Advaya-jñāna

anena jīvenātmanā’ iti tadīyoktāv idantā-nirdeśena tato

‘anena jīvenātmanā’ iti tadīyoktāv idantā-nirdeśena tato bhinnatve’py ātmatā-nirdeśena tad-ātmāṁśa-viśeṣatvena labdhasya bādarāyaṇa-samādhi-dṛṣṭa-yukter atyabhinnatā-rahitasya jīvātmano yad ekatvaṁ ‘tat tvam asi’ ity ādau jñātā, tad-aṁśa-bhūta-cid-rūpatvena samānākāratā | … yathā janma-prabhṛti kaścid gṛha-guhāvaruddhaḥ sūryaṁ vividiṣuḥ kathañcid gavākṣa-patitaṁ sūryāṁśu-kaṇaṁ darśayitvā kenacid upadiśyate ‘eṣa saḥ’ iti | etat tad-aṁśa-jyotiḥ-samānākāratayā tan-mahā-jyotir-maṇḍalam anusandhīyatām ity arthaḥ, tadvaj jīvasya tathā tad-aṁśatvaṁ ca tac-chakti-viśeṣa-siddhatvenaiva paramātma-sandarbhe sthāpayiṣyāmaḥ |
(Tattva Sandarbha: 52)

“The oneness (ekatva) [with the Para-tattva] which is known [from the statement in Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.8.7], ‘You are that’ (tat tvam asi) of the jīvātma, who is not possessed of extreme non-distinctness (atyabhinnatā) [from the Para-tattva] as per the reason seen in the samādhi of Bādarāyaṇa [i.e., Śrī Vyāsadeva in SB 1.7.5] and [who] is apprehended as being a particular part (aṁśa) of his [i.e., the Para-tattva’s] self (ātmā) as per the designation of selfness (ātmatā) [in regard to the jīvātmā on the part of the Para-tattva] even while being distinct from him [i.e., from the Para-tattva] as per the designation of ‘this-ness’ (idantā) [in regard to the jīvātmā] in the statement [in Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.3.2] of his [i.e., of the Para-tattva], ‘Entering [the realm of prakṛti] with this jīva-self (ātmā) [i.e., with this distinct entity known as the jīva who is a part of my self], I shall manifest names and forms,’ is being of the same constitution [lit., ‘form’] (samānākāratā) on account of [the jīvātmā’s] being an entity the form of which is consciousness that is an existent part (aṁśa) of him [i.e., of the Para-tattva; meaning, the oneness of the jīva with the Para-tattva is on account of the jīva being a part (aṁśa) of the Para-tattva that is conscious in constitution just as the Para-tattva is]. … As someone confined, beginning from birth, within a cavern in a house who wishes to know the sun, after having been shown a particle-ray of the sun that has somehow fallen through an air hole [into the cavern], is instructed by someone, ‘This is that [i.e., ‘This light you see here is the sun’], meaning, ‘Because of this [i.e., this sun-ray that you have seen] having the same constitution of light [as the sun] on account of [its] being a part (aṁśa) of that [i.e., of the sun], a vast orb of that light is to be conceived [i.e., you can acquire an understanding of what the sun is by imagining a vast orb made up of a huge number of the rays of light you see here], so [i.e., in a manner akin to the aforementioned method of instruction] we shall establish in Paramātma Sandarbha (18–46) the jīva’s similarly being a part (aṁśa) of him [i.e., of the Para-tattva] on account of [the jīva’s] being existent (siddha) as a particular śakti of his.”

Read on →

śrutau ca jīvo nāmāto’nyaḥ svayaṁ siddho nāsti

śrutau ca jīvo nāmāto’nyaḥ svayaṁ siddho nāsti, parantu tad-ātmaka evety arthaḥ |
(Bhagavat Sandarbha: 19)

“In the Śruti also [i.e., in the statement in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad: 3.7.23, ‘There is no seer other than him [i.e., than the Para-tattva]’ (nānyo’to’sti draṣṭā), it is shown that], the jīva definitively is not another [entity] self-existent (svayaṁ siddha) apart from him, and rather, is verily constituted of him. This is the meaning.”

Read on →

nṛṣu tava māyayā bhramam amīṣv avagatya bhṛśaṁ

nṛṣu tava māyayā bhramam amīṣv avagatya bhṛśaṁ
tvayi sudhiyo’bhave dadhati bhāvam anuprabhavam |
katham anuvartatāṁ bhava-bhayaṁ tava yad bhrū-kuṭiḥ
sṛjati muhus trinemir abhavac-charaṇeṣu bhayam ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.87.32)

[Translated according to Śrī Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda’s commentary:] “Understanding the ignorance as a consequence of your māyā among these human beings wherefrom repeated birth ensues, the wise foster bhāva [i.e., render service] profusely for you, Non-existence [i.e., you who are the cause of liberation from material existence]. How could your followers have any distress on account of [material] existence, since the furrowing of your brows—time (trinemi)—creates distress perpetually for those who are not in your shelter?”

Read on →

saty api bhedāpagame nātha tavāhaṁ na māmakīnas tvam

saty api bhedāpagame nātha tavāhaṁ na māmakīnas tvam |
sāmudro hi taraṅgaḥ kvacana samudro na tāraṅgaḥ ||
(Śrī Śaṅkarācārya’s Viṣṇu-ṣaṭpadī-stotram: 3; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 8.419; Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmārta: 2.2.196)

“Even once the cessation of distinction (bheda) [between you and I] occurs, O Nātha, I am yours, [but] you are not mine. A wave certainly belongs to the ocean, [but] nowhere does the ocean belong to a wave.”

