गोविन्द भाष्य (श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण - अचिन्त्यभेदाभेद वेदान्त ब्रह्मसूत्र भाष्य सटीक)

Supreme Personality of Godhead must be the creator of the individual spirit souls. Any other idea would be illogical. Siddhānta (conclusion): The author of the sūtras gives the following conclusion. Sūtra 16 nātmā śruter nityatvāc ca tābhyaḥ na—not; ātmā—the individual spirit soul; śruteḥ—from the Śruti-śāstra; nityatvāt—because of being eternal; ca—and; tābhyaḥ—from them. Because the individual spirit soul is eternal, and because of the statements of Śruti-śāstra and other scriptures, this idea about the individual spirit soul is not true. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa The individual spirit soul was never created. Why not? The sūtra explains: "śruteḥ" (because of the statements of Śruti-śāstra). In Kaṭha Upaniṣad (1.2.18) it is said: na jāyate mriyate vā vipaścin nāyaṁ kutaścin na babhūva kaścit ajo nityaḥ śāśvato 'yaṁ purāṇo na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre "O wise one, for the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing, and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain."* That the individual spirit soul was never born is also declared in the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (1.9): jñājñau dvāv ajāv īśānīśau "Neither the Supreme Personality of Godhead nor the individual spirit souls

were ever born." The word "tābhyaḥ" in the sūtra means "the eternality of the individual spirit soul is described in the Śruti and Smṛti -śāstras". The word "ca" (and) in the sūtra means that the individual spirit soul is also conscious and full of knowledge. In the Kaṭha Upaniṣad (2.5.13) it is said: nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām "Of all eternal living souls there is one who is the leader. Of all eternal souls there is one who is the leader." In the Bhagavad-gītā the Supreme Lord explains: ajo nityaḥ śāśvato 'yaṁ purāṇaḥ "The soul is unborn, eternal, ever-existing, and primeval." Therefore, when it is said, "Yajñadatta is born and again he dies," such words refer only to the external material body. The jāta-karma ceremony and other ceremonies like it also refer to the external material body. The individual spirit soul is different from the external material body and resides in it like a passenger. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.3.8) it is said: sa vā ayaṁ puruṣo jāyamānaḥ śarīram abhisaṁpadyamānaḥ sa utkraman mriyamāṇaḥ "At the moment of birth the spirit soul enters a material body and at the moment of death the soul leaves the body." In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (6.11.3) it is said: jīvopetam vāva kiledaṁ mriyate na jīvo mriyate "The soul resides in the material body. When the body dies the soul does not die." Here someone may object: How can this be? If this is so, then this fact disagrees with the scriptural description of the individual souls' creation. To this objection I reply: The individual spirit souls are said to be created because they are effects of the Supreme. The Supreme Personality of Godhead has two potencies, and these are said to be His effects. Here is what makes these two

potencies different. One potency is the pradhāna and other inert, unconscious, not alive potencies that are meant to be objects of enjoyment and various experiences. The other potency is the individual spirit souls, who are not inert, dull matter, but are conscious, alive beings, and who are able to enjoy and perceive various experiences. These two potencies share one common feature: that they are both the effects of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In this way the scriptural description of the souls' creation is not contradicted. In this way the scriptures are correct, and in this way, also, the individual spirit souls are never born. Adhikaraṇa 12 The Individual Spirit Souls Are Both Knowledge and Knowers Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Now the author of the sūtras considers the nature of the individual spirit soul. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (3.7.22) it is said: yo vijñāne tiṣṭhan "The individual spirit soul is situated in knowledge." In another passage it is said: sukham aham asvapsaṁ na kiñcid avediṣi "I slept happily. I did not know anything." Saṁśaya (doubt): Is the individual spirit soul unalloyed knowledge only, or is the soul the knower that experiences knowledge? Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): The individual spirit soul consists of knowledge only. This is confirmed by the statement of Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (3.7.22): "The individual spirit soul is situated in knowledge." The soul is not the knower or the perceiver of knowledge. The intelligence is the knower. Therefore statement, "I slept happily. I did not know anything." is spoken by the intelligence, not by the soul.

