सत्यपि भेदापगमे नाथ तवाहं न मामकीनस्त्वम् ।
सामुद्रो हि तरङ्गः क्वचन समुद्रो न तरङ्गः ॥
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.”
Commentary
tac ca māyāvādy-ācāryoktayāpi saṁvādayati—saty apīti; bhedasya māyā-kṛta-saṁsāritvāder apagame vṛtte’pi, ātma-tattva-jñāne saty apīty arthaḥ | tavāhaṁ dāso’smi ity arthaḥ, na tu māmakīnas tvam, aṁśenāṁśino vyāpakatvāsambhavāt, tathā sati sāmyāpatteḥ | evaṁ bhedābheda-siddhāntoktam abhede’pi bhedaṁ dṛṣṭāntena sādhayati—sāmudra iti | taraṅgasya jalamayatvādinā samudrād abhinnatve’pi aṁśatayā paricchinnatvādinā tato bhinna eveti dik | etac ca śrī-bhāgavatāmṛta-ṭīkāyāṁ vistareṇa vivṛtam evāsti |
(Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“Thus, furthermore, the author agrees even with a statement of the Māyāvādī ācārya [i.e., Śrī Śaṅkarācāryapāda]: saty api … [i.e., he cites this verse]. Even when the cessation of the [jīva’s] distinction (bheda) [from Parabrahman, i.e., Śrī Bhagavān] created by māyā of being a saṁsārī occurs, meaning, even when knowledge of the nature of the self (ātma-tattva-jñāna) comes about, ‘I am yours’, meaning, ‘I am a servant [of you, O Nātha,’ is said], but ‘you are not mine’ [is also said] because of the impossibility of the Whole’s (Aṁśī’s) [i.e., Parabrahman’s] being pervaded by a part (aṁśa) on account of the occurrence of equality [between the part and Whole] if that were to occur [which is untenable]. Thus, the author establishes with an illustration a distinction (bheda) [between the jīva and Parabrahman] even in the midst of the non-distinction (abheda) [between them] as described in the philosophy of non-distinction cum distinction (bhedābheda-siddhānta): sāmudra … [i.e., the second half of the verse is spoken]. Even with a wave’s being non-distinct (abhinna) from the ocean on account of [its] being constituted of water and so forth [just as the ocean is], it is verily distinct (bhinna) from that [i.e., from the ocean] on account of being limited and so forth as a result of being a part (aṁśa) [of the ocean]. This is the direction. This is also described with elaboration in the commentary on Śrī Bhāgavatāmṛta (2.2.196).”