Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta

sadā vaijātyam āptānāṁ jīvānām api tattvataḥ

sadā vaijātyam āptānāṁ jīvānām api tattvataḥ |
aṁśatvenāpy abhinnatvād vijātīya-bhidā mṛtā ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.2.195)

“Because of even the jīvas who are eternally possessed of categorical distinctiveness (vaijātya) [in relation to Parabrahman] being [nevertheless] non-distinct [from Parabrahman] by virtue of [their] also being a part (aṁśa) [of Parabrahman] in essential nature (tattvataḥ), an interclass distinction (vijātīya-bhidā) [in regard to Parabrahman] is quashed.”

Read on →

paramātmā parabrahma sa eva parameśvaraḥ

paramātmā parabrahma sa eva parameśvaraḥ |
ity evam eṣām aikyena sajātīya-bhidā hatā ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.2.194)

“He specifically, Paramātmā, is Parabrahman and is the Supreme Īśvara. Thus, in this way, because of their oneness, an intraclass distinction (sajātīya-bhidā) is negated.”

Read on →

muktau sva-tattva-jñānena māyāpagamato hi saḥ

muktau sva-tattva-jñānena māyāpagamato hi saḥ |
nivartate ghanānanda-brahmāṁśānubhavo bhavet ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.2.188)

“That [i.e., the delusion of saṁsāra] ceases on account of the withdrawal of māyā in [i.e., upon the attainment of] mukti by means of knowledge of the essential nature (tattva) of the self, and [then for a jīva who thus becomes liberated] the experience of [only] a part (aṁśa) of the condensed bliss of Brahman shall occur.”

Read on →

sac-cid-ānanda-rūpānāṁ jīvānāṁ kṛṣṇa-māyayā

sac-cid-ānanda-rūpānāṁ jīvānāṁ kṛṣṇa-māyayā |
anādy-avidyayā tattva-vismṛtyā saṁsṛtir bhramaḥ ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.2.187)

“The transmigration (saṁsṛti) [i.e., saṁsāra]—the delusion—of the jīvas, who are eternal being, consciousness, and bliss in constitution, occurs because of oblivion in regard to [their own] essential nature (tattva) because of beginningless ignorance (anādi-avidyā) by means of Kṛṣṇa’s māyā.”

Read on →

atas tasmād abhinnās te bhinnā api satāṁ matāḥ

atas tasmād abhinnās te bhinnā api satāṁ matāḥ |
muktau satyam api prāyo bhedas tiṣṭhed ato hi saḥ ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.2.186)

“Therefore, they [i.e., the jīvas] are considered by the sat non-distinct from him and also distinct [from him], and therefore even when mukti occurs, that distinction shall certainly remain in most cases.”

Read on →

anādi-siddhayā śaktyā cid-vilāsa-svarūpayā

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.”

Read on →

nitya-siddhās tato jīvā bhinnā eva yathā raveḥ

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].”

Read on →

jīva-svarūpaṁ yad vastu paraṁ brahma tad eva cet

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.”

Read on →

sukha-rūpaṁ sukhādhāraḥ śarkāra-piṇḍavan matam

sukha-rūpaṁ sukhādhāraḥ śarkāra-piṇḍavan matam |
śrī-kṛṣṇa-caraṇa-dvandvaṁ sukhaṁ brahma tu kevalam ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.2.181)

“Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s two feet are considered forms of bliss and a substratum of bliss like a lump of sugar [which is both a form of sweetness and a substratum of sweetness] whereas Brahman is only bliss [i.e., it is not also a substratum of bliss].”

Read on →

eka-deśa-sthitasyāgner jyotsnā vistāriṇī yathā

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.”

Read on →

Scroll to Top