Siddhānta (conclusion): The author of the sūtras gives the following conclusion. Sūtra 17 jño 'ta eva jñaḥ—knower; ataḥ eva—therefore. Therefore he is the knower. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa The individual spirit soul is both knowledge and knower. In the Praśna Upaniṣad (4.9) it is said: eṣa hi draṣṭā spraṣṭā śrotā rasayitā ghrātā mantā boddhā kartā vijñānātmā puruṣaḥ "The individual spirit soul is the seer, the toucher, the hearer, the taster, the smeller, the thinker, the determiner, the doer, and the knower." This truth is accepted because it is declared by scripture, not because it is understood by logic. Our acceptance of the truth of scripture is described in sūtra 2.1.27: śrutes tu śabda-mūlatvāt "The statements of Śruti-śāstra are the root of real knowledge." In the Smṛti-śāstra it is said: jñātā jñāna-svarūpo 'yam "The individual spirit soul is both knower and knowledge." Therefore the individual spirit soul is not knowledge alone without being anything else, and this is not at all proved by the statement, "I slept happily. I did

not know anything," for such an idea would contradict these scripture statements that affirm the soul to be the knower. Therefore it is concluded that the individual spirit soul is both knowledge and knower. Adhikaraṇa 13 The Individual Spirit Souls Are Atomic Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Now the author of the sūtras considers the size of the individual spirit souls. In the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad (3.1.9) it is said: eṣo 'ṇur ātmā cetasā veditavyo yasmin prāṇaḥ pañcadhā saṁviveṣa "When the life-breath withdraws the five activities, the mind can understand the atomic soul." Saṁśaya (doubt): Is the individual spirit soul atomic or all-pervading? Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): The individual spirit soul is all-pervading. Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.14) declares that the soul is "mahān" (great). The statement that the soul is atomic is merely a poetic metaphor. Siddhānta (conclusion): The author of the sūtras gives the conclusion in the following words. Sūtra 18 utkrānti-gaty-āgatīnām utkrānti—departure; gati—travel; āgatīnām—and of return Because of departure, travel, and return.

Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa In this sūtra the word "aṇuḥ" (the atomic soul) should be understood from the previous sūtra. In this sūtra the genitive case is used in the sense of the ablative. The individual spirit soul is atomic and not all-pervading. Why is that? The sūtra explains: "Because of departure, travel, and return." In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.2) it is said: tasya haitasya hṛdayasyāgraṁ pradyotate. tena pradyotenaiṣa ātmā niṣkrāmati cakṣuṣo vā mūrdhno vānyebhyo vā śarīra-deśebhyaḥ "The soul shines in the heart. At the moment of death the effulgent soul leaves through the opening of the eyes, the opening at the top of the the head, or another opening in the body." In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.11) it is said: anandā nāma te lokā andhena tamasāvṛtāḥ tāṁs te pretyābhigacchanti avidvāṁso 'budhā janāḥ "Sinful fools enter into planets known as the worlds of torment, full of darkness and ignorance." In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.6) it is said: prāpyāntaṁ karmaṇas tasya yat kiñcedam karoty ayam tasmāt lokāt punar etya yasmai lokāya karmaṇe "At the time of death the soul reaps the results of his works. He goes to the world where he deserves to go. When the results of his past deeds are exhausted, again he returns to the middle planets, the world of karma." In this way the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad describes the soul's travel from one place to another. If he were all-pervading, the soul would not be able to travel from one place to another, for he would already be everywhere.

In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.87.30) it is said: aparimitā dhruvās tanu-bhṛto yadi sarva-gatās tarhi na śāsyateti niyamo dhruva netarathā "O Lord, although the living entities who have accepted material bodies are spiritual and unlimited in number, if they were all-pervading there would be no question of their being under Your control."* However, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, although all-pervading, can travel from place to place. This is possible because He possesses inconceivable powers. Here someone may object: The individual spirit soul can be all-pervading and unmoving, and still, because he mistakenly identifies with the external material body, imagine that he goes and comes. He is like the ruler of a village who never really leaves his realm. To this the reply is given: Because it is said that he both departs and returns it is not possible that the soul is actually stationary and unmoving. The author of the sūtras confirms this in the following words. Sūtra 19 svātmanaś cottarayoḥ sva—own; ātmanaḥ—of the soul; ca—and; uttarayoḥ—of the latter two. Also because the last two refer to the soul. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa The word "ca" (also) is used here for emphasis. Here the word "uttarayoḥ" (the last two) means "of the coming and going". The coming and going here definitely occurs to the individual spirit soul. This is so because the coming and going in the pervious sūtra clearly refer to an agent, to the performer of the action. The coming and going here are understood to be coming and going from a material body. This is clearly seen in the first Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.2) passage quoted in the previous purport. It is also seen in the following words of Bhagavad-gītā (15.4): śarīraṁ yad avāpnoti yac cāpy utkrāmatīśvaraḥ

