अनादिसिद्धया शक्त्या चिद्विलासस्वरूपया ।
महायोगाख्यया तस्य सदा ते भेदितास्ततः ॥
anādi-siddhayā śaktyā cid-vilāsa-svarūpayā |
mahāyogākhyayā tasya sadā te bheditās tataḥ ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.2.185)
“They [i.e., the jīvas] are eternally distinguished from him [i.e., Parabrahman] by means of his beginninglessly existent śakti by the name of mahāyoga the nature of which is a manifestation of consciousness.”
Commentary
nanu māyāṁ vinā sadā bhedaḥ kutaḥ sambhavati? tatrāhuḥ—anādīti | asya śrī-bhagavataḥ śaktyā te jīvās tat-tattvāni tataḥ para-brahma-svarūpād bhagavata eva sadā bheditā aṁśatvena pṛthak-kṛtāḥ santi | kīdṛśyā? anādi-siddhayā anāditvena prasiddhayety arthaḥ | ato jīva-tattvānām apy anādi-siddhatvam | punaḥ kīdṛśyā? cit caitanyaṁ, tasyā vilāso vaibhavaṁ śobhātiśayo vā, sa eva svarūpaṁ tattvaṁ yasyā iti teṣām api caitanya-vibhūti-rūpatvenāmāyikatvam | punaś ca kīdṛśyā? aghaṭana-ghaṭanā-cāturya-viśeṣaṇa mahā-yoga ity ākhyā nāma yasyāḥ, tayā | tathā ca bhagavad-gītāsu—nāhaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya yogamāyā-samāvṛtaḥ ity-ādi | anenāṁśāṁśitvāsambhave’pi tathā sampādana-sāmarthyam iti dik |
(Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“[An objection is raised:] ‘Well, without māyā, how is an eternal distinction [between the jīvas and Brahman] possible?’ To that, they say anādi … [i.e., the bhakti-śāstras speak this verse]. By virtue of Śrī Bhagavān’s śakti, those jīvas, that is, those of that essential nature (tattva), are eternally distinguished from, that is, [they] exist separated on account of being parts (aṁśas) of him, that is, of Bhagavān specifically, whose nature is that of Parabrahman. Of what nature [is that śakti]? ‘Beginninglessly existent’ (anādi-siddhayā), meaning, [it is] well-known as being beginningless. Therefore, the [distinct] essential natures (tattva) of the jīvas also have beginningless existentness. Furthermore of what nature [is that śakti]? That the essential nature (svarūpa), that is, tattva, of which is a manifestation (vilāsa), meaning, a magnificence (vaibhava) or, a profound splendor, of consciousness (cit). Thus, their [i.e., the jīvas’] also being non-māyika [i.e., not existent solely because of the influence of māyā] is because of [their] being forms of the magnificence of consciousness [since consciousness (cit) is categorically distinct from māyā]. Furthermore again of what nature [is that śakti]? That the name of which is mahāyoga, [which is] a qualifier for [i.e., signifying of] proficiency in accomplishing that which is not possible to accomplish [i.e., the śakti that has capability to accomplish what is generally considered impossible and thereby enables the jīvas to beginninglessly exist as distinct yet integral part of Parabrahman is known as mahāyoga, that is, yogamāyā]. So, also, as in Bhagavad-gītā (7.25) [where Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa says], ‘Concealed by yogamāyā, I am not manifest to all’—by means of this [i.e., by means of this beginninglessly existent śakti of Bhagavān the name of which is mahāyoga, syn., yogamāyā], even in the case of the impossibility of [Bhagavān’s, i.e., Parabrahman’s] being [both] a part (aṁśa) and the Whole (Āṁśī), there is capability of accomplishing that [i.e., there is the aspect of Bhagavān in which he exists as a differentiated part of him, that is, the jīva, as the aspect of Bhagavān in which he exists in his full essential nature as the whole that contains all these parts, viz., jīvas]. This is the direction.”