nitya-siddhās tato jīvā bhinnā eva yathā raveḥ |
aṁśavo visphuliṅgāś ca vahner bhaṅgāś ca vāridheḥ ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.2.184)
“The jīvas are certainly eternally existent (nitya-siddha) as distinct from him [i.e., Parabrahman] like the [light-] particles of the sun, sparks of a fire, and waves of the ocean [i.e., just as these are distinct from their sources].”
jīva-svarūpaṁ yad vastu paraṁ brahma tad eva cet |
tad eva sac-cid-ānanda-ghanaṁ śrī-bhagavāṁś ca tat ||
tathāpi jīva-tattvāni tasyāṁsā eva san-matāḥ |
ghana-tejaḥ-samūhasya tejo-jālaṁ yathā raveḥ ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.2.182–183)
“‘The existent (vastu) the essential nature (svarūpa) of which is [called] the jīva—if that specifically were [considered] Parabrahman, [then] that specifically would be constituted of condensed eternal being, consciousness, and bliss, and would be Śrī Bhagavān [himself].’ Still, the essential nature (tattva) of the jīvas would be considered by the sat only his [i.e., Parabrahman’s] parts (aṁśas) like the multiplicity of the light [i.e., the light particles] of the sun, which is an aggregate of condensed light.”
eka-deśa-sthitasyāgner jyotsnā vistāriṇī yathā | parasya brahmaṇaḥ śaktis tathedam akhilaṁ jagat || iti śrī-parāśaroktyā | tathā—‘brahmaṇo hi pratiṣṭhāham amṛtasyāvyayasya ca’ iti śrī-bhagavad-gītādi-vacanena ca ghana-maṇḍala-candra-tejo-ghana-maṇḍala-sūrya-sthānīyasya bhagavac-caraṇāravinda-dvandasya sac-cid-ānanda-ghanasya bhakti-dvārānubhavena sukhaṁ ghanaṁ syād eva | sarva-vyāpi-jyotsnā-tejaḥ-sthānīyasya jīva-svarūpa-bhūtasya jagan-mayasya sac-cid-ānanda-brahmaṇo’nubhavena sukham api tad-anurūpaṁ svalpam eva syāt, na ca māyikaṁ prapañca-jātam idaṁ jyotsnā-sthānīyam iti vācyam | yathā candra-sūryayor jyotsnā-tejaḥ-paramāṇavaḥ prakāśakatvādi-tat-tad-guṇa-yogāt tat-tad-aṁśās tathā jagataḥ sac-cid-ānandatvādy-abhāvena para-brahmaṇo’ṁśatvāsambhavāt śakti-śabda-prayogāc ceti dik |
(Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.2.180)
“As per the statement of Śrī Parāśara [in VP 1.22.54], ‘As the light of a fire situated in one place is spread out [all around], so the śakti of the Supreme Brahman is [spread out] throughout this entire universe,’ and the statement [of Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa] in Śrī Bhagavad-gītā [14.27], ‘Since I am the basis of Brahman, of the imperishable nectar, of the eternal dharma, and of the bliss of the one-pointed,’ the bliss (sukham) [felt by the jīva] as a result of experience by means of bhakti to the two lotus feet of Bhagavān, which are constituted of condensed eternal being, consciousness, and bliss and comparable to the condensed orb of the moon and the illuminating condensed orb of the sun, shall verily be condensed [i.e., intense], whereas the bliss as a result of experience of [the aspect of] brahman constituted of [non-condensed] eternal being, consciousness, and bliss, constitutive of the world (jaganmaya), existent as the nature (svarūpa) of a jīva, and comparable to all-pervading light [rather than to the condensed luminous orb of the sun or the moon itself], shall verily be meager in accord with that [i.e., in accord with how it is of less condensed nature, just as a perception of diffused light is far less intense than a perception of the sun or moon directly]. And it is not that this [world] which is māyika and generated by [mere] appearance (prapañca) should be said to be comparable to light [as brahman, i.e., the jīva, has just been compared] because of the impossibility of the world’s being a part (aṁśa) of Parabrahman [as brahman, i.e., the jīva, is] on account of the non-existence of [its, i.e., the world’s] being constituted of eternal being, consciousness, and bliss, and so forth, and because of the usage of the word śakti [to describe it, rather than the world ‘part’ (aṁśa)], just as the minute particles of the light of the moon and the sun are parts thereof respectively [i.e., are parts of the moon and the sun] because of the presence of various qualities beginning with being illuminating [i.e., because they share the same qualities as the wholes of which they are said to be parts, unlike the material world, which does not share the same qualities as the whole, viz., Parabrahman, that it is said to be a śakti, but not a ‘part’ (aṁśa), of]. This is the direction.”