gṛhītvaitāni samyāti vāyur gandhān ivāśayāt "The living entity in the material world carries his different conceptions of life from one body to another as the air carries aromas. Thus he takes one kind of body and again quits it to take another."* If someone says that the soul actually never goes anywhere, although it seems to go places because of the misidentification of the external material body as the self, then I say this is a foolish idea. In the following words the Kauśītakī Upaniṣad refutes this idea: sa yadāsmāt śarīrāt samutkrāmati sahaivaitaiḥ sarvair utkrāmati "At the time of death the soul, accompanied by all his powers, leaves the material body." The word "saha" (accompanied by) is used when the more important is accompanied by another of lesser importance. An example is the sentence: "Accompanied by (saha) his son, the father took his meal." Another example is in Bhagavad-gītā (15.4), which declares that the soul carries his different conceptions of life from one body to another as the air carries aromas. In this way the foolish example pushed forward by the impersonalists, the example of the air in the jar and in the sky, is clearly refuted. Sūtra 20 nāṇur atac chruter iti cen netarādhikārāt na—not; aṇuḥ—atom; atat—not that; śruteḥ—from the scriptures; iti—thus; cet—is; na—not; itara—other; adhikārāt—because of being appropriate. If it is claimed that the Śruti-śāstra denies the idea that the soul is atomic, then I reply that it is not so, because those descriptions apply to someone else. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Here someone may object: Is it not so that that the individual spirit soul is not atomic? After all, the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.22) affirms:

sa vā eṣa mahā-jana ātmā "The soul is very great." After all, to be great in size is the very opposite of being atomic. If someone claims this, then the sūtra replies: "No. It is not so." Why not? The sūtra explains: "itara" (because these descriptions apply to someone else). These words are descriptions of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the all-pervading Supersoul. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.3.7) it is said: yo 'yam vijñānamayaḥ prāṇeṣu "He is full of knowledge. He stays among the life-airs." Although this passage begins by describing the individual spirit soul, it proceeds with a description of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as is seen in a following passage (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.3.13): yasyānuvittaḥ pratibuddha ātmā "He is the self who knows everything." These words clearly describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead and not the individual spirit soul. Sūtra 21 sva-śabdonmānābhyāṁ ca sva—own; śabda—word; unmānābhyām—with measure; ca—and. Because of its word and measurement. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa

The word "sva-śabda" (the word describing it) here means that the word atomic is used to describe the individual spirit soul. An example of this is in Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad (2.1.9): eṣo 'ṇur ātmā "The soul is atomic in size." The word "unmāna" here means "Its measurement is atomic in size". The precise measurement of the individual spirit soul is given in the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (4.9): bālāgra-śata-bhāgasya śatadhā kalpitasya ca bhāgo jīvaḥ sa vijñeyaḥ sa cāntantyāya kalpate "When the upper point of a hair is divided into one hundred parts and again each of these parts is further divided into one hundred parts, each such part is the measurement of the dimension of the spirit soul."* In these two ways the atomic size of the soul is proved. the word ānantya" here means "liberation". "Anta" means "death", and "an" means "without". Therefore the word "ānantya" means "the condition of being free from death". Here someone may object: Is it not so that if it is atomic in size and situated in a specific place in the material body, the soul could not perceive sensations in all other parts of the body, where the soul is not actually present? If this is said, then the author of the sūtras replies in the following words. Sūtra 22 avirodhaś candana-vat avirodhaḥ—not contradicting; candana—sandal; vat—like It does not contradict. It is like sandal paste. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa

यथा हि शरीरस्यैकदेशे निहितं चन्दनबिन्दुः समग्रं शरीरं सुखयति, तथा एकदेशस्थितोऽपि जीवात्मा सर्वं देहं चेतयते इति न कश्चिद् विरोधः। तथा च ब्रह्माण्डपुराणे पठ्यते— अणुमात्रोऽप्ययं जीवः स्वदेहं व्याप्य तिष्ठति। यथा व्याप्य शरीराणि हरिचन्दनविप्रुषः॥ (अर्थात्—यथा चन्दनस्य बिन्दुः स्वस्पर्शसुखेन समग्रं शरीरं व्याप्नोति, तथैवायम् अणुरपि जीवः समग्रं देहं व्याप्य वर्तते।) ॥ ब्रह्मसूत्रम् २.३.२३ ॥ अवस्थितिवैशेष्यादिति चेन्नाभ्युपगमाद्धृदि हि॥ २३ ॥ पदच्छेदः— अवस्थिति-वैशेष्यात्, इति, चेत्, न, अभ्युपगमात्, हृदि, हि। पदविभागः तथा शब्दार्थः— अवस्थिति-वैशेष्यात् = अवस्थानस्य विशेषभावात् (चन्दनस्यैकदेशे प्रत्यक्षमुपलब्धेः); इति चेत् = यदि एवमुच्येत; न = तन्न साधु; अभ्युपगमात् = श्रुतिषु अङ्गीकृतत्वात्; हृदि = हृदयदेशे; हि = यतः। सूत्रार्थः— यदि कोऽपि ब्रूयात् यच्चन्दनस्य तु शरीरस्य कस्मिंश्चिदेकदेशे प्रत्यक्षं स्थानविशेषोपलब्धिर्भवति, परं जीवस्य तादृशावस्थानविशेषो नोपलभ्यते, अतः स दृष्टान्तो न युक्तः इति चेत्; तन्न, यतो हि श्रुतिषु जीवस्य हृदयप्रदेशे अवस्थानमभ्युपगतम्। ॥ श्रीगोविन्दभाष्यम् (श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण विरचितम्) ॥ पूर्वपक्षः— ननु चन्दनबिन्दोः शरीरे कस्मिंश्चिदेकस्मिन् प्रदेशे प्रत्यक्षत एवावस्थितिर्विशेषेणोपलभ्यते, जीवस्य तु देहे तथा कश्चिदेकदेशीयो विशेषसम्बन्धो नोपलभ्यते। अतः आकाशवत् सर्वत्रैव देहे तस्य व्यापकत्वं किमिति नाभ्युपेयते? तस्मात् चन्दनदृष्टान्तोऽत्र विषमोऽसमञ्जसश्चेति। सिद्धान्तः— इति चेत्, तन्न; कुतः? अभ्युपगमात्। यतो हि श्रुतौ जीवस्य हृद्येवावस्थानं प्रतिपादितम्। तथा च प्रश्नोपनिषदि (३.६) श्रूयते— "हृदि ह्येष आत्मा" इति। ॥ हिन्दी-अनुवाद एवं व्याख्या ॥ [पूर्वसन्दर्भ:] जिस प्रकार शरीर के किसी एक अंग पर लगाया गया चन्दन का एक बिन्दु (बूँद) समस्त शरीर को आह्लादित कर देता है, उसी प्रकार एक ही स्थान पर स्थित रहता हुआ भी यह जीवात्मा सम्पूर्ण शरीर का अनुभव कर लेता है; अतः कोई विरोध नहीं है। ब्रह्माण्डपुराण में भी ऐसा कहा गया है— "यद्यपि यह जीवात्मा अणुस्वरूप है, तथापि यह सम्पूर्ण देह को व्याप्त करके स्थित रहता है; ठीक उसी प्रकार जैसे हरिचन्दन की एक नन्हीं बूँद सम्पूर्ण शरीर को अपने प्रभाव से व्याप्त कर लेती है।" ॥ सूत्र २३ की व्याख्या ॥ [आक्षेप:] यदि कोई यह शङ्का करे कि चन्दन के बिन्दु की तो शरीर के किसी एक भाग में प्रत्यक्ष स्थिति देखी जाती है, किन्तु जीवात्मा का शरीर में ऐसा कोई निश्चित स्थान प्रत्यक्ष ज्ञात नहीं होता, वह तो आकाश की भाँति सम्पूर्ण देह में ही व्याप्त प्रतीत होता है, अतः चन्दन का दृष्टान्त विषम (अनुपयुक्त) है; [समाधान:] तो यह शङ्का ठीक नहीं है; क्योंकि श्रुति-शास्त्रों में जीवात्मा की स्थिति विशेष रूप से हृदय में स्वीकार की गई है। [श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण भाष्य-सार:] श्रुति स्पष्ट रूप से प्रतिपादित करती है कि जीवात्मा का वास्तविक निवास-स्थान भौतिक शरीर का हृदय-कमल ही है। जैसा कि प्रश्नोपनिषद् (३.६) के प्रमाण से सिद्ध होता है—"यह आत्मा निश्चय ही हृदय में स्थित है।"