Read on →

tad-aṁśatvāt tad-abhinnatvena tadīyatvena vā svātmānaṁ vijānīyād

tad-aṁśatvāt tad-abhinnatvena tadīyatvena vā svātmānaṁ vijānīyād ity arthaḥ | evaṁ ca sati so’ham iti—saḥ śrī-bhagavad-aṁśaḥ śuddha-buddha-mukta-svabhāvo’ham; yad vā, tad-aṁśatvena tad-adhīno nitya-sevako’smīty arthaḥ |
(Excerpt from the Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 5.65)

“One should understand one’s self (ātmā) as being non-different from him [i.e., Paramātmā] or as being his own, on account of [the ātmā’s] being a part (aṁśa) of him. This is the meaning [of the aforementioned bhūta-śuddhi meditation]. Since this is such, ‘I am he’ (so’ham) means, ‘I, who am of pure, conscious, and liberated nature, am he, meaning, [I am] a part (aṁśa) of Śrī Bhagavān,’ or alternately, ‘because of [my] being a part of him, I am dependent on him and an eternal servant [of him].’”

Read on →

veda-gamyaḥ paraḥ śuddha iti me dhīyate matiḥ

veda-gamyaḥ paraḥ śuddha iti me dhīyate matiḥ ||
adhyātma-dhyāna-saṁbhūta-bhūtaṁ dīpavat sphuṭam |
jñānaṁ viddhi śubhācāre tena yānti parāṁ gatim ||
(Mahābhārata: 12.220.100)

“[Bhīṣmadeva:] The pure Supreme is knowable through the Veda. This is my firmly held view. O you of fine conduct, know knowledge (jñāna) to be that which is born of meditation related to the higher self and [self-] evident like a lamp. Thereby, one attains the supreme destination.”

Read on →

ekasyaiva viśeṣaṇa-bhedena tad-aviśiṣṭatvena ca pratipādanāt

ekasyaiva viśeṣaṇa-bhedena tad-aviśiṣṭatvena ca pratipādanāt tathaiva tat-tad-upāsaka-puruṣānubhava-bhedāc cāvirbhāva-nāmnor bheda … |
(Bhagavat Sandarbha: 4)

“Because of defining of the One [i.e., the Absolute Reality, both] with the distinction of [possessing] qualifiers and as being unqualified by them [i.e., as being unpossessed of any qualifiers], and so also because of difference in the experiences of persons who are worshippers of those [i.e., of those different aspects of the One, namely, the qualified aspect and the unqualified aspect], there is a difference in the names of the manifestations [of the One, the Absolute Reality, i.e., its qualified aspect is known as Bhagavān and its unqualified aspect is known as Brahman].”

Read on →

sarvato bṛhattamatvād brahmeti yad viduḥ

sarvato bṛhattamatvād brahmeti yad viduḥ, tat khalu paramasya puṁso bhagavataḥ padam eva, nirvikalpatayā sākṣātkṛteḥ prāthamikatvāt, brahmaṇaś ca bhagavata eva nirvikalpa-sattā-rūpatvāt, vicitra-rūpādi-vikalpa-viśeṣa-viśiṣṭasya bhagavatas tu sākṣātkṛtes tad-anantarajatvāt, tadīya-svarūpa-bhūtaṁ tad brahma tat-sākṣātkārāspadaṁ bhavatīty arthaḥ |
(Bhagavat Sandarbha: 7)

“That which is known as Brahman because of [its] being the greatest of all is an aspect of the Supreme Person, Bhagavān, (1) because of direct perception (sākṣātkṛti) [of it] being initially occurrent [i.e., occurrent before that of Bhagavān] on account of [that perception’s] being indeterminate (nirvikalpa), (2) because of Brahman’s also being Bhagavān’s form of indeterminate being, and (3) because of direct perception (sākṣātkṛti) of Bhagavān, who is qualified by determinate specifics such as a wonderful form, being occurrent after that [i.e., after indeterminate perception of Brahman]. Brahman, being constituted of his [i.e., Bhagavān’s] nature, is thus the basis of direct perception (sākṣātkṛti) of him [i.e., Bhagavān, meaning, Brahman and Bhagavān are one and the same entity, the former being an indeterminate perception of that entity, and the latter being a determinate perception of that entity].”

Read on →

yogyatā-vaiśiṣṭyenāvirbhāva-vaiśiṣṭyaṁ

yogyatā-vaiśiṣṭyenāvirbhāva-vaiśiṣṭyaṁ … |
(Bhagavat Sandarbha: 6)

“The specificity of the manifestation [of the Absolute Reality] occurs in accord with the specificity of the fitness [of a sādhaka to experience the Absolute Reality in a specific way].”

Read on →

bhagavad-rūpa-pūrṇāvirbhāvaṁ tat tattvaṁ

bhagavad-rūpa-pūrṇāvirbhāvaṁ tat tattvaṁ … jīvādi-niyantṛtvena sphurad vā pratipādyamānaṁ vā paramātmeti śabdyata iti |
(Bhagavat Sandarbha: 3)

“When the [Absolute] Reality in its complete manifestation in the form of Bhagavān manifests, or is to be defined, as the regulator of jīvas and so forth [i.e., of all aspects of saṁsāra], it is known as Paramātmā.”

Read on →

Scroll to Top