of creation begins. The first emergence from 391 III Prameya the destabilization of the gunas is called the mahat-tattva, the cos- mic intellect, or collective wisdom principle. When further acti- vated by the time factor, the mahat-tattva gives rise to material ego, ahankara, or the empirical “I” principle. From ahankara comes the five subtle elements (smell, taste, form, tactility, and sound), the five gross material elements (earth, water, fire, air, and ether), and the five cognitive senses (the senses of smell, taste, vision, touch, and hearing). This phase of creation is called sarga, or the primary creation. The subsequent creation is conducted by Lord Brahma and is called visarga, or the secondary creation. This involves the sending forth of moving and non-moving beings in accordance with prior karmic inheritance. Brahma is also called Puruşa, the primal cosmic being, or Vairāja, the secondary creator. The third topic is called sthiti, the sustenance of living beings. Śrī Visņu oversees the maintenance of the archetypal laws and structural design codes governing universal affairs, and this main- tenance is known as sthiti or sthana. The maintenance function shows Visņu’s preeminence over Lord Brahma and Lord Siva, who are in charge of the secondary creation and dissolution, respec- tively. For the purpose of sthiti, God appears in the manifest world in every millennium, as He states in Bhagavad Gita: To protect those who are dedicated to the path of truth and to destroy those addicted to the perpetuation of evil, as well as to maintain the integrous social and cosmic order (dharma), I appear regularly in each yuga. (GĪTĀ 4.8)* The fourth topic is called poșana, the nurturing of living beings. Although God is impartial in this regard, being equally disposed to all, those who are indifferent or antithetical to Him severely limit the quality and extent of nurturing that can be received. For nur- turing to take place, as in the natural loving relation between par- ent and child, there must be the gracious offering of unconditional love by the one who nurtures and the open receptivity on the part of the one who receives. For this reason, poșana is here defined as pariträṇāya sadhünär vinasaya ca duskṛtām dharma-samsthapanarthaya sambhavami yuge yuge 392 57 The First Nine Universals Culminate in the Tenth the grace God showers on His own devotees who are in the midst of life in the world. The fifth topic is called uti, the impetus for action. Impelled by their karma, living beings perform various material activities dur- ing the period in which the creation is being maintained (i.e., sthiti), and these activities give rise to various desires for further material activities. These desires, in the form of subconscious impressions within the mind, are called uti. They form a kind of matrix of phe- nomenality for the individual perceiver, because they determine how the world is perceived and how it is subsequently acted upon. With the growth of consciousness through the stages of evolution- ary unfolding, desire, perception, and action are all significantly altered. The sixth topic is called manvantara. Each day of Lord Brahma contains fourteen periods, each of which is ruled over by a differ- ent Manu. The Manus are godly persons empowered to look after the welfare of all human beings. The activities of each Manu, along with the deeds enacted by sages and enlightened beings during the Manu’s reign, constitute manvantara. How these self- and God- realized persons behave and worship is called sad-dharma, or the integrous way of being in relation to the all-encompassing Whole. Manu literally means “the thinker,” and human beings are similarly known as manuşya, mind- or thought-dominated beings. Thus, the dharma established by Manu and the sages is specifically intended for human beings, in which thinking is a dominant feature. The seventh topic is called iśānukatha. The descriptions of Bha- gavan’s pastimes with His associates during His avataric descents in the material world are known as īsānukatha. As discussed earlier in regard to sabda, these descriptions are not mere creation tales or myths about God. In this sense, they both include and transcend lit- eral and symbolic meaning. Their main purpose is to effect the devo- tional turning of consciousness toward the Reality with which they are identical. In this regard, they are self-revealing of that Reality to one whose consciousness is singularly interested and available. When Reality is known directly, as in the case of Śri Suka and Śrīla Vyasa, the question of literal or symbolic becomes irrelevant. 393 III Prameya The eighth topic is known as nirodha, or dissolution. The cre- ation cycle begins when the Lord glances at material nature: “He glanced with the intention, ‘I shall create the various divisions of the world of living beings.’ Indeed, He created them.” Conse- quently, when it is time for dissolution, the Lord turns His eyes away from the creation, and this turning away is called His sleep, or cosmic rest. At that time, all the material elements become unman- ifest in the reverse order in which they appeared, and primordial nature then reverts to the state of equilibrium. Concurrently, the jivas give up their gross bodies, but they remain conditioned by their causal bodies, which consist of their karmic impressions in an unmanifest state. This inactive state of the jivas is called sleep, cor- responding to the Lord’s sleep, and this phase of existence is called nirodha. When the time comes for the next creation cycle, the jivas receive bodies according to the karma they accrued in the previous cycle. The ninth topic is called mukti, or liberation. During the main- tenance period, if a living being fully transcends the concept of his material identity, which leads to the sense of separateness, by offer- ing the pure self in unalloyed devotion to Bhagavan, he is freed from both his subtle and gross bodies and becomes established in his original nature. This condition is called mukti, which is also a type of nirodha; but, in contrast to the nirodha that occurs at the time of cosmic dissolution, when the jiva attains mukti, he is not compelled to take birth again in the material world. Rather, all his miseries come to an end and he enters the spiritual planets, where he resides in his eternal spiritual form. One can attain this state of eternal liberation only by experientially embodying unconditional devotion to Śrī Kṛṣṇa, as Śrīla Vyasadeva witnessed in the state of supracognitive trance. The Supreme Absolute Truth, Bhagavan, who is the tenth topic discussed in Srimad Bhagavatam, is the foundation of the other nine topics. The underlying principles implicit in the cosmic order, which are made explicit through elaboration of the first nine topics, 5 sa ikṣata lokan nu srjeti sa imal lokān asṛjata Aitareya Upanisad 1.1 394 57 The First Nine Universals Culminate in the Tenth all occur by His potency; indeed, the very reason why the Śrīmad Bhagavatam describes these topics is to help us come to know Bhagavan, for a person is known by his works and attributes. In the next anuccheda, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi defines the aśraya- tattva, the fountainhead of all existence, who is the Supreme Personal Absolute Truth. 395Anuccheda 58 The All-Inclusive Tenth Universal Specified as Āśraya, the Ultimate Shelter ५८ । भा० २।१०।७- 16 SUKA continues: आभासश्च निरोधश्च यतोऽस्त्यध्यवसीयते । स आश्रयः परं ब्रह्म परमात्मेति शब्द्यते ॥ १३२ ॥ That entity from whom creation proceeds, into whom it is dis- solved, and by whom both creation and dissolution are made perceivable, is the aśraya, the ultimate source and shelter of all being, and He is known as Parabrahman (the Supreme Tran- scendent Absolute) and as Paramātmā (the Supreme Immanent Self).” (SB 2.10.7)1 “आभासः " सृष्टिः । “निरोधः” लयश्च यतो भवति । “अध्यवसीयते” उपलभ्यते जीवानां ज्ञानेन्द्रियेषु प्रकाशते च । स ब्रह्मेति परमात्मेति प्रसिद्ध आश्रयः कथ्यते । इतिशब्दः प्रका- रार्थः । तेन भगवानिति च । अस्य विवृतिरग्रे विधेया ॥ In this verse, the word abhasa (appearance) stands for cosmic creation, and nirodha (cessation) for cosmic dissolution. The relative pronoun yataḥ (from whom) refers to the entity from whom the creation emanates, into whom it is dissolved, and by whom both creation and dissolution are made perceivable to the abhasaś ca nirodhaś ca yato’sty adhyavasiyate sa asrayaḥ param brahma paramātmeti śabdyate 396 58 The All-Inclusive Tenth Universal Specified as Aśraya, the Ultimate Shelter jivas’ cognitive senses (adhyavasiyate). That renowned source and shelter of all existence - the aśraya - is known as Brahman (the Supreme Transcendent Absolute) and as Paramātmā (the Supreme Immanent Self). Here the word iti [carrying the sense of “so-named,” i.e., “the asraya is ’named as’ Parabrahman and Paramātmā”] expresses the idea of a complete set of terms pertaining to the entity being described [the aśraya]. This implies that to this sentence must be added: “The aśraya is also known as Bhagavan (the Nondual Supreme Person) [in order to complete the given set of terms].” That the ultimate shelter is Bhagavan will be explained later in detail [in Bhagavat Sandarbha]. Commentary THE ŚRIMAD BHAGAVATAM’S DESCRIPTION of the aforementioned ten subjects culminates in the description of the aśraya-tattva. A book that treats too many subjects will bewilder the reader and make it difficult for him to ascertain its ultimate purpose. This is clearly not the case with the Bhagavatam, however, for as stated here, the shelter of all the topics is Bhagavan. None of the other sub- jects can be described without reference to Bhagavan, and indeed, the whole reason why Śrīla Vyasadeva included them was to shed light on Bhagavan’s energies and activities. In other words, Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is really about only one topic - the Supreme Personal Absolute. God is the ultimate source underlying the world’s creation. He also maintains it through His feature as divine immanence (Param- ātmā), and supplies the living beings with the senses and intelli- gence to perceive it. He blesses these suffering jivas with the Vedic instructions, so that the seriously inquisitive can understand Him. He also blesses them with the association of His devotees. Despite these blessings, most jivas remain engaged in material activities, but some develop a desire to know Him. The latter can receive 2 bhagavan iti 397 398 111 Prameya His grace and eventually attain mukti, or liberation, which entails becoming situated in one’s own svarupa, or original nature, giving up all material identification. This is possible only by Bhagavan’s mercy, which in turn is available to one who understands in truth the aśraya-tattva described in Śrimad Bhagavatam. Thus, it is rightly said that the purpose of the other nine topics is to explain the tenth, the aśraya, who is the source of creation and dissolution. The aśraya is called Brahman by the adherents of jñāna- yoga and Paramātmā by the adherents of aṣṭānga-yoga. The word ca (and) in this verse (SB 2.10.7) indicates the topics of the Bhagavatam not explicitly mentioned in the verse, such as poșana. The word iti indicates Bhagavän, the term that the adher- ents of bhakti-yoga use to designate the aśraya. Thus, this verse echoes the verse quoted earlier, vadanti tat (SB 1.2.11), which states that the nondual Supreme Consciousness is called Brahman, Param- ātmā, and Bhagavan. In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī sup- plies further arguments to support the proposition that Bhagavan is the aśraya, or shelter of everything. Anuccheda 59 The Independent Aśraya and the Three Interdependent Divisions of Embodied Selfhood 59.1 ५९ । स्थितौ च तत्राश्रयस्वरूपमपरोक्षानुभवेन व्यष्टिद्वारापि स्पष्टं दर्शयितुमध्यात्मादिवि- भागमाह ( भा० २।१०।८-९ ) - [IN THE PREVIOUS VERSE, the aśraya was described as the source of creation and dissolution.] Now, Śukadeva Gosvāmī demon- strates that during the period of cosmic sustenance (sthiti) as well, the essential nature of the aśraya can be clearly ascertained through immediate intuitive insight (aparokṣanubhava) by sim- ple reference to the microcosm of the individual living being. In order to make this evident, he discusses three divisions of embodied selfhood: adhyatmika [the empirical self as limited cognizer of the visible world through the senses], adhidaivika [the potentiators of the self’s perceptual faculties, or in other words, the higher-order cosmic directives (devas) who preside over and thus facilitate the functions of the cognitive senses], and adhibhautika [the physical self as the visible body, which is the locus of the senses, thus enabling the powers of perception to be actualized]. Śrī Suka says: योऽध्यात्मिकोऽयं पुरुषः सोऽसावेवाधिदैविकः । यस्तत्रोभयविच्छेदः पुरुषो ह्याधिभौतिकः ॥ १३३ ॥ एकमेकतराभावे यदा नोपलभामहे । त्रितयं तत्र यो वेद स आत्मा स्वाश्रयाश्रयः ॥ १३४ ॥ 399 III Prameya [Prior to the generation of the body] that which is known as the adhyatmika-puruşa [the empirical self (jiva) identified with the senses as limited seer] is indistinguishable from the adhidaivika- puruşa [the cosmic potentiators (devas) of the self, who facili- tate the power of seeing of the limited seer]. That which permits these two divisions within a single entity to become differenti- ated is called the adhibhautika-purusa [the physical self, or the visible body as physical seat of the senses]. In the absence of any one of these, the other two cannot be ascertained. Whereas, He who knows these three from the witness position is the Sup- reme Self (ātmā) and His own independent shelter (sva-āśraya). (SB 2.10.8-9)1 59.2 योऽयमाध्यात्मिकः पुरुषश्चक्षुरादिकरणाभिमानी द्रष्टा जीवः । स एवाधिदैविकश्चक्षुराद्यधि- ष्ठाता सूर्यादिः । देहसृष्टेः पूर्वं करणानामधिष्ठानाभावेनाक्षमतया करणप्रकाशकर्तृत्वाभि- मानितत्सहाययोरुभयोरपि तयोर्वृत्तिभेदानुदयेन जीवत्वमात्राविशेषात् । ततश्चोभयः- करणाभिमानितदधिष्ठातृदेवतारूपो द्विरूपो विच्छेदो यस्मात् । स आधिभौतिकश्चक्षुर्गो- लकाद्युपलक्षितो दृश्यो देहः पुरुष इति - पुरुषस्य जीवस्योपाधिः । “स वा एष पुरुषोऽन्न- रसमयः " ( तै० २।१।१) इत्यादि श्रुतेः ॥ The adhyatmika-puruşa (the empirical self) refers to the jiva as limited seer, identified as the owner of the power of sight and the other sense faculties. He indeed is also [indistinguishable from] the adhidaivika-puruşa (the cosmic potentiators of the self), which here refers to the higher-order directives, like the presiding deity of the sun (surya), [who facilitate the power of sight and the other sense faculties]. Before the body is generated, the senses are without physical seats in which to reside and so their functional capacities remain unactualized. Because of the incapacitation of the senses at this time, the adhyatmika self and the adhidaivika self are as yet yo’dhyatmiko’yam puruşaḥ so’sav evädhidaivikaḥ yas tatrobhaya-vicchedaḥ puruso hy adhibhautikah ekam ekatarabhave yada nopalabhamahe tritayam tatra yo veda sa ātmā sväśrayāśrayaḥ 400 59 The Independent Asraya and the Three Interdependent Divisions of Embodied Selfhood undifferentiated, existing as mere potentials within the generic “beingness” [or essence] of embodied selfhood (jivatva-mätra). This absence of differentiation is due to the fact that their indi- vidualized and distinct functions have not yet emerged. [In the case of the adhyatmika self, the distinguishing function (as lim- ited seer) is the sense of proprietorship over the senses by which one appropriates the acts of perception. In the case of the adhi- daivika self, the distinguishing function (as potentiating force) is to be a support for the empirical self’s sense of seership by facilitating the engagement of the senses with their respective objects.] That by which these two separate functions- of sense pro- prietor and cosmic directive of sensory operations - become dif- ferentiated is known as the adhibhautika self, the visible body in which are found the physical seats of the senses, such as the eyeball and other sense organs. The visible body is said to be a “self,” because it is an artificial designation (upadhi) superim- posed upon the actual self, the conscious being (jiva). The phys- ical body has been referred to as a self (purusa) in the Śruti: “This [adhibhautika] self (puruşa) consists of food and vital fluids” (TU 2.1.1).2 Commentary IN THE PREVIOUS ANUCCHEDA, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi demonstrated from the macrocosmic viewpoint that the Supreme Absolute Truth, Bhagavan, is the aśraya-tattva, the support of all existence. Now, he further explains that Bhagavan is the support of each individual in their day-to-day sensory experiences. The originally pure living being who misidentifies with the body, mind, and senses is called the adhyatmika-puruşa, the empirical self as limited seer. The presiding deities (devas) of the senses are called the adhidaivika-purușa, the potentiators of the self, who facilitate the power of seeing of the limited seer. The visible physical body, 2 sa va esa puruso’nna-rasa-mayaḥ 401 III Prameya along with the sense objects, is called the adhibhautika-puruşa, the physical self as the locus of the senses. The adhibhautika-puruşa makes possible the differentiation of the adhyatmika-puruşa from the adhidaivika-purusa. Prior to physical birth, one cannot distinguish the latter two purusas, because they are merged as if they were the same jiva. In this regard, Śrīpāda Baladeva Vidyabhuṣaṇa writes, “Even prior to the generation of the physical body, the senses and their pre- siding deities are present with the jiva” (dehotpatteḥ purvam api jivena särdham indriyani tad-devatăś ca santy eva). They constitute the subtle psychic body (sukṣma-deha). At this stage, the cosmic potentiators of the senses (the devas) and the empirical self (jiva) are as yet undifferentiated, because no physical body exists that could allow for the actualization of their respective potentials. When the physical body comes into existence, the senses take their appropriate seats within it, and their respec- tive presiding deities take charge of them. At that time, one can distinctly perceive the functions of the presiding deities. The eyes, nose, and other senses that we observe in the physical body are not the real senses; rather, they are the seats for the actual senses, which are interior, belonging to the subtle psychic matrix. These interior senses function through the external seats, or instruments (golaka). Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms this in the Fifteenth Chapter of Bhagavad Gitä. After asserting that the living entity is His eternal inte- grated part, He states that the jiva draws forth the mind and five senses, which are situated in material nature, meaning that the jiva egoically appropriates them as his own. Krsna then says that when the ātmā quits the body, it carries the five senses and the mind from their seats into the next body, just as the air carries aromas. Obviously, at the time of death the visible nose and eyes do not disappear. Rather, the subtle senses situated interior to the physi- cal seats, along with the mind, are carried away by the atma. The physical body is also called purușa, or “person” because the ātmā is identified with it. This illusion prompts a person to say, “I am sick,” when actually the body is sick. All bodily designations, such 402 59 The Independent Asraya and the Three Interdependent Divisions of Embodied Selfhood as “short,” “tall,” “American,” “Indian,” “boy,” and “girl,” are based on the jiva’s misidentification with the material body. The Upanisad statement that Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi quoted in this anuccheda confirms the usage of the term puruşa for the body. In the next anuccheda, Jiva Gosvāmi explains the second of the two Bhāgavatam verses (SB 2.10.9) that he quoted in Anuccheda 59.1. 403 Anuccheda 60 The Aśraya Is Its Own Independent Shelter and Thus the Shelter of All 60.1 ६० । एकमेकतराभाव इत्येषामन्योन्यसापेक्षसिद्धत्वे नानाश्रयत्वं दर्शयति - तथा हि दृश्यं विना तत्प्रतीत्यनुमेयं करणं न सिध्यति । नापि द्रष्टा न च तद् विना करणप्रवृत्त्यनु- मेयस्तदधिष्ठाता सूर्यादिः । न च तं विना करणं प्रवर्तते । न च तद् विना दृश्यमित्येकत- रस्याभाव एकं नोपलभामहे । तत्र - तदा तत्त्रितयमालोचनात्मकेन प्रत्ययेन । यो वेद साक्षितया पश्यति स परमात्मा आश्रयः । तेषामपि परस्परमाश्रयत्वमस्तीति तद्व्यवच्छे- दार्थं विशेषणम् । “स्वाश्रयः " अनन्याश्रयः । स चासावन्येषामाश्रयश्चेति । तत्रांशांशिनोः शुद्धजीवपरमात्मनोरभेदांशस्वीकारेणैवाश्रय उक्तः । THE SECOND VERSE UNDER CONSIDERATION, beginning ekam ekatarābhāve (SB 2.10.9), clearly establishes the mutual interde- pendence of these [purusas], by which it is concluded that none of them can be the independent shelter of all being (aśraya). The reasoning is as follows: In the absence of perceivable objects, the sense faculties, whose existence is merely inferred from tangi- ble perceptions of visible objects, remain unsubstantiated. And in the absence of sense perceptions, there can be no limited seer [as appropriator of the acts of perception]. Then again, without the seer, the higher order directives (devas) who oversee sense functioning, such as the presiding deity of the sun, whose exis- tence too is merely inferred from the fact of the senses engage- ment with their objects, are also without basis. Without the directives of sense operations (devas), the senses cannot act, and without the senses, the visible world cannot become an object of perception. Thus, in the absence of any one [of these three 404 60 The Aśraya Is Its Own Independent Shelter and Thus the Shelter of All purusas], the other two cannot be ascertained. Such being the case, the one who knows these three, by virtue of the immedi- ate apprehension of them from the witness position, is indeed the Supreme Immanent Self (Paramātmā) and the actual shelter (āśraya). To distinguish Paramātmā, the actual shelter of all, from the three purusas, who are also shelters for each other but in a mutu- ally interdependent sense, Paramātmā is specifically character- ized as svāśraya, His own independent shelter, meaning that He has no other shelter and is, consequently, the shelter of all oth- ers. In this context, both the pure living entity as well as Param- ătmă are referred to as aśraya, but strictly from the perspective that focuses specifically on the aspect of nondifference between the pure jiva and Paramātmā, who are related as part and whole, respectively. 60.2 317:

Therefore [the jiva is not an independent äśraya, in spite of the following verses]: यया सम्मोहितो जीव आत्मानं त्रिगुणात्मकम् । परोऽपि मनुतेऽनर्थं तत्कृतं चाभिपद्यते ॥ १३५ ॥ जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषुप्तं च गुणतो बुद्धिवृत्तयः । तासां विलक्षणो जीवः साक्षित्वेन विवक्षितः || १३६ ॥ इति । क्षेत्रज्ञ एता मनसो विभूतीर्जीवस्य मायारचितस्य नित्याः । आविर्हिताः क्वापि तिरोहिताश्च शुद्धो विचष्टे ह्यविशुद्धकर्तुः ॥ १३७ ॥ Although transcendental to the three gunas of material nature, the living being thinks of itself as consisting of the three gunas. (SB 1.7.5)1 Wakefulness, dreaming, and deep sleep are conditional states (vṛttis) of the mental faculty (buddhi), caused by the gunas of yaya sammohito jiva ātmānam tri-gunātmakam paro’pi manute’nartham tat-kṛtam cabhipadyate 405111 Prameya material nature. The individual living being has been ascer- tained to be distinct from these states, due to its being their witness. (SB 11.13.27)2 The pure jiva [situated in the liberated position], who is the knower of the field of the psycho-physical organism, merely witnesses the transformations of the impure agent, the mind. (SB 5.11.12)3 इत्याद्युक्तस्य साक्षिसञ्ज्ञिनः शुद्धजीवस्याश्रयत्वं न शङ्कनीयम् । अथवा – नन्वाध्यात्मि- कादीनामप्याश्रयत्वमस्त्येव ? सत्यम् । तथापि परस्पराश्रयत्वान् न तत्राश्रयताकैवल्य- मिति ते त्वाश्रयशब्देन मुख्यतया नोच्यन्त इत्याह- एकमिति । So, although the pure jiva is designated as a witness [a word gen- erally used for Paramātmā] in these statements, he should not be considered as the āśraya. Alternatively, the verse may be explained as follows: It may be questioned, “Is it then to be admitted that the three aspects of embodied selfhood (adhyatmika and so on) also possess the qual- ity of being foundational supports (aśrayas)?” We answer that this is true, but since they are dependent on each other, none of them are the exclusive aśraya; as the verse beginning ekam (SB 2.10.9) confirms, it is not in the direct primary sense that they are referred to as aśrayas. 60.3 तर्हि साक्षिण एवास्तामाश्रयत्वम् ? तत्राह - त्रितयमिति । स आत्मा साक्षी जीवस्तु यः स्वाश्रयोऽनन्याश्रयः परमात्मा स एवाश्रयो यस्य तथाभूत इति । वक्ष्यते च हंसगुह्यस्तवे “सर्वं पुमान् वेद गुणांश्च तज्ज्ञो न वेद सर्वज्ञमनन्तमीडे " ( भा० ६।४।२५) इति । तस्मात् “आभासश्च” (भा० २।१०।७) इत्यादिनोक्तः परमात्मैवाश्रय इति ॥ श्रीशुकः ॥ “So, then the existential condition of being an äśraya must belong to the witness alone [i.e., to the pure jiva]?” The answer to this 2 jägrat-svapna-suşuptam ca gunato buddhi-vṛttayaḥ tāsām vilakṣaṇo jivaḥ sākṣitvena vivakṣitaḥ 3 kṣetrajña eta manaso vibhutir jivasya maya-racitasya nityaḥ avirhitaḥ kvapi tirohitaś ca śuddho vicaste hy aviśuddha-kartuḥ 406 60 The Aśraya Is Its Own Independent Shelter and Thus the Shelter of All is provided in the last line of the verse, beginning with tritayam: The ätmä, or self, is a witness, as an individual unit of conscious- ness (jiva), but he too is sheltered exclusively by that entity who is His own independent shelter (sväśraya), meaning He who has no other shelter, Paramātmā. This point is clearly stated in a verse from the Bhāgavatam section known as the Hamsa- guhya prayers (SB 6.4.25), “The conscious being knows all these transformations of material nature as well as the gunas, which are their source. Yet, in spite of knowing all this, he does not know the all-knowing one. I worship that unlimited Lord.” So, in conclusion, Paramātmā, described in such statements as the one beginning abhäsaś ca (SB 2.10.7, Anuccheda 58), is alone the āśraya. The verses under discussion [SB 2.10.1-9, Anucchedas 56.1- 60.1] were spoken by Śri Suka. Commentary ŚRILA JIVA GOSVĀMI SHOWS HERE that except for Bhagavan, none can be the independent aśraya, which is the tenth topic of Srimad Bhāgavatam. From a cursory look, the jivas and the presiding deities (adhi-devas) of the senses appear to be the aśrayas. The jiva, or the empirical self, is the aśraya for the physical body it inhabits, and the presiding deities are the aśraya for the senses. But none of them can be independent asrayas. For example, without a physical body, the conditioned jiva would be unable to see a flower, because the distinc- tion between the presiding deity of the eyes and the jiva would then not be manifest. On the other hand, if the body is manifest, then the senses take up their respective seats and are presided over by their respective devas. Still, if the devas do not provide support, the senses cannot perceive. The presiding deity of the eye, for example, is the sun. Without the sun’s light, the eye cannot perceive visible objects, even with the jiva’s support. For proper perception, all three supports must sarvam puman veda gunamś ca taj-jño na veda sarvajñam anantam ide 407 III Prameya be present: the empirical self, or jīva (the adhyatmika-puruşa), the physical body (the adhibhautika-purusa), and the potentiators of the senses, or devas (the adhidaivika-purusa). The one who witnesses all the activities of these three purusas is Paramātmā, who is His own independent ašraya as well as the aśraya of the jiva. He is the ulti- mate āśraya. Although the jiva witnesses his own various mental states, he is not their ultimate basis. Sometimes the jiva is referred to as the aśraya in consideration of his being a minute fraction of Paramātmā and thus nondifferent from Him, but the jiva is never the asraya in the primary sense. The jiva is the intermediary energy of Paramatma, who is the energetic Source, and as such, the jiva is always dependent on Him. Still, because the jiva is an integrated part of Paramātmā, he has some of His characteristics in very minute degree, just as a drop of ocean water has some of the ocean’s qualities. It must be empha- sized that the drop does not have all of the qualities of the ocean - the ocean has waves, tides, and storms, none of which a single drop can accommodate. Also, unlike the drop of ocean water, the ocean shelters the whole oceanic world and is suitable for sailing or surfing. Similarly, Bhagavan is the shelter and source of well-being of all existence, a position no jiva can claim. Thus, the jiva, although one with Bhagavan in some respects, should not be considered the object of worship independent of the Lord, who is the basis of all existence. Bhagavan is the supreme substratum or shel- ter for Himself as well as others. This is the import of Sukadeva Gosvāmi’s statements explaining the various topics treated in Śrimad Bhagavatam. Śrīla Sūta Gosvāmi will now draw the same conclusion from a slightly different angle of vision while explaining the characteristics of a Maha-puraṇa. 408 Anuccheda 61 The Second List of the Bhāgavatam’s Ten Topics Also Identifies Its Subject as the Ultimate Shelter 61.1 ६१ । अस्य श्रीभागवतस्य महापुराणत्वव्यञ्जकलक्षणं प्रकारान्तरेण च वदन्नपि तस्यैवा- श्रयत्वमाह । द्वयेन (भा० १२/७/९-१० ) -

IN THE FOLLOWING TWO VERSES, although Śrī Sūta Gosvāmī describes the characteristics of Srimad Bhagavatam that qualify it as a Maha-purāņa in a different manner, he yet affirms that Paramātmā alone is the aśraya: सर्गोऽस्याथ विसर्गश्च वृत्ती रक्षान्तराणि च । वंशो वंशानुचरितं संस्था हेतुरपाश्रयः ॥ १३८ ॥ दशभिर्लक्षणैर्युक्तं पुराणं तद्विदो विदुः । केचित् पञ्चविधं ब्रह्मन् महदल्पव्यवस्थया ।। १३९ ।। O brāhmaṇa, learned authorities on the Puranas identify a Purana as containing ten standard topics: sarga [the destabiliza- tion of the gunas of primordial nature bringing forth the causal cosmic principles of creation]; visarga [the subsequent creation of the individual forms of living beings in accordance with their residual bank of subconscious impressions and desires]; vṛtti [the sustenance of living beings]; rakṣā [the protection and nur- turing of living beings]; antarani [the period of reign of the Manus]; vamsa [the dynasties of great kings]; vaṁśānucarita [the activities of such kings]; samstha [dissolution of the cre- ation]; hetu [the living beings as instrumental cause behind 409 III Prameya creation]; and apăśraya [the ultimate shelter of all states of awareness, of all phenomena, and of all beings]. Other authorities, however, claim that a Purana consists of just five topics. This difference of opinion is accounted for by virtue of the difference in topics that characterize the Mahā-purāņas [which deal with these ten topics] and the minor Purānas [which deal with only five ]. (sB 12.7.9-10 ) ’ " अन्तराणि” मन्वन्तराणि । Here, the word antarāņi refers to manvantarāņi, the period of reign of the Manus. 61.2 पञ्चविधम्- सर्गश्च प्रतिसर्गश्च वंशो मन्वन्तराणि च । वंशानुचरितं चेति पुराणं पञ्चलक्षणम् ॥ १४० ॥ इति केचिद् वदन्ति । Some authorities define a Purana as that which discusses five topics, as expressed in the following verse: “A Purāna is char- acterized by the following five topics - sarga (creation), pratisa- rga (dissolution), varśa (genealogy), manvantarāni (the period of reign of the Manus), and vamśānucarita (the activities of illus- trious kings and enlightened sages appearing within the great dynasties).”2 स च मतभेदो महदल्पव्यवस्थया - महापुराणमल्पपुराणमिति भिन्नाधिकरणत्वेन । यद्यपि विष्णुपुराणादावपि दशापि तानि लक्ष्यन्ते तथापि पञ्चानामेव प्राधान्येनोक्त- त्वात् - अल्पत्वम् । sargo’syätha visargaś ca vṛtti rakṣāntarāṇi ca varhso varśanucaritam samstha hetur apaśrayaḥ dasabhir lakṣaṇair yuktam puranam tad-vido viduḥ kecit pañca-vidham brahman mahad-alpa-vyavasthaya sargas ca pratisargaś ca vamso manvantarani ca varśanucaritam ceti puranam pañca-lakṣaṇam MP 53.65 410 61 The Second List of the Bhagavatam’s Ten Topics Also Identifies Its Subject as the Ultimate Shelter This difference of opinion applies to different Purāņas due to the difference in the number of topics that they treat [either ten or five], characterizing them either as a Maha-purana or an Alpa- purāņa (a major or a minor Purana). Although Purāņas such as the Vişņu Purāņa discuss all ten topics, these Purāņas are still classified as minor, because they discuss only five of the topics in depth. 61.3 | अत्र दशानामर्थानां स्कन्धेषु यथाक्रमं प्रवेशो न विवक्षितः । तेषां द्वादशसङ्ख्यत्वात् । द्वि- तीयस्कन्धोक्तानां तेषां तृतीयादिषु यथासङ्ख्यं न समावेशः । निरोधादीनां दशमादिष्वष्ट- मवर्जम् । अन्येषामप्यन्येषु यथोक्तलक्षणतया समावेशनाशक्यत्वादेव । In Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, it is not the author’s intention to sug- gest that the ten topics appear consecutively, in one canto after another; after all, the Bhāgavatam has twelve cantos [i.e., two more than necessary to cover the ten topics]. Nor should one sup- pose that because the ten topics are listed at the end of the Second Canto, they can be found one after another from Cantos Three to Twelve. This cannot be the case, because the three topics of niro- dha, mukti, and aśraya can all be found in the Tenth, Eleventh, and Twelfth Cantos. Nor will one find the remaining topics in order in the other cantos, with the exception of the Eighth Canto [which deals primarily with the sixth topic, manvantara]. 61.4 तदुक्तं श्रीस्वामिभिरेव This absence of a strict correspondence between the topics and cantos of the Bhagavatam has also been indicated by Śrila Sridhara Svämī: दशमे कृष्णसत्कीर्तिवितानायोपवर्ण्यते । धर्मग्लानिनिमित्तस्तु निरोधो दुष्टभूभुजाम् || १४१ | प्राकृतादिचतुर्धा यो निरोधः स तु वर्णितः ॥ १४२ ॥ इति । 411 III Prameya In the Tenth Canto, the topic of nirodha [dissolution or destruc- tion] is discussed specifically to spread Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s transcenden- tal glories, and in this context, it refers instead to the destruc- tion of the unrighteous rulers due to their deviating from the path of religious truth (dharma). The four types of dissolution (nirodha) of primordial nature, on the other hand, were already described earlier in the Bhagavatam. (Bhāvārtha-dipikā 10.1.1)3 I अतोऽत्र स्कन्धे श्रीकृष्णरूपस्याश्रयस्यैव वर्णनप्राधान्यं तैर्विवक्षितम् । उक्तं च स्वयमेव “दशमे दशमं लक्ष्यमाश्रिताश्रयविग्रहम्” इति । एवमन्यत्राप्युन्नेयम् । Here, Śrīdhara Svami’s intention is to show that the Tenth Canto is primarily concerned with elucidation of the aśraya, who is none other than Śrī Kṛṣṇa. As Śrīdhara Svāmī himself states, “The subject of the Tenth Canto is the tenth topic: how the aśraya-vigraha, the transcendental personhood of God, is the ultimate shelter (aśraya) for His fully surrendered devo- tees (āśrita)” (Bhāvārtha-dipikā 10.1.1). We can draw similar conclusions about the other cantos. 61.5 अतः प्रायशः सर्वेऽर्थाः सर्वेष्वेव स्कन्धेषु गुणत्वेन वा मुख्यत्वेन वा निरूप्यन्त इत्येव तेषा- मभिमतम् । “श्रुतेनार्थेन चाञ्जसा” (भा० २।१०।२) इत्यत्र च तथैव प्रतिपन्नं सर्वत्र तत्तत्स- म्भवात् । ततश्च प्रथमद्वितीययोरपि महापुराणतायां प्रवेशः स्यात् । क्रमो न गृहीतः ॥ Thus, in Śrīdhara Svami’s view, virtually all ten topics are dis- cussed in every canto, either directly or indirectly. It is in the same light that we should understand the statement, “These topics are described here either directly, by straightforward statements, or indirectly, by disclosing the implied meaning” (SB 2.10.2), since we do actually find these topics discussed in both these manners throughout the Bhagavatam. And for the dasame kṛṣṇa-sat-kirti-vitānayopavarnyate dharma-glani-nimittas tu nirodho dusta-bhūbhujam pråkṛtādi-caturdha yo nirodhaḥ sa tu varnitaḥ dasame daśamam lakṣyam äśritäśraya-vigraham 412 61 The Second List of the Bhagavatam’s Ten Topics Also Identifies Its Subject as the Ultimate Shelter same reason, we should recognize that the First and Second Can- tos also belong to this Maha-puraṇa. Therefore, the idea that these topics are discussed in a strict sequence is unacceptable. Commentary PREVIOUSLY, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi showed that Sūta Gosvāmi, Suka- deva Gosvāmi, and Śrīla Vyasadeva all agreed about what is the essential message of Srimad Bhagavatam. Here, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi reiterates this conclusion by citing Sūta Gosvämï’s statements regarding the characteristics of a Maha-purana. Although the ten topics described by Śri Sūta seem to differ from those mentioned by Śukadeva Gosvāmi, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī shows that in essence they are the same. In Bhāvārtha-dipika, while commenting on SB 12.7.9, Śrīdhara Svami offers the following reconciliation between Sukadeva’s list and Suta’s list: “Sarga and visarga are found in both lists. Sthāna in the first list is called vṛtti in the second; poşana is called rakṣā. Úti, implying the psychic imprints sheltered in the jiva, is called hetu. Manvantara is called antara, and isänukatha is called vamsa and vaṁśānucarita. Nirodha is called samstha in the second list, and by use of the latter word, mukti in the form of ultimate dissolu- tion is also stated.” [Mukti as one of the four types of dissolution is discussed in Anuccheda 63.] See Figure 61.1, for a comparison of the two lists. A major, or Maha-purana, deals extensively with these ten top- ics, while a minor Purana deals with only five-sarga (creation), pratisarga (dissolution), vamsa (the genealogies of kings or sages), manvantaras (the reigns of Manus), and vaṁśänucarita (the histo- ries of various sages, kings, and avataras). In the course of dis- cussing these five topics, a minor Purana will touch upon all ten asya viśvasya atra sargo visargaś ca sthanam poṣaṇam utayaḥ, manvantaresanukatha nirodho muktir äśrayaḥ, ity atrokte sthana-poṣane vṛtti-rakṣa-sabdabhyam ucyete. antarani manvantarani vamšo vaṁsyänucaritam itiśänukathaḥ, samstha nirodhaḥ. anenaivätyantika-laya-rupă muktir apy uktä. hetu-sabdena jiväśraya-vasana-sabda-vacya utayo grhitaḥ. 413 III Prameya topics of a Maha-purana, but its primary focus is only upon the five topics listed above. This difference in how extensively the ten top- ics are treated constitutes the principal distinction between a Maha- purāņa and a minor Purana. Figure 61.2 illustrates in what context a minor Purāņa would discuss the ten characteristics of a Mahā- purāṇa. ŚUKADEVA GOSVĀMĪ SŪTA GoSVÄMI

1. Sarga Sarga