hṛdi hy eṣa ātmā "The soul resides in the heart." In the final conclusion the spirit soul, although atomic in size, is, in one sense, all-pervading throughout the entire material body. This is explained in the following sūtra. Sūtra 24 guṇād vālokavat guṇāt—by quality; vā—or; āloka—light; vat—like. By quality or like light. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Although the soul is atomic in size, it pervades the body by the quality of consciousness. Like light it pervades the entire body. As the sun, although situated in one place, fills the universe with light, so the soul fills the body with consciousness. The Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself declares this in Bhagavad-gītā (13.34): yathā prakāśayaty ekaḥ kṛtsnaṁ lokam imaṁ raviḥ kṣetraṁ kṣetrī tathā kṛtsnaṁ prakāśayati bhārata "O son of Bharata, as the sun alone illuminates all this universe, so does the living entity, one within the body, illuminate the entire body by consciousness."* When the sun emanates sunlight it does not lose any atoms from its mass, nor does it become diminished in any way. Rubies and other jewels also emanate light without losing atoms from their mass or becoming diminished in any way. It is not possible to say that when light is emanated from them these things become diminished in size. The light they emanate is their quality, not their mass. The quality can function in a plane apart from the substance that possesses it. The author of the sūtras explains this in the following example.

Sūtra 25 vyatireko gandhavat tathā hi darśayati vyatirekaḥ—difference; gandha—fragrance; vat—like; tathā—so; hi—indeed; darśayati—shows. As a fragrance is in a different place, so it is also in a different place. This the scripture shows. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa As the fragrance of flowers or other objects may travel to a place far from its source, so the consciousness that emanates from the soul may travel from the heart and enter the head, feet, or other parts of the body. The Kauśītaki Upaniṣad (3.6) explains: prajñayā śarīraṁ samāruhya "By consciousness the soul is all-pervading in the material body." Even though the fragrance may travel very far it is never actually separated from its source, just as the light of a jewel is also not separated from its source. In the Smṛti-śāstra it is said: upalabhyāpsu ced gandhaṁ kecid brūyur anaipuṇāḥ pṛthivyām eva tam vidyād apo vāyuṁ ca saṁśritam "They who do not understand may sometimes say that fragrance is present in water. Earth is the natural home of fragrance, although it may sometimes take shelter of water or air." In the Praśna Upaniṣad (4.9) it is said:

एष हि द्रष्टा "आत्मा ही वह पुरुष (चेतन सत्ता) है जो देखता है।" संशय: क्या आत्मा में विद्यमान चेतना नित्य है अथवा अनित्य? पूर्वपक्ष: आत्मा स्वभावतः अचेतन (जड़) है। वह पाषाण के समान है। चेतना तभी उत्पन्न होती है जब आत्मा का मन से संयोग होता है। यह शास्त्रों के इस कथन में देखा जाता है: "मैं सुखपूर्वक सोया। मुझे किसी भी वस्तु का भान नहीं था।" यह कथन सिद्ध करता है कि चेतना आत्मा का स्वाभाविक गुण नहीं है, अपितु अन्य वस्तु (मन) के सम्पर्क से उत्पन्न होती है। यह लोहे और अग्नि के सदृश है। अग्नि में रखने पर लोहे की छड़ धीरे-धीरे अग्नि के गुणों को ग्रहण कर लेती है। यदि चेतना आत्मा का स्वाभाविक गुण होती, तो प्रगाढ़ निद्रा (सुषुप्ति) में इसका लोप नहीं होता। सिद्धान्त: आगामी शब्दों में सूत्रकार (श्रीव्यासदेव) अपना सिद्धान्त प्रस्तुत करते हैं। सूत्र २६ पृथगुपदेशात् पृथक् — पृथक् (भिन्न रूप से); उपदेशात् — उपदेश (कथन) होने के कारण। क्योंकि (ज्ञान और ज्ञाता का) पृथक् उपदेश किया गया है। श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण कृत तात्पर्य / भाष्य आत्मा नित्य रूप से चेतन है। यह किस प्रकार जाना जाता है? सूत्र स्पष्ट करता है: "क्योंकि पृथक् उपदेश है।" उस उपदेश के कुछ उदाहरण प्रस्तुत हैं। प्रश्नोपनिषद् (४.९) में कहा गया है: एष हि द्रष्टा "आत्मा नित्य देखता है (नित्य द्रष्टा है)।" बृहदारण्यकोपनिषद् (४.५.१४) में कहा गया है:

avināśī vā are ayam ātmānucitti-dharmā "The soul's consciousness is never destroyed." The soul does not become conscious merely by contact with the mind, for soul and mind are both indivisible and cannot interact. Turning away from the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the soul obscures its natural spiritual knowledge. Turning towards the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the soul revives its natural spiritual consciousness. This is described in the Smṛti-śāstra: yathā na kriyate jyotsnā mala-prakṣālanān maṇeḥ doṣa-prahāṇān na jñānam ātmanaḥ kriyate tathā "As by washing away the dirt that covered a jewel, the jewel's splendor is not created but merely uncovered, so by removing the dirt of materialism that covered the soul, the soul's splendor is not created, but merely uncovered. yathodapāna-khananāt kriyate na jalāntaram sad eva nīyate vyaktim asataḥ sambhavaḥ kutaḥ "As by digging a well, water is brought forth but not created, so by spiritual activities the nature of the soul is brought forth but not created. How would it be possible to create the the soul's qualities from nothing? tathā heya-guṇa-dhvaṁsād avarodhādayo guṇāḥ prakāśyante na jānyante nitya evātmano hi te "When material faults are destroyed, the soul's qualities become revealed. The soul's qualities are eternal. they are never created." Here someone may object: These quotes from scripture merely show that the soul is synonymous with consciousness. They do not prove that the soul itself is conscious.

To this objection the author of the sūtras replies in the following words. Sūtra 27 tad-guṇa-sāratvāt tad vyapadeśaḥ prājña-vat tat—of that; guṇa—quality; sāratvāt—because of being the essence; tat—that; vyapadeśaḥ—designation; prājña—intelligent; vat—like. It is called that because that is its essential nature, just as He who is intelligent. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Because the soul is consciousness itself, therefore it is conscious. Why is that? The sūtra explains: "It is called that because that is its essential nature." In this sūtra the word "guṇa" (quality) refers to the soul's quality of consciousness. The word "sāra" means "the essential nature of the thing, the absence of which makes the thing non-existent." The word "prājña-vat" means "Like Lord Viṣṇu, who is known as “prājña" (all-knowing) because He is all knowledge. Because He is all-knowledge personified, Lord Viṣṇu is said to know everything. In the same way, because the soul is consciousness personified, therefore the soul is conscious. That the statements "the soul is consciousness personified" and "the soul is conscious" mean the same thing is also confirmed in the next sūtra. Sūtra 28 yāvad ātma-bhāvitvāc ca na doṣas tad-darśanāt yāvat—as long as; ātma—of the soul; bhāvitvāt—because of existence; ca—and; na—not; doṣaḥ—fault; tat—of that; darśanāt—because of the sight. It exists as long as the soul exists. There is no fault in this, because it is clearly seen. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa

There is no fault in saying that the two sentences “the soul is consciousness" and "the soul is conscious" mean the same thing. That is the meaning here. Why is that? The sūtra explains: "It exists as long as the soul exists. There is no fault in this, because it is clearly seen." The soul's consciousness exists for as long as the soul exists. As long as the soul exists, the soul's consciousness will not be destroyed. The soul exists eternally, without a beginning or end in time, and the soul's consciousness also exists eternally. The sun may be given here as an example. The sun is both light and the bringer of light. As long as the sun exists it will have these two features, which are actually not different. In the same way the soul is both consciousness and conscious. Here someone may object: Is it not true that consciousness is born from the modes of material nature? Is it not true that, because it does not exist in the state of dreamless sleep, consciousness is not eternal? Is it not true that even when the living entity is fully awake his consciousness is in fact created by a barrage of various sense-objects? If these objections are raised, the author of the sūtras replies in the following words. Sūtra 29 puṁstvādi-vat tv asya sato 'bhivyakti-yogāt puṁstva—virility; ādi—beginning with; vat—like; tu—but; asya—of him; sataḥ—of the existing; abhivyakti-yogāt—because of manifestation. But like virility and other things it exists and then is manifest. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa The word "tu" (but) is used here to dispel doubt. The word "na" (It is not like that) is understood in this sūtra. It is not true than consciousness is non-existent in dreamless sleep and only exists in the waking state. Why is that? the sūtra explains: "But like virility and other things it exists and then is manifest." In the state of dreamless sleep the soul's consciousness exists in a dormant state, and in the state of wakefulness that dormant consciousness becomes fully manifested. Here the sūtra gives the example of virility. In childhood virility and other qualities associated with it exist in a dormant state. Then, at the beginning of adulthood, they become manifested. In the same way consciousness is dormant in dreamless sleep and fully manifested in the waking state. This is described in the