tad evaṁ māyāśrayatva-māyā-mohitatvābhyāṁ sthite dvayor bhede tad-bhajanasyaivābhidheyatvam āyātam |
(Tattva Sandarbha: 44)
“Thus, in this way, given the distinction between the two [i.e., between Śrī Bhagavān and the jīva] existent because of [their respectively] being the shelter of māyā and deluded by māyā, solely worship (bhajana) of him [i.e., of Śrī Bhagavān] being the abhidheya is understood.”
tat sasarja tadā brahmā bhagavān ādi-kṛt prabhuḥ |
teṣāṃ ye yāni karmāṇi prāk-sṛṣṭyāṁ pratipedire |
tāny eva te prapadyante sṛjyamānāḥ punaḥ punaḥ ||
hiṁsrāhiṁsre mṛdu-krūre dharmadharmāv ṛtānṛte |
tad-bhāvitāḥ prapadyante tasmāt tat tasya rocate ||
(Viṣṇu Purāṇa: 1.5.60–61)
“Then Lord Bramā, the original maker and master, emanated them [i.e., all the living beings throughout the universe]. Being emanated again and again [in this way in each cyclic emanation of the universe], they acquired [in this present cyclic emanation] only those karmas of theirs which were acquired [by them] in the previous emanation [of the universe]. They acquired [dispositions and actions constituted of combinations of] violence and non-violence, gentleness and cruelty, dharma and adharma, truthfulness and untruthfulness, being steeped in [various combinations of] these [in accord with their previous karmas]. Thus, they liked them [i.e., thus they felt affinity for the dispositions and actions they adopted because they naturally gravitated to them as a result of their previous karmas, meaning, as a result of the vāsanās they were beset with in accord with their previous karmas].”
prakṛtiṁ puruṣaṁ caiva viddhy anādī ubhāv api |
vikārāṁś ca guṇāṁś caiva viddhi prakṛti-saṁbhavān ||
kārya-kāraṇa-kartṛtve hetuḥ prakṛtir ucyate |
puruṣaḥ sukha-duḥkhānāṁ bhoktṛtve hetur ucyate ||
puruṣaḥ prakṛti-stho hi bhuṅkte prakṛtijān guṇān |
kāraṇaṁ guṇa-saṅgo’sya sad-asad-yoni-janmasu ||
(Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā: 13.19–21)
“Prakṛti and the puruṣa—for certain know both to be verily beginningless (anādi), and know the transformations (vikāras) and functions (guṇas) [thereof] to be born of prakṛti. Prakṛti is said to be the cause in regard to being the producer of effects and instruments. The puruṣa is said to be the cause in regard to being the experiencer of happinesses and sufferings. The puruṣa situated in prakṛti experiences the functions (guṇas) born of prakṛti amid births in high and low wombs, and his attachment to [these] functions (guṇas) is the cause [thereof].”
na karmāvibhāgād iti cen nānāditvāt |
(Vedānta-sūtra: 2.1.35)
“‘No, [Brahman cannot be said to be free from partiality or cruelty just by making reference to karma] because of the non-distinction of karma [from Brahman prior to the emanation of the universe].’ If this [objection is raised], [then to that it is said] no, [karma is not simply undivided prior to the emanation of the universe] because of [karma’s] being beginningless [i.e., because of karma’s becoming recurrently distinguished from Brahman in each successive emanation of the universe in accord with its state at the end of each previous emanation of the universe in a perpetual cycle without beginning].”
‘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.”
sa yad ajayā tv ajām anuśayīta guṇāṁś ca juṣan
bhajati sarūpatāṁ tad anu mṛtyum apeta-bhagaḥ |
tvam uta jahāsi tām ahir iva tvacam ātta-bhago
mahasi mahīyase’ṣṭa-guṇite’parimeya-bhagaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.87.38; cited in Bhagavat Sandarbha: 24; Paramātma Sandarbha: 39)
“Since he [i.e., the jīva], however, can lie down with the unborn [i.e., ignorance (avidyā) on account of the unborn (ajayā) [i.e., māyā], he partakes of the qualities [of the unborn] and thereafter of likeness [to those qualities of the unborn], becomes deprived of fortune (apeta-bhagaḥ), and undergoes death [i.e., saṁsāra]. You, on the contrary, shun her [i.e., the unborn, i.e., māyā], like a serpent [its] skin, and, being possessed of fortune, are exalted in [your own] eightfold greatness, being of immeasurable fortune.”
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.”