Visarga Visarga 3. Sthana Vrtti 4. Poşana Rakṣa 5. Üti Hetu 6. Manvantara Vamsa 7. Isänukatha Vamsanucarita 8. Nirodha Samsthä 9. Mukti Samstha 10. Āśraya Apäśraya Figure 61.1: Ten Topics in the Bhagavatam Śrimad Bhagavatam contains twelve cantos, but the list of a Maha-purana’s topics is found at the end of the Second Canto. From this, plus the fact that the first two cantos seem in some ways intro- ductory, some scholars conclude that the Bhagavatam treats these ten topics successively in each canto from the Third onwards. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi has no regard for this theory. Since a Mahā-purāņa deals with ten topics, if the first two cantos of the Bhagavatam described none of these, then the Bhagavatam proper would have only ten cantos. It is obvious enough, however, that the First and Second Cantos discuss at least sarga, visarga, and rakṣā. Earlier, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmī listed the defining characteristics of Srimad Bhāgavatam, and among these were its having eighteen 414 61 The Second List of the Bhagavatam’s Ten Topics Also Identifies Its Subject as the Ultimate Shelter thousand verses and twelve cantos, and its beginning with a reference to the Gayatri mantra. If the first two cantos are not really part of the Bhagavatam, then what remains would no longer fit the definition. Other scholars say that because Sukadeva speaks only from the Second Canto on, the First Canto is not part of the Bhāgavatam proper. But their opinion is countered by the same reply. Nirodha, mukti FIVE TOPICS TEN TOPICS 1. Sarga Sarga, visarga, äśraya 2. Pratisarga 3. Vamsa 4. Manvantara 5. Vamsanucarita Iśānukathā Manvantara, sthäna Isanukatha, poşana, ūti, āśraya Figure 61.2: Five Topics of a Minor Purana in Relation to the Ten Topics Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī additionally argues that the ten items of Srimad Bhagavatam are not described in strict sequence, one per canto. First of all, there are twelve cantos and only ten topics. If we try to resolve this dilemma by excluding two of the cantos, Śrīmad Bhagavatam will be reduced to less than the stipulated eighteen thousand verses. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi further says that although nirodha is the eighth item, it is discussed profusely in the Tenth, Eleventh, and Twelfth Cantos. This opinion is confirmed by Śrīdhara Svami, one of the earliest and most respected authorities on Srimad Bhagavatam. According to the adherents of a successive description of the ten topics begin- ning from the Third Canto, the Tenth Canto should describe the eighth item, nirodha, and the Twelfth Canto the tenth item, āśraya. Undoubtedly, the Tenth Canto discusses nirodha, but its principal topic is the aśraya, whom it establishes to be Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personal Absolute. In Śrīla Jiva Gosvami’s opinion, which finds support from the commentary of Śridhara Svāmī, all twelve cantos of the Bhagavatam 415111 Prameya describe all ten topics, though some cantos place more emphasis on certain topics and less on others. In Sarva-samvadini, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī specifies which topics are covered extensively in each canto, as seen in Figure 61.3. TOPICS PRIMARILY DISCUSSED IN CANTOS 1. Sarga Two, Three 2. Visarga Two, Three, Four 3. Vrtti Three, Seven, Eleven 4. Rakṣa 5. Manvantara 6. Vamsa Throughout Eight Four, Nine 7. Vamsanucarita Four, Nine 8. Samstha Eleven, Twelve 9. Hetu Three, Eleven 10. Apäśraya Ten Figure 61.3: Discussion of the Ten Topics in the Cantos As mentioned before, the ultimate purpose of Śrīmad Bhagava- tam is to explain the tenth item, the aśraya, the original Supreme Person, Bhagavan. From the very beginning of Tattva Sandarbha, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi has proposed that Srimad Bhagavatam focuses entirely on Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the supreme shelter of all existence. The Bhāgavatam describes Śrī Kṛṣṇa in its beginning, middle, and end, and not just in the last canto. Śrī Jiva will explain this matter in greater detail in Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha. In the next anuccheda, he presents Sūta Gosvāmi’s definitions of the first seven of the ten topics. 416 Anuccheda 62 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya - Part 1 62.1 ६२ । अथ सर्गादीनां लक्षणमाह (भा० १२॥७।११) - SŪTA GOSVĀMĪ THEN DESCRIBES the characteristics of the ten topics, beginning with primary creation (sarga): अव्याकृतगुणक्षोभान् महतस्त्रिवृतोऽहमः । भूतमात्रेन्द्रियार्थानां सम्भवः सर्ग उच्यते ॥ १४३ ॥ The primary creation (sarga) refers to the destabilization of the neutralized gunas of unmanifest primordial nature, giving rise to the first evolute mahat, from which evolve successively the threefold principle of individuation [ahankara, the “I” principle, or ego], the subtle aspect of the elements [sound and so on], the senses, and the gross sense objects.” (SB 12.7.11) प्रधानगुणक्षोभान् महान् । तस्मात् त्रिगुणोऽहङ्कारः । तस्माद् भूतमात्राणां भूतसूक्ष्माणा- मिन्द्रियाणां च स्थूलभूतानां च तदुपलक्षिततद्देवतानां च सम्भवः सर्गः । कारणसृष्टिः सर्ग इत्यर्थः । When the neutralized force of the gunas of unmanifest primor- dial nature (pradhana) is destabilized, it gives rise to the first evo- lute, mahat-tattva, and from mahat evolves the ego (ahankara), 1avyakṛta-guna-kṣobhän mahatas trivṛto’hamaḥ bhūta-mätrendriyarthānāṁ sambhavaḥ sarga ucyate 417 III Prameya which has three aspects corresponding to the three gunas of nature. From this threefold ego successively evolve the subtle aspect of the elements [sound and so on], the senses, and the physical elements. The unfolding of the subtle elements, the senses, and the physical elements implies the coming into being of their presiding deities as well. So, the consecutive generation of all these phenomenological existents [brought about by the destabilization of the gunas of unmanifest primordial nature] is known as sarga (primary creation). In other words, sarga refers to the generation of the causal cosmic principles [by which phenomenal existence is brought forth]. 62.2 भा० १२।७।१२- Sūta Gosvāmi continues: पुरुषानुगृहीतानामेतेषां वासनामयः । विसर्गोऽयं समाहारो बीजाद् बीजं चराचरम् ॥ १४४ ॥ The secondary creation (visarga) refers to this aggregate of the world of both moving and non-moving beings, which stream forth like the emergence of one seed from another. This aggre- gate is derived from the totality of all these evolutes of primor- dial nature [beginning with mahat, the cosmic wisdom princi- ple], which have been facilitated [lit., “graced”] by the Primor- dial Person (purusa), and brought forth in accordance with the unconscious complex of desires of the living beings. (SB 12.7.12)2 “पुरुषः” परमात्मा । " एतेषाम् " महदादीनाम् । जीवस्य पूर्वकर्मवासनाप्रधानोऽयं समाहारः - कार्यभूतश्चराचरप्राणिरूपो बीजाद् बीजमिव प्रवाहापन्नो विसर्ग उच्यते । व्यष्टिसृष्टिविसर्ग इत्यर्थः । अनेनोतिरप्युक्ता । 2 Here, the word puruşa (the Primordial Person) refers to Param- ātmā, and the pronoun eteṣām (of these) indicates the evolutes of puruşänugrhitänäm eteşär väsanämayaḥ visargo’yam samāhāro bijad bijam caracaram 418 62 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya - Part 1 primordial nature, beginning with the first evolute, mahat (the cosmic wisdom principle). So, visarga refers to this totality [of manifest evolutes], brought forth primarily by the living being’s past desires for action as the end effect [in a chain of causality], exhibiting itself as the incessant streaming forth of moving and non-moving beings, like the emergence of one seed from another. In other words, visarga refers to the creation of the individual organisms, and thus, by this discussion of visarga, the topic of ūti (the impetus for action in living beings) is also touched upon. 62.3 भा० १२|७|१३- Sūta continues: वृत्तिर्भूतानि भूतानां चराणामचराणि च । कृता स्वेन नॄणां तत्र कामाच् चोदनयापि वा ॥ १४५ ॥ Vrtti in general refers to the process of sustenance, by which moving beings live upon the non-moving [and sometimes upon other moving beings as well]. For the humans among such mov- ing beings, vṛtti specifically refers to prescribed patterns of life- sustaining action in accordance with individual nature, which may be impelled either by personal desire or by the guiding light of scriptural injunction. (SB 12.7.13)3 “चराणाम्” भूतानां सामान्यतोऽचराणि चकाराच् चराणि च कामाद् वृत्तिः । तत्र तु नृणां स्वेन स्वभावेन कामाच् चोदनयापि वा या नियता वृत्तिर्जीविका कृता । सा वृत्तिरुच्यत इत्यर्थः । Mobile living beings generally subsist on immobile beings, but they may also subsist on other moving beings as well, as indi- cated by the word ca (and) in this verse. The impetus for such life-sustenance in these [less evolved forms of] moving beings is vṛttir bhūtāni bhūtānāṁ carāṇām acarāṇi ca kṛtā svena nṛṇām tatra kamāc codanayāpi vā 419 111 Prameya desire. For humans, however, among all such moving beings, the actions performed in pursuit of livelihood are prescribed accord- ing to individual nature, impelled either by personal desire or by scriptural injunction. So, vṛtti more specifically refers to these prescribed patterns of life-sustaining action in human beings. 62.4 भा० १२१७११४- Sūta continues: रक्षाच्युतावतारेहा विश्वस्यानुयुगे युगे । तिर्यङ्गर्त्यर्षिदेवेषु हन्यन्ते यैस्त्रयीद्विषः ॥ १४६ ॥ The activities of the various avataras of Bhagavan Acyuta (the infallible Lord), who appear in this world in each age among the animals, human beings, sages, and celestial beings (devas), by which those inimical to the message of the three Vedas [the daityas] are undone, is known as protection (rakṣa) of the universe. (SB 12.7.14) “यैः” अवतारैः । अनेन – ईशकथा । स्थानं पोषणं च - इति त्रयमुक्तम् । Here, the pronoun yaiḥ (by whom) means by the avataras. This definition of “protection” (rakṣā) also incorporates the three topics isa-katha (narrations about the Supreme Lord), sthāna (the sustenance of living beings), and poşana (the mercy displayed by Bhagavan in nurturing His devotees). 62.5 भा० १२१७/१५- Sūta continues: rakṣacyutavatärehä viśvasyänuyuge yuge tiryan-martyarşideveşu hanyante yais trayi-dvişah 420 62 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Asraya - Part 1 मन्वन्तरं मनुर्देवा मनुपुत्राः सुरेश्वराः । ऋषयोऽशावताराश्च हरेः षड्विधमुच्यते ॥ १४७ ॥ The period of reign presided over by the ruling Manu, the gen- eral devas, the sons of Manu, the ruling devas [such as Indra], the great sages, and the partial avataras of Lord Hari is known as manvantara, consisting of six elements. (SB 12.7.15)5 मन्वाद्याचरणकथनेन सद्धर्म एवात्र विवक्षित इत्यर्थः । ततश्च प्राक्तनग्रन्थेनैकार्थ्यम् | From the mention here of the activities of the Manus and others, it is to be understood that the true intention in describing them is solely to delineate the nature of sad-dharma (the path of true reli- gion). Consequently, the ten topics of Srimad Bhagavatam listed here are identical in meaning to those mentioned earlier in the Bhagavatam [in the Second Canto, see Anuccheda 56.1]. 62.6 5 भा० १२।७।१६ - 6 Sūta continues: राज्ञां ब्रह्मप्रसूतानां वंशस्त्रैकालिकोऽन्वयः । वंश्यानुचरितं तेषां वृत्तं वंशधराश्च ये ॥ १४८ ॥ The succession of kings of pure descent originating from Brahmā and extending continuously throughout the past, present, and future is known as vamsa (the dynasties of great kings). The accounts of such dynastic kings and especially of their most prominent descendants, who upheld the sanctity of the line, constitute the subject of dynastic history (vamsyanucarita). (SB 12.7.16) manvantaram manur deva manu-putrāḥ sureśvarāḥ rṣayo’msavataraś ca hareh sad-vidham ucyate rajñām brahma-prasutānām vaṁsas traikāliko’nvayaḥ vamsyanucaritam teṣam vṛttam varśadharaś ca ye 421 III Prameya तेषां राज्ञां ये च वंशधरास्तेषां वृत्तं वंश्यानुचरितम् ॥ Among these kings, the vamśa-dharaḥ are those prominent descendants who upheld the sanctity of the dynastic lines. The accounts of their actions are what constitute vaṁśānucarita (dynastic history). Commentary AT THE END OF THE SECOND CANTO, Sukadeva Gosvāmi lists and defines the ten topics of Srimad Bhagavatam, and in the Twelfth Canto Suta Gosvāmi does the same. The first topic is called sarga (primary creation). During the total dissolution everything in the cosmos becomes unmanifest, a state called prakṛti or pradhāna. In this state, the three gunas of primordial nature remain in a state of equilibrium. Not until the gunas are destabilized and thrown out of balance can creation begin again. This same principle applies to human beings: When a person is satisfied, peaceful, and equipoised, he will not initiate some new activity; some stimulus must unsettle his equilibrium and motivate him to act. One engages in sex, for example, when one’s mind and body are stimulated by lust or the desire to procreate. The original perturbation in pradhana is caused by the glance of the Supreme Lord, with which He impregnates prakṛti (primor- dial nature), with the conditioned jivas. Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms this in Bhagavad Gita, “The vast material nature, called Brahman, is My womb, into which I sow the seed of living beings” (mama yonir mahad brahma tasmin garbham dadamy aham, GITA 14.3). Here, the word brahma means prakṛti, not Bhagavan’s feature as absolute unqualified being. The first emergence from the impregnated, or destabilized, state of prakṛti is called mahat-tattva (the cosmic intellect). On the level of individuated being, mahat-tattva is known as citta (the faculty of pure intellection, prior to the emergence of ego). It should be noted that in the traditional Sankhya ontology (as presented in the Sankhya-pravacana Sutra of Kapila), the faculty here referred to as 422 62 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Asraya - Part 1 citta is instead called buddhi. In either case, this faculty of pure intellection or pure reason is understood as the highest aspect of the human psyche. This is made clear by the characteristics of citta as described in Śrimad Bhagavatam (SB 3.26.21). It is of the nature of sattva, transparent (svaccha), free from perturbation (santa), and the locus wherein direct realization of Bhagavan is actualized (bhagavataḥ padam). In the succeeding verse (SB 3.26.22), it is com- pared to pure water prior to contact with the earth. All these char- acteristics, together with the fact that ahankara is a subsequent emergence, demonstrate that citta, as defined in the Bhāgavatam, is a trans-egoic faculty of knowing. When further impelled by kala, Bhagavan’s time potency, the mahat-tattva or citta gives rise to the three kinds of ahankara (empirical ego). These include vaikärika-ahankära (sättvika ego), which is a modification (vikära) of cosmic or individual intel- lect (mahat or citta) into the generalized principle of individua- tion; taijasa-ahankara (rajasika ego), which is the active force pro- pelling both conscious (sattva) and unconscious (tamas) capacities; and bhūtādi-ahankara (tāmasika ego), which encompasses the five subtle elements (tan-mātras). Vaikārika-ahankara gives rise to manas, the elemental substance of mind, and also to the presiding deities of material creation. Taijasa-ahankära gives rise to buddhi (intellect), the faculty of dis- crimination or ascertainment, and also to the senses, which are of two types, the five cognitive senses (hearing, touching, seeing, tast- ing, and smelling), and the five conative senses (speaking, grasping, locomotion, evacuation, and procreation). Once again, it should be noted that the faculty of buddhi men- tioned above as a derivative of the rajasika-ahankara is not identical in all respects to the buddhi of the traditional Sankhya, which in the Bhāgavatam is referred to as citta. The characteristics of the buddhi that is subsumed under the rajasika ego are primarily the ascertain- ment of the nature of objects that are presented to awareness and helping the senses in their work of perceiving objects. So, whereas citta is evidently a trans-egoic faculty of knowing, buddhi is a faculty of knowing operative within the jurisdiction of ego. This distinction 423 III Prameya between citta and buddhi is unique to the Sankhya metaphysics of the Bhagavatam. Citta is also the seat of beginningless ignorance (anādi-avidyā). Bhūtādi-ahankära gives rise to the five subtle aspects of the mate- rial elements (tan-matras - sound, touch, form, taste, and smell). When the kala potency acts on the tamasika-ahankära, the subtle element (tan-matra) of sound comes into being, followed by ether (ākāśa) and the auditory organ. Under the impulse of time, ether then gives rise to the tan-matra of touch, and then air and the tac- tile organ evolve. Similarly, air gives rise to the tan-matra of form, after which fire and the visual organ evolve; fire gives rise to the tan-mätra of taste, and then water and the gustatory organ evolve; and, finally, water gives rise to the tan-matra of smell, after which earth and the olfactory organ evolve. Paramātmā Himself is the pri- mordial agent of this primary phase of emergent creation (sarga), which includes the manifesting of the above elements’ presiding deities. The latter have been indicated here (in SB 12.7.11) by the word artha. See Figure 62.1 for the stages of evolutionary unfolding in its primary phase (sarga). It should be noted that the Bhagavatam distinguishes between the cognitive senses and the physical sense organs, which are the seats or instruments of the cognitive senses. Figure 62.1 shows that the empirical ego in its rajasika aspect gives rise to buddhi (intellect, or the faculty of discrimination and ascertainment) and the senses. These senses are not the sense organs but rather the subtle sense faculties, which accompany the jiva from body to body. The physical sense organs are, of course, dissolved along with the rest of the gross body at death. Each of the five tan-matras (sound, touch, form, taste, and smell), which are subtle aspects of the material elements, become mixed with the time energy of Paramātmā and give rise to its corresponding gross element (mahabhuta) and the seat of the corresponding sense organ, as in Figure 62.2. The mahat-tattva or citta (illuminated perceptivity), ahankara (the “I” principle), manas (mind), and buddhi (intellect) are con- sidered internal senses. These four, plus the five conative senses 424 62 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya- Part 1 (speaking, grasping, walking, excreting, and procreating), the five cognitive senses (hearing, touching, seeing, tasting, and smelling), the five gross material elements (sky, air, fire, water, and earth), and the five subtle elements (sound, tactility, form, taste, and smell) total twenty-four elements (tattva); and the jiva and Paramātmā can be counted as the twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth. Time (kāla) is not counted separately, being a potency of Paramätmä Prakṛti or pradhana (equilibrated state of nature) Glance of Paramātmā (kāla) Mahat-tattva or citta (pradhana becomes disequilibrated) Ahankara (empirical ego) Vaikärika (beingness) Taijasa (dynamism) Mind and presiding deities Intellect and ten senses Tamasa (inertia) Five tan-matras and five material elements Figure 62.1: Evolutionary Unfolding of Prakrti The second topic is called visarga (secondary creation). Because pure elements cannot be employed in the process of creation, the five mahābhūtas listed above must be further combined by the pro- cess called pañci-karana (quintuplication)? In this process, each of the mahābhūtas is mixed with the other four according to a certain ? “Element” is not an exact translation of the word tattva. It should not be confused with the elements of the Periodic Table of chemistry. It is an ontological category and literally means “thatness.” The glance of Paramātmā (kāla) is not produced by prakṛti or pradhana but is included in Figure 62.1 to show the sequence of events. • Panici-karana is the theory that explains how gross elements are produced from subtle elements through quintuplication, or “five part compounding.” At the time of creation the five gross elements remain in an uncompounded state, → 425III Prameya ratio. Then Lord Brahma, using these mixed elements, proceeds with the secondary phase of creation (visarga). He creates the bod- ies of the myriad living beings according to the stored-up karmic impressions of their previous lives. Visarga includes the manifes- tation of Brahma’s mind-born sons - Atri, Vasistha, Dakṣa, Manu, and others. Some of these sons are Prajapatis (progenitors), whose offspring populate the universe. The phases of creation continue in cycles, one phase giving rise to the next, like one seed giving rise to another seed. The seeds in this creative process are the living entities’ fruit-bearing activities. TAN-MATRA ELEMENTS SEATS OF THE SENSES Sound Sky Ears Touch Air Skin Form Fire Eyes Taste Water Tongue Smell Earth Nose Figure 62.2: Interrelation of the Tan-matras with the Elements After sarga and visarga comes vṛtti (the sustenance of living beings), which is the third topic. As stated in the First Canto, one living being is generally sustained by eating others: Those who are devoid of hands are prey for those who have hands, while those devoid of legs are prey for the four-legged. The weak are the subsistence of the strong. Indeed, one living being is food for another. (SB 1.13.47) 10 being enfolded within the subtle elements (tan-matras). The theory holds that in the evolution of the gross elements, the five subtle elements are first divided into two halves, one of which is further divided into four parts. The first half of each subtle element is then combined with the one-eighth part of each of the other elements. Thus, each gross element is made up of one-half of itself and one-eighth of each of the other four elements. 10 ahastäni sa-hastänäm apadani catus-padăm phalguni tatra mahatam jivo jivasya jivanam 426 62 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya - Part 1 Usually, immovable beings are food for those that move, but some moving beings, such as tigers, prey on other moving beings. Human beings are unique in this regard, because they can choose what kind of food they eat. In this matter they can be guided either by their own desires or by Vedic scriptural injunction. Those who eat according to whim, glide down to lower species, while those who follow scripture, progress toward liberation. The fourth topic is called rakṣā (protection of living beings). Since Śrī Viṣņu accepts the responsibility of upholding Vedic cul- ture in the universe, He appears in every millennium (yuga) to protect His devotees and to curb the evil-doers. This function is called rakșă (protection). Bhagavan does not restrict His appear- ances only to the human species. As Prahlada Mahārāja says in his prayers to Śri Nrsimha: O Supreme Person, in this way You appear in various avataras in the form of human beings [such as Śrī Kṛṣṇa], animals [such as Varaha], sages [such as Nara-Nārāyaṇa], devas [such as Vamana], or aquatics [such as Matsya] to protect the different worlds and to destroy the enemies of creation. (SB 7.9.38)” The fifth topic is called antarani (the period of reign of the Manus). The cosmos exists for the duration of Śrī Brahma’s life, one hundred years according to his time scale, in which one day lasts for one thousand cycles of the four yugas - Satya, Tretā, Dvā- para, and Kali. By human calculation, therefore, a day of Brahma lasts 4,320,000,000 years. For managerial purposes he divides each of his days into fourteen periods, called manvantaras. The person who rules during each of these periods is called Manu, who is assisted by the devas, such as Candra and Varuna; his sons; Lord Indra; the seven great sages, called sapta-rsis; and a special partial expansion of the Supreme Lord who incarnates for each particular manvantara. The devas and sages are all appointed for the period of one manvantara, and the activities of these great persons constitute sad-dharma (the path of true religion). “ittham ny-tiryag-rşi-deva-jhaṣavatārair lokan vibhavayasi hamsi jagat pratipān 427 III Prameya At present, we are in the period of the seventh Manu, Vaivasva- ta Manu, or more precisely, in the 5,112th year of Kaliyuga, in the twenty-eighth yuga cycle of the day of Brahma, called the Śveta-varaha-kalpa, during his fifty-first year. Srimad Bhagava- tam names the fourteen Manus, the corresponding avataras who are contemporaneous with them, and the names of the individuals occupying the post of Indra in their respective periods, as shown in Figure 62.3. MANU MANU’S FATHER NAME OF THE AVATARA INDRA 1. Svayambhuva Brahmä Yajña Yajña 2. Svärocişa Agni Vibhu Rocana 3. Uttama Priyavrata Satyasena Satyajit 4. Tämasa Priyavrata Hari Trisikha 5. Raivata Priyavrata Vaikuntha Vibhu 6. Cakṣuşa Caksu Ajita Mantradruma 7. Vaivasvata Vivasvan Vamana Purandara (Śraddhadeva) 8. Sāvarni Vivasvān Sarvabhauma Bali 9. Dakṣa-sāvarņi Varuna Rṣabha Adbhuta 10. Brahma-sävarni Upaśloka Visvaksena Sambhu 11. Dharma-savarni Upaśloka Dharmasetu Vaidhṛta 12. Rudra-savarni Upaśloka Svadhämä Ṛtadhämä 13. Deva-savarni Upaśloka Yogeśvara Divaspati 14. Indra-sävarņi Upaśloka Brhadbhānu Śuci Figure 62.3: Fourteen Manus Two prominent dynasties of kings come from Lord Brahma- the sun dynasty and the moon dynasty. The enumeration of these dynasties is known as vamsa, the sixth topic. The description of the deeds performed by the prominent kings appearing in these dynasties is called vaṁsyanucarita, the seventh topic. 428 62 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya - Part 1 In the next anuccheda, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi explains the definitions of the remainder of the Bhagavatam’s ten topics and concludes Śri Tattva Sandarbha by explaining their purpose. 429 Anuccheda 63 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya - Part 2 63.1 ६३ | भा० १२ | ७/१७- SÜTA continues: नैमित्तिकः प्राकृतिको नित्य आत्यन्तिको लयः । संस्थेति कविभिः प्रोक्तश्चतुर्धास्य स्वभावतः || १४९ ।। There are four types of cosmic dissolution - naimittika (occa- sional), prākṛtika (total), nitya (constant), and atyantika (ulti- mate). Learned authorities refer to these four types of dissolu- tion, which occur under the influence of the Lord’s own inher- ent potency [svabhava], as samstha (dissolution of the creation). (SB 12.7.17)1 “अस्य” परमेश्वरस्य । “स्वभावतः” शक्तितः । “आत्यन्तिकः” इत्यनेन मुक्तिरप्यत्र प्रवे- शिता । In this verse, the pronoun asya (His) refers to Parameśvara, the Supreme Lord, while svabhavataḥ [due to His innate self- condition] means “by His potency.” By the term atyantikaḥ (ulti- mate), it is implied that the topic of mukti (liberation) too is included in the discussion of ultimate dissolution. naimittikaḥ prakṛtiko nitya atyantiko layah samstheti kavibhih proktaś caturdhasya svabhavataḥ 430 63.2 63 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya - Part 2 भा० १२/७/१८- Suta continues: हेतुर्जीवोऽस्य सर्गादिरविद्याकर्मकारकः । यं चानुशयिनं प्राहुरव्याकृतमुतापरे ॥ १५० ॥ Out of ignorance the living being (jiva) becomes identified as the performer of action, and in this sense is the cause (hetu) of the creation, maintenance, and destruction of the universe. In this regard, some authorities refer to the jiva as anusayi [the empirical self having consequences attached to its acts from which it is temporarily disconnected during the period of dis- solution], while others refer to it as avyäkṛta [the same empir- ical self no longer disconnected from its self-imposed desig- nations (upädhis) at the inception of creation, thus becoming instrumental in bringing forth the creation]. (SB 12.7.18)2 I “हेतुः” निमित्तम् । “अस्य " विश्वस्य । यतोऽयमविद्यया कर्मकारकः । यमेव हेतुं केचिच् चैतन्यप्राधानेनानुशयिनं प्राहुः । अपर उपाधिप्राधान्येनाव्याकृतमिति । The word hetu (cause) here refers to the efficient cause (nimitta). The pronoun asya (of this) refers to this universe, the existence of which is due in one sense to the jivas who, out of ignorance, become identified as performers of action. Some refer to this same cause [the jiva] as anuśayi [the empirical self, temporarily divested of its upadhis during the period of dissolution], when emphasizing the jiva’s identity as pure consciousness [prior to the overlay of phenomenality], while others refer to it as avya- krta [the empirical self no longer disconnected from its upadhis at the inception of creation], when emphasizing the jiva’s self- appropriated upadhis. 2 hetur jivo’sya sargāder avidya-karma-kārakaḥ yam canusayinam prahur avyakṛtam utapare 431 III Prameya 63.3 भा० १२।७।१९ - Sūta continues: व्यतिरेकान्वयो यस्य जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषुप्तिषु । मायामयेषु तद् ब्रह्म जीववृत्तिष्वपाश्रयः ॥ १५१ ॥ He who is present [as witness] throughout all states of aware- ness-wakefulness, dreaming, and deep sleep - in all the phe- nomena manifested by the external energy and within the func- tions of all living beings, yet who also exists separate from all this [being situated alone in His own essential nature], is the Supreme Absolute Truth, Brahman, and the ultimate shelter. (SB 12.7.19) श्रीबादरायणसमाधिलब्धार्थविरोधादत्र च जीवशुद्धस्वरूपमेवाश्रयत्वेन न व्याख्यायते । किन्त्वयमेवार्थः – जाग्रदादिष्ववस्थासु । “मायामयेषु” मायाशक्तिकल्पितेषु महदादिद्र- व्येषु च । केवलस्वरूपेण व्यतिरेकः परमसाक्षितयान्वयश्च यस्य तद् ब्रह्म जीवानां वृत्तिषु - शुद्धस्वरूपतया सोपाधितया च वर्तनेषु स्थितिष्वपाश्रयः । सर्वमत्यतिक्रम्याश्रय इत्यर्थः । “अप” इत्येतत् खलु वर्जने वर्जनं चातिक्रमे पर्यवस्यतीति । It cannot be proposed that the jiva is the aśraya, even in its pure state, since that would contradict the truth directly experienced by Śrila Vyasadeva in the state of samadhi. Rather, the only cor- rect understanding is as follows: The Supreme Brahman, being situated alone in His own essential nature, is always distinct from [vyatireka] the states of awareness known as wakefulness, dreaming, and deep sleep, and from all phenomena generated by the extrinsic potency, beginning with the mahat-tattva. While remaining aloof from these manifestations, He is simultane- ously involved with them [anvaya] as their supreme witness. Therefore, He is the ultimate support (apäśraya) for the jiva’s activities in both the pure state and that conditioned by upadhis. In other words, the term apaśraya indicates that while He is the vyatirekanvayo yasya jāgrat-svapna-suşuptiṣu mayamayesu tad brahma jiva-vṛttişv apăśrayaḥ 432 63 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Asraya - Part 2 foundation of everything (aśraya), He also transcends every- thing (apa). The prefix apa signifies “exclusion,” which here amounts to the idea of transcending. 63.4 तदेवमपाश्रयाभिव्यक्तिद्वारभूतं हेतुशब्दव्यपदिष्टस्य जीवस्य शुद्धस्वरूपज्ञानमाह । द्वा- भ्याम् (भा० १२।७।२०-२१) - — Thus, in the next two verses, Sūta Gosvāmi expounds knowledge of the pure nature of the jiva, who has been designated above by the word hetu, the cause of material existence, because such knowledge leads to realization of the apăśraya, the transcenden- tal fountainhead of existence: पदार्थेषु यथा द्रव्यं तन्मात्रं रूपनामसु । बीजादिपञ्चतां तासु ह्यवस्थासु युतायुतम् ॥ १५२ ॥ विरमेत यदा चित्तं हित्वा वृत्तित्रयं स्वयम् । योगेन वा तदात्मानं वेदेहाया निवर्तते ॥ १५३ ॥ As elemental substances [such as earth, water, and so on] inhere in their products [such as pots], having specific names and forms and yet also exist separate from them, the pure jiva, who is exclu- sively of the nature of consciousness, is associated with the var- ious phases of existence from conception till death and yet is distinct from them. When the conscious being abandons its identification with the three phenomenal states of wakefulness, dreaming, and deep sleep, either through self-study or through regulated spir- itual practice, it then becomes aware of the Supreme Imma- nent Self [Paramātmā] and withdraws from material endeavor. (SB 12.7.20-21)* 4 virameta yada cittam hitvä vṛtti-trayam svayam yogena va tad-ātmānam vedehāyā nivartate padartheṣu yatha dravyam tan-matram rupa-namasu bījādi-pañcatām tāsu hy avasthasu yutayutam 433 III Prameya 63.5 रूपनामात्मकेषु पदार्थेषु घटादिषु यथा द्रव्यं पृथिव्यादियुतमयुतं च भवति । कार्यदृ- ष्टिं विनाप्युपलम्भात् । तथा तन्मात्रं शुद्धं जीवचैतन्यमात्रं वस्तु गर्भाधानादिपञ्चता- न्तासु नवस्वप्यवस्थास्वविद्यया युतं स्वतस्त्वयुतमिति शुद्धमात्मानमित्थं ज्ञात्वा निर्वि- ण्णः सन्नपाश्रयानुसन्धानयोग्यो भवतीत्याह - विरमेतेति । “वृत्तित्रयम्” जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषु- प्तिरूपम् । “आत्मानम्” परमात्मानम् । “स्वयम्” वामदेवादेरिव मायामयत्वानुसन्धानेन देवहूत्यादेरिवानुष्ठितेन योगेन वा । ततश्च “ईहायाः ” तदनुशीलनव्यतिरिक्तचेष्टायाः ॥ श्री- सूतः ॥ उद्दिष्टः सम्बन्धः || Elemental substances, such as earth, water, and so on, inhere in their products, such as pots, having specific names and forms. Yet, at the same time, they do not inhere in these products, as they are seen to exist separate from them. In the same way, the pure jiva, though exclusively of the nature of consciousness, becomes involved with the nine stages of life from conception till death due to ignorance. By its constitutional nature, however, the jiva remains always distinct from these fluctuating states of awareness. By thus knowing itself as pure consciousness, the liv- ing being awakens detachment and becomes eligible to focus its investigation upon the transcendental source and shelter of all (apāśraya). This is the purport of the second of the two verses quoted above, beginning virameta (SB 12.7.21). The compound vṛtti-traya (the three fluctuating states) refers to the states of wakefulness, dreaming, and deep sleep. The word ātmānam (the Self) here means Paramātmā, the Supreme Immanent Self. The word svayam (by self-study) means [that the identification with the three fluctuating states may be given up] by carefully examining their illusory nature, as demonstrated by the sage Vamadeva and others. The phrase yogena vã (or by yoga) indicates that alternatively one may give up this identifica- tion by disciplined spiritual practice, as undertaken by Śrīmati Devahūti and others. Thāyāḥ nivartate (he withdraws from all actions) means that he refrains from all activities other than the culture of God-realization. These verses were spoken by Sūta Gosvāmi. This completes our explanation of sambandha, 434 63 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya - Part 2 the relation between Śrimad Bhagavatam and the subject it expounds. 63.6 इति कलियुगपावनस्वभजनविभजनप्रयोजनावतारश्रीश्रीभगवत् कृष्णचैतन्यदेवचरणा- नुचरविश्ववैष्णवराजसभाजनभाजनश्रीरूपसनातनानुशासनभारतीगर्भे श्रीभागवतसन्द- र्भे तत्त्वसन्दर्भो नाम प्रथमः सन्दर्भः ॥ Thus ends Tattva Sandarbha, the first book of the Bhagavata Sandarbha, which was written under the instruction of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Śrīla Sanatana Gosvāmi, the revered lead- ers of the royal assembly of world Vaisnavas. They are unal- loyed servants of the lotus feet of the Supreme Lord, Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahaprabhu, the purifier of the jivas in Kaliyuga, who descended to distribute the benediction of His own devotional worship. समाप्तोऽयं श्रीश्रीतत्त्वसन्दर्भः ॥ HERE ENDS TATTVA SANDARBHA. Commentary THIS ANUCCHEDA COMPLETES the explanation of the ten topics mentioned by Śrī Sūta Gosvāmi. The eighth topic is called samsthā, the dissolution of the material creation, of which there are four kinds - naimittika, präkṛtika, nitya, and atyantika. The dissolu- tion that occurs at the end of a day of Brahma is called naimittika (occasional). The final dissolution of the cosmos at the end of Lord Brahma’s life is called prakṛtika (total). The inexorable moment-by- moment progression of everything in the material world toward annihilation is called nitya (constant). And when an individual jīva attains final release from both his subtle and gross bodies and enters the spiritual sky, that dissolution is called atyantika (ultimate dis- solution, namely, liberation). Having attained this state, one does 435III Prameya not take birth again in the material world. Thus, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi says that atyantika-laya includes mukti, the ninth among the ten topics of Srimad Bhagavatam enumerated by Sukadeva Gosvāmī in Anuccheda 56. In Sarva-saṁvādinī, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī states that, in addition to the dissolutions mentioned above, there is also a partial dissolu- tion at the end of each manvantara. To substantiate this statement, he cites the Vişnu-dharmottara Purana, Śrimad Bhagavatam, and the Bharata-tātparya of Śrī Madhvācārya. Part of the reference from the Vişnu-dharmottara Purana states: King Vajra asked, “O greatly fortunate brahmana, what is the state of the world when a manvantara ends? Please explain this to me.” Märkandeya replied, “At the end of a manvantara, the devas appointed for that particular manvantara, being free from sins, attain to Maharloka and reside there.” (Visnu-dharmottara Purana 1.75.1-2)5 Märkandeya goes on to explain that the seven sages, Manu, and Indra go to Brahmaloka, while the earthly sphere becomes submerged in a deluge. This description of the general annihila- tion at the end of each manvantara is similar to the one given in the Twenty-fourth Chapter of the Bhagavatam’s Eighth Canto. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi comments that the existence of a dissolution at the end of each manvantara is further substantiated by Hari-vamsa Purana and commentaries on its chapters dealing with the subject of universal dissolution. Thus, the dissolution at the end of a manvantara can be categorized as naimittika (occasional), because it occurs repeatedly with the changes of Manus. The ninth topic is called hetu, which refers to the jiva as the effi- cient cause of creation. Bhagavan is not causal in the sense of having vajra uvāca manvantare parikṣine yādṛşi dvija jāyate samavastha maha-bhāga tādṛśīm vaktum arhasi märkandeya uvāca manvantare pariksine deva manvantaresvarāḥ mahar-lokam athäsädya tişṭhanti gata-kalmaṣaḥ 436 63 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya - Part 2 any sort of necessity to create. He has no purpose of His own to achieve by creating this material world. He is eternally established in His own transcendental self-existence and self-abode, which is the ground of the play of His divinity. The word “creation” is in fact misleading, since primordial nature is one of His eternal potencies. As such, creation is nothing other than the emergence of concrete forms out of the undifferentiated matrix of pure potentiality. Simi- larly, dissolution is nothing other than reabsorption of the evolutes of nature back into their primordial state. So, in this sense, Bha- gavān does not create the world, He simply supplies the conscious intention in the form of His glance that precipitates the unfolding of the implicit order. This too He does for the welfare of those liv- ing beings who are diverted from His devotional service. He thus provides the jivas with the opportunity to fulfill their desires and ultimately to attain liberation. By contrast, the jivas are known as avidya-karma-käraka, act- ing out of ignorance and sustaining the universe. In that sense, the jivas are the efficient cause of the creation, even though they neither design nor produce it. As Śrī Kṛṣṇa states in Bhagavad Gītā, “O mighty-armed Arjuna, the living beings are that by which this entire cosmos is sustained” (jiva-bhūtām maha-baho yayedam dharyate jagat, GĪTĀ 7.5). Bhagavan’s ultimate purpose in facilitating the emergence of the material world is to enable the jivas to attain bhakti and thus access liberation from the cycle of repeated birth and death. Sukadeva Gosvāmī states this explicitly in the Tenth Canto: The Lord created the intellect, the senses, the mind, and the vital force of the living beings for the purpose of apprehending sense objects (mātrā), for taking birth (bhava), for providing a range of experience for the self (atmane), and [ultimately] for transcend- ing the act of filtering experience through the screen of prior assumptions (akalpanaya, i.e., for liberation). (SB 10.87.2) In Paramatma Sandarbha (Anuccheda 93), Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī explains buddhindriya-manaḥ-pränän janānāṁ asrjat prabhuḥ matrarthaṁ ca bhavartham ca atmane’ kalpanaya ca 437 III Prameya that the real intention of God in manifesting the universe is to pro- vide an opportunity to His devotees who were unable to achieve perfection in the previous cycle of creation, so that their devotion may be brought to the completion stage. From this, we can clearly see that the jiva is certainly not the aśraya of the cosmos. Accord- ing to Śrīla Vyasadeva’s realization in the higher cognitive state of samadhi, that position belongs to Bhagavan. This brings us to the final topic, apaśraya, the transcendental shelter of all existence. If God is the aśraya of this material world, wouldn’t He also necessarily be in contact with maya and her cre- ation? In answer to this, Śrī Sūta Gosvāmī replies that Bhagavan is apāśraya, the transcendental shelter. In other words, He is the āśraya, but He is apart from (apa) maya. In GITA 7.4, Śrī Kṛṣṇa describes His own material nature as bhinnä prakṛtiḥ (His separated energy). In His original transcendental form, Bhagavan is com- pletely aloof from the material manifestation, but as Paramātmā, He witnesses and regulates the activities of both the jivas and māyā. Thus, by His inconceivable potency, He is both “in-volved” with the creation and simultaneously transcendental to it. This too is confirmed by Him in Bhagavad Gitä: This entire cosmos is pervaded by Me in My unmanifest form. All living beings are situated in Me, but I am not in them. (GĪTĀ 9.4)” Yet, even though Bhagavan, as Paramātmā, pervades the cos- mos and controls it, He is neither in physical contact with it nor influenced by it. In Anuccheda 53, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi showed that knowledge of the pure nature of the jiva is the first step in the science of God- realization. Here in Anuccheda 63, he substantiates this statement with two verses by Śri Sūta Gosvāmi (quoted in Anuccheda 63.4). In SB 11.22.46, Śrī Kṛṣṇa mentions the nine states of bodily exis- tence experienced by the jiva: conception, gestation, birth, infancy, childhood, youth, maturity, old age, and death. Although in the con- ditioned state, the jiva seems to be implicated in these nine states, “maya tatam idam sarvam jagad avyakta-murtină mat-sthäni sarva-bhutani na caham teşv avasthitaḥ 438 63 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Asraya - Part 2 he never actually is. The jiva animates the body, yet still exists independent of the body and its nine states. When a person comes to know that he remains ever distinct from the body’s nine states - whether in the condition of wakeful- ness, dreaming, or merged in deep sleep - he becomes qualified to walk on the path of God-realization. That is the stage of athato brahma-jijñāsā - one who knows that he is distinct from the body is eligible to inquire into the Absolute Truth (vs 1.1.1). This anuccheda offers two processes for self-realization. The word svayam (by one- self, or in other words, by self-study) implies the path of jñāna, in which one meditates on the self as distinct from everything else in the realm of māyā. The Bṛhad-aranyaka Upanisad relates the his- tory of a sage named Vamadeva who followed this path (BAU 1.4.10), and the Eleventh Canto (Chapters 7-9) of Srimad Bhagavatam tells of another practitioner, a brahmana identified as Dattatreya. The second process is indicated by the word yogena, which points to the path of bhakti. On this path, one considers the self as distinct from the three states of existence - the waking state, the dreaming state, and the state of deep sleep- and meditates on the Supreme Self, Paramātmā. This path is exemplified by Lord Kapiladeva’s mother, Śrīmati Devahuti, whose story is narrated in the Third Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmi con- cludes that the aśraya of everything is Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Per- sonal Absolute Truth. He alone is the subject (sambandhi-tattva) of Śrimad Bhagavatam. Summary of Śri Tattva Sandarbha The first eight anucchedas, which are in verse form, make up the invocation (mangalacarana). In these verses, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi offers homage to his teachers and to his worshipful Deity. In addi- tion, he explains why he is writing the book and defines its subject as well as the criteria of eligibility for its readers. In Anucchedas 9 through 18, Jīva Gosvāmi discusses Vedic epis- temology. This he does in order to determine a means of valid 439 III Prameya knowing by which the core truths of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana can be definitely determined. He first points out that all human beings are subject to four defects that prevent them from acquiring valid knowledge independently. Of the ten means of valid knowing, Śrīla Jiva accepts śabda (sacred sound revelation) as supreme, for, being identical with the Absolute Reality that it signifies, it alone can bestow perfect knowledge of that Reality. He also accepts perception and inference as valid means of knowledge when they are in accord with śabda-pramāņa. Since the Vedas are sabda-brahma (knowledge revealed by Bha- gavan), they are the highest authority. But because they are now unavailable in their complete form, because they are cryptic, and because they can no longer be learned from representatives of an authorized disciplic succession of teachers, Śrila Jiva Gosvāmi recommends the Purāņas, which, along with the Rāmāyaṇa and Mahabharata, are the fifth Veda. Next, Śrīla Jiva shows that the Puranas have the same source, authority, and nature as the Vedas, and that, for people in this age, their simple language and universal accessibility render them an even better source of knowledge than the four Vedas. But the Purāņas seem to contradict one another in various ways - for example, by glorifying different deities as most worshipable - and most of them lack a proper disciplic succession. By the process of elimination, therefore, in Anuccheda 18, Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi proposes Srimad Bhagavatam as the most suitable Purana for investigation. From Anucchedas 19 to 26, Śrīla Jiva reveals the supreme quali- ties of Srimad Bhagavatam that establish its epistemological validity. He argues that it is the most authoritative Vedic scripture, being the ripened fruit of the desire tree of Vedic knowledge. Addition- ally, the Bhāgavatam is based on Gayatri, which is the essence of the Vedas, and it is the natural commentary on Vedanta-sutra. Then in Anucchedas 27 and 28, Śrīla Jīva describes the basic scheme of the Sandarbhas, what sources he plans to refer to, and his method of analysis. Having established Srimad Bhagavatam as the most authorita- tive pramāņa in the matter of the direct knowing of Ultimate Reality, 440 63 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Asraya - Part 2 Jiva Gosvāmi proceeds with the determination of sambandha, abhi- dheya, and prayojana in two parallel sections. The first concerns the self-disclosure of these truths from the transcendental experience of Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmi, the original speaker of Srimad Bhagava- tam. Although this analysis is covered in just one anuccheda (29), it is highly significant, because it clearly demonstrates that realiza- tion of Bhagavan supersedes that of Brahman. The second section concerns the self-disclosure of the same truths from the supracog- nitive samadhi of Śrīla Vyasadeva, the author of Srimad Bhagavatam. This is dealt with in Anucchedas 30-49. The main principles derived from these two sections are as follows:

1. The subject to be realized (sambandhi-tattva) in Srimad Bhagava- tam is Śrī Kṛṣṇa.
2. The subjective Reality, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, is the original Supreme Person, Svayam Bhagavan.
3. He is inherently self-endowed with variegated potencies, which are divided into three main categories - intrinsic, extrinsic, and intermediary.
4. Maya, His extrinsic potency, functions under His direction, but cannot control Him.
5. The jivas, although integrated conscious parts of Paramātmā, are causelessly and beginninglessly bound by māyā.
6. The jivas cannot transcend maya by their own initiative.
7. Unconditional turning of awareness in devotional surrender to Bhagavan is the jiva’s only means (abhidheya) of ultimate attainment.
8. The ultimate completion (prayojana) of such devotional turning culminates in the pervasion of prema, divine love of Kṛṣṇa. The first six of these eight principles are elaborations on the nature of the sambandhi-tattva, whereas principles seven and eight concern abhidheya and prayojana, respectively. While describ- ing Vyasa’s samadhi, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī uses logic and scriptural reference in Anucchedas 34 to 43 to decisively refute the two pri- mary doctrines (of the reflection and delimitation of Brahman) of the Advaitavadis. He also explains the real meaning and pur- pose behind the statements in scriptures describing the oneness 441 III Prameya between the jiva and Brahman. This distinction was necessary in order to self-evidently disclose the true nature of abhidheya and prayojana. After ascertaining in general terms the core truths of samba- ndha, abhidheya, and prayojana from the transempirical experi- ences of both Śrī Suka and Śrīla Vyasa, Jiva Gosvāmī begins the elaboration of sambandha from Anuccheda 50 right through to the end of Tattva Sandarbha. The description of the subjective Reality is divided into two primary sections. In the first (Anucchedas 50- 55), Jiva Gosvāmi demonstrates how that Supreme Reality can be intuited in relation to the microcosm of the individual conscious being. In Anucchedas 50 to 52, he first shows that the subject of Srimad Bhagavatam is the nondual Supreme Reality by analyzing a line from the second verse of its first chapter. In Anucchedas 53 to 55, he explains the nature of the jiva - namely, that the jiva, being an integrated part of Brahman, is conscious like Brahman but can never be equal to Brahman. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmi explains that under- standing this conscious identity between the jiva and Brahman is the initial step toward realizing the Absolute Truth. From Anuccheda 56 on, he examines the nature of the subjective Reality in relation to the macrocosmic or universal order. To do so, he analyzes the ten topics of the Bhagavatam, citing Sukadeva Gosvāmi’s list in the Second Canto and Sūta Gosvāmi’s list in the Twelfth Canto. He shows that there is no clash of either spirit or content between these two great Bhāgavatam authorities. In their descriptions of the first nine topics, both Sukadeva and Suta convey an understanding of the multifarious potencies and activities of the tenth item, the shelter of all, Bhagavan Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Thus, from various angles, Jiva Gosvāmī has established that Śrimad Bhagavatam is the ultimate scriptural authority and that it teaches the following: Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personal Absolute Truth, unconditional devotion is the means of ultimate attainment, and the ultimate attainment is pure unalloyed love of the Supreme Personal Absolute Truth. 442 63 Descriptions of the First Nine Topics Intuitively Signify the Tenth, the Aśraya - Part 2 In the next three Sandarbhas, Śrila Jīva Gosvāmi will further elaborate on sambandhi-tattva. HARI OM TAT SAT aṣāḍhasya site pakşe dvitiyayam rathotsave grahe vede randhre netre tikeyam pūrṇatām gata mukhabjäc chri-guror chrutvä śri-haridasa-chästrinaḥ yatha-matiḥ kṛtā tika satām eṣā prasidatām THUS ENDS THE ŚRI JIVA TOŞANI COMMENTARY ON ŚRI TATTVA SANDARBHA, THE FIRST BOOK OF ŚRI SAT SANDARBHA, BY ŚRILA JIVA GOSVĀMI PRABHUPADA. 443 ReferencesEditors’ Notes EACH ANUCCHEDA OF TATTVA SANDARBHA with commentary is presented as a chapter. If an anuccheda has more than one main verse, each verse has usually been placed in a separate section within the chapter. Normally, the Sandarbhas have been composed according to a formula where ideas are coalesced around principal verses of the Bhagavatam, each one illustrating a particular theological point. Each anuccheda is defined and numbered by the Bhagavata verse itself. The numbering system being used for the Tattva Sandarbha, however, follows a different pattern, primarily because of the com- mentary of Baladeva, which cuts the long passage into smaller, more manageable portions. The pramana section, in fact, constitutes an introduction since its purpose is to set the stage for this method of organizing the Sandarbhas. This is stated clearly in Anuccheda 28, and the Sanda- rbha proper really only begins with Anuccheda 29, with SB 12.12.68 forming the principal verse. The much longer section, Anucchedas 30-49, contains as its core the eight verses surrounding Śrila Vedavyasa’s vision. It is indeed an appropriate beginning to the entire Six Sandarbha series. In Puri Dasa’s critical edition, therefore, these are numbered as Anucche- das 1 and 2. This edition follows the tradition that accords with Baladeva. 447 448 References The numbering of anucchedas follows the edition of Śrī Haridāsa Śāstrī. The numbering of verses from Srimad Bhagavatam and Bhagavad Gita follows the edition of Gita Press. The numbering of verses from Mahabharata and Padma Purana follows the edition of Nag Publishers. There are numerous verses cited by Jiva Gosvāmi throughout the Sandarbhas that are not to be found in the printed versions of the particular books referenced by him. In all such cases, no number is provided after the verse cited. Within the Sanskrit text, sandhi is sometimes broken into compound words, e.g., sat-cit-ananda instead of saccidānanda, or acintya-bheda-abheda instead of acintya-bhedabheda. The Language of Transcendence - Key Terms and Concepts by Navadvip Das (Bruce Martin) IN THE WORK OF TRANSLATING THE SANDARBHAS, careful atten- tion has been given to the language used to convey specific terms and concepts. The emphasis has been on maintaining consistency with the overall theme of the work and, in particular, with the spe- cific vision developed by Śrī Jiva Gosvāmi. The Sat Sandarbha, also known as Bhāgavata Sandarbha, is no ordinary exposition of theism, for it defines Bhagavan in terms of nondual consciousness (advaya- jñāna). By so doing, it opens the field of investigation of nondual reality to new insights, and so creates a basis for interface with other wisdom schools, as well as with the fields of transpersonal psychology, transcendental phenomenology, and the leading edge of quantum physics, cosmology, and consciousness studies. Jīva Gosvāmi’s treatise certainly took into account the most important philosophical views of his day, and there is much in his writing that can be of great value to modern fields of knowledge as well. So the language used in translating his work has been chosen to facilitate such correspondence. To assist the reader we have supplied below an explanation of key terms that appear throughout the text so that the underlying meaning that has informed them can be clearly understood. In this regard, three terms in particular require special attention so that their sense may be correctly understood by the reader: “nondual devotion” as a translation (in select passages) for uttama- bhakti, the “Nondual Personal Absolute” and the “Complete Whole” 449 References as translations for Bhagavan, and “Radical Nondualism” for the Absolute Idealism of Sankara’s Advaita Vedanta. In going through this vital introduction to the language of the Sandarbhas, we hope you will discover that this is not merely a glos- sary of terms, but an interconnected framework of revelatory con- cepts. With this in mind, the selection begins with acintya, the transrational, because it contains a discussion of sabdyate, how the Absolute is describable in words. ACINTYA (TRANSRATIONAL) This term refers to that which is beyond conventional logic or reason, yet not altogether inexpress- ible through language and thought. The Nondual Absolute is not altogether inconceivable because it can be conceived, but only through transrational logic. Śrīdhara Svami as well as Jiva Gosvāmi define it is tarka-asaham - beyond the range of conventional or linear logic. Just as there exist higher order laws operating within the quantum domain that don’t conform to mechanistic science, so also there are higher order dynamics existing within the transper- sonal domain that surpass conventional logic. It is these tran- srational dynamics that make possible transcendent variety and distinction within the nondual whole while still preserving per- fectly intact its nondual nature. So although acintya literally means “beyond thought,” or “inconceivable,” it actually points to the realm of transconventional being, which is nonetheless describable in words. The transpersonal reality is, of course, beyond mind and thought and is incapable of being grasped merely by mental striving; yet being of the nature of self-luminosity, or self-revelation, it can nonetheless disclose itself even through thought and language. So acintya, rendered as inconceivable, does not imply incapability of being expressed in words. Bearing this in mind, acintya should not be equated with Sankara’s notion of anirvacaniya, or inexpress- ibility through words. If Brahman is no more than unqualified being, devoid of characteristics or potencies, then nothing more can be said about It, because any description would ultimately be an imposition of a thought construct upon inscrutable reality. If, however, as the Bhāgavata maintains, the Absolute is replete 450 The Language of Transcendence - Key Terms and Concepts with unlimited potency, then unlimited words, which are them- selves potencies emanating from that source, can appropriately describe that Reality. This is exactly the point that Jiva Gosvāmī makes in Bhagavat Sandarbha (Anuccheda 98). The Vedas are trans- human words emanating from the divine source that accurately depict its true inherent nature, because the Vedas are infused with the self-revelatory power of the intrinsic potency. Jīva goes a step further by saying that even human speech that is similarly infused with the intrinsic potency and thus in correspondence with the divine source can also describe the Absolute. This is the final pur- pose for which the intellect, mind, and senses were created in the first place. In the words of the Bhāgavata (10.87.2), these material instruments were created “ultimately to transcend the act of filter- ing experience through the screen of prior assumptions (akalpa- naya), or in other words, for liberation.” So in answer to the ques- tion, “how can thought and language describe the Absolute?” it can simply be said, “because they were created specifically to do so.” Hence, the word sabdyate, “describable in words,” is used in reference to the Nondual Absolute, mentioned in the Bhagavata’s seminal verse (1.2.11). It is for this reason that the knowers of truth (tattva-vit) refer to it as Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavan. It is in this light too that Śrī Jiva defines acintya as śästraika-gamya- tvam - that which is knowable only through the revealed word of God or of realized devotees. He did not conclude it to be ineffable. BRAHMAN (THE UNQUALIFIED ABSOLUTE) This refers to the Nondual Absolute (advaya-jñāna), devoid of all distinctions, such as names, forms, qualities, and action, and hence devoid of inher- ent potency (svarupa-śakti). Such distinctions (bheda) are perceived through conventional logic to be limiting adjuncts (upadhis) that would confine the Absolute, leading to the inevitable dualism of subject and object (i.e., the name is different from the named and potency different from “the potent”). Thus Brahman is sometimes conceived as that which remains upon negation of the sum total of the phenomenal. Such conventional logic, of course, presupposes all distinction as “phenomenal distinction.” It cannot at all account even for the 451 References possibility of transphenomenal distinction (acintya bheda) because that is necessarily beyond the predetermined range of its own inves- tigative validity. It cannot make any claims whatsoever in regard to possibilities lying beyond this limit. So, in effect, all that can be def- initely concluded by this method is that for the Absolute to be non- dual, it cannot have material names, material forms, and so on. If there are such things as transphenomenal names, forms, qualities, action, and personhood that are inherently nondual, or that exist as inherent potencies of the Nondual Absolute, an altogether different method and logic, transrational in nature, is required to apprehend them. Hence, to be precise, Brahman is not so much the Absolute devoid of all distinction as the indistinct vision of the Absolute. In other words, it is the indistinct view of Reality as disclosed by the path of jñana. It is not the distinct view of Reality inclusive of a transphenomenal interiority, as disclosed by the path of nondual devotion (see uttama bhakti and svarupa-sakti below). PARAMĀTMĀ (THE SUPREME INDWELLING SELF OR, SIMPLY, THE SUPREME SELF) This refers to the immanent feature of the Absolute, pervading the cosmos and the individual living beings as the Supreme witness, internal guide, and regulator. Paramātmā is the Supreme Self of all individual selves (ātmā), and so He may also be referred to as the Supreme Immanent or the Supreme Immanent Self. Though Paramātmā remains uninvolved with prakṛti and the living beings as impartial witness, He is, nonetheless, their origina- tor and the facilitator of their operations. As such He is Iśvara, the Supreme Controller, Master, Source, and Foundation. Yet, Param- ātmā should not be equated with “the Creator God” because primor- dial nature and the living beings are His eternal potencies. Hence, Paramātmā is the Nondual Absolute in His feature of immanence. In contrast with Brahman, Paramätma is replete with transphe- nomenal distinction, including name, form, qualities, action, and personhood, all of which are inherent in Him. While yet nondif- ferent from Bhagavan, He is but a portion of a portion of the orig- inal Complete Person (Svayam Bhagavan). So while He Himself in His own self-effulgent nature is fully transcendent, His sphere of influence is tied to the perpetual play of creation, known as sṛṣṭi- 452 The Language of Transcendence - Key Terms and Concepts lilă. Thus, He does not manifest the full extension of transcendental variegatedness as in the case of Bhagavan. So Paramātmā is Bhaga- van with the limited role of sheltering the modifications of prakṛti and the jivas who are involved with her. BHAGAVAN (THE NONDUAL PERSONAL ABSOLUTE) Etymo- logically, the word bhagavan is composed of bhaga + vat, endowed with or encompassing all opulence (bhaga). That which encom- passes everything is the Complete Whole, implying that it includes and yet transcends everything. Bhagavan may also be rendered as the Complete Person (Purna Purusa) when emphasizing that the Complete Whole is inherently personal in nature. The former term may be more appropriate, or universally applicable, when stress- ing simply Bhagavan’s general characteristic of all-inclusivity. In the most generic sense Bhagavan may be referred to simply as the Supreme Person or the Supreme Being. When speaking of the Absolute as nondual awareness (advaya- jñāna) and Bhagavan as the complete distinct vision of nondual awareness, it may be appropriate to refer to Bhagavan as the Non- dual Personal Absolute in keeping with the context. In contrast with Brahman, Bhagavan is the distinct vision of the Nondual Absolute, inherently self-endowed with intrinsic potency (svarupa- śakti), and hence eternally replete with transcendental name, form, qualities, action, and personhood. As discussed above, though all of these distinct characteristics inhere in Him, He is yet one and non- dual in nature, which is made possible through His unprecedented transrational power (acintya-sakti). So the metaphysical system that depicts this state of being is known as acintya-bheda-abheda. In contrast with Paramātmā, who is but a portion of the Complete Whole, Bhagavan’s variegatedness is entirely beyond the realm of creation, being exclusively the play of divinity, known as divya-līlā. Hence, Bhagavan may be understood as the Nondual Absolute in His feature of supreme transcendence. The Nondual Personal Absolute, Bhagavan, is not just the Com- plete Whole, but an integrated whole. He is not whole because of being devoid of distinct parts that might otherwise contradict His undifferentiated unity. Rather, He is inherently inclusive of 453 References varieties of distinct energies as their supreme source and refuge. These energies have no existence apart from Bhagavan and thus in this sense are nondifferent from Him. Yet, while these energies exist as distinct aspects of His inherent nature, He is more than the sum total of them. He thus includes and yet transcends them. He is therefore an integrated whole having individual parts that are dis- tinct from, and yet one with, Him. There is nothing which exists independent of Bhagavan. THE JIVA (THE INDIVIDUAL LIVING BEING) This refers to the conscious self (atma) as qualified by the intellect (buddhi), ego (ahankära), the mind (manas), the senses, and the physical body. In this sense, the jiva is known as the embodied self or the empiri- cal self. Yet, the jiva’s individual selfhood (i.e., its supra-empirical selfhood rooted in the very identity of the atma) is not a product of mere illusion that vanishes on the awakening of its identity with Brahman. Though the jiva is one in identity with Brahman, this does not signify absolute non-distinction as advocated by Sankara. The jiva is in fact a conscious part of Paramātmā. By this it is not meant that the jiva is a broken-off part but an integrated part of the Complete Whole. The jiva eternally partakes of identity with Paramatma and can never be ontologically separated from Paramātmā, even in the so- called state of bondage. The jiva, as conscious or integrated part (cid-amsa), is never truly bound. The jiva, however, is sometimes referred to as vibhinnāmsa, a separated part. This separation is purely psychological, owing to beginningless ignorance. Even in this state of psychological or self-imposed bondage, the jiva is no other than an integrated part of the integrated whole. This is due to the fact that the jiva is an eternal distinct potency of Param- ātmā known as taṭastha-sakti, the intermediary potency. It is so- called because it belongs neither to the intrinsic spiritual potency (svarupa-sakti) nor to the extrinsic material potency (māyā-śakti), but can be influenced by both. So the jiva is eternally distinct from and yet one with Paramātmā, by virtue of the transrational potency (acintya-sakti) of the one Nondual Absolute. 454 The Language of Transcendence - Key Terms and Concepts UTTAMA BHAKTI (PURE OR UNALLOYED DEVOTION) First of all, because the entire discussion of Bhagavata Sandarbha proceeds on the basis of the definition of Ultimate Reality as nondual consciousness (advaya-jñāna), and because Bhagavan is shown to be nondual consciousness in its highest completion, it seems only appropriate to consider bhakti, which is the means of realizing the Nondual Personal Whole, Bhagavan, as being of the nature of nonduality. In light of this consideration, nondual devotion does not refer to devotion merely as a means of realizing the unqual- ified Nondual Absolute (i.e., Brahman). Such a notion would be more appropriately rendered as devotional nonduality, wherein nonduality is the subject and devotion merely a qualifier. Rather, nondual devotion is meant in the sense of the inherent potency of the complete Nondual Absolute, Bhagavan, which reveals Him as the unity that upholds all distinction. It is the devotion opened to when all separative and dualistic self-concepts operating under the influence of the gunas have been transcended. The purity of uttama bhakti signifies that it is altogether beyond the influence of the gunas of primordial nature, and thus it is also known as nirguna bhakti (see the discussion that follows below). DEVOTION MIXED WITH THE GUNAS (DUALISTIC DEVOTION) Correspondingly, if nondual devotion is the means that discloses the Nondual Absolute as Bhagavan, then devotion mixed with the gunas must necessarily be dualistic in nature. This is exactly what Kapiladeva states in the Bhagavata (3.29.8-10). He uses the terms bhinna-drg-bhava (of separatist vision) and pṛthak-bhava (a sepa- ratist) to describe the performers of devotion mixed with any one of the three gunas. In Bhakti Sandarbha, after the description of äropa-siddha bhakti (attributive devotion) and sanga-siddha bhakti (associative devotion), there follows the explanation of uttama bhakti (i.e., svarupa-siddha bhakti). But the delineation of uttama bhakti proper is preceded by a discussion of bhakti in the gunas, which is marked by these three types of separatist or dualistic visions. The key point is that the performer is still rooted in dual- ism, considering him or herself separate from Bhagavan. Sadhana is thus performed with this dualistic mentality, as a means only to 455 References an end and therefore causal in nature, rather than as an end unto itself, acausal in nature, as immediate and present connection with Bhagavan, here and now. NIRGUNA BHAKTI (DEVOTION FREE FROM THE GUNAS) BY contrast with mixed devotion, devotion free from the gunas is com- pared (SB 3.29.11) to the natural, continuous, unobstructed flow of the Ganga to the sea, because the Ganga, while distinct from the ocean, is nonetheless in no way disconnected from the ocean, which is its final refuge. Jīva Gosvāmī states in Tattva Sandarbha that the oneness of the jiva and Brahman is in terms of identity of being, yet he clarifies that this oneness in no way implies absolute non- distinction. It could also be stated the other way, that the distinc- tion between the jiva and Paramätma in no way implies absolute or categorical separation. In fact, as an integrated part of the Com- plete Whole, the jiva can never be separated from Paramātmā, even in the state of bondage. The sense of separation is merely psycholog- ical, having no ontological reality whatsoever. Hence, devotion in which the performer holds to the egoistic position of being a doer or subject separate from the ultimate “object” (Bhagavan) is most appropriately referred to as dualistic devotion. By placing this discussion as a preface to uttama bhakti, Jiva Gosvāmi clearly recognizes this mentality as a significant and prominent pitfall among those who presume themselves to be on the path of pure devotion. So the terms nondual devotion and dual- istic devotion are helpful in clarifying this most important distinc- tion. And what does this distinction imply in practical terms for the practitioner? It is not we who perform devotion, rather it is devotion that performs us. That is to say that devotion enacts itself through its own power of self-revelation, and in so doing it reveals the living being in its true identity, lending its inherent nature of awareness and bliss to the instrument of its manifestation. Beginning from the sense organs, the tongue, ears, eyes, hands, and so on, it works its ways inward, pervading the internal organs, the vital system, the emotions and the mental quantum of mind, ego, and intellect, till it reaches at last to the ātmā, making the ātmā one with its essential nature. In what sense then can the practitioner 456The Language of Transcendence - Key Terms and Concepts truly be said to be a practitioner or a performer of devotion? One who holds to the egoistic and separatist conception of being a per- former of devotion, a chanter of the name, a doer of acts of good to others and God, and so on, is caught in dualistic devotion, impeding this transcendental flow. When we abandon this separatist identity, we become but instruments through which devotion itself flows unimpeded, the interactive screen upon which the divine name arises, the playground in which the drama of worship unfolds. KARMA (DUALISTIC ACTION) In the same light, karma, even in its niskāma form in which the desire for the fruit of action is relin- quished, is necessarily dualistic because the performer holds to the notion of being separate from the object and the result of action. It is for this reason that Jiva Gosvāmī as well as Sanatana Gosvāmī dis- agree with Śrīdhara Svami in not accepting karma offered to Bhaga- vän as bhakti. Even when the desire for fruit is given up, the sense of doership remains. So, when the discussion again carries refer- ence to the Absolute as nondual awareness, karma is appropriately referred to as dualistic action. In a more general context, it may be rendered as goal-oriented or result-oriented action. This is just another way of saying the same thing because all dualistic action is carried out by a performer seeking some particular result that is separated both from the performer and the act itself in time and place and is therefore causal in nature. SANKARA’S ADVAITA VEDANTA (RADICAL NONDUALISM) This is but one school of Vedanta and hence but one school of nondual- ism. From the Bhāgavata (1.2.11) and from Jiva Gosvāmī’s analysis throughout the Sat Sandarbha, it is clear that there is also theistic or devotional nondualism. In fact, Jiva Gosvāmi’s entire vision devel- ops from his understanding of the Absolute as nondual awareness, and from his recognition of nonduality as the common ground and the lowest common denominator from which a discussion of the Absolute can proceed. Thus, the Bhagavata’s vision of nonduality, which Jiva seeks to bring forth, is a unique one, far exceeding the generic oneness of Sankara. So it is essential to speak of different schools of nonduality with different emphasis. It is in this light that we refer to Sankara’s view 457 References as Radical Nondualism, from the Latin radix, or “connected to the root,” implying that his view denies all distinction to the very core. It is absolute in its denial of distinction. Sankara’s doctrine claims to represent the quintessence of the Upanisads. Yet, in the Upanisads we find two types of statements, i.e., those that accommodate transphenomenal variety within unity and those that emphasize oneness and nondistinction. Examples of the first type are svābhāvikī jñāna bala kriya ca, “The Supreme Person has multifarious potencies that are intrinsic to His being, includ- ing knowledge, will power, and action” (Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.8), and, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām eko, “There is one supreme eternal amongst all the eternal living beings and one supreme con- scious source amongst the multitude of conscious entities” (Katha Upanisad 2.2.13). Examples of the second type are sarvam khalv idam brahma, “All this is indeed Brahman” (Chandogya Upanisad 3.14.1), and, neha nänä ‘sti kiñcana, “There is no diversity here whatsoever” (Katha Upanisad 2.1.11). Sankara has given importance only to those statements that emphasize oneness alone and treated the state- ments advocating unity in variety as secondary, denying primary meaning to them without giving any satisfactory explanation or reason. The question may be asked, how can nondualism be put forth as the most valid description of reality when it is practically observed that there is a distinction between subject and object, between Spirit (Brahman) and the world (jagat or prakṛti), between con- scious beings (jivas) and insentient matter? Sankara’s solution. is to advocate nondualism (lit. “not two”) by denial of the object: brahma satyam jagan mithya (the world is unreal, only Brahman is real), so that in effect there is only Brahman, there is only the subject and no object, there is only one. So, because Śankara’s nondualism denies the object to the very root (radix), it may be referred to as Radical Nondualism. That is to say that it can account for oneness only (abheda) and not for distinction. Distinction is admitted only in an empirical sense (as mithya) but without fun- damental ontological existence. He can in no way accommodate transphenomenal distinction (acintya-bheda), because he cannot 458 The Language of Transcendence - Key Terms and Concepts accommodate inherent potency (svarupa-śakti) within the Nondual Whole. An alternate meaning of radical is “that which is a departure from tradition.” Sankara’s Vedanta or Nondualism is radical in this sense too because it is a departure from the traditional or mainstream Vedantic view that acknowledges the ontological real- ity of prakṛti, Isvara, and the living being. Śankara may have thought it necessary to reinterpret this view in order to legitimize and stress the nondual nature of the Absolute, but in doing so, he introduced a strategic error that ultimately undermined his own system, that of Brahman’s becoming overwhelmed by mayā. It is for this reason that his doctrine is sometimes rightly referred to as Māyāvāda, because māyā, which is said by him to be devoid of onto- logical reality, is yet able to overcome Brahman, the one and only real. Because of this mutation of mainstream Vedantic thought, his system may appropriately be referred to as “Radical Nondualism.” Again, Sankara’s attempt to establish nonduality by denial of the object proves to be inadequate and unsatisfactory. His contri- bution is significant in what it attempts to accomplish, but it begs a more comprehensive and far-reaching understanding of nondu- ality. In a way, Sankara’s view can be seen as a reaction to, and the counterpart of, the Buddhist doctrine of anatta (or anätma), which by contrast establishes nonduality by denial of the subject. Both of these views, though establishing nondualism from opposite starting points, stop short of a truly authentic transrational meta- physics, resorting to conventional logic to establish a limited and hence morphed nonduality. Still, both are useful in urging conven- tional devotion out of its tendency to get stuck in dualism. It is finally the acintya-bheda-abheda metaphysics of the Bhagavata and Jiva Gosvāmi that completes and surpasses the limited nondualistic views of Sankara and the Buddha. NONDUALITY OF THE BHAGAVATA (THEISTIC NONDUALISM) By comparison, the nonduality of the Bhagavata may be referred to as theistic nondualism, which finds its most complete expression in the visionary view known as acintya-bheda-abheda, the transra- tional inherence of distinction within the integral Nondual Whole. 459 References In this view, like that of Sankara, there is only one vastava vastu, or ontological existent that is nondual in nature, yet unlike Sankara, it is admitted that unlimited potency of different categories inheres in this one existent. Though the inherence of distinction appar- ently contradicts its nonduality from the point of view of conven- tional reason or logic, from the transrational perspective (acintya), it is perfectly in keeping with the higher internal laws (or consti- tuting nature) that govern the transphenomenal reality. To take it a step further, nondualism that can accommodate oneness only and not distinction remains impoverished and hence can hardly be admitted as the Complete Whole. Therefore, theistic nondualism extends far beyond Sankara’s view. Yet, if Bhagavan is wrongly interpreted merely as the creator or regulator God, then this would seem to advocate dualism. This is a gross error that has allowed nondual devotion to be reduced to dualistic worship. Theism in general is almost automatically equated with dualism and is thus conceived to be inferior by the schools of nondualism that advocate either Brahman or nirvana as ultimate. The highest state of the transpersonal is concluded through conventional logic to be non-personal. But this is exactly the point at which conventional logic breaks down. The logic that exhausts itself at the doorway of Brahman or nirvana becomes the barrier to the hidden interior of nondual awareness, an expanded nonduality that accommodates distinction in oneness. This is why it is imperative to begin the discussion of reality at the point of advaya-jñāna and to correspondingly understand Bha- gavan as the Nondual Personal Absolute. In this way, we eliminate the possibility of the misplaced reduction and force the investiga- tion of reality to proceed beyond its general limit, that of unqual- ified, indistinct, monolithic Brahman. That is the real purpose of the Bhāgavata and Jiva Gosvāmi’s presentation of the Bhagavata Sandarbha - to lead the discussion into the interiority of nondual awareness. SVARUPA-SAKTI (THE INTERIORITY OF NONDUAL AWARE- NESS) This refers to the inherent potency with which the Nondual Absolute is eternally self-endowed. When the Nondual Absolute is 460 The Language of Transcendence - Key Terms and Concepts conceived as unqualified and devoid of potency, It is known as Brahman. When the same Nondual Absolute is conceived as inher- ently self-endowed with all potency, It is known as Bhagavan. The ontological entity is one and the same, yet, a higher order, or, in other words, transrational, logic is required to understand how dis- tinction (bheda) can be possible without violating the basic nature of nonduality (abheda). This is worked out in detail in the Bhāgavata and the Sat Sandarbha. In short, the inherent nature of the Nondual Absolute cannot be other than nondual. And it is the inherent nature or intrinsic potency of the Nondual Absolute that discloses its interiority, that discloses its variegated display of transcendent being, awareness, and bliss. So it is the intrinsic potency (svarupa- śakti), particularly in the form of nondual devotion (uttama bhakti), that discloses the interiority of nondual awareness. EKAPĀDA & TRIPADA VIBHŪTI (ONEFOLD AND THREEFOLD DIMENSIONALITY OF BEING) These terms are commonly ren- dered as “the one-quarter manifestation of Reality” (i.e., the mate- rial realm) and “the three-quarter manifestation of Reality” (i.e., the spiritual realm). Strictly speaking, however, this has nothing to do with any sort of mathematical ratio between the material and spiritual domains. If the spiritual realm is infinite, should it not be infinitely more vast than the material world? (In fact, even the material realm is infinite, and conventional mathematics fails at the level of infinity, infinity being transrational.) Moreover, if the 3:1 ratio is merely symbolic to indicate the magnitude of Spirit in relation to matter, why then express it by such a paltry ratio as 3:1 instead of, say, a million to one? After all, we are speaking about infinity and 3:1 just doesn’t seem to cut it. As Jīva Gosvāmi demonstrates in Bhagavat Sandarbha (Anu- ccheda 67), 3:1 refers to something quite specific. Tripäd vibhūti, which is another name for the spiritual realm, refers to three qualities or dimensions of transcendental being, namely immortal- ity (amṛtatva), fearlessness (abhaya), and auspiciousness (kṣema). These are three qualities woven into the fabric of transcendence. Ekapada vibhuti, on the other hand, which is a name for the material world, refers to mortality alone. Thus, in the material 461 References world, “being” culminates moment to moment in death alone. Fear and inauspiciousness, which are the material counterparts of the other two spiritual characteristics, are subsumed within the simple inescapable fact of mortality. So it is clear from this analysis that we are speaking about dimensions or aspects of being and not about mathematical ratios. Further, a parallel can be drawn between the three qualitative dimensions of transcendental being and the well-known descrip- tion of Spirit as sat-cit-ananda. Immortality can be equated with sat, because it signifies eternal existence. Fearlessness can be equated with cit, because it is a state of awareness, and auspiciousness can be equated with ananda, because it is a state of beatitude and, hence, bliss. Jiva Gosvāmi goes on to explain that kṣema, or auspiciousness, specifically refers to all-auspicious devotion, which culminates in prema (i.e., änanda). 