एवं तत्र चिरं तिष्ठन्मर्त्यलोकस्थितं त्विदम् ।
माथुरमण्डलं श्रीमदपश्यं खलु तादृशम् ॥
तत्तच्छ्रीगोपगोपीभिस्ताभिर्गोभिश्च तादृशैः ।
पशुपक्षिकृमिक्ष्माभृत्सरित्तर्वादिभिर्वृतम् ॥
तथैवाविरतं श्रीमत्कृष्णचन्द्रेण तेन हि ।
विस्तार्यमाणया तादृक्क्रीडाश्रेण्यापि मण्डितम् ॥
तत्कदाचिदितस्तत्र कदापि विदधे स्थितिम् ।
भेदं नोपलभे कञ्चित्पदयोरधुनैतयोः ॥
evaṁ tatra ciraṁ tiṣṭhan martya-loka-sthitaṁ tv idam |
māthura-maṇḍalaṁ śrīmad apaśyaṁ khalu tādṛśam ||
tat-tac-chrī-gopa-gopībhis tābhir gobhiś ca tādṛśaiḥ |
paśu-pakṣi-kṛmi-kṣmābhṛt-sarit-tarv-ādibhir vṛtam ||
tathaivāvirataṁ śrīmat-kṛṣṇacandreṇa tena hi |
vistāryamāṇayā tādṛk-krīḍā-śreṇyāpi maṇḍitam ||
tat kadācid itas tatra kadāpi vidadhe sthitim |
bhedaṁ nopalabhe kañcit padayor adhunaitayoḥ ||
(Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmṛta: 2.6.371–374)
“In this way, after staying there [i.e., in Goloka] for a long time, I perceived this blessed district of Mathurā situated in the mortal world to indeed be such [i.e., to be just like Goloka], to be filled with those very blessed gopas and gopīs, those very cows, and similar animals, birds, insects, mountains, rivers, trees, and so forth, and to verily be likewise also adorned with series of similar sports being expanded never-endingly by him—blessed Kṛṣṇacandra. Thus, I dwell sometimes here [i.e., in Bhauma Vraja] and sometimes there [i.e., in Goloka]. Now I do not perceive a distinction between these two places at all.”
Commentary
nanu tarhi bhauma-mathurā-maṇḍale’smin katham āgato’si? tatrāha—evam iti caturbhiḥ | tādṛśaṁ śrī-goloka-sadṛśam eva apaśyaṁ śrī-goloka-tattvānubhavenaivaṁ tan-mathurā-maṇḍala-tattvānubhava-siddheḥ | jñāna-parāṇāṁ brahma-svarūpa-jñānenaivātma-tattva-jñāna-siddhivat, anyathā prathamaṁ bahir-dṛṣṭyā jñānānudayenaitat-sādhane sādhakānāṁ śraddhādy-anutpatteḥ | ata eva tac ca padayor api brahmaṇīva tattva-pratipādakayor ādau tat-pada-nirdeśa iti dik | tādṛśatvam eva darśayan tad viśinaṣṭi—tat-tad iti dvābhyām | tais taiḥ śrī-goloka-vartibhir eva ity atyantābhedābhiprāyeṇa | vastutas tu tat-tat-pṛthak-mūrti-viśeṣair ity arthaḥ | tatrātrāpi sadaivaika-rūpeṇa śrī-bhagavat-krīḍokteḥ | … atra vartamāno’pi jāne iha tatraiva nivasann asmi, tatra nivasann api jāne atraiva vartamāno’smīty arthaḥ | nanu tarhi pūrvam etat parityajya kathaṁ tat-prāptaye bahula-yatno’kāri? tatrāha—adhunaiveti | pūrvaṁ tu etat-tattvānanubhavena parama-bheda-jñānam evāsīd ity arthaḥ | atra yuktiś coktaiva |
(Excerpt from the Dig-darśanī-ṭīkā)
“[A question is raised:] ‘Well, then why have you returned to this district of Mathurā situated on earth [i.e., in Bhauma Vraja, from Goloka]?’ [In response] To this [question] he speaks with four [verses]; evam … [i.e., he speaks BB 2.6.371–374]. I perceived [this blessed district of Mathurā situated in the mortal world] to be such (tādṛśam), that is, to be indeed similar to blessed Goloka, ‘in his way’ (evaṁ), that is, by way of attainment of perception of the essential nature (tattva) of that district of Mathurā [situated on earth, i.e., Bhauma Vraja] by means of [having had] perception of the essential nature (tattva) of blessed Goloka like adherents of [the path of] jñāna’s attainment of knowledge (jñāna) of the essential nature (tattva) of the self (ātmā) specifically by means of [having acquired] knowledge (jñāna) of the true nature (svarūpa) of Brahman on account of sādhakas’ non-manifestation of conviction (śraddhā) and so forth in that sādhana [i.e., in the sādhana on the