462 Tattva Sandarbha at a Glance I Mangalacarana Invocations (Anucchedas 1-7) The Seed-Conception of the Sat Sandarbhas (Anuccheda 8) II Pramāņa Epistemological Validity of the Vedas, Itihasas, and Purāņas Culminating in Śrimad Bhagavatam (Anucchedas 9-18) The Characteristics of Śrīmad Bhagavatam That Establish Its Epistemological Validity (Anucchedas 19-26) Methodology of the Sat Sandarbhas (Anucchedas 27-28) III Prameya Determination of Sambandha, Abhidheya, and Prayojana The Transformation of Consciousness of Sri Sukadeva (Anuccheda 29) The Supracognitive Samadhi of Vyasa (Anucchedas 30-49) Elaboration of Sambandha Intuition of the Subject through Reference to the Individual (Anucchedas 50-55) Intuition of the Subject through Reference to the Universal - The Ten Topics of Srimad Bhagavatam (Anucchedas 56-63) The Ten Topics as per the Second Canto (Anucchedas 56-60) The Ten Topics as per the Twelfth Canto (Anucchedas 61-63) 463 Glossary In this glossary, word meanings are separated by commas when the words in a series are nearly synonymous or when they serve to amplify the meaning of the other words with which they are correlated. They are separated by semicolons when they represent a sufficiently distinct variation in meaning from the previous word or group of words. Periods are used to mark off definitions that are expressed as complete sentences. ABHIDHEYA The means by which the ultimate goal is actualized; a method that enables the radical shift in awareness from absorption in mat- ter to immersion in the one Absolute Reality. According to Śrī Jiva Gosvāmi, bhakti is the means prescribed in Srimad Bhagavatam. ACARYA A spiritual preceptor also called a guru; one who teaches scrip- tural conclusions, embodies them in life, and also guides his students to follow by his example. ADHIKĀRĪ A person who has the requisite eligibility for studying a book or undertaking a particular spiritual practice. ADHYAROPA Another word for adhyāsa. ADHYASA Superimposing one object or its qualities onto another. This implies wrong knowledge, such as mistaking a rope for a snake in semi-darkness. ADVAITA Nonduality; the metaphysical view based on the Upanisads that Absolute Reality is nondual in nature. ADVAYA-JÑANA Nondual consciousness; the supreme nondual conscious source as defined in the Bhagavata (1.2.11). AGAMA Tantra-sastra. According to the Varahi Tantra, the Agamas deal primarily with seven topics: creation, dissolution, worship of deva- tās, sadhană practices, preparatory rites (puraścarana), six practices 465 References for subduing adversaries, and four divisions of meditation (dhyana- yoga). The Agamas may be divided into two: Vedic and non-Vedic. The Vedic Agamas are further divided into three: Śaiva, Śākta, and Vaiṣṇava. The Vaisnava Agamas deal primarily with the rules and procedures for worship of deities and uttering of mantras. The Bṛhad- gautamiya, Krama-dipika, and Narada Pañcaratra are among the chief Vaiṣṇava Agamas. ANADI Beginningless; that which is without beginning but which can come to an end, such as the bondage and ignorance of the living beings. ANANDA Spiritual bliss or ecstasy; the potency of Bhagavan that relates to His aspect of bliss. This corresponds to the hladini potency. ANIRVACANIYA Lit., “ineffable.” This is a term used specifically in Advaita- vada in reference to Brahman, the Absolute Reality, when perceived as devoid of qualities, form, or actions. According to them, language, being a thought construct, cannot touch that Reality, and hence It is ineffable. This term is also used in reference to māyā, which is con- ceived by them to be indefinable either in terms of being existent (sat) or non-existent (asat). It cannot be said to be sat; otherwise, the existence of two ontological realities, Brahman and māyā, would compromise nonduality. Yet, it cannot be defined as asat; otherwise, the world could never become an object of our perception. Hence, it is indescribable. ANTARANGA-SAKTI The intrinsic potency of God (see svarupa-śakti). ANUCCHEDA Śri Jiva Gosvāmi divides each Sandarbha into sections called anucchedas. These anucchedas are organized around one prominent verse from Srimad Bhagavatam and conclude with the name of the speaker and hearer of that principal verse. In this translation, we sometimes refer to the anucchedas using the Sanskrit word, and sometimes as “text” or “section.” ANVAYA Positive concomitance; an affirmation used to substantiate the validity of an assertion; used in connection with vyatireka, or neg- ative concomitance, which further corroborates the original asser- tion by demonstrating the defect that results from non-application of that assertion. APASIDDHANTA Metaphysical propositions that are not validated by a school of philosophy. APAURUSEYA That which is not a product of the human mind; transhuman; the self-revealed Vedic scriptures. 466Glossary ARANYAKA One of the four divisions of the Vedas that is primarily con- cerned with the performance of sacrifices (vajña). This class of literature also inculcates the theology that underlies yajña. ASRAMA Four stages of life within the varṇāśrama system, with a gradu- ated course of duties meant to lead an individual towards realiza- tion of Ultimate Truth. The four stages are brahmacarya (study of the Vedas while practicing celibacy), garhasthya (sacrifice, worship, and charity within the context of family life), vanaprasthya (retirement from social duties and gradual intensification of spiritual practice), and sannyasa (detachment from all worldly objects and absorption in knowledge of the self and God). ASRAYA The ultimate shelter; the tenth of ten topics of Srimad Bhagavatam. From the other nine topics of Srimad Bhagavatam, it can be under- stood that the tenth topic refers to that which is the shelter of all creation, of all that relates to sustenance, of all forms of dissolution, and even of liberation itself, residing on the far shore of the Ocean of Causality. That which is the shelter of all manifestation and even of liberation is the ultimate shelter, the one nondual awareness, the Complete Whole, experienced in the intimacy of love as Śrī Kṛṣṇa. ASURA Adversary of the gods (suras); one who opposes the authority of God and the theistic order of the cosmos; the anti-divine. ATMA In accordance with the context, this can refer to the body, mind, intelligence, fortitude, or endeavor. It most often denotes the pure self, who is an individual unit of consciousness, the living being. In other contexts it can signify the supreme consciousness, or the Supreme Immanent Self, Paramātmā. ATMA-TATTVA The essence of all ātmās; the Supreme Self; knowledge or truth of Absolute Reality. ĀTMĀRĀMA One who rejoices in the pure Self alone; one who is altogether free from identification with, or attraction to, all that constitutes the non-self, consisting of the physical, the vital-emotional, the mental, and the intellectual instruments of the psycho-physical complex. AVADHŪTA An ascetic beyond the bounds of conventional, moral, or cultural sensibilities. AVASTU That which has no-existence; an illusory object. AVATARA Descent; an appearance or manifestation of God upon the earth in any of His forms, to establish dharma and to enact the divine play of transcendence. Technically speaking, it is misleading to translate avatara as incarnation when speaking of the descent of the eternal 467 References forms of God, who do not “in-carnate” in the etymological sense of becoming invested with a human or phenomenal form. Rather, their “descent” or manifestation amounts to a self-revelation of their own eternal intrinsic forms. AVIDYA Ignorance; an aspect of maya that covers a person’s true self- awareness. BHAGAVAN The supreme personal manifestation of God; that Supreme Entity who is complete to an unlimited degree in six opulences: beauty, wealth, strength, fame, knowledge, and renunciation; the Complete Whole, encompassing even Brahman and Paramātmā; nondual awareness inherently self-endowed with transphenome- nal form, personhood, and limitless transcendental attributes that invite participation in the infinite play of divine love. BHAJANA In its primary sense, the devotional turning of consciousness (sammukhya) toward Bhagavan in love and service. This includes actions such as hearing narrations of Bhagavan, chanting His name, remembering Him, serving His deity form, and so on. BHAKTI Devotion to God; a unique potency of God, stemming from His own intrinsic nature and endowed with consciousness and bliss. When this same eternal potency infuses the individual awareness of the living being, it takes the shape of love and flows back to its original source, Bhagavan, causing the waves of His own ecstasy to swell. The word bhakti comes from the root √bhaj, which means to serve. Hence, the primary meaning of bhakti is to render service with full participation of one’s being, without cause or motive, with- out adulteration of any partial pursuit, for the exclusive pleasure of and communion with the Complete Whole, Bhagavan. BHAŞYA A commentary, especially a commentary that systematically and contextually explains the meanings of the aphorisms (sütras) or verses (slokas) of a traditional philosophical text. BHAVA Being, existence, presence; contemplation, awareness, medita- tion; feeling, emotion, love; a stage of bhakti; the first sprout of prema, or pure love of God (see bhava-bhakti). BHAVA-BHAKTI The initial stage of perfection in devotion. A stage of bhakti in which suddha-sattva, or the essence of Bhagavan’s intrinsic potency, consisting of consciousness and bliss, is transmitted into the heart of the practicing devotee from the heart of one of Bhaga- vān’s eternal associates and which softens the heart by different 468 Glossary kinds of taste. Bhava-bhakti is the first sprout of prema, or pure love of God. Bhava-bhakti is the seventh of the eight stages of develop- ment of the bhakti-lata, the creeper of devotion. Bhava-bhakti is also said to be the fruit of sadhana-bhakti, not as a causal effect, but rather as the blossoming of the very same potency into an existential state of being and awareness within the receptacle of the heart. BHŪTA-SUDDHI Purification of the elements of the body as a preparation for worship. According to the principle, “To worship God, one must be of the nature of God” (devam bhutva devam yajet), it is understood that to worship the divine in truth, one must be immersed in the same divinity. Even the physical body should be constituted of the same divine nature. This purification of the body is approached in different ways in the various spiritual disciplines. Because bhakti is essentially awareness in love, purification of the body, known as bhūta-suddhi, is approached on this path through a conscious process. BRAHMA The primal cosmic being or creator god; the four-headed god who carries out the work of secondary creation (visarga) in the uni- verse under the inspiration and direction of the Supreme Immanent Self, Paramātmā. He is born from the lotus navel of Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu and is one of the three gunavatāras. The secondary creation involves the revelation of the subtle creative ideation in accordance with which individual concrete forms come into being. This specif- ically refers to the sending forth of moving and nonmoving living beings. BRAHMA-JÑANA Nondual awareness; knowledge or immediate intuition of unqualified Brahman; knowledge aiming at monistic liberation; also known as kaivalya-jñāna, or knowledge of exclusive identity with Brahman. BRAHMA-SAYUJYA One of the five types of mukti, or liberation. This is the goal of those who adopt the path of jñana-yoga and entails absolute identification with Brahman and abandonment of one’s own distinct identity. BRAHMA-SUTRA A compilation of concise statements called sutras, or aphorisms, written by Vyasa, providing the essential meaning of the Upanisads. Also known as Vedanta-sütra. BRAHMA-VIDYA Knowledge pertaining to Brahman, which is the indeter- minate aspect of Absolute Reality. BRAHMACARI The first asrama, or stage of life, in the varṇāśrama system, 469 References characterized by celibacy, study of the Vedas from a teacher, and practice of austerities. BRAHMAJYOTI The peripheral effulgence (tanu-bha) emanating from the transphenomenal body of Bhagavan. BRAHMAN The Nondual Absolute, divested of all form, quality, and action; the indeterminate aspect of the Supreme Truth; the effulgence ema- nating from Bhagavan, the Complete Whole, who is the core of non- dual awareness, just as heat and light radiate from the sun. Brahman is thus said to be a generic feature of God, devoid of distinguishing characteristics. BRAHMANA One of the four varnas, or social divisions, in the varṇāśrama system; a priest or teacher. Their specific duties are study and teach- ing of scriptures, charity, performance of sacrifice for themselves and others, and acceptance of gifts. When used in reference to the body of sacred literature, the Brahmanas refer to one of the four divisions of the Vedas that provide details about the proper execu- tion of yajña. Every sakha (a branch or school of the Vedas) has its own Brāhmaṇa literature. At present a total of 19 Brähmaņas are available. BUDDHI Intellect, perception, comprehension, understanding, discrimi- nation, judgment, discernment; the highest faculty of the psyche, which consists of intellect, ego (i.e., the “I-principle”), and mind; the second of the twenty-five elements of Sankhya in its microcosmic or individuated aspect. Its macrocosmic counterpart is mahat, cosmic intellect, or the collective wisdom principle. CITTA Mind, heart, thought, intention; in Patanjali’s astanga-yoga sys- tem, citta specifically refers to mind, which has three components: intellect (buddhi), ego (ahankara), and mind (manas); the individual consciousness in contrast to mahat, or universal consciousness. CITTA-VṚTTI Mental modifications. According to Advaita Vedanta, when the luminous mind is projected outward through the sense organs, it reaches the objects and is modified into their forms. This men- tal modification is called citta-vṛtti. According to the classical Yoga tradition of Patanjali, the mental modifications are of five types: pramāna (true cognition), viparyaya (erroneous knowledge), vikalpa (imagination), nidra (sleep), and smṛti (memory). DEVA A celestial being; devas are gods residing in the heavenly planets who are endowed with great piety, tremendous life spans, and 470 Glossary superior mental and physical prowess. They are entrusted with specific powers for the purpose of universal administration. DEVATA God (see deva). DEVI Lit., “goddess,” which could stand for any among the host of god- desses but a word popularly used to indicate Goddess Durga (see below). DHAMA A holy place of pilgrimage; the abode of God, where He appears and enacts His transcendental pastimes. DHARMA Religion; prescribed duty; nature; justice, virtue, morality, law. In its conventional sense, dharma refers to the socio-religious duties prescribed in scripture for different classes of people in the varṇā- śrama system. In its transcendent aspect, dharma refers to bhagavat- dharma, or the transcendent potency of devotion stemming from Bhagavan and meant exclusively for His pleasure, because this is the spiritual function that actualizes the pure self’s highest potential. DURGA A primary form of the feminine Goddess. She is the presiding deity of primordial nature, prakṛti. She is regarded as the consort of Lord Śiva and is also popularly known as Devi. GAUDIYA VAIṢNAVISM The school of Vaisnavism founded by Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahaprabhu. GAUDIYA VAIṢNAVA An adherent of the Bengal school of Vaisnavism founded by Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahaprabhu in the 16th century CE. GAYATRI A Vedic mantra chanted by the twice-born, or dvijas, at the time of sunrise and sunset. It is considered to be the mother of the Vedas. GOSVĀMĪ Originally, a renounced Vaisnava holy man; a person belonging to certain Brahmana Vaisnava families associated with a temple; a person born in the dynasty of an acarya. Lit., “one who has mastered his senses.” This is a title used for a person who has been formally initiated into the renounced order of life (sannyasa). At present it is also a title for a specific priestly class. GUNA The three constituent aspects of prakṛti, or primordial nature, embodying both psychic and physical force: sattva (luminosity), rajas (dynamism), and tamas (inertia). The word guna in Sänkhya is distinguished from its conventional meaning of “a quality,” because the Sänkhya doctrine admits no distinction between substance and attribute. Rather, quality and substance together form a sin- gle whole, and it is the concrete unity of both that any material 471 References thing represents. The term guna thus means a component factor or constituent of prakṛti. HLADINI The delight-giving potency, which is an aspect of God’s svarupa- Sakti, the potency that constitutes His very nature. It is this hladini potency that gives bliss to Bhagavan and His devotees, just as the light emanating from a luminous object illuminates both the lumi- nous object itself and all other items in its sphere of radiance. This hladini potency, manifesting as bhakti within the heart of a devotee, flows back to Bhagavan in the form of love, thus expanding His own delight. Bhakti is the supreme aspect of this intrinsic potency. ISVARA Lit., “the controller,” “regulator,” or “master.” This term is synony- mous with the word Paramātmā, the Supreme Immanent Self within all living beings, since it is He who regulates primordial nature and the living beings from within. Sometimes Iśvara also refers to Śiva. ITIHASA Lit., “so indeed it was.” Primarily, this refers to the Mahabharata and the Rāmāyaṇa, the two great epics of India. When not used as a proper noun, it simply refers to a historical event. JIVA The conscious self (ātmā) as qualified by the intellect (buddhi), ego (ahankara), the mind (manas), the senses, and the physical body; the embodied self or the empirical self; an individuated part of the taṭastha-sakti, or intermediary potency, of God; an individual living being. JIVAN-MUKTI Living liberation; the state of being liberated from the influence of the material gunas while still embodied. JÑANA Knowledge, awareness, omniscience; the path of knowledge directed towards awareness of oneness with Brahman, and having as its ultimate aim liberation from material existence; awareness of inscrutable being that pervades all form and yet is without form, that is the source of all manifestation and yet lies beyond the manifested cosmos; absorption in that one nondual state of being. JNANA-MARGA The path of jñana, as described above. JÑANĪ One who pursues or has perfected the path of jñāna, directed toward awareness of oneness with Brahman. KAIMUTYA A principle of logic that draws on comparison to establish a conclusion; the principle of “how much more true,” also called a 472 Glossary fortiori logic. By showing the validity of a proposition of lesser signif- icance, the proposition of greater significance is thereby concluded. This principle is used throughout the text and may be exemplified as follows: “If even unintentional chanting of the name of God leads to emancipation, how much greater must be the effect of conscious chanting.” KAIVALYA The state of “aloneness;” the unconditional existence of the Self; liberation from material bondage; knowledge of the identity between unqualified Brahman and the pure living being; the state of unconditional devotion. KALIYUGA The fourth in a cycle of four ages; the iron age of quarrel, hypocrisy, and degradation, said to last for 432,000 years. It began about 5,200 years ago, the day Śrī Kṛṣṇa departed from earth. KALPA A day of Brahma, or 1,000 cycles of the four yugas, being a period of 4,320 million earth years. At the end of Brahma’s day, there is a par- tial devastation of the cosmos, and at the beginning of the next day, a new creation is enacted resembling the previous day in some but not all details. The Puranas describe events occurring in different kalpas, though related events are sometimes merged into one descrip- tion and spoken of as if occurring on the same day. This accounts for inconsistencies in certain details of descriptions that actually occurred on different days of Brahma. KALPANA Assumed or apparent reality; imagination; creation; a theoreti- cal construct; the act of conceptualization. KAMA Desire, longing; pleasure, enjoyment; love, affection; object of desire, pleasure, or love; sensuality, sexual love; one of the four puruşārthas, or goals of human attainment, among dharma, artha, kama, and mokṣa. In this latter sense, kama refers to enjoyment that is not opposed to dharma and that follows as its outcome. KARMA-KANDA A division of the Vedas that relates to the performance of ceremonial acts and sacrificial rites directed towards attainment of heaven. Through purification of intent, this path can lead either to jñāna or bhakti. KARMA-YOGA The performance of one’s prescribed duties in varnasrama in which one offers the fruit to the Supreme Lord only as a secondary process to attain one’s desired goal. This may be done either with a desire for material reward (sakāma) or for purification aiming at liberation or devotion (niskāma). KIRTANA One of nine primary limbs of bhakti; recitation of or singing the 473 References glories of God; singing the names, form, qualities, and pastimes of Bhagavan. KOSA Lit., “case,” or “covering.” This term refers to the five sheaths called panca-kośa in Vedantic philosophy. In Gauḍīya Vedanta, the five kośas are understood as anna-maya (the gross body), prana-maya (the vital force), mano-maya (the total psychic apparatus taken as a unit), vijñāna-maya (the individual conscious self), and ananda-maya (the Supreme Blissful Self). In Advaita Vedanta, the last two are inter- preted differently as intellect and Brahman, respectively. According to some Advaitavada thinkers, however, ananda-maya-kosa refers not to Brahman directly but to the causal body of bliss, which is the finest level of covering of Brahman. KṢATRIYA The second of the four varnas, or social divisions, in the varṇa- śrama system; an administrator or warrior. Their specific duties are protection of subjects, charity, performance of sacrifices, study of scriptures, and absence of attachment for objects of enjoyment. LILA An act of the Divine performed exclusively for transcendental delight and not under the influence of the law of karma; pastime; divine play. This word is commonly used for the sacred acts of Bhagavan and His associates. MAHAT The second element in the Sänkhya system (the first being prakṛti itself); the unindividuated or collective cosmic intellect; this is the macrocosmic counterpart of buddhi, or individuated intellect; the first evolute of prakṛti, or primordial nature in the state of equilib- rium. Mahat or buddhi is the source of ahankara, or ego, the next element of manifestation. MANGALACARANA The invocatory verse or verses at the beginning of a book; lit., the act of invoking auspiciousness for the completion of the undertaking and removal of any obstacles. This is usually expressed in the form of a prayer to the deity worshipped by the author. MANTRA A sound formula, consisting of the Names of God, which addresses any individual deity. Mantras are given to a disciple by a guru at the time of formal initiation (diksa) for worship and realization of God. Mantra is the sound form of the deity. MANTRA-GURU The teacher who initiates the disciple by mantra recitation into the worship of the Lord. 474 Glossary MANU The father of mankind; the ruler of a world cycle of humanity. A day of Brahma, called a kalpa, is divided into fourteen periods called manvantaras. Manu is entrusted with the procreation of human beings and the managerial affairs of this period. Thus, there are four- teen Manus in a day of Brahma. The first of these was a son of Brahma. Now the seventh Manu, Vaivasvata, is ruling. MANVANTARA A world cycle ruled by a Manu; the religious princi- ples established for the Manus, the progenitors and sovereigns of humanity; one of ten primary subjects of Srimad Bhāgavatam. MAYA Bhagavan’s extrinsic potency that influences the living entities to accept the egoism of being independent enjoyers of this material world; the potency that constitutes the material world. MIMÄMSÄ Lit., “respectful investigation;” one of the six schools of Indian philosophy. This system deals mainly with the nature of dharma, or the duties to be followed by human beings, based on the hermeneu- tics of the Vedas. It is also called Pūrva-mīmāmsã, or the prior inves- tigation, in contrast to Uttara-mimämsä, the posterior investigation, also popularly known as Vedanta. This distinction is based on the fact that the Vedas have two divisions: that of karma-khanda, which deals with the execution of yajñas, and jñāna-khanda, which dis- closes the knowledge of Absolute Reality, Brahman: Because Uttara- mīmāmsā is popularly called Vedanta, the term mimämsä, used for Pūrva-mīmāṁsa, is also sometimes called Karma-mīmāṁsā. MUDRA A Symbolic gesture usually performed with the hands and fingers. These are employed in the worship of a deity and also in classical dance and drama. Besides conveying a specific message, mudrās also invoke corresponding energies. Thus, they are also used in medita- tion to elicit a suitable effect on the mental state of the practitioner. MUKTI Liberation; the fourth goal of human attainment among dharma, artha, kāma, and moksa; the goal aspired for through the path of knowledge; one of nine primary topics of Srimad Bhagavatam. MUNI A sage intent on the life of contemplation. NIRGUNA Beyond the influence of primordial nature’s three interconnected constituent principles of psychic and physical force, namely, sattva (illumination), rajas (dynamism), and tamas (inertia); exclusively of the nature of transcendence. OM The sacred syllable embodying the Absolute (see pranava). 475 References PARAMAHAMSA A title awarded to an ascetic of the highest order. The word paramahamsa may be divided into two words - parama (sup- reme) and hamsa (swan). The swan is poetically said to be able to sep- arate milk from water when these two fluids are mixed. Thus, a para- mahamsa refers to a topmost, swan-like person who can distinguish spirit from matter, reality from illusion, and who can extract the very essence of spiritual truth. This also refers to the fourth and final stage of sannyasa, which has been referred to as nişkriya (freedom from all material obligations) in Śrīmad Bhagavatam (3.12.43). PARAMARTHIKA Supreme, ultimate, absolute; transcendental to matter; a word used by Advaita-Vedāntists to refer to the highest of three grades of existence, namely, the ontologically real or the Absolute Reality, Brahman. (Contrast with pratibhäsika and vyavahārika) PARAMĀTMĀ The Supreme Immanent Self; the Supreme Indwelling Self, or the Supreme Witness of the total material energy (the metacosm), of the individual universes (the macrocosm), and of the individuated living beings (the microcosm). PAROKSAVĀDA Indirect reference or instruction; when something is described in such a way as to conceal the real meaning. Scripture often makes use of this method to instruct those on varying levels of awareness. Only those on a higher stage of development can grasp the true intent, and it is rendered all the more relishable because of its mysterious nature. It is, therefore, said that the gods are fond of parokṣavāda. PRADHANA Primordial nature, also known as prakṛti. The term pradhana (primary, original, predominant) suggests the primary nature of prakrti as the first cause of the aggregate of all effects in the world. This refers to the state of equilibrium of the three gunas, prior to their being set in motion by the puruşa, from which the cosmos evolves (see also prakṛti). PRAKRTI According to Sankhya philosophy, prakṛti is the uncaused cause of the whole world of effects, which are its modifications. It is the ultimate material cause into which the whole world is dissolved. It is infinite and all pervasive, inactive and immobile, subject to transformation but devoid of motion. It is one, unconditioned, indeterminate, devoid of parts, independent, and unmanifest. It is the state of equilibrium of sattva, rajas, and tamas, which are not attributes but constituents of prakṛti. In association with purusa, it becomes active but unconscious, whereas puruşa is inactive 476Glossary but conscious. According to the Bhagavata, the Supreme Puruşa, Mahaviṣṇu, glances at the unconscious prakyti, thus animating it and causing the gunas to interact with each other. This sets in motion a chain of cause and effect from which the manifested cosmos unfolds. (Contrast with purusa) PRAMANA Evidence; a means of valid knowing; any means by which valid knowledge of an object becomes known to a subject. Three such means of valid cognition are primary, namely, perception, inference, and revealed sound (sabda). PRAMEYA The knowable, referring to the categories of ontological exis- tence; that which is to be known by any means of valid cognition. This especially refers to the ultimate Truth, Bhagavan, His energies, the means of attaining Him, and the goal to be achieved in relation to Him. PRANAVA The sacred syllable Om, described as follows in the Uttara- khanda of the Padma Purana: “Pranava is the seat of Brahman, and it is said to be the embodiment of the three Vedas [Sama, Ṛg, and Yajur]. It consists of three letters, A, U, and M. A represents Visņu, u represents the Goddess Laksmi, and м represents the twenty- fifth element who is the servant of these two.” This syllable is often repeated as a form of spiritual practice that reveals one’s nature as a conscious part of the Supreme Whole, whose perfection lies in the spontaneous dedication of love. PRASTHANA-TRAYI Tripartite authoritative scriptures: the Upanisads, the Vedanta-sutra, and the Bhagavad Gitä; the threefold basis of Vedanta philosophy. For a Vedantic school to be recognized as dis- tinct and authoritative, it must establish its metaphysics on the basis of these three canonical sources. PRATIBHASIKA Illusory; a mere appearance, such as dreams or water mis- perceived in a mirage; a word used by Advaita-Vedāntists to describe the illusory grade of existence. (Contrast with paramarthika and vyāvahārika) PRATYAKSA Perception; knowledge arising out of the contact of a sense organ with its object. It is of two kinds, namely, savikalpaka (determinate) and nirvikalpaka (indeterminate). PRAYOJANA The goal to be attained in relation to the Supreme; the goal of spiritual practice. In bhakti this refers to prema, or love of God (see below). PREMA A stage of bhakti characterized by the appearance of love; the 477 References perfected stage of devotion. This is the ninth stage in the develop- ment of the creeper of bhakti; the mature state of love that completely melts the heart and gives rise to a deep sense of mamata, or belonging, in relationship to Bhagavan. PRITI Supreme love for the Lord, also known as prema. PURANA A division of the Smrti literature. They are 18 in number and are traditionally accepted to have been composed by Vedavyasa. They are considered to be the backbone of Indian culture. They are second only to the Vedas in authority. They are more popular than the Vedas because of their simple approach of describing the subject matter of the Vedas using historical narrative and stories. PURUSA The Primeval Being as the Self and original source of the cosmos; the Supreme Being, or Immanent Self, of the cosmos; the animating principle in living beings. In other contexts this can refer to the indi- vidual self, or to spirit as opposed to matter (prakṛti). It can also refer simply to a male or mankind. PURUSAVATARA The three manifestations of Viṣṇu who oversee the cre- ation on the levels of metacosmic, macrocosmic, and microcosmic being, also called the three Paramātmās. The first puruṣāvatāra is called Mahavişņu, or Karanodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. He is the Paramātmā for the complete extrinsic potency, prakṛti (the metacosm). The second is called Garbhodakaśāyi Vişņu, who is the Paramātmā for each individual universe (the macrocosm). The third is called Kṣiro- dakaśāyi Viṣṇu; who is the Paramätmä for each individual being, the jiva (the microcosm). The word paramātmā is commonly used to refer to the third puruṣāvatāra. RAJAS One of the three gunas, or constituent aspects of material nature; the dynamic principle that propels the living beings to action and stimulates desires for material enjoyment. RASA Juice, liquor, potion; taste, flavor, relish; pleasure, delight; essence; the spiritual transformation of the heart that takes place when the perfected state of love for Śrī Kṛṣṇa, known as rati or bhāva, is converted into profound aesthetic relish (rasa) by combination with various types of transcendentally awoken ecstasies. In Bhakti- rasāmṛta-sindhu (2.1.5), bhakti-rasa is defined: “When the sthayi- bhava, or foundational love, in one of the five primary relationships of equanimity, servitorship, friendship, parental affection, or conju- gal love, is combined with vibhāva (excitants), anubhava (extrinsic 478 Glossary ecstasy), sättvika-bhava (intrinsic ecstasy), and vyabhicārī-bhava (intensifying ecstasy), thus producing an extraordinary taste in the heart of the devotee, it is called bhakti-rasa.” RŞI A sage; one who has realized the Vedic mantras. SABDA A word; sound; the Vedas as sound revelation or linguistic truth; a form of pramaņa, i.e., evidence or a means of valid knowing. SADHANA Practices undertaken in various traditions as the means of attainment of their respective goals. SADHANA-BHAKTI Devotion in the stage of practice; devotion that puri- fies the heart and leads the devotee toward love of God; the practices of devotion, which can be condensed into nine primary acts, such as hearing, chanting, remembering, and so on. SADHYA-BHAKTI The perfected stage of bhakti, when consciousness is per- meated with bhava, the intrinsic potency of God predominated by awareness and bliss. This is the stage in which bhakti has completely transformed the being, making the self one with its own inherent nature and culminating in divine love of God. The word sadhya implies that this stage develops through sadhana, or the gradual cultivation of devotion. SAGUNA Related to the material influences of sattva, rajas, and tamas. Bhakti is inherently free from the gunas, and yet the bhakti of the performer who is still influenced by the gunas is called saguna. SAKAMA Action performed with a desire for the fruit; duties prescribed in scripture and undertaken with a desire for enjoyment in this world and the next. SAKTI Potency; the female principle of divine energy, especially when personified as the consort of the male expression of the Divine. SAMADHI Trance; complete absorption of all mental faculties into the one object of meditation; manifestation of the object of meditation only, devoid of the cognition of the act of meditating; the eighth stage in Patanjali’s aṣṭānga-yoga system. On the path of bhakti, samadhi refers to the manifestation of Bhagavan along with His associates, abode, and lilă in the state of supra-cognitive absorption, as experienced by Vyasa. SAMAŞTI Collectivity, totality, an aggregate; the collective existence of all living beings; the perspective of the collective in contrast with that of the individual. (Contrast with vyaşți) 479 References SAMBANDHA Knowledge of the interrelatedness between the Supreme Being, His potencies, and the living beings. This knowledge of relation is an essential support to the practice of devotion, because it provides a clear understanding of the nature of the world we live in, the true nature of the self, the nature of God, and the essential function of the self in relation to God. This essential function can be summed up as dasya, wherein the part finds completion through identification with and service to the whole. Through bhakti in the stage of bhāva, or supra-mundane awareness, this generic identity blossoms into one of the relations of personal servant, friend, parent, or lover. In a different context, sambandha refers to one of the four indispensable elements that are described in the introduction of every Vedic literature: adhikari (qualification of the reader), visaya (the subject matter of the book), sambandha (the relation of the book as signifier with the subject or truth that it signifies), and prayojana (the purpose to be achieved by reading and following the book). SAMMUKHYA The state of having one’s face turned toward the Absolute; the state of absorption in God, as contrasted with vaimukhya. Jiva Gosvāmi says that jñana and bhakti are the two direct methods to shift awareness toward the Absolute. Other methods, such as karma, Sänkhya, and vairagya, may act as assistants to these two primary methods. In conclusion, however, bhakti is the sole method that engenders an embrace of the Whole in completion. SAMPRADAYA A school of metaphysical thought and spiritual discipline that has its source in God and which transmits its teaching in a disciplic chain of guru-student. SAMSARA Cyclic existence; the domain of karma and rebirth; the con- dition of worldly bondage created by egoism under the impact of ignorance. SAMSKĀRAS The latent desires for action, whether beneficial or detrimen- tal, that are generated along with corresponding acts and which remain lodged in the heart of the performer; the subconscious imprints recorded and stored in the mind from action, thought, and sensory perception. These imprints give rise to desire that perpetuates the cycle of action and reaction, binding one to samsara. SAMVIT The power of consciousness; an aspect of Bhagavan’s intrinsic potency by which He is conscious of all things and enables others to know. SANDHINI The power of being or existence; an aspect of Bhagavan’s 480 Glossary intrinsic potency by virtue of which He is self-existent and supports the existence of everything else. SANKHYA One of the six traditional systems of Indian philosophy; the path of knowledge involving an analysis of Spirit and matter. The founder of the Classical Sankhya-yoga system is the sage Kapila, who is dif- ferent from the avatara of Bhagavan known as Kapila, the son of Kar- dama and Devahuti. Classical Sankhya is atheistic in nature, being devoid of the concept of Isvara. In this system, the cosmos unfolds as the interplay of purusa, the self, and prakṛti, primordial nature. When prakṛti, which is the state of equilibrium of the three gunas, is brought into the proximity of the purusas, it sets in motion a chain of cause and effect that evolves the cosmos. In course of time, the cosmos is reabsorbed into its primordial state. All of this takes place to facilitate the purusas in the pursuit of both enjoyment and even- tual liberation. In the Bhagavata conception of Sankhya, however, the original puruşa is Mahāvisņu, who activates prakrti through His glance. SANNYASA The renounced order of life, the fourth stage of life in the varnasrama system. SANNYASI A member of the renounced order; the fourth äśrama, or stage of life, in the varṇāśrama system, characterized by detachment from all worldly pursuits, indifference to social status, and full absorption in knowledge or devotion. SARGA The original setting in motion of the material energy by the Lord; one of ten principal topics of Srimad Bhagavatam. The topic of sarga (primary creation) deals with the generation of the universal or col- lective wisdom faculty (mahat-tattva), the ego (ahankara, the “I”- principle, or the principle of individuation), the mind (manas), the five subtle sense objects (matras), the five cognitive and five conative senses (indriyas), and the five gross elements (bhūtas), resulting from the displacement of the equilibrium of the three gunas (i.e., primor- dial nature’s three interdependent constituting principles of psychic and physical force), brought about through the intent of the Supreme Controller (Parameśvara). SĀRŪPYA-MUKTI One of the five types of liberation in which one attains a form similar to that of Bhagavan. ŚASTRA Scriptures; this includes the Vedas, Upanisads, Purānas, Smṛtis, and Agamas; the authorized literature that is accepted as infallible. SAT Being or existence; that which is ultimately real. 481 References SATTVA One of the three constituent aspects of prakṛti, or primordial nature, that influences living beings toward the cultivation of wisdom and purity; luminosity. SIDDHA Realized, perfected; a liberated associate of Bhagavan who accom- panies Him when He descends in the material world to assist in His pastimes; one who attains perfection of realization in this life and thus transcends the influence of the gunas. SIDDHANTA The conclusive principle on a subject or of a school of thought. SIDDHI Paranormal powers or psycho-spiritual attainments that are the by-products of accomplishment in yogic practice. SMRTI-SASTRA Lit., “that which is remembered;” tradition as distin- guished from Śruti, or revelation; the body of sacred literature that is composed in pursuance of the Śrutis (in contradistinction toŚruti, or that which is directly heard by or revealed to the rşis). These include the six Vedangas, the dharma-sästras (such as Manu-samhita), the Purānas, and the Itihasas (Vedic historical narrations). ŚRUTI That which is heard; revelation, as distinguished from Smrti, or tra- dition; infallible knowledge that was received by Brahma or by the great sages in the beginning of creation and which descends in dis- ciplic succession from them; the body of literature that was directly manifest from Bhagavan. This applies to the original four Vedas (also known as nigamas) and includes the Upanisads. SUDDHA-SATTVA The state of pure existence, beyond the three gunas of prakṛti; the self-luminous state of being in which Bhagavan is revealed along with His associates and abode. SVADHARMA That which is one’s own duty. In its conventional sense, this refers to the duties prescribed in scripture that relate to one’s own caste and stage of life. In its transcendent sense, it refers to the nature and function of the pure self, distinct from all material identification. SVARUPA-SAKTI The intrinsic potency of Bhagavan that constitutes His very nature. It has three aspects: sandhini, the potency that accom- modates the spiritual existence of God and His associates; samvit, the potency that is the basis of God’s own omniscience and that bestows transcendental awareness of Him; and hladini, the potency by which Bhagavan enjoys transcendental bliss and awards such bliss to His devotees. SVARUPA The intrinsic nature of the self or God. 482 Glossary SVARUPA-LAKSANA An intrinsic characteristic; the essential character- istic of an object by which its identity is revealed. (Contrast with taṭastha-lakṣaṇa) TAMAS Inertia; one of the three constituent aspects of primordial nature that promotes ignorance and indolence. TATASTHA-LAKSANA An extrinsic characteristic; an incidental defining characteristic of an object which, though not being a permanent or innate feature of the object it qualifies, helps to differentiate it from other objects. (Contrast with svarupa-lakṣaṇa) TATASTHA-SAKTI The intermediary potency belonging to Paramātmā and consisting of the conscious living beings. TATTVA Essence; truth; Brahman; reality; principle. TRIPADA-VIBHŪTI The three-fourths manifestation of the Supreme; the eternal spiritual realm consisting of threefold dimensionality of being, namely, immortality, fearlessness, and all-auspiciousness. TURIYA The fourth state; the Absolute Consciousness; that which tran- scends the three states of waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. This ultimately refers to Bhagavan, who is free from the three kinds of upādhis, namely, virat (gross), hiṛanyagarbha (subtle), and kāraṇa (causal). UPADHI An artificial or material designation with which the eternal, tran- scendent self is identified; designations pertaining to the gross and subtle bodies. UPALAKṢANA The implying of that which is not directly stated; a princi- ple often used by commentators in interpreting scriptural texts. In another context this can refer to the incidental determining charac- teristic of an object in contrast with viseșana, or the intrinsic quality of an object. VAIKUNTHA The eternal spiritual domain; the majestic realm of the spir- itual world that is predominated by Lord Narayana or His various expansions; that domain which is entirely free from the influence of the three gunas. VAIMUKHYA The state of having one’s face turned away from the Abso- lute; the state of absorption in the ephemeral, rooted in causeless ignorance. This is the basis of samsara and can be remedied simply by turning one’s face to encounter the Absolute directly, known as sammukhya (see sammukhya). 483 References VAIRAGYA Detachment or indifference to the world; a spiritual disci- pline involving the acceptance of voluntary austerities to achieve detachment from sense objects. VAISNAVA A person initiated into and devoted to the worship of Visnu, Krsna, or any of the avataras of Visņu. VARNA The four castes (brahmana, kṣatriya, vaisya, and sudra) in which one carries out corresponding socio-religious duties in the system. known as varṇāśrama. VARNASRAMA The Vedic social system, which organizes society into four occupational divisions (varnas) and four stages of life (asramas). VASTU A substance; that which exists eternally; the Supreme Existent or God. VEDANTA One of the six theistic schools of Indian philosophy that is rooted. in the teachings of the Upanisads and the Brahma-sutra of Vyāsa. Vedanta stresses the nonduality of the Absolute, His potencies, and His integrated parts (the individual living beings). VEDANTA-SUTRA See Brahma-sūtra. VISUDDHA-SATTVA Pure existence; unadulterated being; a feature of Bha- gavan’s intrinsic potency, known as cit-sakti, the conscious potency (see suddha-sattva). VYAŞTI Individuality; differentiation; an individual entity as distin- guished from the whole; the individuated existence of the living being; the individual perspective. (Contrast with samaşti) VYATIREKA Distinction, separation; negative concomitance, or logical dis- continuance, implying the non-possibility of an object’s existence when some other object upon which the former is dependent is absent. For example, if there is no fire, then there is no smoke. This form of reasoning is used in connection with anvaya, or positive concomitance. VYAVAHARIKA Empirical reality, one of the three grades of existence accepted by the Advaita-vedanta School. (Contrast with paramarthika and prätibhāsika) VYUHA A self-expansion of Bhagavan, such as Vasudeva, Sankarṣaṇa, Pra- dyumna, and Aniruddha. All of these are expansions of the origi- nal Complete Person, Svayam Bhagavan Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and are almost equally powerful. YAJNA Vedic sacrifice; a method of communion with God or with the cosmic powers. 484 Glossary YOGA A spiritual discipline aiming at union of the individual self with the universal Self. There are many different branches of yoga, such as karma-yoga, jñāna-yoga, and bhakti-yoga. Unless specified, however, yoga generally refers to the classical astanga-yoga system of Patañjali. YUGA An age of the world. The Vedas describes four yugas that proceed in a cycle: Krta, or Satya, Treta, Dvapara, and Kali. The first of these yugas lasts for 1,728,000 years, the second for 1,296,000 years, the third for 864,000 years, and the fourth for 432,000 years. The descend- ing numbers represent the physical and spiritual deterioration of humanity in each age. The four yugas form an aggregate of 4,320,000 years and constitute a maha-yuga, or great yuga. 485 Abbreviations AP Agni Purana BAU Bṛhad-aranyaka Upanisad BRS Bhakti-rasamṛta-sindhu cc Caitanya-caritămṛta CHU Chandogya Upanisad GITA Bhagavad Gitā ISA Isa Upanisad KENA Kena Upanisad KU Katha Upanisad LBH Laghu-bhagavatāmṛta MANU Manu-samhita MP Matsya Purāṇa MB Mahabharata MUU Mundaka Upanisad PANINI Panini-sūtra PP Padma Purana SB Srimad Bhagavatam śu Svetasvatara Upanisad TU Taittiriya Upanisad VP Visņu Purāņa vs Brahma-sutra (Vedanta-sutra) 486Subject Index abhidheya as disclosed by Vyasa, 222 as disclosed to Vyasa, 215 as the means of attainment, 30 bhajana as, 41, 203, 207, 211 bhakti as, 225, 307, 315, 441, 442 determination of, 58, 201, 341, 344, 440, 441 determination of by Vyasa, 221 determination of through samadhi, 295 not clearly ascertained through Vedänta alone, 78 one of four primary topics of a book, 27 one of four seed topics, 29 related to sambandha and prayojana, 211, 213, 239 sadhana-bhakti as, 317 self-revealed through sabda, 208 the basis of, 237 unknowable through inference, 60 acintya-bheda-abheda as devotional nondualism, 196 as the basis of theistic nonduality, 240 of Bhagavan and the jiva, 303, 305 resolves contradictions in the Vedas, 305 the relation of the jiva with Brahman, 360 adhibhautika-puruşa body as, 399 facilitates differentiation of self from devas, 401 interdependence of, 408 adhidaivika-purusa interdependence of, 408 487 References the devas as, 399, 401 undifferentiated prior to the body, 400 adhyatmika-puruşa interdependence of, 408 the jiva as, 399, 401 undifferentiated prior to the body, 400 Advaita Vedanta pramānas accepted by, 57 Advaitavada (radical nondualism) Brahman as defined in, 213 conceptions of inserted in Sridhara Svami’s commentary, 189, 191 condemned by Caitanya Mahaprabhu, 337 contradicted by Vyasa’s samadhi, 267 countered by Jiva, 262 defeated by Madhvācārya, 196 described as veiled Buddhism, 168 flaws in, 271 hearing of leads to ruin, 260 illusory grade of reality in, 283 inconsistencies in, 289 interpretation of Vedanta-sutra, 117 lack of completion of, 169 not worthy of discussion, 193 on cognitive awareness of the jiva, 241 on Ïśvara and the jiva, 261 on māyā as anirvacaniya, 291 Sankarācārya propagated, 167 Śrīdhara Svāmī’s theistic views in opposition to, 191 three grades of existence in, 268 two prominent theories of, 264 view on liberation, 276 Advaitavādīs accept the Vedas as authority, 298 advocate radical nondistinction, 240 advocate radical nondualism, 260 antithetical to devotion, 259 attribute empirical reality to scriptures, 292 cite the example of crystal, 273 claim that Srimad Bhagavatam promotes impersonalism, 210 488 Agni Subject Index consider mäyä as anirvacaniya, 304 contradict themselves, 286 deny the essential reality of Bhagavan, 191 flaws in the theories of, 282 insist on Brahman as devoid of qualities, 361 misinterpret scripture, 296 not Jiva’s primary audience, 192 on the dissolution of ego, 289 Śrīdhara Svāmi attracted to Śrimad Bhagavatam, 336 Srimad Bhagavatam respected by, 118 support their ideas with scripture, 266 theories of refuted, 283 theory of maya of, 261 theory of on Brahman and the jiva, 288 view of the atma in deep sleep, 374 view of the jiva of, 276, 277 glorified in the tamasika Purāņas, 108 aharkāra (ego) a subsequent emergence from citta, 423 as an element of Sankhya in Śrīmad Bhagavatam, 424 as an evolute of primary creation, 387, 388, 392 gives rise to the subtle elements, 424 three divisions of, 417, 423 Ambarīṣa Mahārāja anādi advised by Gautama, 97 Brahman as, 270 conditioning of the jiva as, 242 karma as, 257 nyaya definition of is literal, 244 nyaya principle of, 243 the jiva and māyā as, 257 the jiva as, 271 time as, 256 anadi-avidyā citta as the seat of, 424 anadi-siddha the Vedas as, 60 489 References Aniruddha as Kṣirodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, 32 anirvacaniya māyā as, 290, 291 not to be confused with acintya, 304 anubandha-catuṣṭaya description of, 6 apauruşeya (sabda) acceptance of pauruşeya-sabdas as, 52 as the means of knowing Reality, 52, 53 authorities who accepted the Vedas as, 64 beyond the limitations of language, 38 Itihasas and Purāņas as, 75, 85, 91 scripture as, 298 Srimad Bhagavatam as, 117 the Purānas as, 96 Vedas as, 51, 61, 63, 66 asat (unreal) as defined in Bhagavad Gita, 290 Brahman cannot be defined as, 271 māyā other than, 290, 291, 304 the world as, 58 āśraya Bhagavan as, 384, 401, 438 Brahman as, 432 immediate intuition of, 399 Kṛṣṇa as, 385, 439 Paramātmā as, 408, 409 Paramātmā as and not the three purusas, 405 principal topic of the Tenth Canto, 415 specification of, 396 Srimad Bhagavatam culminates in, 397 Tenth Canto primarily concerned with, 412 the jiva’s awareness of, 434 the Supreme Brahman as, 381 the tenth topic of Srimad Bhagavatam, 382, 410 the three aspects of the embodied self cannot be, 406 aṣṭanga-yoga adherents of 490 Subject Index consider Paramātmā as aśraya, 398 dependent on bhakti, 318 insufficient as means, 308 ātmā (the self) as changeless, 372, 377 as consciousness and conscious, 371 as dear, 349 as the witness, 363, 407 authentic selfhood of, 374 body and senses lifeless without, 318 carrying away of the mind and senses by, 402 cognition an inherent capacity of, 374 dependent on Paramātmā, 374, 375 descent of the intrinsic potency into, 250 distinct from the body, 377 distinct from the seen, 368 distinction of from Paramātmā, 299 emanates from Mahāvişņu’s glance, 31 existence of beyond the body, 61 free from six changes, 367 free from upadhi in deep sleep, 370 identified with the gunas, 234 intuited from the state of deep sleep, 369 nondifferent in nature from Brahman, 381 Sankara’s misleading doctrine of, 169 the body as an upadhi of, 228 three states of, 372 atyantika-mukti absence of ego does not grant, 290 avadhūta Sukadeva appeared like, 178 avatāra according to pratibimba-vāda, 265 activities of, 420 appearance of in every day of Brahma, 109 appearance of in various species, 427 Buddha as, 61 channa Caitanya as, 9 491 References complexions of, 8 Hayagriva as, 132 lila Garbhodakaśayi Visņu as the source of, 32 list of corresponding to the Manus, 428 of Śiva, Śankarācārya as, 161 of the purusa, 226 Parasurama as, 179 pastimes of, as a topic of Srimad Bhagavatam, 389, 390, 393 Vyasadeva as, 91, 96, 103, 179 avidya (ignorance) a product of māyā, 278 as an aspect of māyā, 261 as upadhi of māyā, 288 Brahman in contact with, 286 in Advaitavada theory, 288 limitation of Brahman by, 265 reflection of Brahman in, 265 reflection of Paramātmā in, 299 the jivas act out of, 437 Ayurveda effectivity of dependent on guidelines, 67 herbal formulae prescribed in, 66 Aśvini-kumāras taught knowledge of Brahman, 133 Baladeva Vidyabhūṣaṇa comments on the pronoun imăm, 15 comments on the word anga, 9 defines the term sandarbha, 24 Balarama as svaṁsa expansion, 348 killed Roma-harṣaṇa, 331 name of confirms Kṛṣṇa’s supremacy, 325 Bhagavad Gita describes the jiva and Brahman as eternal, 271 included in Mahabharata, 154 recitation of pleasing to Hari, 129 Sankarācārya commented on, 167 Sankarācārya supported his arguments with, 260 492 Subject Index Śrīdhara Svämi’s commentary on, 191 two categories of being recognized in, 290 Bhagavan activities of the avatāras of, 420 actualization of the knowing of, 245 Advaitavadīs deny the essential reality of, 191 appearance of as a devotee foretold, 9 as infinite, 257 as nondual consciousness, 361 as sambandhi-tattva, 211 as the ǎśraya, 401 as the subject of Srimad Bhagavatam, 416 as the tenth topic of Srimad Bhagavatam, 394 Caitanya Mahaprabhu as, 7 cannot withdraw favor from māyā, 246 complements the action of maya, 252 designation of the aśraya as, 397 devotion to surpasses the bliss of Brahman, 213 dharma characterized as meditation on, 123 direct perception of by Vyasa and Suka, 48 disclosed by prema, 224 distinct from the jiva, 307, 372 does not intervene in maya’s work, 248, 249 extrinsic characteristics of, 385 fitness to worship, 147, 156 form of localized and all pervading, 71 Gayatri intent upon, 150 includes and transcends Brahman, 212 includes Brahman and Paramātmā, 236 includes holarchically embedded parts, 289 inherent aesthetic value of, 212, 213 intuition of leads to devotion, 105 knowledge of manifested by bhakti, 279 liberation dependent on, 279 lilă of, real and transcendental, 296 love for as prayojana, 310 most worthy of love, 375 Mäyä ashamed to face, 248 493 References not disclosed through logic, 294 not indifferent to the jivas, 251 not influenced by māyā, 255 nothing to achieve through creation, 436 ordered Sankarācārya, 162 prema belongs to the intrinsic potency of, 226 primary attributes of, 233 primary topics of Srimad Bhagavatam as related to, 388 purpose of in manifesting the universe, 438 realization of brought about by prema, 317 realized in the post-liberated state, 210 relation of the jiva with, 302 Sankara opposed the reality of, 191 Sat Sandarbha a treatise on, 5 self-disclosed as the subject, 295 sleep of as cosmic dissolution, 394 Srimad Bhagavatam as the beloved of, 128 Śrimad Bhagavatam culminates in, 138 Srimad Bhagavatam delineates the truth of, 155 Srimad Bhagavatam identical to, 119, 158 Srimad Bhagavatam one in nature with, 134 Srimad Bhagavatam the direct utterance of, 136, 153 Śuka realized by hearing Srimad Bhagavatam, 202 supersedes Brahman, 441 supports the experience of oneness, 293 the jiva one and different from, 304 the jiva’s acintya-bheda-abheda relation with, 303 the name of identical with, 10 the object of meditation in Gayatri, 143, 145 the Puranas culminate in, 152 the Vedas emanated from, 65 the world as a signifier of, 391 three potencies of, 233, 334 vision of the jivas as part of, 240 bhajana as abhidheya, 41, 202, 207, 211 as devotional turning of consciousness, 22 cuts the bonds of maya, 308 bhakti (devotion) 494 Subject Index a function of the intrinsic potency, 232 as abhidheya, 225, 295, 317, 441 as causeless, 332 as meditation on Paramätmä, 439 as the means in the samadhi of Vyasa, 218 as the means of attainment, 236, 442 as the means of liberation, 394 as the purpose of creation, 437 as ultimate path, 117 bhava as the dawn of prema, 318 sadhana matures into, 318 bliss of surpasses brahmananda, 328 definition of, 318 distinction of the jiva as the basis of, 308 establishes one in relatedness, 313 independent of other methods, 335 kaivalya implies, 362 made possible by the vision of the Purāņas, 105 of three types, 224 ontological difference the foundation of, 377 other paths dependent on, 308, 318 perceived by Vyasa as the means, 307 rāga as the culmination of the evolution of truth, 169 the ultimate expression of prema, 169 sadhana as abhidheya, 225, 315 directly counteracts miseries, 316, 319 does not produce prema, 322 prompted by scripture, 317 transmutational power of, 245 Suka confirms the bliss of, 213 superiority of to jñāna, 213 superseded Brahman realization, 336 surpasses liberation, 161 vaidhi raga-bhakti superior to, 169 sabda as scriptural authority relevant to, 201 495 References vidya synonymous with, 279 Bhartrhari quoted on the limitations of logic, 71 Bhisma instructed Yudhisthira, 183 Brahma approached Nārāyaṇa, 102 bewilderment of, 158 day of (kalpa), 109 day of contains fourteen periods, 393, 427 glorified in the rajasika Purāņas, 107 granted boon to Vṛtra, 131 Hari creates through, 84 in Madhva’s philosophy, 196 offered Gautama a boon, 104 secondary creation of, 382, 387, 392, 426 the Vedas manifested through, 81 the Vedas transmitted to, 60 two dissolutions related to, 435 two dynasties of kings originating from, 428 unaware of what Vyasadeva knows, 96 weighs the Mahabharata, 137 Brahmaloka Manu and Indra attain to, 436 Brahman accordance with the Vaisnava view of, 280 according to pariccheda-vāda, 264 according to pratibimba-vāda, 265 according to Sankara, 271 as defined in Advaitavada, 213 as nondual consciousness, 361 as nondual reality, 378 as pāramarthika-sattā, 269 as pure consciousness and bliss, 350 as the aśraya, 432 as the subject of Vedanta-sutra, 385 Bhagavan as beyond, 105 Bhagavan includes and transcends, 202, 211, 212 bliss of surpassed by bhakti, 328 496cannot be delimited, 284 Subject Index cannot be mistaken for the world, 292 cannot be reflected, 273, 274 comparable to the sun, 300 contacts avidya, 286 defined in universal terms, 381 delimitation of not possible, 297 denial of the potencies of, 305 dependent on Bhagavan, 334 designation of the aśraya as, 397, 398 flaws in Advaitavada theory of, 268 flaws in ascribing upadhis to, 272 identity with not related to devotion, 319 in contact with vidya and avidya, 261 included within the Purna Puruşa, 232 indivisible into jivas, 287 intuition of dependent on bhakti, 316 knowledge of required for liberation, 154, 275 Kṛṣṇa as, 29, 30 merging into not literal, 293 merging into not the import of kaivalya, 362 modification of in Advaitavada, 266 nature of defined, 353 neither quality nor substance, 290 no direct mention of in Vyasa’s samādhi, 235 nondistinction of the jiva and, 262 not independent of Bhagavan, 236 not overcome by māyā, 241 not the subject of Vyasa’s trance, 295 oneness of identity with, 356 oneness of the jiva with, 277 problems in Advaitavada conception of, 289 purpose of describing the jiva’s oneness with, 354 qualitative oneness of the jiva with, 156 qualities of from the empirical view, 269 related to the path of jñāna, 212 Śukadeva absorbed in the bliss of, 328 Sukadeva’s realization of, 209 superseded by Bhagavan, 441 497 References superseded by devotion, 336 taken indicatively in Advaitavada, 290 the abode of Visņu as, 149 the jiva as different and nondifferent from, 302, 303 the jiva as subordinate to, 305 the jiva one and distinct from, 359, 360, 442 the only ontological reality, 240, 292 the ultimate vastitude, 357 under the influence of avidya, 288 understood with reference to the jiva, 366 upadhis impede realization of, 278 upadhis of as apparent, 283 valid understanding of, 297 Visņu as, 146 brahmananda prema includes and transcends, 327 brahmanas chant Gayatri, 156 cursed by Gautama, 104 brahma-sayujya surpassed by prema, 213 the goal of brahma-jñāna, 212 Buddha counted among the avataras, 61 influence of on Vedic religion, 168 rejected the Vedas, 358 buddhi (intellect) a product of rajasika ego, 423 as an element of Sankhya in Srimad Bhagavatam, 424 characteristics of, 423 in Sänkhya ontology, 423 operation of in perception, 49 three states of, 405 Buddhism supplanting of by Advaitavada, 169 veiled, Advaitavada as, 168 Buddhists momentary view of refuted, 367 on momentary consciousness, 355-357 498 pramaņas accepted by, 57 reject the Vedas, 61 Subject Index view of cannot account for a common reality, 359 view of the atmä in deep sleep, 373, 374 Caitanya Mahaprabhu accepted Srimad Bhagavatam as the spotless Purana, 118 acintya-bheda-abheda philosophy of, 196 as channa-avatāra, 9, 12 as Śrī Krsna, 7 as the father of sankirtana, 11 delivers kṛṣṇa-prema, 251 established prema as the fifth puruşärtha, 311 Jiva Gosvāmi’s worshipful Deity, 11 purifier of the jivas, 435 referred to in Sarva-samvadini, 8 refuted Advaitavada, 191 revered Śrīdhara Svami’s commentary, 191, 337 Šikṣāṣṭaka verse of, 350 stayed at the home of Vyenkata, 16 taught raga-bhakti, 169 teachings of beyond liberation, 311 warned about hearing Advaitavada, 260 Cārvākas pramaņas accepted by, 57 Causal Ocean citta as the boundary between spirit and matter, 31 a trans-egoic faculty of knowing, 423 as an element of Sänkhya in Srimad Bhagavatam, 424 as pure intellection, 422 operation of in perception, 49 cognition as an inherent capacity of the ātmā, 374 Buddhist view of, 355 Govinda beyond the power of, 165 linguistic, sabda as, 39 logic dependent upon, 71 made possible by the subjective Reality, 222 momentary view of, 365 499 References of the absence of being, 56 samadhi not mediated through, 215 the inconceivable as beyond, 63 Dadhici Hayagriva as, 132 taught Nārāyaṇa-varma, 128 Dattatreya followed the path of self-study, 439 defects Itihasas and Puranas free from, 78 of human beings, four types of, 43-45 perception and inference vitiated by, 60 sabda free from, 51, 54 the Vedas free from, 60, 65, 72 transcendence of, 48 Devahūti devas Devi undertook the path of yoga, 434, 439 appeared from the mouth of the Supreme Lord, 85 as adhidaivika-puruşa, 399, 401 as asraya of the senses, 407 assist the Manus, 427 attain to Maharloka, 436 Brahma as the grandsire of, 81 humbled by Bhagavan, 253 inferred from the fact of perception, 404 perplexed due to Gautama’s curse, 102 require the vision of the Vedas, 73 the Vedas as the guiding vision for, 69 the Vedas passed on by, 62 and the killing of Vṛtra, 131 Devi Bhagavatam controversy regarding, 130, 131 dharma enactment of for rational beings, 380 influence of luminaries on, 77 intended for human beings, 393 meditation on Radha-Kṛṣṇa as the highest, 125 500 Subject Index Srimad Bhagavatam establishes the principles of, 163 supreme, Srimad Bhagavatam reveals, 181 takes shelter of Srimad Bhagavatam in Kaliyuga, 