path of jñāna that leads to knowledge of the the essential nature (tattva) of the self (ātmā)] as a result of the non-arising of knowledge by way of external vision at first otherwise [i.e., as a person who has not learned from the śāstras about the true nature (svarūpa) of Brahman will not acquire knowledge of the true nature of Brahman at first because such knowledge cannot be gained from external vision, that is, mere sensory perception, which is the only means of knowledge that such a person who has not been educated about the the true nature of Brahman has, and as consequently such a person will not acquire knowledge of the essential nature (tattva) of the self (ātmā) since that the essential nature (tattva) of the self (ātmā) is Brahman and such a person has no knowledge of the true nature (svarūpa) of Brahman, so a person will not experience how the district of Mathurā situated on earth is similar to Goloka until a person has had experience of Goloka itself and can then perceive how the the district of Mathurā situated on earth is similar to it]. Therefore, among the two words that are imparting of the essential nature (tattva) [of Brahman in the celebrated statement in Chāndogya Upaniṣad (6.8.7) tat tvam asi, lit., ‘That you are,’], there is mention of the word tat first, which means [in this case] ‘like Brahman.’ This is the direction [i.e., the word tat, ‘that,’ is mentioned first because if someone does not first have knowledge of the true nature of Brahman, the referent of the word tat in this case, then they will not understand the significance of being told that they are that, and similarly one will not understand or experience the significance of being told that Bhauma Vraja is non-different from Goloka if first of all they do not have understanding or experience of Goloka; thus, Sarūpa here says that after living in Goloka and experiencing it for himself he could then experience how Bhauma Vraja is non-different from it].
“Showing this similarity [between Bhauma Vraja and Goloka] specifically, he describes it with two [verses]: tat-tat … [i.e., he states BB 2.6.372–373]. ‘Those very’ (tat-tat) [gopas and gopīs], meaning, specifically, the residents of blessed Goloka, is [stated] with the intent of an absolute non-distinction [between the resident of Goloka and the people perceived in Bhauma Vraja]. In actuality, however, they are particular separate forms [i.e., simultaneously existent, non-co-located alternate forms] of those very [residents of Goloka] is the meaning because of the description in this regard of Śrī Bhagavān’s sport [being performed] always with only one form even here [in Bhauma Vraja]. …
“Even while present here [i.e., in Bhauma Vraja], I perceive that I am dwelling only there [i.e., in Goloka], and even while dwelling there, I perceive that I am only present here. This is the meaning.
“[A question is raised:] ‘Well, then why previously did you completely relinquish this [i.e., Bhauma Vraja] and make a profound effort to attain that [i.e., Goloka]?’ To that [question], he says adhunā … [i.e., he speaks the second half of BB 2.6.374]. Previously, I had only awareness of a complete distinction [between Bhauma Vraja and Goloka] because of a lack of perception of the essential nature of this [realm of Bhauma Vraja as a result of a lack of experience of the essential nature of Goloka]. This is the meaning. In this regard, the reasoning (yukti) was also certainly stated [earlier].”