162, 184 the Vedas educate about, 310 ultimate, Srimad Bhagavatam delineates, 122, 123 dissolution doubt as a meaning of kalpa, 109 as reabsorption, 391 as total unmanifestation, 422 Bhagavan as the source of, 150 description of, 390, 394 discussed in the final three cantos, 415 discussion of in the Tenth Canto, 412 four types of, 430, 435 karmic bondage remains during, 290 made perceivable by the aśraya, 396 one of five topics of a minor Purana, 109, 410, 413 one of ten topics of Srimad Bhagavatam, 380, 382, 409 overseen by Śiva, 392 partial, 436 perpetual cycle of, 256 proceeds from Bhagavan, 385 the asraya as the source of, 398 the sun globe destroyed at the time of, 149 ultimate, liberation included under, 430, 435 Visņu the unconditional cause of, 146 three varieties of, 42 Durga glorified in the tamasika Purāņas, 108 rides on a lion, 131 Dvaparayuga avatara’s complexion in, 8 dissemination of the Purana in, 89 knowledge completely destroyed in, 102 the Vedas became covered by ignorance in, 104 Ekadasi reciting Śrimad Bhagavatam recommended for, 134 eligibility 501 References one of four essential items of a book, 6 to read Sat Sandarbha, 20, 22 epistemology discussed in Anucchedas 9-18, 439 importance of for practice, 42 indispensable to truth inquiry, 37 Vedantic, infallibility of, 295 Vedic, freedom from sensory defects the cornerstone of, 45 Vedic, in Tattva Sandarbha, 42 evolution of all forms, Paramātmā the source of, 31 of beings, Paramātmā the source of, 32 of consciousness, 393 of pradhana, 289 of ultimate truth, 169 forefathers (pitrs) glorified in the mixed Puranas, 108 gauņi-vṛtti potency of words, 298 Gautama accepted the Vedas as apauruşeya, 64 advises Ambariṣa, 97 did not accept conclusions of Vedānta-sutra, 117 does not adhere to Vedanta, 77 founder of a wisdom school, 54 philosophy of as partial, 344 recommends Śrimad Bhagavatam for Ekadasi, 134 Gautama Rṣi the curse of, 102, 103 Gayatri as a meditation on Radha-Kṛṣṇa, 125 chanted by brahmanas, 156 essence of the Vedas, 124 meaning of the word bharga in, 148 origin of all Vedic mantras, 122 significance of the name of, 157 Srimad Bhagavatam based on, 124, 126, 155, 440 Srimad Bhagavatam is a commentary on, 136, 143, 145 502 Subject Index Srimad Bhagavatam unfolds from, 121 worship of Visņu as the meaning of, 155 Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi gunas guru Hari composed the first draft of the Sandarbhas, 18 always mixed, 288 as phenomenal arisings, 242 Brahman as beyond, 214 destabilization of, 387, 409, 417 division of the Purāņas according to, 108, 109, 134 embodied by the Purāņas, 114, 115 equilibrated state of, 422 māyā composed of, 257 nature of, 289 Puranas arranged in accordance with, 116 rajas greed develops from, 114 leads to doubt, 49 sattva elevation to through other paths, 308 prominent in vidya, 288 Purānas in are more authentic, 112 the perspective disclosed through is superior, 114 some Purānas tainted with, 152 Srimad Bhagavatam as free from, 134 tamas delusion develops from, 114 leads to illusion, 49 the ātmā becomes conditioned by, 228 the jiva identified with, 234, 405 the jiva transcendental to, 237 the self as transcendental to, 218 three divisions of ego according to, 418 three states of buddhi caused by, 405 required for understanding the Vedas, 67 the need for, 64, 105 all Purānas contain glorification of, 116 503 References as the Source of all, 84 ätmärāmas attracted to, 332 glorified in the sättvika Purāņas, 107 Śukadeva attracted by the qualities of, 219 the sleep of as cosmic dissolution, 391 Hayagrīva brahma-vidya imparted by, 127 Dadhici as, 132 hetu or linga (referential mark) in inference, 50 hladini Indra as the potency of bliss, 233 approaches Dadhīci, 132 attains to Brahmaloka, 436 kills Vṛtra, 131 names of corresponding to the Manus, 428 Vṛtra meant to kill, 78 inference (anumana) as pramāņa, 38, 50 as to the changeless ātmā, 377 deficient as pramāņa, 41, 51 inconclusive in regard to Ultimate Truth, 68, 70 of two kinds, 50 one of three primary pramāņas, 57 valid in support of scriptural truth, 73 valid when in accord with sabda, 440 validity of impaired by four defects, 45, 60 vyapti the key factor in, 51 Isvara according to pariccheda-vāda, 265 according to pratibimba-vāda, 265 as Brahman with sättvika upadhi, 240 cannot be explained by illusory upadhis, 284 distinct from the jiva, 259, 262 in Advaitavada theory, 261, 264, 266, 272, 282, 286, 288 not overcome by māyā, 241 Itihāsas allow for variation in wording, 78 504 Subject Index as apauruşeya, 75, 91 as reliable as the Vedas, 78 as the fifth Veda, 82, 84, 85, 87, 91 as transpersonal (apauruşeya), 85 derived from the Yajur Veda, 90 establish the meaning of the Vedas, 95, 106 excellence of due to compiler, 103 Mahabharata as, 79 Purāņas more important than, 110 recitation of compared to the chanting of the Name, 98 recommended above the Vedas, 74 study of recommended, 78 Vedic nature of, 79 Jaimini does not adhere to Vedanta, 77 jiva according to Advaitavada, 261, 266 according to pariccheda-vada, 264 according to pratibimba-vāda, 265 affected by upadhis, 274 an integrated part of Paramätma, 441 an integrated part of the Real, 337 an integrated part of the Whole, 292 an integrated part of Visņu, 197 appropriation of the mind and senses by, 402 as adhyatmika-puruşa, 400, 401 as an element of Sänkhya in Srimad Bhagavatam, 425 as an eternal entity, 241 as asraya of the body, 407 as beginningless, 257 as belonging to Brahman, 353 as conscious energy of the subject, 240 as consciousness and conscious, 238, 241 as deluded Brahman, 277 as infinitesimal, 257 as intermediary potency, 224, 348 as intermediary potency of Paramātmā, 368 as the cause of creation, etc., 431, 436 attainment of liberation by, 394 505 506 References basic axioms regarding, 383 benefited by maya’s punishment, 249 bewilderment of, Bhagavan does not intercede in, 248 Bhagavan not indifferent to, 251 blessed with Vedic instructions, 397 bondage of beginningless, 242 bondage of defies logic, 244 cannot be a reflection of Brahman, 273 cannot be the aśraya, 432, 438 cannot be the result of upãdhis, 271 comparable to the sun’s reflection, 300 covered by mayā, 239 deliberation upon is to know Brahman, 363, 366 difference and nondifference from Brahman, 302, 303, 305 dissolution of ego and liberation, 290 distinct from Bhagavan, 295, 307, 372 distinct from Isvara, 255, 259 distinct from the phases of existence, 433 distinction of from the Reality, 383 distinction of, the basis of devotion, 308 experiences misery, 377 impregnation of into prakṛti, 422 in Advaitavada theory, 286-288 inactive state of, 394 influenced by mayā, 256 integrated part of Bhagavan, 335 intuition of the Absolute from, 381 knowledge insufficient for liberation of, 278 liberation of as ultimate dissolution, 435 liberation of dependent on grace, 280 liberation of through identity with Brahman, 275 miseries of removed by bhakti, 316 nine states of, 438 nondistinction of with Brahman, 262 not an adulterated version of Brahman, 292 not independent of Paramātmā, 374 not the ãśraya, 406 one and different from Bhagavan, 304 one and distinct from Brahman, 359, 360, 442Subject Index oneness of identity with Brahman, 356 Paramātmā as distinct from, 299 prema as prayojana for, 313 purpose of describing its oneness with Brahman, 354, 362 qualitative oneness of with Brahman, 156 reabsorption of into Hari, 391 rehabilitated by māyā and Bhagavan, 252 subject to maya’s illusion, 234 surrender required by, 313 the body as upadhi on, 401 three states of, 372 transcendental to the gunas, 237 undergoes suffering, 376 jivan-mukta jñāna as absence of ego, 290 adherents of consider Brahman as aśraya, 398 as an event of consciousness, 352 as self-study, 439 as ultimate path, 117 Brahman related to, 212 dependent on bhakti, 316, 318 insufficient as means, 308 path of as a division of the Vedas, 152 lacking the vision of the Puranas, 104 surpassed by bhakti, 213 kaivalya as prayojana, 352, 355 implies devotion, 361 Kaliyuga as the age of strife, 10 Caitanya’s appearance in, 12 channa-avatara in, 9 memory diminished in, 77 sankirtana recommended for, 163 Srimad Bhagavatam arises like the sun in, 160 the Veda divided into four at the advent of, 76 507 References kalpa Vyasa appears in every, 103 worship in, 5, 10, 11 as a synonym for Purana, 107 as one of six Vedāngas, 77 meanings of, 109 Śveta-varaha, the present day of Brahma, 428 Sarasvata, Śrimad Bhagavatam narrates the events of, 126, 131, 151, 157 Kanāda accepted the Vedas as apauruşeya, 64 philosophy of as partial, 344 Kapila accepted the Vedas as apauruşeya, 64 does not adhere to Vedanta, 77 founder of a wisdom school, 54 karma κάνγα as beginningless, 257 as impetus for action, 393 attainment of the planet of the forefathers by, 108 avataras not subject to, 266 bodies attained in accordance with, 394 bondage of remains during dissolution, 290 bonds of burned by knowledge, 242 one of seven categories in Vaiseṣika philosophy, 345 path of as a division of the Vedas, 152 lacking the vision of the Puranas, 104 vāsanās the topic of uti concerns, 389, 390 instructs like a lover, 182 kirtana complete, 10 recommended for Kali, 5, 10, 11 worship of Caitanya through, 12 Krama Sandarbha referred to as the seventh Sandarbha, 25 Kumārila Bhaṭṭa described the Vedas as authorless, 62 508 pramaņas accepted by, 57 Krsna Subject Index as nondual consciousness of Srimad Bhagavatam, 361 as sambandhi-tattva, 207, 226, 229, 236, 441 as Svayam Bhagavan, 29, 30, 33, 334 as the aśraya, 385, 412, 415, 439 as the personification of viśuddha-sattva, 115 as the Purna Puruşa, 233, 320, 323 as the supreme object of love, 350 as Ultimate Reality, 344 assured Sukadeva, 210 ätmärämas drawn to, 335 brought to Vyasa’s hermitage, 333 delivered Pūtana, 339 devotion to as liberation, 394 four special qualities of, 227 free from three kinds of difference, 348 Gayatri as a meditation on, 125 Gayatri refers to, 155 mercy of toward enemies, 339 most worthy of love, 311, 314 Name of Adhokṣaja as, 229 Caitanya sings, 5 frees one from material identification, 11 fruit of the Vedas, 94, 98 hearing of invokes His presence, 321 identical with Him, 326 meaning of, 324 purely Vedic, 98 Srimad Bhagavatam as the representation of, 184 Srimad Bhagavatam nondifferent from, 134 Sukadeva captivated by, 384 surpasses Nārāyaṇa in rasa, 314 the reservoir of all qualities, 184 the tenth topic of Srimad Bhāgavatam, 442 Laksmi in Madhva’s philosophy, 197 Śrī-sampradaya originated from, 190 509 References lakşya-artha (indicative meaning) primary meaning required for, 290 liberation lilā logic as an obstruction to love, 312 as establishment in essential nature, 390, 398 as the purpose of creation, 437 as ultimate dissolution, 435 attained by chanting Gayatri, 155 description of, 394 devotion surpasses, 161 devotion the real meaning of, 362 discussion of in different cantos, 411 impersonal, compared to a tigress, 260 included in the topic of dissolution, 430 Indian philosophical schools directed toward, 311 knowledge insufficient for, 278 knowledge of Brahman required for, 154 not aspired for by devotees, 312 one of ten topics of Srimad Bhagavatam, 382 prema as beyond, 311 through jnana, 276 Krsna distinguished by, 207 of Govinda, 165 of Kṛṣṇa beyond logic, 71 Śuka attracted to, 296 anadi in the nyaya system of, 244 Bhagavan not disclosed by, 294 dry, to be abandoned, 73 inconclusive in regard to Ultimate Truth, 69, 70 Kṛṣṇa’s lila as beyond, 71 mäyä acts contrary to, 235, 244 of ardha-kukkuți, 305 of candra-sakha-nyaya, 156 of Māyāvādis, faulty, 260 of oneness and distinction, as transrational, 303 of positive and negative concomitance, 376, 377 510 of suci-kataha-nyaya, 223 of Vyasa’s samadhi, 353 Subject Index regarding duration of a cause, 358 sabda unknowable through, 39 self-dependent, as unacceptable, 66 the Absolute acts contrary to, 244 Ultimate Truth beyond, 67 utility of in regard to scripture, 72 Vedantic, of a nondual object, 347 Western terms of, 50 Madhvācārya accepted the Vedas as apauruşeya, 64 as Vaisnava authority, 17 embraced the Vaisnava view, 171 library of, 196 refuted Advaitavada, 169, 260 rejected that the Vedas are manmade, 66 teacher of Tattvavāda, 194, 196 wrote Bhagavata-tātparya, 174 Mahabharata as the fifth Veda, 83, 440 as valuable as the Vedas, 145 contradiction regarding chronology, 327, 329, 330 distribution of the verses of, 140 heavier than the Vedas, 140 is equal to the Vedas, 154 Srimad Bhagavatam establishes the meaning of, 136, 137, 141, 142, 145 two versions of, 330 mahabhūtas (gross elements) combined through pañci-karana, 425 evolve out of the tan-mätras, 424 Mahā-purāṇa Srimad Bhagavatam as, 409 mahat-tattva (cosmic intellect) as an element of Sankhya in Srimad Bhagavatam, 424 as an evolute of primary creation, 387, 388 as the first evolute of pradhana, 392, 417, 422 Brahman distinct from, 432 511 References evolution of, 419 generated from pradhana, 289 mahā-väkya according to Sankara, 277 Mahāviṣṇu as Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣņu, 31, 32 manas (mind) a product of sättvika ego, 423 as an element of Sankhya in Srimad Bhagavatam, 424 mangalācarana asirvädätmaka, 13 Jiva Gosvāmi’s, 7 namas-kriyatmaka, 13 the first eight anucchedas comprise, 439 three types of, 6 vastu-nirdeśatmaka, 11, 13 Manus attain to Brahmaloka, 436 dharma enacted by, 382 list of fourteen, 428 period of reign of, 409, 421, 427 sad-dharma enacted by, 389, 393 manvantara māyā partial dissolution at the end of, 436 action of complemented by Bhagavan, 252 acts contrary to logic, 244 as a devotee of Bhagavan, 246, 248 as an upadhi on Brahman, 240 as anirvacaniya, 290, 291, 304 as beginningless, 242, 257 ashamed of her work, 239 Bhagavan apart from, 438 Bhagavan never under the spell of, 307 composed of the three gunas, 257 couldn’t bear to face Bhagavan, 241 dependent on Bhagavan, 262 dependent on Paramātmā, 253 disclosed as subordinate to Bhagavan, 295 512 Subject Index empirical knowledge as a feature of, 279 extrinsic potency of Bhagavan, 224, 335 how shame is possible in, 247, 253 in Advaitavada theory, 261, 286, 287 in the samadhi of Vyasa, 218 knowledge and ignorance as products of, 278 name and form as products of, 269 not part of Bhagavan’s svarupa, 231, 234 potency of the Real, 337 principal function of, 242 regulated by Puruşa, 32 separate from Bhagavan, 255 subdues the jivas, 234 Śuka free from the influence of, 333 three purposes of her punishment, 249 under Kṛṣṇa’s direction, 441 meditation intuitive insight as the basis of, 72 on Bhagavan Gayatri as, 125, 143 the dharma of Srimad Bhagavatam, 123 on Brahman, Suka abandoned, 210 on Paramātmā, 366, 367, 439 on Rädhä-Kṛṣṇa Gayatri as, 125 on the feet of Govinda, 167 on the self as Brahman, 156 on Vişnu Gayatri as, 131 the Puruşa to be self-apperceived through, 149 Vyasa ascended the path of, 124 Mīmāmsakas on the Itihasas and Puranas, 84 pramāņas accepted by, 57 mukhya-artha (primary meaning) necessity of, 290 mukhya-vṛtti nādi potency of words, 298 513 References puritat the mind enters in deep sleep, 373 Naiyayikas offer proofs of God’s existence, 71 pramāņas accepted by, 57 Narada Muni heard Srimad Bhagavatam from Suka, 180, 183 identified Vyasadeva’s gap, 123 instructed Vyasa, 97 Nārāyaṇa armor of, 127, 133 as Vyasa, Purānas compiled by, 103 devotees of Govinda not drawn to, 323 Krsna as, 29 Kṛṣṇa surpasses in rasa, 314 Mahabharata glorifies as supreme, 141 name of synonymous with Kṛṣṇa, 325 the Vedas a direct manifestation of, 54 the Vedas identical to, 60 topics of, the Nārāyaṇiya as the repository of, 139 vilasa expansion of Kṛṣṇa, 33 Vyasa as an avatara of, 101, 103, 195 nondual as freedom from three kinds of difference, 347 transphenomenal diversity as, 33 nondual consciousness as the Absolute Truth, 355 beyond cause and effect, 356 Brahman described as, 360 Buddhist view of, 356 characterized by existence and bliss, 349 intuition of through the aggregate, 383 intuition of through the individual, 342, 383 the fundamental nature of Reality, 341, 348 three aspects of, 383 Nondual Reality as the subject of Srimad Bhagavatam, 442 nondualism considered only in relation to phenomenality, 33 514 Subject Index devotional Caitanya’s philosophy as, 196 evolution of, 169 of Advaitavada, contradiction in, 287 radical accepts only the subject, 305 not supported by scripture, 296 propagated by Sankaracārya, 167 purpose of introducing, 168 refutation of through sabda, 294 theistic in line with Vyasa’s experience, 301 theistic, Vaisnava, 289 wholistic, as holarchism, 289 Nyaya anadi principle of, 243, 244 epistemology considered in, 42. leads to realization of phenomenality, 345 of Gautama, 344 on cause and effect, 358 Padmapādācārya pratibimba-vada theory of, 266 pakṣa (location) of an inference, 50 pāramārthika-sattā Brahman as, 269 in Advaitavada, 268 Paramātmā absorption of living beings into, 390 as dear, 349 as Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, 31 as immanent within the sun, 148, 156 as Karaṇodakaśāyi Viṣņu, 31 as Kşirodakaśāyī Viṣņu, 32 as nondual consciousness, 361 as the aśraya, 405, 407, 409 as the Immanent Self, 221 as the Puruşa, 227, 418 as the twenty-sixth element of Sankhya in Srimad Bhāgavatam, 425 515 References as witness of the three purusas, 408 creation maintained by, 397 dependent on Bhagavan, 334 designation of the aśraya as, 397, 398 distinct from the jiva, 299 distinguished from the ātmā, 371 included within the Purna Puruşa, 232 jivas dependent on, 362 māyā dependent on, 253 meditation on, 366 meditation on as bhakti, 439 no direct mention of in Vyasa’s samadhi, 235 not independent of Bhagavan, 236 primordial nature as an upadhi of, 228 the ätmä dependent on, 375 the atma distinct from, 377 the jiva an integrated part of, 441 the jiva as intermediary potency of, 368 the jiva distinct from, 359 the jiva’s awareness of, 433 the source of self-luminosity, 374 the witness of the jivas and maya, 438 untouched by māyā, 235 Parasurama as an avatara, 179 Parasara the twenty-sixth Vyasa, 103 para-vyoma beyond material creation, 33 pariccheda-vāda contradicted by Vyasa’s samadhi, 267 not supported by scripture, 296 refutation of, 270, 282, 284, 287, 288 theory of explained, 264 valid interpretation of, 297 Parikşit inquires from the sages, 178 Patanjali accepted the Vedas as apauruşeya, 63 516Subject Index did not accept conclusions of Vedanta-sutra, 117 founder of a wisdom school, 54 samadhi in the system of, 215 Paurānikas pramaņas accepted by, 57 perception (pratyakṣa) as pramāna, 38, 46 as unmediated seeing, 47 deficient as pramāņa, 41 no power to contradict sabda, 54 one of three primary pramaņas, 57 vaiduşa and avaidușa, 54 vaiduşa, sabda coextensive with, 209 valid when in accord with sabda, 440 validity of impaired by four defects, 45, 60 Prabhakara pramaņas accepted by, 57 pradhana (primordial nature) as the state of equilibrium, 422 destabilization of, 417 generates mahat-tattva, 289 perturbation of caused by the Lord’s glance, 422 the dormant state of nature, 391 Pradyumna as Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣņu, 32 prakṛti (primordial nature) as beginningless, 242 as eternal, 256 as the separated energy of Bhagavan, 438 as the state of equilibrium, 422 as the upadhi of Paramātmā, 221 beginningless relation with the jiva, 243 dissolution of, 394 impregnation of with jivas, 422 not independent of Bhagavan, 348 the dormant state of nature, 391 the world as a transformation of, 197 works under Krsna’s direction, 235 prama 517 References as valid knowledge, 42 sense perception can lead to, 46 pramāņa as epistemological means, 37 as the means of valid knowing, 30, 42 comparison as, 55 gesture as, 57 inclusion as, 56 inference as, 38, 50 no other can substantiate the Vedas, 66 non-cognition of beings as, 56 perception as, 38, 46 presumption as, 55 sabda as, 38, 39, 51, 53 sabda as supreme, 440 sättvika Purāṇas as, 116 Srimad Bhagavatam as the most authoritative, 207 Srimad Bhagavatam as, 201, 211, 222, 295, 344 Srimad Bhagavatam as supreme, 440 Srimad Bhagavatam as the emperor of, 114, 153, 159, 195 statements of sages as, 54 subsumed under three categories, 57 ten in number, 46, 57 the Vedas as, 70 tradition as, 56 validity of impaired by four defects, 45 pramātā as the knower, 42 prameya prāņa description of, 197 disclosed by Srimad Bhagavatam, 207 intrinsically related to pramāna, 208 as changeless, 369, 372 as one, 364, 368 the atma compared to, 365 prātibhāsika-sattā in Advaitavada, 268 sublation of, 269 518 Subject Index pratibimba-văda contradicted by Vyasa’s samadhi, 267 not supported by scripture, 296 refutation of, 270, 272, 282, 284, 287, 288 theory of explained, 265 valid interpretation of, 297 prayojana as disclosed by Vyasa, 222 as disclosed to Vyasa, 215 determination of, 58, 201, 341, 344, 440, 441 determination of by Vyasa, 221 determination of through samadhi, 295 kaivalya as, 352, 355 not clearly ascertained through Vedanta alone, 78 one of four essential items of a book, 6 one of four primary topics of a book, 27 one of four seed topics, 29 prema as, 41, 202, 207, 211, 224, 226, 310, 312, 320, 322, 442 prema for Kṛṣṇa as, 314 prema related to sambandha and abhidheya, 211, 213, 239 self-revealed through sabda, 208 the basis of, 237 actualized through bhajana, 42 as prayojana, 30, 41, 202, 207, 211, 212, 224, 310, 312, 326, 335, 441 as the basis of glory in Mathura, 14 as the completion stage of bhakti, 225 as the fifth puruşărtha, 311 as the ultimate attainment, 442 counteracts two fundamental faults, 316 definition of, 224, 318 dependent on grace, 315, 317 makes possible realization of Bhagavan, 317 not produced by sadhana, 322 not something generated, 226 perception of as prayojana, 320 raga-bhakti as the ultimate expression of, 169 sadhana matures into, 319 samskāras destroyed by, 320 519 References self-manifests by hearing Śrimad Bhagavatam, 322, 323 superiority of to brahma-sayujya, 213 Vyasa perceived as prayojana, 314 priests (rtviks) four divisions of, 87, 90 Puranas allow for variation in wording, 78 as apauruşeya, 75, 91, 96 as good as the Vedas, 110 as reliable as the Vedas, 78 as the fifth Veda, 82, 84, 85, 87, 91, 440 as transpersonal (apauruşeya), 85 chronology of, 330 complete the Vedas, 79 culminate in Bhagavan alone, 152 derived from the Yajur Veda, 90 divided in eighteen parts, 89 divisions of according to the gunas, 108, 109, 134 emanated from Brahma’s mouth, 81 establish the meaning of the Vedas, 95, 106 eternality of, 97 excellence of due to compiler, 103 five subjects of, 108 gunas embodied by, 114, 115 instruct like a friend, 182 major and minor, 410, 413, 414 purely Vedic, 98 recitation of compared to the chanting of the Name, 98 recommended above the Vedas, 74 sättvika as sabda-pramāṇa, 116 spotless, Srimad Bhagavatam as, 118 Srimad Bhagavatam as the Sama Veda among, 143, 157 Srimad Bhagavatam the most complete of, 136 study of recommended, 78 those in sattva are more authentic, 112 Vedic nature of, 93 Pura Puruşa as the original Complete Person, 221 520 Subject Index denial of impersonal interpretation of, 228 Kṛṣṇa as, 226, 227, 233, 320, 321, 323 Paramātmā and Brahman included within, 232 witnessed by Vyasa, 218 Puruşa as eternal, 256 as Garbhodakaśayi Viṣṇu, 31 as immanent within the sun, 149 as Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣņu, 31 as Kṣirodakasayi Viṣṇu, 32 as Paramātmā, 221, 227, 418 as the Immanent Self, 226 essential characteristic of, 232 Kṛṣṇa as, 29, 31 māyā regulated by, 29, 32 primordial nature an upadhi of, 228 three forms of, 31, 32 puruşarthas the fifth, prema as, 311 the Vedas educate about, 310 Pūrva-mīmāṁsā epistemology considered in, 42 Pūtanā awarded post of a foster-mother, 339 Radha as personified potency of bliss, 234 Caitanya covered with the complexion of, 9, 12 Gayatri as a meditation on, 125 Radha-Krsna Gayatri as a meditation on, 125 monists worship merely for liberation, 312 Radhamohana Gosvāmi comments on a Mīmāmsaka view, 84 comments on Tattva Sandarbha, 171 Rāmacandra as svämśa expansion, 348 Rāmānujācārya accepted the Vedas as apauruşeya, 64 as Vaisnava authority, 17 521 References Jiva’s explanations based on, 190, 191 refuted Advaitavada, 169 Rāmāyaṇa rasa as the fifth Veda, 440 Kṛṣṇa surpasses Nārāyaṇa in, 314 of Srimad Bhagavatam, 172 rşi (sage) authoritative statements of, 54 names of recited in Vedic study, 63 sapta Rudra appearance of with the Manus, 427 approached Nārāyaṇa, 102 Hari destroys through, 84 Rūpa Gosvāmi accepted the Vedas as apauruşeya, 64 engaged Jiva in composing the Sandarbhas, 18 spiritual teacher of Jiva Gosvāmi, 14 Śabara Svāmi sabda accepted the Vedas as apauruseya, 62 as pramāņa, 38, 39, 51, 53 as revealed sound, 37 as standard of validity for Vaisnavas, 55 as supracognitive sound potency, 38 as the supreme pramāna, 440 assisted by perception and inference, 60 Bhagavan understood through, 304 Buddhist philosophy inconsistent with, 61 coextensive with supra-cognitive knowing, 208 free from defects, 54 Itihasas and Purānas as, 78 Krsna’s lila understandable only by, 71 one of three primary pramāņas, 57 refutation of Advaitavada through, 294 sättvika Purānas as, 116 self-confirmation not a defect in, 70 Srimad Bhagavatam as, 201 522 Subject Index vaiduşa-pratyaksa the basis of, 54 validity of established, 42 sabda-brahma, 440 sad-dharma as enacted by the Manus, 389, 393 as enacted by the Manus, devas, and sages, 427 delineated through descriptions of the Manus, 421 sādhaka (practitioner) importance of metaphysical view for, 211 sadhana-catuṣṭaya (fourfold practice) recommended by Sankarācārya, 277 sadhya as prema, 320 as inferred object in logic, 50 samādhi as a higher mode of knowing, 48 as a supracognitive state, 215 of Vyasa abhidheya perceived in, 315 Advaitavada contradicts, 241, 267, 294 all that was witnessed in, 323 Bhagavan witnessed in, 233 consistency of with the experience of ātmāramas, 332 description of, 217 does not support nondistinction, 353 four items perceived in, 256 Kṛṣṇa perceived in, 326 Māyāvāda refuted in, 441 parallels the account of Suka, 221 Paramātmā and Brahman not mentioned in, 235 perception of prema in, 320 reality principles determined in, 441 reconciliation of scripture with, 302 reveals Bhagavan as aśraya, 438 self-disclosure of truth in, 229 Srimad Bhagavatam disclosed in, 330 the jiva not the aśraya in, 432 ultimate truth of Srimad Bhagavatam revealed in, 223 open-eyes, of Sukadeva, 202 523 References pastimes of Kṛṣṇa to be experienced in, 220 sambandha as disclosed to Vyasa, 215, 222 as the relation between signified and signifier, 41, 341, 343, 344 as the relation between word and meaning, 29 determination of, 58, 201, 341, 344, 440, 441 determination of by Vyasa, 221 determination of through samadhi, 295 elaboration of in Anucchedas 50-63, 442 not clearly ascertained through Vedänta alone, 78 one of four essential items of a book, 6 one of four primary topics of a book, 27 one of four seed topics, 29 purpose of stating, 6 related to abhidheya and prayojana, 211, 213, 239 self-revealed through sabda, 208 sambandhi-tattva as the Purna Puruşa, 232 Bhagavan as, 211 direct realization of by Suka, 202 elaboration of, 239 Krsna as, 207, 226, 229, 236, 439, 441 samskāras destroyed by prema, 320, 323 samvit as the potency of consciousness, 233 sandarbha defined, 24 sandhini as the potency of being, 233 Sankarācārya accepted the Vedas as apauruşeya, 64 as an avatara of Śiva, 161 Brahman according to, 271 Govindaşṭaka of, 162, 163 Madhvācārya belonged to the line of, 171 maha-vakya according to, 277 no fault in propagating Advaitavada, 169 proponent of pratibimba-vada, 266 524 Subject Index proposed three grades of existence, 268 purpose of in introducing Advaitavāda, 168 recommends sadhana-catuṣṭaya, 277 Śiva ordered to descend as, 167 tenets of based on Vedanta-sūtra, 260 Vyasa’s experience contradicts the view of, 258 wrote poems glorifying Krsna’s pastimes, 173 Sankarṣaṇa as Karaṇodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, 32 Sänkhya buddhi in, 422 on the evolution of pradhana, 289 pramānas accepted by, 57 Srimad Bhagavatam metaphysics of, 424 sankirtana as primary, 11 recommended for Kaliyuga, 10, 163 self-discloses Bhagavan, 13 true import of, 10 Sanskrit vaidika and laukika, 76, 78 Vedic tonal accents in, 78 Sanatana Gosvāmī engaged Jiva in composing the Sandarbhas, 18 spiritual teacher of Jiva Gosvāmi, 14 Sarasvati glorified in the mixed Purāņas, 108 sarga (primary creation), 422 description of, 387, 388, 392, 417, 418 discussed in the first two cantos, 414 found in both lists of ten topics, 413 one of five topics of a minor Purana, 410, 413 one of ten topics of Srimad Bhagavatam, 382, 409 Sarva-samvadini on sabda-pramaņa, 54 scriptural logic supported in, 72 ten pramānas listed in, 46 two divisions of pratyaksa in, 48 525 References sat (real) sattva as defined in Bhagavad Gitä, 290 as ontological completion, 213 as the sole existent in the beginning, 353 Brahman cannot be defined as, 271 in Advaitavada only Brahman is, 196 in Tattvavāda, everything is, 196 mayă other than, 290, 291, 304 the inherent value of Bhagavan as, 212 leads to valid determination, 49 Satyayuga avatara’s complexion in, 8 knowledge remained pure in, 102 worship in, 11 science endless theorizing in, 71 not uniquely objective, 64 reference to in the Vedas, 65 scientific materialism as the dominant world view, 44 scientists prone to deception, 64 seed-conception description of, 27 senses (cognitive) arise from taijasa-ahankära, 423 as elements of Sänkhya in Srimad Bhagavatam, 425 as evolutes of primary creation, 387, 388, 392, 417 assisted by buddhi, 423 Brahman beyond the reach of, 271 consciousness appears variegated by the influence of, 365, 367, 368 control of as the purpose of injunctions, 308 creation made perceivable to, 397 deactivation of in deep sleep, 369, 370, 372, 374 function of facilitated by the devas, 399, 401 limitations of, 45 limited functional capacity of, 41, 43 misapplied in service of ego, 245 526Subject Index operation of, 46, 49 perceive only present events, 53 perception occurs through, 46 prāna appears as many in contact with, 364 presiding deities as the aśraya of, 407 purposes of the creation of, 250, 437 sadhana enacted through, 318 subject to delusion and limitation, 47 the body as the seat of, 401, 402 transcendental, 49 transmutation of, 48 without physical seats prior to the body, 400 senses (conative) arise from taijasa-ahankara, 423 as elements of Sänkhya in Srimad Bhagavatam, 424 Sheldrake, Dr., Rupert Śiva Smrti quoted from Science Set Free, 45, 64 as the greatest Vaisnava, 167 declared as Supreme in Śiva Purana, 110 glorified in the Linga Purana, 116 glorified in the tamasika Purāņas, 107 glorifies the Purāņas, 102, 104 ordered to descend as Sankarācārya, 167 oversees cosmic dissolution, 392 Sankarācārya as an avatara of, 161 Itihāsas and Purāņas as, 99 Śrīdhara Svāmi appealed to non-theistic Vedäntists, 169 as a great Vaiṣṇava, 191 as Vaisnava authority, 17 inserted Advaitavada conceptions in his commentary, 189, 191 inserted monistic ideas in Srimad Bhagavatam commentary, 336 Jiva’s explanations based on, 191 revered by Caitanya, 337 Srimad Bhagavatam a commentary on Gayatri, 143, 145 Absolute Reality to be known from, 347 527 528 References as apauruşeya, 119 as pramāņa, 211, 222, 295 as a Maha-puraṇa, 409 as signifier of Reality, 341 as supreme pramāṇa, 440 as the beloved of Bhagavan, 128 as the emperor of all pramāņas, 114, 118, 153, 159, 195 as the fruit of the Vedas, 174 as the natural commentary on Vedanta-sutra, 121, 137, 139 based on Gayatri, 124, 126, 155 Caitanya relied on, 311 captivated Sukadeva, 214 characteristics of, 157 commentaries on, 160, 162 contradiction regarding chronology, 327, 329, 330 controversy regarding, 131, 132 correspondence of the ten topics of, 421, 442 culminates in the aśraya, 397 discussion of the ten topics of in every canto, 412, 415 epistemological validity of, 440 established as pramāņa, 201 establishes the meaning of Mahabharata, 141, 145 expands the meaning of the Vedas, 143, 152 explanation of the name of, 158 hearing of awakens prema, 320, 322, 323 hearing of is bhakti, 335 hearing of transformed Sukadeva, 202, 210 in agreement with Gayatri, 156 Madhvacārya commented on, 173 meant for the sätvatas, 315 more relishable from Suka’s mouth, 296 most authoritative pramāṇa, 207 nine topics of define the tenth, 385, 391, 395 nondifferent from Krsna, 134 nondual consciousness as the subject of, 360, 442 nonlinear logic founded on, 377 promotes prema as prayojana, 312 purpose of to describe the aśraya, 384, 416 revealed to Vyasa in trance, 124, 223 Subject Index Sama Veda among the Puranas, 143, 157 Sänkhya metaphysics of, 424 signifier of Reality, 343 Śridhara’s commentary as preeminent, 337 Sukadeva studied, 219, 333, 335 supreme authority on Svayam Bhagavān, 11 teaches in three ways, 181 ten topics of, 382, 422 ten topics of are not sequential, 411, 415 the Absolute as the subject of, 352 the direct utterance of Bhagavan, 153 the essence of Vedanta, 172 the exclusive subject of, 354 the representation of Kṛṣṇa, 180, 184 the reservoir of all qualities, 184 the scripture of supreme transcendence, 129, 134 two versions of the ten topics of reconciled, 413 unfolds from Gayatri, 121, 150 unmanifest at the end of Dvaparayuga, 97 Vyasa taught to Suka, 327, 338 Vyasa’s experience the nucleus of, 301 Vyasa’s purpose in composing, 226 witnessed in samādhi, 330 Śrī-sampradaya Śruti Gopala Bhaṭṭa studied the teachings of, 16 originated from Lakṣmi, 190 as revealed sound, 37 intuition of Brahman through assimilation of, 275 nature of Brahman defined in, 353, 357 on the body as a purusa, 401 on the conscious nature of the jiva, 371 on the relation of the jiva and Brahman, 361 on the state of deep sleep, 373 oneness of the jiva and Brahman described in, 359 Śrimad Bhagavatam as the highest manifestation of, 182 statements of cannot be meaningless, 278 statements of considered as Purāņic, 84 the Vedas as, 65 529 References subjective Reality meaning of, 222 Śukadeva accepted as guru, 173, 179 appeared like an avadhuta, 178 attraction of to the lila of Bhagavan, 296 captivated by Hari, 333 captivated by Srimad Bhagavatam, 214 determination of truth from, 383 drawn out of fixity in Brahman, 213, 295 drawn to the pastimes of Kṛṣṇa, 205 established in direct knowing, 48 experience of contradicts Advaitavada, 294 explains nine topics to define the tenth, 385 identity of heart with Vyasa, 208, 222, 334, 336 increased distinction of Srimad Bhagavatam due to, 183 protected from maya by Kṛṣṇa, 333, 338 Reality directly known by, 358 Reality manifested to through sabda, 40 reality principles determined by, 344, 441 self-realized in the womb, 209 Srimad Bhagavatam first spoken by, 131 studied Srimad Bhagavatam, 335 topmost student of Vyasadeva, 174 transformed by hearing Śrimad Bhagavatam, 202, 210 two accounts of, 339 two levels of awakening in, 209 untouched by Mayā, 207 Vyasa taught Srimad Bhagavatam to, 219, 327, 328, 338 svarupa-sakti devotion belongs to, 318 seen by Vyasa, 230 the qualities of Bhagavan as, 232 svayam-prakāśa sabda as, 38 svayam-rupa definition of, 34 Svayam Bhagavan as sambandhi-tattva of Srimad Bhagavatam, 236 530 Subject Index expansion of into svamśa forms, 348 Kṛṣṇa as, 29, 30, 33, 184, 227, 229, 441 most worthy of love, 313 Srimad Bhagavatam as supreme authority on, 11 the Purna Purusa as, 221 Sūta Gosvāmī was not a dvija, 78 tan-matras (subtle elements) a product of tamasika ego, 424 as elements of Sankhya in Srimad Bhagavatam, 425 as evolutes of primary creation, 387, 388, 418 mix with the time energy, 424 Tantrikas pramāņas accepted by, 57 Tattvavāda time taught by Madhvacārya, 194, 196 not conscious, 257 perceived by Vyasa in samadhi, 256 two categories of, 257 Tretayuga avatara’s complexion in, 8 knowledge somewhat distorted in, 102 worship in, 11 Tvaṣṭā received knowlegde of Nārāyaṇa Armor, 133 upădhi according to pariccheda-vāda, 264 as apparently real, 283 as empirically real, 270, 271, 275, 278 as self-appropriated by the jiva, 431 Brahman cannot be reflected in, 274 distinction of the jiva and Bhagavan not due to, 264 flaw in ascribing to Brahman, 272 flaws in Advaitavada theory of, 268 Isvara as, on Brahman, 286 of avidya, 288 of Brahman, the jiva is not, 238 531 References of Paramätma, primordial nature as, 221, 228 of vidya, 288 on Brahman, 240, 261 the atma free from in deep sleep, 370 the body as, of the ātmā, 228 the body as, on the jiva, 401 translation of, 227 two grades of, 270 vidya and avidya as, 278 Upanisads advaya-jñāna as the essence of, 356 as the cream of the Vedas, 117 number of, 76 oneness of the jiva and Brahman as the essence of, 360 Sankarācārya commented on, 167 Sankarācārya’s tenets based on, 168, 260 statements of as viṣaya-vakya of Vedanta-sutra, 190, 299 teach that Brahman is an integrated whole, 355 the Supreme Brahman as the essence of, 354 Vedanta-sutra incorporates the essential message of, 117 upāsanā path of as a division of the Vedas, 152 Vacaspati Miśra pariccheda-vāda theory of, 265 Vaikuntha as eternal, 149 as the residence of Nārāyaṇa, 29 Bhagavan as the Lord of, 389 in para-vyoma, 33 kṛṣṇa-prema not available to the residents of, 251 name of synonymous with Kṛṣṇa, 325 Vaiśeşika of Kanāda, 345 Vaiśeşikas pramaņas accepted by, 57 reduction of reality by, 343 seven categories of, 345 Vaisnavas 532 Subject Index emphasize acintya nature of Bhagavan, 304 interpretation of Vedanta-sütra of, 117 prior to Caitanya, 311 Śiva as the greatest of, 167 theistic nondualism of, 289 view of embraced by Madhvacārya, 171 Vallabhācārya refuted Advaitavāda, 169 Vamadeva Veda demonstrated the path of self-study, 434 divided into four, 101 Vedanta Srimad Bhagavatam as the essence of, 352 theistic on deity worship in Advaitavada, 312 theory of perception of, 367 Vedanta-sutra (or Brahma-sutra) Advaitavada interpretation condemned by Caitanya, 337 as a basis of reconciliation, 117 chronology of, 330 conclusions of the Vedas presented in, 70 decisive conclusions of the Vedas, 113 divisions of, 190, 299 essence of the Vedas, 123 intuition of Brahman from the jiva in, 366 lack of conformity as to the meaning of, 77 Śańkarācārya commented on, 167 Sankarācārya’s tenets based on, 260 Srimad Bhagavatam a natural commentary on, 117, 121, 137, 139, 440 Vyasa’s method in, 385 Vedāntists Vedas minimize the value of logical proof, 71 absolute nondistinction not advocated by, 301 accepted by Advaitavādīs, 298 advocate difference and nondifference, 304, 305 as apauruşeya-sabda, 51, 54, 61, 63, 66 as infallible, 68 533 534 References as pramāna, 59 Buddha’s impact on, 168 chronology of, 330 completed by the Purāņas, 79, 98 conclusions of presented in Vedanta-sutra, 70 covered by ignorance due to Gautama’s curse, 104 devotion as the true intent of, 169 divided into four, 76, 93 dry logic to be abandoned in the study of, 73 educate about puruṣārthas, 310 equate the jiva with Brahman, 305 eternality of, 97 free from defects, 65 Gayatri as the essence of, 124 Gayatri embodies the meaning of, 121 identical to Nārāyaṇa, 60 infallibility of, 295 Itihasas and Purānas nondifferent from, 75 Kṛṣṇa’s Name as the fruit of, 94, 98 Mahabharata as equal to, 154 Mahabharata as valuable as, 145 manifested through Brahma, 81 meaning of established by Purānas and Itihāsas, 95, 106 Purānas as good as, 110 rejected by Buddha, 358 Sama Veda as the best of, 143, 157 six limbs of (Vedāngas), 77 Srimad Bhagavatam as the essence of, 172, 174 Srimad Bhagavatam as the purport of, 117 Srimad Bhagavatam expands the meaning of, 136, 143, 152 stress the importance of the guru, 64 study of not recommended at present, 74 subdivisions of, 76 teach like a ruler, 182 the fifth, Puranas and Itihasas as, 82, 84, 85, 87, 91 the role of reason in understanding, 72 three divisions of, 152 to be interpreted in accord with Vyasa’s trance, 299 understanding of requires a guru, 67 Subject Index upanayana-samskära a prerequisite for, 123 Upanisads as the cream of, 117 valid in regard to Ultimate Truth, 69 word order of is fixed, 75, 78 word order of unchanged, 65 written in Vedic Sanskrit, 78 Yajur as the original, 87, 90, 92 Vedic literature chronology of, 330 vidya (knowledge) a product of māyā, 278 as an aspect of maya, 261 as upadhi of maya, 288 in Advaitavada theory, 286 Isvara as the proprietor of, 286 limitation of Brahman by, 265 reflection of Brahman in, 265 synonymous with devotion, 279, 280 vilāsa expansion definition of, 33 visarga (secondary creation) visaya Viṣṇu description of, 387, 392, 418, 426 discussed in the first two cantos, 414 found in both lists of ten topics, 413 one of ten topics of Srimad Bhagavatam, 382, 409 determination of, 58 Kṛṣṇa as, 41 one of four essential items of a book, 6 one of four primary topics of a book, 27 one of four seed topics, 29 abode of as Brahman, 149 and the killing of Vrtra, 131 as the object of meditation in Gayatri, 146 declared as Supreme in Visnu Purāṇa, 110 Gayatri as a meditation on, 131 name of synonymous with Kṛṣṇa, 325 oversees cosmic maintenance, 392 535 References supreme among the trinity, 197 three forms of, 32 upholds Vedic culture in the universe, 427 worship of as the meaning of Gayatri, 155 viśuddha-sattva Kṛṣṇa as the personification of, 115 Viśvarupa taught Indra the Nārāyaṇa Armor, 133 Vrträsura Devi Bhagavatam tells the story of, 131 generated by intonation of a mantra, 78 killed by Indra’s thunderbolt, 133 Srimad Bhagavatam tells the story of, 122, 126 vyapti (invariable concomitance) in inference, 50 the key factor in inference, 51 Vyasadeva appears in every Kaliyuga, 103 as an avatara, 91, 96, 99, 103, 179 as Nārāyaṇa, 101 Bhagavan descends as, 313 brought Krsna to his hermitage, 333, 338 compiled Mahābhārata, 79, 331 compiled Vedanta-sūtra, 113 compiler of the Vedas and Purāņas, 110 composed two editions of Srimad Bhagavatam, 140, 329 delivers the meaning of Gayatri in Srimad Bhagavatam, 125 determination of truth from, 383 divided the original Purāṇa, 90 divided the Veda into four, 76, 87, 101 established in direct knowing, 48 experience of supports theistic nonduality, 301 heard Srimad Bhagavatam from Suka, 180, 183 identity of heart with Suka, 208, 334, 336 instructed by Narada, 97 knowledge of is beyond everyone’s grasp, 96 Kṛṣṇa perceived by in samadhi, 326 meaning of the name of, 93 method of in Vedanta-sutra, 385 536Subject Index opinion of hard to determine, 117 perceived bhakti as abhidheya, 225, 307, 315, 317 perceived four items in samadhi, 256 perceived prema as prayojana, 314, 320, 322 purpose of in composing Srimad Bhagavatam, 226 Reality directly known by, 358 Reality manifested to through sabda, 40 reality principles determined by, 344, 441 revelation of sambandhi-tattva to, 224 samadhi of contradicts Advaitavada, 260, 267, 294 description of, 217 discloses Bhagavan as aśraya, 438 does not support nondistinction, 353 implies a transmental mode of knowing, 215 parallels the account of Suka, 221 sometimes called Kṛṣṇa, 324 Srimad Bhagavatam as the crowning achievement of, 123 Srimad Bhagavatam revealed to in samadhi, 121, 124, 223 Srimad Bhagavatam self-manifested to, 137 taught Srimad Bhagavatam to Sukadeva, 171, 174, 327, 328, 338 the heart of contains all knowledge, 103 Vedas to be interpreted in accord with, 299 witnessed Bhagavan in samadhi, 233 writing of Itihasas and Purānas, Mimāmsakas view of, 84 vyävahārika-sattä in Advaitavada, 268 sublation of, 269 Yasoda binding Kṛṣṇa, 71 yoga Kṛṣṇa suckled by, 324 devotees easily attain the results of, 316 of unalloyed devotion subdues the material energy, 232 Vyasa established in, 217 other scriptures focus on, 184 undertaken by Devahuti, 434 Yoga (School) 537 538 References pramānas accepted by, 57 samadhi outlined in, 215 yogamāyā Kṛṣṇa veils Himself through, 9 Yudhisthira instructed by Bhisma, 183 Verse Index abhasaś ca nirodhaś ca (SB 2.10.7), 396, 406 abhiyuktatarair anyair (BRS 1.1.46), 71 abhiyuktatarair anyair (Vakya-padiya 1.34), 71 acchedyo’yam adahyo’yam (GĪTĀ 2.24), 271 acintyäḥ khalu ye bhāvā (Mahabharata, Bhisma-parva 5.22), 69 adav ante ca madhye ca (Skanda Purana 4.95.12), 80 adav ante ca madhye ca (Hari-vamsa Purana 3.132.95), 152 adhikari ca sambandho (source unknown), 6 adhitästena yenoktam (Vişņu-dharma Purana), 95 adhītavān dvāparādau (SB 2.1.8), 206, 213 adho’nena sayanena (Hari-vamsa Purana 2.101.30), 229 adhvaryavam yajurbhis tu (Vayu Purana 1.60.18), 87 adhyagan mahad ākhyānam (SB 1.7.11), 219, 333, 335 ady-anta-vad asaj jñātvā (SB 11.28.9), 57 adyapy amartya-loke tu (MP 53.10), 89 adyapy amartya-loke tu (Śiva Purana 7.1.1.38), 93 adya-trayaṁ brahma-rupam (Drg-drsya-viveka 20), 269 agneḥ puranam gayatrim (source unknown), 150 agneyam ca şaḍ etani (Padma Purana 5.236.18.21), 109 agny-ādi-rupo vişnur hi (AP 216.8), 146 agrhyo na grhyate (BAU 9.26), 271 aham brahma param dhama (SB 12.5.11), 262 aham eva kalau vipra (Naradiya Purana 5.47), 9 aham eväsam evagre (SB 2.9.32), 232 aham jyotiḥ paramṁ brahma (AP 216.6), 147, 156 aham sarvasya prabhavaḥ (GITA 10.8), 232, 350 aham tvām sarva-papebhyo (GITA 18.66), 313 ahankära itiyam me (GITA 7.4), 438 ahastāni sa-hastānām (SB 1.13.47), 426 539 Verse Index asti bhāti priyam rūpam (Drg-drsya-viveka 20), 269 astv evam anga bhagavan (SB 5.6.18), 219 asya mahato bhūtasya (BAU 2.4.10), 75, 83, 91, 331 asya viśvasya atra sargo (Bhāvārtha-dipikā 12.7.9), 413 ata eva copamā suryakādi-vat (vs 3.2.18), 299 atas tadaiva pūrva-nirmitasyaiva (Sarartha-darśini 1.7.8), 140 atha ha bhagavams tava (SB 12.6.72), 148, 156 atha ha väva nityäni (Bhällaveya-śruti), 256 athāpi socasyātmānam (SB 1.5.4), 123 atharvāņam atho vedam (Kurma Purana, Purva 52.20), 76 athāto brahma-jijñāsā (vs 1.1.1), 439 atha yada suṣupto (BAU 2.1.19), 373 ātmāpahata-pāpmā vijaro (CHU 8.7.1), 366 ātmārāmāś ca munayo (SB 1.7.10), 219, 232, 332, 335 ātmā vă are draṣṭavyah (BAU 2.4.5), 72 ätmeśvaro’tarkya-sahasra-saktiḥ (SB 3.33.3), 357 atra sargo visargaś ca (SB 2.10.1), 381, 383 atrir vasisthas cyavanaḥ (SB 1.19.9), 176 audgatram samabhiś caiva (Vayu Purana 1.60.18), 87 avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā (GITA 9.11), 385 avani-patir ivāsādhünăm (SB 12.6.71), 148, 156 avaśyam eva vaktavyam (source unknown), 6 avatārānucaritaṁ hares (SB 2.10.5), 388 avatīrņo mahāyogi (Skanda Purana), 101 āvirbhūtās tato vedäḥ (Skanda Purana 7.2.3), 81 ävirhitaḥ kväpi tirohitaś ca (SB 5.11.12), 405 avyäkṛta-guna-kṣobhan (SB 12.7.11), 417, 424 avyucchinnäs tatas tv ete (VP 1.2.26), 256 bahūnām janmanām ante (GITA 7.19), 48 barhāpīḍam naṭa-vara-vapuḥ (SB 10.21.5), 339 bhagavac-chabda-vacyäni (vp 6.5.79), 233 bhagavad-bhakta-rupeņa (Naradiya Purana 5.47), 9 bhagavan iti sabdo’yam (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 226.68), 220 bhagavantam tatra matva (source unknown), 150 bhaktir utpadyate pumsaḥ (SB 1.7.7), 218, 226, 229, 320, 322 bhakti-yogam adhokṣaje (SB 1.7.6), 218, 229, 295, 307, 316, 317 bhakti-yogena manasi (SB 1.7.4), 217, 223, 229, 317, 320 bhaktyā sañjātaya bhaktyā (SB 11.3.31), 322 bhaktyā tv ananyaya sakya (GĪTĀ 11.54), 280 541 References aho baki yam stana-kala-kūṭam (SB 3.2.23), 339 ajñānenāvṛtaṁ jñānam (GĪTĀ 5.15), 238 ajo nityaḥ śāśvato’yam (GITA 2.20), 271 akāmaḥ sarva-kāmo vā (SB 2.3.10), 221, 319 akāmas tu tad avapnoti (Vişņu-dharmottara Purana 1.165), 155 akaroḥ sacivaṁ dutam (SB 1.9.20), 338 akhyānaiś capy upakhyanair (Vayu Purana 1.60.21), 87 alakṣya-lingo nija-labha-tusto (SB 1.19.25), 178 amathya matimanthena (Mahabharata, Mokṣa-dharma 343.12), 138 ambarīşa suka-proktam (Padma Purana), 130 ambuvad agrahanat tu (vs 3.2.19), 297, 299 anadi mat-param brahma (GITA 13.13), 270 anadir bhagavan kalo (VP 1.2.26), 256 ananyāpekşi yad rupam (LBH 1.1.12), 33 anarthopaśamam sākṣād (SB 1.7.6), 218, 225, 229, 232, 247, 315-317, 319 andesu pesişu taruşv (SB 11.3.39), 369, 372, 383 anena jīvenātmanānupraviśya (CHU 6.3.2), 359 anityam asukham lokam (GĪTA 9.33), 252 anvaya-vyatirekābhyam (SB 2.9.35), 232 anyārthaś ca paramarśaḥ (vs 1.3.20), 363, 367 anye ca devarși-brahmarṣi-varya (SB 1.19.11), 176 anye vyavaharanty etany (Skanda Purana), 100 anyonyabhibhavāśraya-janana-mithuna-vṛttayah (Sankhya-kärikā 12), 289 apara-samsara-samudra (Padma Purana), 134 apareyam itas tv anyam (GĪTĀ 7.5), 235 apaśyat puruşaṁ pūrṇam (SB 1.7.4), 217, 221, 226, 229, 232, 317, 320, 321 apasyat puruşaṁ pūrvam (SB 1.7.4, variant reading), 230 aranyakaṁ ca vedebhya (Mahabharata, Mokṣa-dharma 343.13), 138 ardha-kukkuți-nyaya (source unknown), 305 artho’yam brahma-sūtrāņām (Bhāgavata-tātparya 1.1.1), 136 artho’yam brahma-sūtrāṇām (Garuda Purana), 136 asango hy ayam puruṣaḥ (BAU 4.3.15), 274 asan varņās trayo hy asya (SB 10.8.13), 8 āśliṣya vā pāda-ratam (Sikṣāṣṭaka 8), 350 aṣṭādaśa-purāṇānām (Skanda Purana, Visnu-khanda 5.16.33), 143 aṣṭādaśa-purāṇāni (MP 53.70), 329 aṣṭādaśa-sahasrāņi (AP 272.7), 127 aṣṭādaśa-sahasrāņi (MP 53.22), 122 aṣṭādaśa-sahasrāņi (Skanda Purana 7.1.2.42), 126 540 Verse Index daśame daśamam lakṣyam (Bhavartha-dipika 10.1.1), 412 daśame kṛṣṇa-sat-kirti (Bhāvārtha-dipikā 10.1.1), 412 deśe dese tatha granthän (Bharata-tätparya 2.7), 195 devair brahmadibhiḥ sarvair (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.273), 137 dharma-gläni-nimittas tu (Bhävartha-dipikā 10.1.1), 412 dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavo (SB 1.1.2), 122, 181 dharma-samsthapanarthaya (GITA 4.8), 392 dharma-viseṣa-prasutad (Vaiseṣika-sutra 1.1.4), 344 dhimahiti gayatrya prarambhena ca (Bhavartha-dipika 1.1.1), 124 dhyanena puruşo’yam ca (AP 216.16), 149 dravya-guna-karma-samanya (Vaiśeşika-sutra 1.1.4), 344 dvādaśa-skandha-yukto’yam (Bhagavata-tätparya 1.1.1), 136 dvädaśa-skandha-yukto’yam (Garuda Purana), 136 dvadasa-skandha-yukto’yam (Garuda Purana), 144 dvaipayanena yad buddham (Padma Purāņa), 96 dvăpare paricaryāyām (SB 12.3.52), 11 eka āsīd yajur vedas (Vayu Purana 1.60.17), 87 ekādaśo yaś ca lalața (Padma Purana), 134 ekam ekatarābhāve (SB 2.10.9), 400, 404, 406 ekam evādvitiyam (CHU 6.2.1), 260 ekam śata-sahasram tu (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.107), 140 ekam tu mahataḥ srastr (Satvata-tantra 1.30), 32 eka-vimśati-bhedena (Kurma Purana, Purva 52.19), 76 etac chrutvä tathovaca (SB 6.9.52), 128 etat kṣetram samäsena (GĪTĀ 13.6), 373 etavad eva jijñäsyam (SB 2.9.35), 232 ete camsa-kalāḥ pumsaḥ (SB 1.3.28), 226 evam dehe mṛte jivo (SB 12.5.5), 262 evam evaişa samprasado (CHU 8.12.3), 366 evam ime sarve veda (Gopatha Brahmaņa, Purva 2.10), 85 evam mitho vivikta-svabhavayor (Gītā-bhūṣaṇa 13.20), 243 evam pravṛttasya sada (SB 1.4.26), 329 evam samikṣann ātmānam (SB 12.5.11), 262 evam stutaḥ sa bhagavan (SB 12.6.73), 97 gāruḍam ca tathā pādmam (Padma Purana 5.236.18.18), 109 gautamasya rscḥ śāpāj (Skanda Purana), 101 gayatri-bhāṣya-rupo’sau (Bhagavata-tātparya 1.1.1), 136 gayatri-bhāṣya-rupo’sau (Garuda Purāna), 136 543 References bhāratam sarva-vedaś ca (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.272), 137 bhārata-vyapadesena (Visnu Purana), 95 bhāvaḥ sa eva sāndrātmā (BRS 1.4.1), 318 bhaviṣyaṁ vāmanam brahmam (Padma Purana 5.236.18.20), 109 bhayam dvitiyābhiniveśatah syad (SB 11.2.37), 239 bhūmir āpo’nalo vayuḥ (GITA 7.4), 438 bhūta-mātrendriya-dhiyam (SB 2.10.3), 387 bhūta-mätrendriyärthanam (SB 12.7.11), 417, 424 bhūtāni bhagavaty ātmany (SB 11.2.45), 48 bibhety alpa-śrutad vedo (Skanda Purana 5.3.122), 106 bījādi-pañcatām tāsu (SB 12.7.20), 433 bodhayantiti hi prähus (Hari-lilämṛta 1.9), 181 brahmanando bhaved esa (BRS 1.1.38), 328 brahmaṇḍam brahma-vaivartam (Padma Purana 5.236.18.19), 109 brahmano guna-vaiṣamyād (SB 2.10.3), 387 brahmano hi pratiṣṭhāham (GITA 14.27), 236 brahman veda-rahasyam ca (Mahābhārata, Ādi-parva 1.62), 140 brahma veda brahmaiva bhavati (MUU 3.2.9), 276 brahmeti paramātmeti (SB 1.2.11), 361 brahmyaṁ purāṇam prathamam (Skanda Purana, Prabhasa-khaṇḍa 2.5), 83 brahmyam purāṇam prathamam (Skanda Purana 7.2.5), 81 bṛhattvad bṛmhaṇatvāc ca (VP 3.3.21), 356 bruhi naḥ śraddadhānānām (SB 12.11.28), 148, 156 bruhi yogeśvare kṛṣṇe (SB 1.1.23), 162, 184 buddhi-grāhyam atîndriyam vetti (GĪTĀ 6.21), 49 buddhim yā naḥ pracodayat (Devi Bhāgavatam), 131 buddhindriya-manaḥ-prāṇān (SB 10.87.2), 250, 437 cakre bhāratam akhyanam (MP 53.70), 329 candra-śākhā-nyāya (source unknown), 156 caritam daitya-rajasya (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 22.115), 129 cãturhotram abhüt tasmims (Vayu Purana 1.60.17), 87 caturlakṣa-pramāņena (MP 53.9), 89 caturyugeşu racitan (Viṣṇu Purāņa 3.4.4), 101 channaḥ kalau yad abhavas (SB 7.9.38), 9 dadṛśur nihatām tatra (Hari-vamsa Purana 2.101.32), 229 daivi hy eṣā guṇa-mayi (GITA 7.14), 246, 279, 280, 308 daśabhir lakṣaṇair yuktam (SB 12.7.10), 409 daśamasya viśuddhy-artham (SB 2.10.2), 381, 383, 412 542 References gayatri-bhāṣya-rupo’sau (Garuda Purana), 143 gayatrya ca samarambhas (source unknown), 127 gayatry-ukthäni śāstrāņi (AP 216.1), 151 ghate bhinne yathākāśa (SB 12.5.5), 262 gītānām asahasram ca (Padma Purana), 129 gobhir nigadita-govinda-sphuta-nāmānam (Govindaṣṭaka 4), 165 gopālam bhū-lila-vigraha-gopālam (Govindaṣṭaka 4), 165 gopi-mandala-goṣṭhi-bhedam (Govindāṣṭaka 5), 165 govinda go-dvija (SB 1.8.43), 324 govindanghri-saroja-dhyāna (Govindaṣṭaka 9), 167 govindaṣṭakam etad adhite (Govindaṣṭaka 9), 167 grantho’ṣṭādaśa-sahasraḥ (Bhagavata-tātparya 1.1.1), 136 grantho’ṣṭādasa-sahasraḥ (Garuda Purana), 136 grantho’ṣṭādaśa-sahasro (source unknown), 127 gṛhe na tisthate yasya (Skanda Purana, Visnu-khanda 5.16.42), 143 grhita-cetă răjarse (SB 2.1.9), 206, 213 grhitvaitāni samyati (GĪTĀ 15.8), 402 güḍhärthasya prakasaś ca (source unknown), 24 harer guṇākṣipta-matir (SB 1.7.11), 219, 333, 335 hayagriva-brahma-vidya (source unknown), 127 hema-simha-samanvitam (MP 53.21), 122, 153 hetur jivo’sya sargāder (SB 12.7.18), 431 hladini sandhini samvit (SB 1.12.69), 233 iccha dveṣaḥ sukham dukham (GĪTĀ 13.6), 373 idam bhāgavatam nama (SB 2.1.8), 206, 213 idam śatasahasrad dhi (Mahabharata, Mokṣa-dharma 343.11), 138 idam te natapaskaya (GĪTĀ 18.67), 22 idam tu jñeyam atīndriyatvena (Sankara-bhāṣya 13.13), 271 isvarasya vimuktasya (SB 3.7.9), 235, 244 iti bharatam ākhyānam (Catur-varga-cintamani, Vrata-khanda 1.28), 145 iti bhāratam ākhyanam (SB 1.4.25), 79, 97, 145, 154, 329 itihasaḥ puranam ca (SB 1.4.20), 82 itihasa-puraṇābhyam (Manu-samhita), 74 itihasa-puraṇābhyam (MB 1.1.267), 74, 143, 151 itihasa-puranais tu (Skanda Purana 5.3.122), 106 itihasa-purāṇānām (Vayu Purāņa 1.60.16), 87 itihasa-purāṇāni (SB 3.12.39), 82 itihāsasya ca sa vai (Atharva Veda 15.6.12), 85 544 Verse Index iti matva bhajante ma (GĪTĀ 10.8), 350 ittham nr-tiryag-rsi-deva (SB 7.9.38), 427 ity adyam ūhanam tarkaḥ (Kurma Purāṇa), 72 ity asadharanam proktam (BRS 2.1.43), 227 jagada bhāratãdyeṣu (Bharata-tātparya 2.8), 195 jägare tat-padam yati (Skanda Purana, Prahlada-samhita), 130 jägrat-svapna-suşuptam ca (SB 11.13.27), 405 janmady asya yato (SB 1.1.1), 122, 133, 146 janma karma ca me divyam (GITA 4.9), 279 jayate’sti vardhate (Nirukta 1.1.2), 367 jijñāsitam adhītam ca (SB 1.5.4), 123 jijñäsitam susampannam (SB 1.5.3), 123 jīva-bhūtām maha-baho (GĪTĀ 7.5), 235, 437 jīvenātmanā (CHU 6.3.2), 353 jñānägniḥ sarva-karmāņi (GĪTĀ 4.37), 241, 251, 276 jñānam labdhvā parāṁ santim (GĪTĀ 4.39), 276 jnana-śakti-balaiśvarya-virya-tejämsy (vp 6.5.79), 233 jñānena tu tad ajñānam (GĪTĀ 5.16), 238 jñātum draṣṭum ca tattvena (GITA 11.54), 280 jñeyam yat tat pravakṣyāmi (GĪTĀ 13.13), 270 kaivalyaika-prayojanam (SB 12.13.12), 355, 361 kālam kāla-kalātītam (Govindaṣṭaka 7), 166 kalau naşta-dṛśam eşa (SB 1.3.43), 134, 160, 181, 184, 330 kälenägrahaṇam matva (MP 53.8), 89 kaler dosa-nidhe rajann (SB 12.3.51), 11 kalim sabhäjayanty arya (Catur-varga-cintamani, Pariseşa-khanda 8), 163 kalim sabhäjayanty arya (SB 11.5.36), 161, 163 kalpa sastre vidhau nyaye (Medini 1.21.2), 109 kāma-kāmo labhet kamam (Vişnu-dharmottara Purana 1.165), 155 kāma-kāmo yajet somam (SB 2.3.9), 221 kāntaṁ kāraṇa-käraṇam (Govindaṣṭaka 7), 166 kanthas tu räjan navamo (Padma Purana), 134 karmana pitṛlokaḥ (BAU 1.5.16), 108 karma-śreyasi müḍhānām (Catur-varga-cintamani, Vrata-khanda 1.28), 145 karma-śreyasi mūḍhānām (SB 1.4.25), 79, 145, 154, 329 kārṣṇam ca pañcamam vedam (Bhavisya Purana), 83 karyopadhir ayam jivaḥ (Śuka-rahasya Upanisad 2.12), 266 kasmai yena vibhāsito’yam (SB 12.13.19), 146, 153, 155 545 References kasya vā bṛhatim etam (SB 1.7.9), 219, 332 kathāḥ mukti-vyāghrya na śrņu (Manaḥ-sikṣā 4), 259 katham sa vaiṣṇavo jñeyaḥ (Skanda Purana, Vişnu-khanda 5.16.42), 143 katham sa puruṣaḥ pārtha (GITA 2.21), 271 katham vā pāṇḍaveyasya (SB 1.4.7), 182 kathayantaś ca mām nityam (GĪTA 10.9), 350 kecit pañca-vidham brahman (SB 12.7.10), 409 kecit suryam kecid agnim (AP 216.8), 146 kiñcit tad anyathā jātam (Skanda Purana), 101 kintu jñāna-virakty-adi (BRS 1.2.251), 319 kirtanād eva kṛṣṇnasya (SB 12.3.51), 11 ko’nyo hi bhuvi maitreya (Visnu Purana 3.4.5), 101 kṛṣir bhu-vacakaḥ śabdo (commentary on Visnu-sahasra-nāma 20), 325 kṛṣir bhu-vācakaḥ śabdo (Mahabharata, Udyoga-parva 70.5), 325 kṛṣṇa-dvaipayanaṁ vyasam (Visnu Purāņa 3.4.5), 101 kṛṣṇa-sabdasya tamala (Nama-kaumudi), 321 kṛṣṇas tu bhagavan svayam (SB 1.3.28), 226, 321 kṛṣṇa-varnam tviṣākṛṣṇam (SB 11.5.32), 5 kṛṣṇe parama-pūruṣe (SB 1.7.7), 218, 227, 229, 314, 320-323 kṛṣṇe sva-dhamopagate (SB 1.3.43), 134, 181, 184, 330 kṛtā svena nṛṇām tatra (SB 12.7.13), 419 kṛtavan bhāratam yas tvam (SB 1.5.3), 123 kṛte yad dhyāyato visņum (SB 12.3.52), 11 kṛti-sädhya bhavet sadhya (BRS 1.2.2), 225, 318 kṣetrajña eta manaso vibhūtīḥ (SB 5.11.12), 405 kurvanty ahaitukim bhaktim (SB 1.7.10), 219, 332, 335 kvacit kvacin mahārāja (SB 11.5.39), 190 lebhe gatim dhātry-ucitām tato’nyam (SB 3.2.23), 339 likhitva tac ca yo dadyad (AP 272.6), 127 likhitva tac ca yo dadyad (MP 53.21), 122, 153 likhitva tac ca yo dadyad (Skanda Purana 7.1.2.41), 126 lila-premņā priyadhikyam (BRS 2.1.43), 227 lokasyājānato vidvāmś (SB 1.7.6), 218, 229, 316, 317 loka-traya-pura-mula-stambham (Govindāṣṭaka 2), 164 mac-citta mad-gata-prāṇā (GĪTĀ 10.9), 350 madhura-madhuram etan (Skanda Purana, Prabhasa-khanda), 94 mahar-lokam athāsādya (Visnu-dharmottara Purana 1.75.2), 436 mahattvad bhāravattvac ca (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.274), 137 546Verse Index maitreya aurvaḥ kavaşah (SB 1.19.10), 176 mamaivāmśo jīva-loke (GĪTA 15.7), 402 mamaivāmśo jiva-loke (GĪTĀ 15.7), 292 mama yonir mahad brahma (GITA 14.3), 422 mam ca gopaya yena syat (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 71.107), 167 mam caiva pratijagraha (Vayu Purana 1.60.16), 87 mam eva ye prapadyante (GITA 7.14), 246, 279, 308 manah-saṣṭhānīndriyāņi (GITA 15.7), 46, 402 manvantaram manur deva (SB 12.7.15), 421 manvantarāņi sad-dharma (SB 2.10.4), 388 manvantare parikṣine yadrṣi (Vişņu-dharmottara Purana 1.75.1), 436 manvantare parikṣine deva (Vişnu-dharmottara Purana 1.75.2), 436 manvantareśānukatha (SB 2.10.1), 381, 383 manye tvām viṣaye vācām (SB 1.4.13), 98 mäträrtham ca bhavärtham (SB 10.87.2), 250, 437 mat-sthani sarva-bhutani (GITA 9.4), 438 matsyam kaurmam tatha laingam (Padma Purana 5.236.18.20), 109 mayadhyakṣena prakṛtiḥ (GITA 9.10), 235, 253 māya-jīvayor apimac-chaktitvena (Sārārtha-varṣiņi 13.20), 242 maya-kalpita-nänä-käram (Govindaṣṭaka 1), 163 māyāmayeṣu tad brahma (SB 12.7.19), 432 māyāṁ ca tad-apāśrayam (SB 1.7.4), 217, 231, 232, 255, 307, 317, 320 mayam vyudasya cic-chakty (SB 1.7.23), 231 māyā paraity abhimukhe (SB 2.7.47), 231, 234 maya sangopaniṣadām (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.62), 140 maya tatam idam sarvam (GITA 9.4), 438 māyā-vādam asac-chastram (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 236.7), 168 māyāvadi-bhāṣya sunile (Caitanya-caritamṛta, Madhya-lilä 6.153), 260 medhätithir deval (SB 1.19.10), 176 mimamsate ca yo vedän (Vyasa-smrti 4.45), 85 mokṣa-bandha-karī ādye (SB 11.11.3), 279 mṛtsnām atsīheti (Govindaṣṭaka 2), 164 müḍho’yam nābhijānāti (GITĀ 7.25), 67 muktim dadāti karhicit (SB 5.6.18), 219 muktir hitvanyatha rupam (SB 2.10.6), 390 munir vivakşur bhagavad-gunanam (SB 3.5.12), 142, 154 na bhajanty avajananti (SB 11.5.3), 308 nābhis tatha pañcama eva (Padma Purana), 134 na cainam kledayanty apo (GITA 2.23), 271 547 References na caśuśrüşave väcyam (GITA 18.67), 22 nādevo devam arcayet (source unknown), 147 näham prakāśaḥ sarvasya (GITA 7.25), 9, 67 nähaṁ vedair na tapasā (GĪTĀ 11.53), 280 na hi jñānena sadṛśam (GĪTĀ 4.38), 276 na hi satyasya nänätvam (SB 12.4.30), 266 na hy ataḥ paramo labho (SB 11.5.37), 163 naimittikaḥ prākṛtiko (SB 12.7.17), 430 nainam chindanti sastrāņi (GITA 2.23), 271 nairgunya-stha ramante sma (SB 2.1.7), 206, 213 naiṣā tarkeņa matir āpaneya (KU 1.2.9), 67 naiti bhakti-sukhambhodheḥ (BRS 1.1.38), 328 na jayate mriyate (GĪTĀ 2.20), 271 na karmavibhāgad (vs 2.1.35), 257 namami devam karuna (Padma Purana), 134 nāma va rg-vedo yajur-vedaḥ (CHU 7.1.4), 85 nama-vyāharaṇam vişnor (SB 6.2.10), 326 nänärṣeya-pravaran (SB 1.19.11), 176 nänärtha-vattvam vedyatvam (source unknown), 24 nänātvam chidrayor yadvaj (SB 12.4.30), 266 nanyaḥ pantha vidyate (su 5.15), 276 nārāyaṇād viniṣpannam (Skanda Purāna), 101 na sa siddhim avapnoti (GĪTĀ 16.23), 244 nāsato vidyate bhāvo (GĪTĀ 2.16), 290 näsäv rşir yasya matam na bhinnam (Mahabharata, Vana-parva 313.117), 54 na tatha vasudevasya (SB 1.5.9), 123 nātmā jajāna na mariṣyati (SB 11.3.38), 363, 367, 372, 383 na vã are patyuḥ kāmāya (BAU 2.4.5), 349 nava nitam yatha dadhno (Mahabharata, Mokṣa-dharma 343.12), 138 nayakānām siro-ratnam (BRS 2.1.17), 184 na yasya tiṣṭhate gehe (Skanda Purana, Vişnu-khanda 5.16.41), 143 neha nänästi kiñcana (BAU 4.4.19), 260 nigama-kalpa-taror galitam phalam (SB 1.1.3), 124, 172, 180 nirdhūta dvaya-śoka-vimoham (Govindaṣṭaka 6), 166 nirgatam brahmano vaktrat (Skanda Purana 7.2.5), 81 nirnayaḥ sarva-śāstrāṇām (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.272), 137 nirodho’syānuśayanam (SB 2.10.6), 390 nişeka-garbha-janmani (SB 11.22.46), 438 nişkalam nişkriyam santam(śu 6.79), 273 548 Verse Index nityaḥ sarva-gataḥ sthäṇur (GITA 2.24), 271 nityam śuddham param brahma (AP 216.6), 147 nitya-sabda-mayam punyam (Skanda Purana 7.2.4), 81 nitya-siddha kṛṣṇa-prema’sadhya’kabhu naya (cc, Madhya-lila 22.107), 322 nitya-siddhasya bhavasya (BRS 1.2.2), 225, 318 nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś (KU 2.2.13), 361 om namas te (SB 12.6.67), 148 om namo bhagavate (SB 12.6.67), 148, 156 om sarva-caitanya-rupām (Devi Bhāgavatam), 131 padartheşu yatha dravyam (SB 12.7.20), 433 pădau yadīyau prathama (Padma Purāṇa), 134 pañcangatvaṁ puranam (MP 53.64), 107 param bhāvam ajānanto (GĪTĀ 9.11), 385 param jyotir upasampadya (CHU 8.12.3), 366 parāśaro gädhi-suto (SB 1.19.9), 176 parasya saktir vividhaiva (śu 6.8), 303 pariņāma-tapa-saṁskāra-duḥkhair (Yoga-sutra 2.15), 251 parinişthito’pi nairgunya (SB 2.1.9), 206, 213 päriseṣya-nyaya (source unknown), 68 paritrāṇāya sadhūnām (GĪTĀ 4.8), 392 parokṣa-vādo vedo’yam (SB 11.3.44), 104 paro’pi manute’nartham (SB 1.7.5), 218, 229, 234, 237, 405 paścäd aham yad etac ca (SB 2.9.32), 232 pathasva sva-mukhenaiva (Padma Purana), 130 pathitavyam prayatnena (Padma Purana), 129 paurṇamasyaṁ praustha-padyam (AP 272.6), 127 paurṇamasyaṁ praustha-padyam (Skanda Purana 7.1.2.41), 126 phalguni tatra mahatām (SB 1.13.47), 426 pibata bhāgavatam rasam alayam (SB 1.1.3), 172 pitṛ-deva-manusyäṇām (SB 11.20.4), 69 pitrye pañcadaśa proktam (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.107), 140 prakāśinī să savitur (AP 216.2), 151 prākṛtādi-caturdha yo (Bhavartha-dipika 10.1.1), 412 prakṛtim puruşaṁ caiva (GITA 13.20), 242, 256, 271 pramada-mohau tamaso (GĪTĀ 14.17), 114 pramāṇa-prameya-samśaya (Nyaya-sutra 1.1.1), 344 pramāņeṣv anavasthanad (SB 11.19.17), 58 pratyakṣam canumānam ca (MANU 12.105), 57 549 References pratyakṣāvagamam dharmyam (GITĀ 9.2), 49 pratyakşenǎnumänena (SB 11.28.9), 57 pratyutthitäs te munayaḥ (SB 1.19.28), 178 prauṣṭha-padyam paurņamāsyām (MP 53.21), 122 pravargyam brahma-vidyaṁ ca (SB 6.9.52), 128 praviṣṭany apraviştäni (SB 2.9.34), 232 prayeņa munayo rajan (SB 2.1.7), 206, 213 prayeṇa tirthabhigamapadeśaiḥ (SB 1.19.8), 176 prayeṇātma-samaṁ śaktyā (LBH 1.1.15), 33 pritir na yavan mayi vasudeve (SB 5.5.6), 320 pumsām īsa-kathaḥ proktā (SB 2.10.5), 388 punar jāto’yam ity ahur (Hari-vaṁśa Purana 2.101.32), 229 puraṇam anyatha kṛtvä (Naradiya Purana), 102 purāṇam api sankṣiptam (Siva Purana 7.1.1.38), 93 purāṇam naiva jānāti (Skanda Purana 5.3.124), 106 purāņam pañcamo vedaḥ (source unknown), 82 purāņam tvam bhagavatam (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 22.115), 129 purāṇānāṁ sāma-rupaḥ (Bhagavata-tätparya 1.1.1), 136 purāṇānāṁ sāma-rupaḥ (Garuda Purana), 136 purāṇānāṁ säma-rupaḥ (Garuda Purana), 143, 152 purāṇa-samhitas cakre (Vayu Purana 1.60.21), 87 pūraṇāt puranam (source unknown), 74 puräneṣu tu sarveṣu (Naradiya Purana, Uttara-khanda 193.3), 132 pura tapaś cacãrogram (Skanda Purana 7.2.3), 81 pūrṇaḥ so’yam atiśayaḥ (Bhagavata-tätparya 1.1.1), 136 pūrṇaḥ so’yam atiśayah (Garuda Purana), 136 puruşam pūrṇam nirupādhim (Bhavartha-dipikā 2.3.10), 228 puruṣānugṛhītānām (SB 12.7.12), 418 pūrvam evaham ihasam (source unknown), 230 purvāparāvirodhena (Kurma Purana), 72 pūtana-nama ghora sã (Hari-vamsa Purana 2.101.31), 229 putreti tan-mayataya taravo (SB 1.2.2), 210, 338 rājaseṣu ca māhātmyam (MP 53.67), 107 raja-vidya raja-guhyam (GITA 9.2), 280 rājñāṁ brahma-prasūtānāṁ (SB 12.7.16), 421 rakṣacyutavatärehā (SB 12.7.14), 420 rākṣasi nihată raudra (Hari-vamsa Purana 2.101.30), 229 randhran venor adhara-sudhayapurayan (SB 10.21.5), 339 rasenotkṛṣyate kṛṣṇa (BRS 1.2.59), 314 550 Verse Index rätrau tu jāgarahḥ karyaḥ (Padma Purana), 129 rcaḥ sāmāni chandāmsi (Atharva Veda 11.7.24), 85 rgvedam bhagavo’dhyemi (Kauthumiya Chandogya Upanisad 7.1.2), 83 rgvedo’tha yajurvedah (Vişnu-dharma Purana), 95 rg-yajuḥ-samatharvakhyān (SB 3.12.37), 82 ṛṣayo’mśāvatārāś ca (SB 12.7.15), 421 ṛtambhară tatra prajñā (Yoga-sutra 1.48), 49 ṛte’rtham yat pratiyeta (SB 2.9.33), 212, 232 sa asrayaḥ param brahma (SB 2.10.7), 396, 406 śabda eva mulaṁ pramānam (Sarva-samvadini), 54 sa bhaktiḥ sadhanam bhavaḥ (BRS 1.2.1), 224 sa brahmaņā sṛjati (source unknown), 84 sa bṛhatim diśam anu (Atharva Veda 15.6.10), 85 sad eva saumyedam agra āsīt (CHU 6.2.1), 353 sad-varga-samyamaikäntäḥ (SB 7.15.28), 308 sadyo hrdy avarudhyate’tra krtibhiḥ (SB 1.1.2), 210 sa ikṣata lokan nu srjeti (Aitareya Upanisad 1), 393 śākhānāṁ tu satenaiva (Kurma Purana, Purva 52.19), 76 sakrd api parigitam (Skanda Purana, Prabhasa-khanda), 94 śakya evam-vidho draṣṭum (GITA 11.53), 280 samādhinānusmara tad-viceṣṭitam (SB 1.5.13), 220 sama-drn nirvikalpakaḥ (SB 1.4.4), 209 samavasthā mahā-bhaga (Visnu-dharmottara Purana 1.75.1), 436 sama-vedam sahasreņa (Kurma Purana, Purva 52.20), 76 samsāriņām karuṇayaha (SB 1.2.3), 173 samstheti kavibhiḥ proktaś (SB 12.7.17), 430 samuddhṛtam idam brahman (Mahabharata, Mokşa-dharma 343.13), 138 samvadaḥ samabhūt tāta (SB 1.4.7), 182 samyan-masṛṇitaḥ svanto (BRS 1.4.1), 318 sandrānanda-viseṣātmā (BRS 1.1.17), 224 sankirṇa-buddhayo deva (Skanda Purana), 101 sankirṇeşu sarasvatyaḥ (MP 53.68), 107 sankṣipya caturo vedāmś (Śiva Purana 7.1.1.37), 93, 96 sanne yad indriya-gane (SB 11.3.39), 369, 372, 383 saranyam śaraṇam jagmur (Skanda Purana), 101 sarasvatasya kalpasya (Skanda Purana 7.1.2.40), 126 sargaś ca pratisargaś ca (MP 53.65), 108 sargas ca pratisargaś ca (MP 53.65), 410 sargo’syätha visargaś ca (SB 12.7.9), 409 551 Verse Index siddhartham jñāta-sambandham (Śloka-värttika 1.1.17), 6 śivam kecit pathanti sma (AP 216.7), 146 snäna-vyakula-yoşid-vastram (Govindaṣṭaka 6), 165 śraddha-bhakti-gṛhītānandam (Govindäṣṭaka 5), 165 śreyaḥ-sṛtim bhaktim udasya (SB 10.14.4), 316 śreyas tv anupalabdhe’rthe (SB 11.20.4), 69 śrī-kṛṣṇa kṛṣṇa-sakha (SB 1.8.43), 324 śrimad-bhagavad-gunanuvarnana (Bhavartha-dipika 1.1.1), 337 śrīmad-bhāgavatakhyo’yam (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 198.30), 134, 184 śrīmad-bhāgavatam bhaktyä (Skanda Purana, Prahlada-samhita), 130 śrīmad-bhāgavatam śaśvat (source unknown), 150 śrīmad-bhāgavatasyatha (Skanda Purana, Visņu-khanda 6.4.3), 134, 184 śrutes tu sabda-mulatvāt (vs 2.1.27), 69, 73 śrutiḥ pratyakşam aitihyam (SB 11.19.17), 58 sthitir vaikuntha-vijayah (SB 2.10.4), 388 stri-śūdra-dvija (Catur-varga-cintamani, Vrata-khanda 1.28), 145 stri-südra-dvija-bandhūnām (SB 1.4.25), 79, 84, 97, 145, 154, 329 sūcī-kaṭāha-nyāya (source unknown), 223 sudānto’pi susanto’pi (Naradiya Purana), 102 śuddhajivasyāśrayatvam (SB 11.13.27), 405 suddho vicaşte hy (SB 5.11.12), 405 śukam adhyāpayām āsa (SB 1.7.8), 140, 218, 327 śuka-mukhad amṛta-drava-samyutam (SB 1.1.3), 172, 180 sukhopavişteşv atha (SB 1.19.12), 176 śuklo raktas tathā pīta (SB 10.8.13), 8 sama-duḥkha-sukham dhiram (GĪTĀ 2.15), 252 supām su-luk (PANINI 7.1.39), 148 sutasya vivikta-dṛṣṭeh (SB 1.4.5), 209 svacchatvam avikaritvam (SB 3.26.22), 422 svāgamaiḥ kalpitais tvam ca (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 71.107), 167 svām kāṣṭhām adhunopete (SB 1.1.23), 162, 184 svargāpavargam mad-dhama (SB 11.20.33), 316 svarupam anyākāram yat (LBH 1.1.15), 33 svarūpam ekam evästi (Skanda Purana, Vişņu-khanda 6.4.3), 134, 184 sva-sukha-nibhṛta-cetas (SB 12.12.68), 205 sva-sukhenaiva nibhṛtam purnam ceto (Bhavartha-dipikā 12.12.68), 206 svayam-dṛṣṭārtha-kathanam prähur (Sridhara Svämi on VP 3.6.1), 91 tac-chuddham vimalam viśokam (SB 12.13.19), 146, 155 tad acchāyam aśariram (Praśna Upanisad 4.10), 274 553 References sariram yad avapnoti (GĪTĀ 15.8), 402 sarva-bhūteşu yaḥ paśyed (SB 11.2.45), 48 sarva-buddham sa vai veda (Padma Purana), 96 sarva-dharman parityajya (GITA 18.66), 313 sarvam khalv idam brahma (CHU 3.14.1), 260 sarvam mad-bhakti-yogena (SB 11.20.33), 316 sarvam pumän veda gunāmś (SB 6.4.25), 406 sarvätmakenäpi yadā (SB 1.4.26), 329 sarvātmanā mriyamāņaiś (SB 1.19.24), 177 sarvatra śaśvad anapayy (SB 11.3.38), 363, 367, 372, 383 sarva-vedanta-saram hi (SB 12.13.15), 172 sarva-vedanta-sāram yad (SB 12.13.12), 352, 354 sarva-vedetihäsänäm (SB 1.3.41), 171 sarva-yonişu kaunteya (GITA 14.4), 253 sarvebhya eva vaktrebhyah (SB 3.12.39), 82 sarve prāṇāḥ sarve lokāḥ (BAU 2.1.20), 304 sarveṣāṁ tu sa nāmāni (MANU 1.21), 60 sa samhitam bhāgavatim (SB 1.7.8), 140, 218, 327 sa samvṛtas tatra mahan (SB 1.19.30), 178 ṣaṣṭim śata-sahasrāņi (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.106), 140 śāstradau tena vaktavyaḥ (Sloka-värttika 1.1.17), 6 śāstrāntarāņi sañjānan (Bhārata-tātparya 2.7), 195 śastra-yonitvät (vs 1.1.3), 69, 73 satām prasangan mama virya-samvido (SB 3.25.25), 247, 249 śataśo’tha sahasraiś ca (Skanda Purana, Vişņu-khanda 5.16.40), 143, 153 śata-viccheda-samyutaḥ (Garuda Purana), 144 sattvam yad brahma-darśanam (SB 1.2.24), 112 sattvät sañjāyate jñānam (GITA 14.17), 112, 114 sättvikāni puraṇāni (Padma Purana 5.236.18.19), 109 sättvikeṣu ca kalpeşu (MP 53.67), 107 satyam jñānam anantam brahma (TU 2.1.1), 353 satyam jñānam anantam brahma (TU 2.1.1), 30 satyaṁ jñānam anantam nityam (Govindaṣṭaka 1), 163 satyam sada-sivaṁ brahma (AP 216.16), 149 satyam vada dharmam car (TU 1.11), 182 sa vă eșa puruşo’nna-rasa-mayaḥ (TU 2.1.1), 401 sa vai nivṛtti-nirataḥ (SB 1.7.9), 219, 332 seyam bhagavato māyā (SB 3.7.9), 235, 244 siddhantatas tv abhede’pi (BRS 1.2.59), 314 552 References tad aikṣata bahu syam (CHU 6.2.3), 353 tad anenaiva vyāsānām (Visnu Purāņa 3.4.4), 101 tad antarasya sarvasya (ISA 5), 304 tad-anta yadi no yogan (SB 7.15.28), 308 tad-artho’tra catur-lakṣaḥ (MP 53.11), 89 tad-aṣṭādaśadha kṛtva (MP 53.10), 89 tad ātmānam eva vedahaṁ brahmasmi (BAU 1.4.10), 275, 439 tad ejati tan naijati (ISA 5), 304 tad idam grāhayāmāsa (SB 1.3.41), 171 tad-rasāmṛta-tṛptasya (SB 12.13.15), 172 tadvad agneś ca māhātmyam (MP 53.68), 107 tad vidyäd ätmano māyām (SB 2.9.33), 212, 232 tad-vijñänärtham sa gurum (MUU 1.2.12), 67 tad-vrttantodbhavam loke (Skanda Purana 7.1.2.40), 126 tair vijñāpita-karyas tu (Skanda Purana), 101 taj-joṣaṇād aśv apavarga-vartmani (SB 3.25.25), 247 taj-jyotiḥ paramam brahma (MP 216.3), 146 taj-jyotir bhagavan vişnur (AP 216.7), 146 tamasas tu rajas tasmät (SB 1.2.24), 115 tam eva viditvä ati (su 3.8), 276 tam itihasaś ca puranam (Atharva Veda 15.6.11), 85 taṁ namāmi hariṁ param (SB 12.13.23), 133 tapo-nidhe tvayoktam hi (Mahabharata, Mokşa-dharma 343.14), 138 tarati śokam ātma-vit (CHU 7.1.3), 276 tarkāpratiṣṭhānāt (vs 2.1.11), 69, 70 täsäm brahma mahad yonir (GITA 14.4), 253 tasmad gurum prapadyeta (SB 11.3.21), 105 tasya bhāsā sarvam idam (MUU 2.2.10), 374 tasyäham na praṇaśyāmi (GĪTĀ 6.30), 48 tasyaite kathitä hy arthaḥ (śu 6.23), 67 tataḥ purāṇam akhilam (Skanda Purana 7.2.4), 81 tataḥ smṛteyam gayatri (AP 216.1), 151 tataś ca vaḥ prcchyam imam (SB 1.19.24), 177 tathāpi bhrama-pramāda (Sarva-samvadini), 54 tathā sarīrāņi vihaya (GITA 2.22), 271 tato’tra mat-suto vyasa (Vişņu Purana 3.4.2), 101 tat-purusasya puruṣatvam (Taittiriya Aranyaka 1.23.4), 230 tatrabhavad bhagavan (SB 1.19.25), 178 tatrapy ekāntinām śreṣṭhā (BRS 1.2.58), 323 554 Verse Index tatra tatra harir yati (Skanda Purana, Visnu-khanda 5.16.44), 143 tatropajagmur bhuvanam (SB 1.19.8), 176 tat tvam asi (CHU 6.8.7), 275, 353 tat tvam asy-ādi-vākyebhyaḥ (Bṛhan-naradiya Purana 35.68), 275 tayor aikyam param brahma (commentary on Vişnu-sahasra-nama 20), 325 tene brahma hṛdă (SB 1.1.1), 60, 122 teṣām ādityavaj jñānam (GĪTĀ 5.16), 238 teşăm asau klesala eva (SB 10.14.4), 316 tiryan-martyarṣideveşu (SB 12.7.14), 420 tīvreņa bhakti-yogena (SB 2.3.10), 221, 319 trai-vistapa-ripu-vira-ghnam (Govindaṣṭaka 3), 164 trayam su-viditam kāryam (MANU 12.105), 57 trimśac chata-sahasram ca (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.106), 140 tritayam tatra yo veda (SB 2.10.9), 400, 404, 406 tṛtīyam sarva-bhūta-stham (Satvata-tantra 1.30), 32 tvam adyaḥ puruṣaḥ sākṣād (SB 1.7.23), 231 tyago hi purușa-vyäghra (GITA 18.4), 298 tyaktvä deham punar janma (GITÄ 4.9), 279 ubhayor api drsto’ntas tv (GITA 2.16), 290 ubhayor yan na dṛṣṭam hi (Skanda Purana 5.3.123), 106 ucchiṣṭāj jajñire sarve (Atharva Veda 11.7.24), 85 utsannan bhagavän vedän (Skanda Purana), 101 vädaḥ pravadatām aham (GĪTĀ 10.32), 72 vadanti tat tattva-vidaḥ (SB 1.2.11), 346, 349, 383, 398 vaimalya-sphuța-ceto-vṛtti-viśeṣābhasam (Govindaṣṭaka 3), 164 vaiṣṇavaṁ naradiyam ca (Padma Purana 5.236.18.18), 109 vaiṣṇavānāṁ yatha śambhuḥ (SB 12.13.16), 167 vaṁśānucaritam ceti (MP 53.65), 410 vamśo vamśānucaritam (SB 12.7.9), 409 vaṁśyānucaritam teṣām (SB 12.7.16), 421 vamsyanucaritam caiva (MP 53.65), 108 vandyaseṣa-maha-muni (Govindaṣṭaka 8), 166 varṇayanti mahātmānaḥ (SB 2.10.2), 381, 383, 412 vartate nirupādhiś ca (Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda 226.68), 220 vāsāmsi jirṇāni yatha (GĪTĀ 2.22), 271 västava-śabdena vastuno (Bhävärtha-dipikā 1.1.2), 337 vastv advitiyam tan-nişṭham (SB 12.13.12), 352, 354 vasudevaḥ sarvam iti (GITA 7.19), 48 555 References vasudeva-pară vedäḥ (SB 1.2.28), 157 vayo-madhyam jara mṛtyur (SB 11.22.46), 438 vedaḥ pratiṣṭhitaḥ sarve (Naradiya Purana), 102 vedāḥ pratiṣṭhitaḥ sarve (Skanda Purāņa 5.3.121), 106 vedāḥ pratiṣṭhitaḥ sarve (Visnu Purana), 95 vedäḥ puräṇam kavyam ca (Hari-lilämṛta 1.9), 181 vedam ekam catuṣpadam (Visnu Purana 3.4.2), 101 vedän adhyāpayāmāsa (MB 12.340.21), 82 vedānāṁ sama-vedo’smi (GITA 10.22), 157 vedärthad adhikaṁ manye (Naradiya Purana), 102 vedartha-paribṛmhitaḥ (Garuda Purana), 143, 151 veda-sabdebhya evadau (MANU 1.21), 60 vedas tatha samastais tair (Visnu Purana 3.4.3), 101 vedavan niścalam manye (Skanda Purana 5.3.121), 106 vedāvināšinam nityam (GITA 2.21), 271 vede rāmāyaṇe caiva (Skanda Purana 4.95.12), 80 vede ramayane caiva (Hari-vaṁśa Purana 3.132.95), 152 vedyam västavam atra vastu (SB 1.1.2), 343, 354 viddhy anadi ubhāv api (GĪTĀ 13.20), 271 vidyavidye mama tanu (SB 11.11.3), 279 vijñānam anandam brahma (BAU 3.9.28), 260 vijñānam ānanda brahma (BAU 3.9.34), 350 vijñāpayām āsa (SB 1.19.12), 176 vijñāya prajñaṁ kurvīta (BAU 4.4.21), 279 vikārāmś ca guņāmś caiva (GITA 13.20), 242, 256 vilajjamānaya yasya (SB 2.5.13), 238 vimohitä vikatthante (SB 2.5.13), 238 virameta yada cittam (SB 12.7.21), 433 vişädigdham stanam raudram (Hari-vamsa Purana 2.101.31), 229 visargo’yam samāhāro (SB 12.7.12), 418 viṣṇur nārāyaṇaḥ krsno (Amara-kosa 1.18), 325 vişņus tad-bhava-yogac ca (Mahabharata, Udyoga-parva 70.5), 325 vṛddhi-hrasa-bhaktvam (vs 3.2.20), 297, 299, 300 vṛndavana-bhuvi (Govindaṣṭaka 8), 166 vrträsura-vadhopetam (MP 53.20), 122 vṛttibhir lakṣaṇam proktam (SB 3.26.22), 422 vṛttir bhūtāni bhūtānāṁ (SB 12.7.13), 419 vyadadhad yajña-santatyai (SB 1.4.19), 76 vyarocatālam bhagavan (SB 1.19.30), 178 556Verse Index vyasa-citta-sthitākāśād (Skanda Purana), 100 vyäsa-rupam aham kṛtvä (MP 53.9), 89 vyāsa-sūnum nato’smi (SB 12.12.68), 205, 207 vyāsasyaivājñaya tatra (Mahabharata, Adi-parva 1.273), 137 vyasocchiṣṭam jagat sarvam (source unknown), 103 vyasta-vedataya khyāto (Siva Purana 7.1.1.37), 93 vyatanuta kṛpaya yas (SB 12.12.68), 205 vyatirekanvayo yasya (SB 12.7.19), 432 yac chişṭam tu yajurvede (Vayu Purana 1.60.22), 88, 90 yad ähur väsudeväkhyam (SB 3.26.21), 422 yad brāhmaṇānītīhāsa-puraṇāni (Taittiriya Aranyaka 2.9), 88 yad u ha vāva vibudharṣabha (SB 12.6.68), 148, 156 yad vai tan na pasyat (BAU 4.3.23), 371 ya evemam lokam (SB 12.6.70), 148, 156 yaḥ pathet prayato nityam (Skanda Purana, Viṣṇu-khanda 5.16.33), 143 yaḥ svānubhavam akhila-śruti-sāram (SB 1.2.3), 173 ya iha vāva sthira-cara-nikaranam (SB 12.6.69), 148, 156 yajeta puruşam param (SB 2.3.10), 221, 227, 228, 319 yajñaiḥ sankirtana-prayair (SB 11.5.32), 5 yajumṣy ayata-yāmāni (SB 12.6.73), 97 yam canusayinam prahur (SB 12.7.18), 431 yam manyase mätuleyam (SB 1.9.20), 338 yam pravrajantam anupetam (SB 1.2.2), 210, 338 yan na dṛṣṭam hi vedeșu (Skanda Purana 5.3.123), 106 yanti mad-yajino’pi mam (GITA 9.25), 155 yasmin nṛṇām grämya-sukhānuvadair (SB 3.5.12), 154 yasmin nṛņām gramya-sukhänuvädair (SB 3.5.12), 142 yas tatrobhaya-vicchedaḥ (SB 2.10.8), 400 yasya deve para bhaktir (śu 6.23), 67 yasyām vai śrüyamāṇāyām (SB 1.7.7), 218, 229, 320, 322 yatha dharmadayas cartha (SB 1.5.9), 123 yathägneḥ visphulinga (BAU 2.1.20), 304 yathaidhamsi samiddho’gnir (GITA 4.37), 251, 276 yathā mahānti bhūtāni (SB 2.9.34), 232 yatha sa bhagavan vyāsaḥ (Bhārata-tātparya 2.8), 195 yathātra tena vai vyasta (Visnu Purāna 3.4.3), 101 yat karmabhir yat tapasa (SB 11.20.32), 316 yatnenapadito’py arthaḥ (BRS 1.1.46), 71 yatnenapadito’py arthaḥ (Vakya-padiya 1.34), 71 557 558 References yato va imani bhūtāni (TU 3.1), 84 yato vindeta paramam (SB 11.5.37), 163 yatradhikṛtya gayatrīm (source unknown), 150 yatradhikṛtya gayatrim (MP 53.20), 122, 145 yatra nityataya sarve (BRS 2.1.17), 184 yatra prati-padam kṛṣṇo (Naradiya Purana, Uttara-khanda 193.3), 132 yatra sankirtanenaiva (Catur-varga-cintamani, Pariseșa-khanda 8), 163 yatra sankirtanenaiva (SB 11.5.36), 163 yatra yatra bhaved vipra (Skanda Purana, Visnu-khanda 5.16.44), 143 yat tat sattva-gunam svaccham (SB 3.26.21), 422 yaya sammohito jiva (SB 1.7.5), 218, 229, 234, 237, 238, 241, 255, 307, 405 yenäśrutam śrutam bhavati (CHU 6.1.3), 353 yeşām śrīśa-prasado’pi (BRS 1.2.58), 323 yo’dhyatmiko’yam puruṣaḥ (SB 2.10.8), 400 yo brahmaņam vidadhati (śu 6.18), 60 yogena dama-dharmeņa (SB 11.20.32), 316 yogena va tad-ātmānam (SB 12.7.21), 433 yo mam pasyati sarvatra (GITA 6.30), 48 yo veda caturo vedän (Skanda Purana 5.3.124), 106 Bibliography Primary Sources Acarya Lalita Kṛṣṇa Gosvāmi, ed. Śri Madhva Vedanta, Pürna-prajña Bhāṣya of Madhvacārya. Prayag: Śrī Nimbarka Pitha, 1974. Adivaraha Purana. Varanasi: Sarva-bharatiya Käsiraja Nyasa, 1983. Agni Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1988. Aitareya Upanisad. Väräṇasi: Ratna Publications, 1985. Amarsimha. Amara-kośa with Rāmāśramiṭīkā. Sanskrit. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratisthana, 1984. Amolakarama Sastri, ed. Bṛhadaranya-svetāśvataropaniṣadau. Vrindavan: Nimbärka Mahasabhā, 1925. Amolakarāma Śastri, ed. Chandogya Upanisad. Vrindavan: Nimbārka Mahā- sabhā, 1937. Atharvaveda with Satvalekara Tikā. Hindi. Poona: Svadhyaya Mandala, 1985. Avalon, Arthur, ed. Brahma-samhita. Varanasi: Bhartiya Vidya Prakashan,

Bāla Kṛṣṇa Bhaṭṭa. Prameya-ratnarnava. Kolhapur: Sri Vallabha Vidyapitha, 1997. Baladeva Vidyabhüṣaṇa. Brahma Sutra with Govinda-bhäṣya. Sanskrit. Kusuma Sarovara: Kṛṣṇadāsa Bābā, 1953. Bhagavad Gita with Sankara-bhāṣya. Gorakhpur: Gita Press, 1984. Bhagavad Gita with Särärtha-varşini and Gita-bhüṣaṇa. Kusuma Sarovara, Mathura: Kṛṣṇadāsa Bābā, 1966. Bhartṛhari. Vakya-padiya. Sanskrit. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Vidyabhavana, 1990. Vakya-padiyam. Ed. by Raghunatha Sharma. Varanasi: Sampoornanada Sanskrit Visvavidyalaya, 1980. 559 References Bhaṭṭoji Dikṣita. Vaiyakaraṇa-siddhanta-kaumudi. With Bala-manorama. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Surbharati Prakashan, 2004. Bhavananda Siddhanta Vāgīsa Bhaṭṭācārya. Kāraka-cakram. Calcutta: Cha- tra Pustakalaya, 1937. Bhaviṣya Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Brahma Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Brahma Vaivarta Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Brahmanda Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Brahma-sütram, Sundara Bhaṭṭa-tika on Nimbärka Bhasya. Varanasi: Chau- khamba Sanskrit Series Office, 1999. Bṛhadaranyaka Upanisad, mula-matram. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984. Bṛhan-naradiya Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Caraka and Cakra-pāni Datta. Caraka-samhita. Sanskrit. New Delhi: Ras- triya Sanskrit Visva-vidyalaya, 2006. Chandogya Upanisad, mula-matram. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984. Chandogya Upanisad, Upanisat-sangraha. Sanskrit. Delhi: Chaukhamba San- skrit Pratisthana, 1970. Devendranath Pandeya, ed. Sänkhya-kärikā. Jaipur: Jagdish Sanskrit Pus- takalaya, 2002. Devi-Bhāgavata Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1986. Dharmaraja Adhvarindra. Vedanta-paribhasa. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Vidyabhavana, 1983. Garuda Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Gauri Tantra. Sanskrit. Handwritten Manuscript, Folio No. 0563, Jiva Insti- tute Library. Gopala Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmi and Sanatana Gosvāmi. Hari-bhakti-viläsa. Ed. by Śri Haridāsa Śāstrī. Vrindavan: Sri Gadadhara Gaura-hari Press, 1985. Gopala-tapani Upanisad. With a comment. by Bhagiratha Jha. Vrindavan: Gautam Rsi Ashram, 1949. Gopatha Brahmana. Sanskrit. Benaras: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratisthana, 1976. Haridāsa Śāstrī, Śrī, ed. Sanat-kumara-saṁhita. Vrindavan: Sri Gadadhara Gaura-hari Press, 1981. Harivaṁsa Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Hemadri. Caturvarga Cintamani. Sanskrit. Benaras: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratisthana, 1985. Isa Upanisad, Upanisat-sangraha. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratisthana, 1970. Itihasa-samuccaya. Manuscripts, Jiva Institute Library. 560 Bibliography Jayatirtha. Pramana-paddhati. Udupi: Dvaita Philosophy Resource Centre, 2011. Jitante-stotra. Manuscripts, Jiva Institute Library. Jiva Gosvāmi. Bhagavat Sandarbha. Ed. by Śri Haridasa Śāstrī. Vrindavan: Sri Gadadhara Gaura-hari Press, 1983. 1 Bhakti Sandarbha. Ed. by Śrī Haridasa Śāstrī. Vrindavan: Sri Gadadhara Gaura-hari Press, 1983. Brhat-krama-sandarbha. Ahemadabad: Bhagavat Vidya Pitha, 1998. Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha. Ed. by Śrī Haridasa Sastrī. Vrindavan: Sri Gadadhara Gaura-hari Press, 1983. Paramatma Sandarbha. Ed. by Śrī Haridasa Śāstrī. Vrindavan: Sri Gadadhara Gaura-hari Press, 1983. -Priti Sandarbha. Ed. by Śrī Haridasa Śāstrī. Vrindavan: Sri Gadadhara Gaura-hari Press, 1983. Sarva-samvadini. Kusuma Sarovara, Mathura: Kṛṣṇadāsa Bābā, 1967. Tattva Sandarbha. Ed. by Sri Haridāsa Šāstrī. Vrindavan: Sri Gadadhara Gaura-hari Press, 1983. Kälikä Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Kanailal Adhikari, Śrī, ed. Sätvata Tantra. Sanskrit. Navadvipa, 1981. Katha Upanisad. Varanasi: Ratna Publications, 1985. Katha Upanisad, mula-matram. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984. Kaunda Bhatta. Vaiyakaraṇa-bhūṣaṇa-sara. Varanasi: Sampoornanada San- skrit University, 1988. Kena Upanisad, mula-matram. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984. Kesava Kaśmiri Bhaṭṭa. Krama-dipikā. Salemabad: All India Nimbārkācārya Education Board, 1993. Vedanta-kaustubha-prabha-vṛtti. Ed. by Amolakarāma Sastrī. Vrinda- van: Nimbärka Mahasabhä, 1938. Kesava Miśra. Tarka-bhāṣā, Badrinatha Sukla. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2000. Kṛṣṇa Caitanya, Śrī. Sikṣāṣṭaka (in Songs of the Vaisnava Acāryas). Sanskrit. Mumbai: BBT, 1979. Krṣṇadāsa Kaviraja. Caitanya Caritamṛtam. Bengali. Ed. by Śri Haridasa Śästri. Vrindavan: Sri Gadadhara Gaura-hari Press, 1988. Caitanya-caritămṛtam. Ed. by Edward C. Dimock Jr. Boston, Mas- sachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1999. Kṛṣṇa-sänkara Sastri, ed. Bhagavata Purana. Ahemadabad: Sri Bhagavat Vidyapitha, 1982. 561 References Kumārila Bhaṭṭa. Mimämsä Śloka-värttika. Darbhanga: Kamesvarasingh Darbhanga Sanskrit Visvavidyalaya, 1979. Śloka-värttika. Varanasi: Ratna Publications, 1993. Kurma Purāna. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Laksmidhara. Nama-kaumudi. Sanskrit. Ahmadabad: Śrī Kośalendra Matha, 1964. Laugākṣi Bhaskara and A.B. Gajendragadkar. Artha-sangraha. Delhi: Moti- lal Banarsidass, 1998. Madhavananda, Swami, ed. Bṛhad-aranyaka Upanisad with Sankara-bhasya. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1988. Madhusudana Sarasvati. Siddhanta-bindu. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Samsthan, 2007. Madhvacārya. Bhagavata-tätparya. Udupi: ABMM, 1980. - Mahabharata-tätparya-nirnaya. Udupi: ABMM, 1985. Visņu-tattva-vinirnaya. Ed. by K.T. Panduragi. Banglore: Dvaita Vedanta Studies and Research Foundation, 1959. Maha Upanisad. Varanasi: Ratna Publications, 1987. Mahabharata. Sanskrit. Gorakhpura: Gitä Press, 1987. Mahabharata. Sanskrit. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1987. Mahabharata with Bharatabhava-dipa commentary. With a comment. by Śrī Nilakantha. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1991. Mahadevananda Sarasvati. Tattvänusandhanam. Varanasi: Sri Dakshina Murti Matha, 1994. Maha-kurma Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Mainkar, T.G., ed. Sänkhya-kärika. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratistha- nam, 2004. Manu. Manu-smrti. Ed. by Hargovind Shastri. Varanasi: Choukhamba San- skrit Series Office, 1979.

• Manu-smrti. Sanskrit. Vārānāsi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Series Office,

Matsya Purana. Poona: Ananda Asrama, 1981. Medinikära. Medini Kośa. Sanskrit. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Sam- sthana, 1968. Mundaka Upanisad, mula-matram. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984. Nägeśa Bhatta. Laghu-sabdendu-sekhara. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Sam- sthana, 1983. Naradiya Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1984. 562 Bibliography Narahari Cakravarti. Bhakti-ratnākara. Bengali. Bāgh Bazaar: Gaudiya Mis- sion, 1981. Nārāyaṇa Bhaṭṭa. Nārāyaṇīyam. Benarasa: Bharatiya Vidya Samsthāna, 1992. Nārāyaṇa Bhaṭṭa and Nārāyaṇa Pandita. Manameyodaya. Trans. by C. Kun- han Raja and S.S. Suryanarayana Sastri. Madras: The Adyar Library and Research Centre, 1975. Nimbarka. Brahma-sütram with Nimbarka-bhāṣya. Vrindavan: Kalyana Dasa, 1932. Nimbārkācārya. Dasa-sloki, Giridhara Prapanna țikā. Varanasi: Chau- khamba Sanskrit Series, 1927. Vedanta-parijata-saurabha. Calcutta: Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1943. Padma Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1984. Pañcapadma. Pañca-padika. Ed. by Kisor Das Swami. Dehradun: Swami Ramtirtha Mission, 2001. Pandit Jagdish Shastri, ed. Kaivalya Upanisad, Upanisat-sangraha. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratisthana, 1970.

• ed. Mahā-nārāyaṇa Upanisad, Upaniṣat-sangraha. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratisthana, 1970. -ed. Nārāyaṇīya Upanisad, Upaniṣat-sangraha. Delhi: Chaukhamba San- skrit Pratisthana, 1970. -ed. Nrsimha-tapani Upanisad, Upaniṣat-sangraha. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratisthana, 1970. Pāṇini. Aṣṭādhyāyi sütrapatha. Sanskrit. Varanasi: Krsnadasa Academy,

Purusottama Gosvāmi. Prasthäna-ratnākara. Kolapur: Sri Vallabha Vidyap- itha, 1999. Vedanta-adhikaraṇa-mālā. Kisanagadh: Pusti Prakasana, 1981. Purusottamăcărya. Vedanta-ratna-mañjușă. Ed. by Amolakarāma Săstri. Vrindavan, 1941. Raghunathadasa Gosvāmi. Manaḥ-sikṣā. Sanskrit. Vrindavan: Imalitala, 1959. Rāmānujācārya. Vedanta-sutra Śri-bhāṣya. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1965. Ramasankar Tripathi, ed. Patanjala Yoga-darśanam. Varanasi: Krishnadas Academy, 1985. Rangarāmānuja. Rangaramanujabhāṣyopeta Aitareya Upanisat. Madras: San- skrit Reseach Institute, 1973- 563 References Rangarāmānuja. Rangarāmānujabhāṣyopetă Bṛhadaranyaka Upaniṣat. Mel- kote: Sanskrit Samsodhana Samsat, 1995. Rg Veda. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1988. Rūpa Gosvāmi. Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu with Durgama-sangamani and Bhakti-sara-pradarsini tikās. Sanskrit. Vrindavan: Harinama Press, 1981. Laghu-bhāgavatamṛtam. Sanskrit. Bombay: Khemarāj Śrīkṛṣṇadāsa, 1902.

• Laghu-bhāgavatamṛtam. Sanskrit. Mayapura: Caitanya Matha, 1982. Padyavali. Vrindavan: Raghava-caitanya Dasa, Gopinatha Baga, 1959. Sadananda. Vedanta-sära. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1979. Sahasra-nama-stotra. Gorakhpur: Gita Press, 1954. Sankarācārya. Drg-dṛśya-viveka. English. With a comment. by Swami Nikhilananda. Mysore: Sri Ramakrishna Asrama, 1976.

Brahma-sutra with Sankara-bhāṣya. Ed. by Svami Yogindrānanda. Vara- nasi: Chaukhamba Vidyabhavana, 2005. Govindaṣṭaka (Stotra-ratnavali). Gorakhpur: Gita Press, 1990. Visņu-sahasra-nama-bhäşya. Ed. by Arthur Avalon. Varanasi: Bhartiya Vidya Prakashan, 1985. Sätvata Tantra. Navadvip, W Bengal: Śri Kanailal Adhikari, 1981. Sāyaṇa-Madhava. Sarva-darśana-sangraha. Ed. by V.S. Abhyankar. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1978. Śiva Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1986. Skanda Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1986. Śrī Kṛṣṇa Yamala Tantra. Varanasi: Pracya Prakāśana, 1992. Śridhara Svāmi. Bhāvārtha-dipika. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass, 1992. Śrīharṣa. Khandana-khanda-khadyam. Ed. by Svāmi Yogindrānanda. Vara- nasi: Chaukhamba Vidyabhavan, 1992. Srimad Bhagavatam. English. Gorakhpur: Gita Press, 1993. Śrimad Bhagavatam, mula-matram. Sanskrit. Gorakhpura: Gita Press, 1980. Śrimad Bhagavatam with Sanskrit commentaries by Sridhara Svami, Jiva Gosvāmi, and others. Ahmedabad: Bhāgavata Vidyapitha, 1965. Śrinivāsācārya. Yatindra-mata-dipikā. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Surbharati Prakashana, 1989. Sudarsana Sūri. Brahma-sutra, Śruti-prakäsikä on Sri Bhasya. Madras: Sri Visishtadvaita Pracharini Sabha, 1989. Šuka-rahasya Upanisad. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidas, 1984. Śuka-rahasya Upanisad, mula-matram. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984. Svetasvatara Upanisad, mula-matram. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984. 564 Bibliography Taittiriya Upanisad, mula-matram. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984. Upanisads with Sankara-bhāṣya. Trans. by Swami Gambhirananda. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1989. Vacaspati Miśra. Sankhya Kärikā Tikā. Chaukhamba Sanskrit Samsthana, 1992. Vägbhaṭṭācārya. Aşṭanga-hṛdaya. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidas, 1963. Vallabhäcārya. Brahma-sutram with Anubhāṣya. Nathadvara, Rajasthan: Sri Nathdvara Temple Board, 1981. Tattva-pradipika. Kolhapur: Srivallabhavidyapitha, 1982. Välmiki. Rāmāyaṇa. Sanskrit. Gorakhpura: Gitä Press, 1990. Varaha Purana. Varanasi: Sarvabhāratīya Kāśirajanyasa, 1983. Vätsyāyana. Nyaya-darśanam, Vätsyayana Bhāṣya, Taranatha Nyaya tark- tirtha. Ed. by Taranatha Nyaya-tarka-tirtha. Delhi: Munshiram Mano- harlal, Publishers, 2003. Vidyaranya Muni. Pañcadasi. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratisthanam, 1987.

• Vivarana-prameya-sangraha. Varanasi: Amara Publications, 1999. Vidynidhi Joshi, ed. Iśady-astopanisad. Mathura: Ramapartapa Shastri, 1937. Visņu Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985. Visņu Purana. Delhi: Parimal Publication, 1986. Vişņu Puri. Bhakti-ratnavali. Ed. by Balacanda Gosvāmi. Vrindavan, 1930. Visnudharmottara Purana. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1985.. Viśvanatha Kaviraja. Sahitya-darpana. Ed. by Satyavrat Singh. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Vidyabhavan, 1988. Vopadeva and Hemadri. Muktä-phala. Sanskrit. Calcutta: Scottish Church College, 1944. Vṛndavan Däsa Thakura. Caitanya-bhagavata. Ed. by Śri Haridasa Sästrī. Vrindavan: Sri Gadadhara Gaura-hari Press, 1984. Vyasa Smrti. Sanskrit. Delhi: Eastern Book Linkers, 1988. Vyasa-tirtha and Madhusudana Sarasvati. Nyayamṛta-advaita-siddhi. Ed. by Svami Yogindrānanda. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Vidyabhavana, 1984. Yāska. Niruktam. Sanskrit. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Vidyabhavana, 1983. Secondary Sources Abhyanakar, K.V. A Dictionary of Sanskrit Grammar. Baroda: Oriental Insti- tute, 1986. Abhyankara, K.V. Paribhāṣa-sangraha. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1967. 565 References Apte, V.S. The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary. Delhi: Motilal Banarsi- dass, 1998. Bhāṣyam Svāmi, Dr. Visiṣṭādvaita-kośa. Melkote: Academy of Sanskrit Research, 2009. Bhimacharya Jhalkikara. Nyāya-kośa. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1978. Bryant, Edwin F. Yoga Sutra. New York: North Point Press, 2009. Carudeva Śāstrī. Upasargārtha-candrika. Delhi: Surabhi Prakashana Sam- stha, 1982. Chari, S.M. Srinivasa. Fundamentals Of Visistadvaita Vedanta. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1998. The Philosophy of Visistadvaita Vedanta. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2008. - Vaishnavism. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2000. Chatterjee, S. and D. Datta. An Introduction to Indian Philosophy. Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1984. Chhabinath Mishra. Nyayokti-kośa. Delhi: Ajanta Publications, 1978. Dasgupta, Surendranath. A History of Indian Philosophy. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1988. De, S.K. Early History of the Vaisnava Faith and Movement in Bengal. Calcutta: Firma KLM, 1987. Gajanan Shambhu Sadhale, Shastri, ed. Upanisad-väkya-mahākośa. Delhi: K.C. Publishers, 1990. Gerow, Edwin. A Glossary of Indian Figures of Speech. The Hague: Mounton and Company, 1971. Hiriyanna, M. Outlines of Indian Philosophy. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1993. India Heritage Research Foundation. Encyclopedia of Hinduism. Delhi: Rupa and Co., 2012. Jacob, G.A. Upanisad-vākya-kośa. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1963. Kapila-deva Pandeya. Mimämsä-nyaya-prakāśa-vimarśa. Varanasi: Sam- poornananda Sanskrit Visvavidyalaya, 2001. Kapoor, O.B.L. The Philosophy And Religion of Sri Caitanya. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1994. Macdonell and Keith. Vedic Index. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Vidya-bhavan,

Mesquita, Roque. Madhva’s Unknown Literary Sources: Some Observations. Aditya Prakashan, 2000. Muralidhara Pandeya. Sankara-vedänta-kośa. Varanasi: Sampoornanada Sanskrit Vishva-vidyalaya, 1998. 566Bibliography Niścala Dasa, Svämi. Vicara-sägara. Bombay: Sri Sadhubela Udasina Ashrama, 1992. Parthasarathi Mishra. Sastra-dipika. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Surabharati Prakashana, 2008. Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli. Indian Philosophy. New Delhi: Oxford Univer- sity Press, 1999. Raghunatha Dasa Gosvāmi. Manaḥ-sikṣa. Vrindavana: Imalitala, 1959. Rājā Rādhākānta Deva. Sabda-kalpa-druma. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1987. Raja, K. Kunjunni. Indian Theories of Meaning. Madras: The Adyar Library and Research Center, 1963. Rūpa Gosvāmi. Padyavali. Bhakta Bharata Granthamālā, 1959. Shah, Jethala G. Śrimad Vallabhācārya - His Philosophy and Religion. Nadiad: The Pushtimargiya Pustakalaya, 1969. Sharma, B.N.K. Philosophy of Sri Madhvacārya. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1991. Sharma, Chandradhar. A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2003. Sharma, Thakurdatta. Bhuvanesa Laukika-nyaya-sahasri. Varanasi: Vyāsa Prakāśan, 1989. Sheldrake, Rupert. Science Set Free. Deepak Chopra, 2013. Thiselton, Anthony C. A Concise Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Religion. Baker Academic, 2005. Tribhuvana Dāsa, Svāmī. Visiṣṭādvaita vedanta kā vistṛta vivecana. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratisthana, 2013. Yudhiṣṭhira Mīmāṁsaka. Mīmāṁsā-sabara-bhāṣyam. Bahalgadh, Sonepat: Ramalala Kapoor Trust, 1987. 1 Sanskrit-dhātu-kośa. Delhi: Drakshadevi Pyarelal Paropakari Trust, 1961. 567 Acknowledgments This book is an outcome of the combined efforts, cooperation, and good wishes of many individuals. I am indebted to all of them. Shri Jagadananda Das (Dr. Jan Brzezinski) did the preliminary editing. Shri Navadvip Das (Bruce Martin) did the final editing and review after thoroughly rechecking the Sanskrit text. He also coined new terminology to convey the meaning of Jiva Gosvämï’s words pre- cisely. Jaroslav Ovčáček worked very committedly to do the lay- out. The subject index was prepared through the combined efforts of Navadvip and Vrinda Dasi (Vita Skoblikov). Proofreading was done by Shri Purusottama Das for Sanskrit and by Malati Manjari Dasi (Miriam Saha), Dineshaja Dasi (Denise McGrew), Shailesha Krishna Das (Saulius Bytautas), JoAn Street, and Subhadra Dasi (Nayna Parbhoo) for English. I sincerely thank Shri Jaya Radha Raman Das from France for his financial support for the project. My thanks to Dridha Vrata Das and Aljoša Basarić for the drawing of Jiva Gosvāmi, to Sonja Fink-Ocklenburg for the graphic of the tulasi plant on the front cover, as well as to Janja Pirc, and Meera and Daniel Joshi for their valuable help in designing the cover. Malati Manjari coordinated the work of layout, proofreading, cover design, indexing, and everything else needed for this project. My very spe- cial thanks to her. I would also like to acknowledge David Březina and the Rosetta Type Foundry for supplying us with the fonts for our specific needs, and giving us valuable suggestions and personal attention. Finally, I also thank Klaus Schneider and Kösel GmbH & Co. KG for their cooperation and effort in printing this book. 568 Acknowledgements I thank Jaya Devi, who looks after the management of Jiva Institute and thus provides me time to write. Others who have been very supportive of my service and given me encouragement include Shri Vrajeshvara Das, Kamala Mataji, Prof. Edwin Bryant (Advaita Prabhu Das), Dr. Partap Chauhan, Shri Rishi Pal Chauhan, and Dr. Teresa E. Warren (Hemalata Devi Dasi). My sincere gratitude to all of them. 569 Satyanarayana Dasa BORN IN 1954, he was drawn to the spiritual traditions of his home country India since his childhood. After receiving at postgraduate degree in 1978 from IIT Delhi, he then worked in the United States for four years. After this period, he returned to India to begin formal study of the orthodox systems of Indian philosophy known as şad-darśana under the direct guidance of his guru Śrī Haridasa Sastri Mahārāja and Svāmi Śyama Saraṇa Mahārāja. This education was pursued in the traditional manner for more than 25 years as he dedicated himself to the practice of bhakti-yoga. In 1991 he accepted the traditional Vaisnava order of renounced life, babaji-veșa. His main focus has been on the works of Jiva Gosvāmi, particularly the Sat Sandarbhas, providing English translation and commentary. He also earned four sastric degrees, and received both a law degree and a PhD in Sanskrit from Agra University. Satyanarayana Dasa is the director of the Jiva Institute of Vaishnava Studies in Vrindavan, India. In 2013 he was honored by the president of India, Pranab Mukherjee, for his extraordi- nary contribution in presenting Vedic culture and philosophy to students and audiences within India and internationally.ŚRĪ TATTVA SANDARBHA Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī THE ESSENTIAL MESSAGE OF THE BHAGAVATAM, or in other words, the self-disclosure of its essential truths of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana, is found in the verses narrating what Śrīla Vyasa witnessed in the state of unmedi- ated trance-beginning with the supreme subject, Bhagavan, who was seen to be inclusive of His own intrinsic potency as well as His subordinate extrinsic potency, māyā. What was disclosed to Vyasa was not a non-differentiated Brahman being overpowered by maya and turning into many jivas. Rather, He saw that the jiva is distinct from Bhagavan and is captivated by maya because of misidentifying the self as independent of Bhagavan. Vyasadeva thus saw that the cause of the jiva’s suffering is this false sense of independence born of misplaced identity. In one and the same vision, the means corresponding to the inherent distinction between the jiva and Bhagavan was revealed to Vyasa. He saw that the solution to the jiva’s predicament is the total offering of the self in devotion to the Supreme Person (bhakti-yogam adhokṣaje), not imagining a state of oneness with Him. From the commentary on Anuccheda 41 JIVA Jiva Institute of Vaishnava Studies Vrindavan