बृहदारण्यकोपनिषद् (४.३.३०) के निम्नलिखित वचन — यद्वै तन्न विजानाति विजानन्वै तद्विज्ञेयं न विजानाति न हि विज्ञातुर्विज्ञानात् विपरिलोपो विद्यतेऽविनाशित्वान्न तु तद् द्वितीयमस्ति ततोऽन्यद्विभक्तं यद् विजानीयात् ॥ "सुषुप्ति की अवस्था में आत्मा चेतन और अचेतन दोनों प्रतीत होती है। आत्मा सर्वदा चेतन है, और चेतना इससे कभी पृथक् नहीं हो सकती, क्योंकि आत्मा और उसकी चेतना का कभी विनाश नहीं हो सकता। फिर भी, सुषुप्ति की अवस्था में आत्मा के सम्मुख कोई ऐसा विषय उपस्थित नहीं रहता जिसका वह भान करे।" जब चेतना के ग्रहण करने हेतु कोई बाह्य विषय नहीं होता, तब चेतना सुप्त (अव्यक्त) रहती है। अतः सुषुप्ति में चेतना सुप्त रहती है। जब इन्द्रियों का विषयों के साथ सम्पर्क होता है, तब चेतना अभिव्यक्त हो जाती है। यदि यह सुषुप्ति के समय सुप्तावस्था में विद्यमान न होती, तो जाग्रत् अवस्था में चेतना स्वयं अभिव्यक्त नहीं हो सकती थी, जैसे जन्म से नपुंसक व्यक्ति युवावस्था के आरम्भ में पौरुष की अभिव्यक्ति नहीं कर सकता। इस प्रकार यह सिद्ध होता है कि जीवात्मा अणु-परिमाण, ज्ञानस्वरूप और नित्य ज्ञाता (चेतन) है। अब सूत्रकार सांख्य मतावलम्बियों के सिद्धान्त का निराकरण करते हैं। संशय : क्या जीवात्मा केवल ज्ञानस्वरूप ही है और कुछ नहीं? क्या जीवात्मा सर्वव्यापी (विभु) है? पूर्वपक्ष : जीवात्मा सर्वव्यापी है। ऐसा इसलिए है क्योंकि इसके कर्मों का फल सर्वत्र दृष्टिगोचर होता है। यदि यह अणु-परिमाण होता, तो आत्मा शरीर के भिन्न-भिन्न अङ्गों में उत्पन्न सुख-दुःख की अनुभूति करने में असमर्थ रहता। यदि यह मध्यम परिमाण वाला होता, तो नित्य न होता। अतः जीवात्मा को सर्वव्यापी ही मानना चाहिए। सिद्धान्त : अधोलिखित शब्दों में सूत्रकार यथार्थ सिद्धान्त प्रतिपादित करते हैं — सूत्र ३० नित्योपलब्ध्यनुपलब्धिप्रसङ्गोऽन्यतरनियमो वाऽन्यथा ॥ ३० ॥ नित्य — नित्य, सदा; उपलब्धि — प्रतीति (ज्ञान); अनुपलब्धि — अप्रतीति (अज्ञान); प्रसङ्गः — प्रसङ्ग, आपत्ति; अन्यतर — दोनों में से किसी एक का; नियमः — नियम, प्रतिबन्ध; वा — अथवा; अन्यथा — अन्यथा (अन्य प्रकार मानने पर)। अन्यथा (आत्मा को विभु मानने पर) नित्य उपलब्धि, नित्य अनुपलब्धि, अथवा

॥ श्रीगोविन्दभाष्यम् (श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण विरचितम्) ॥ [ पूर्वपक्ष-निरासः — जीवस्याणुत्व-सिद्धान्तः ] भाष्य-सार (संस्कृत): यदि जीवात्मा केवलं चिद्रूपः सर्वगतश्चाभ्युपगम्येत, तर्हि सर्वदा चैतन्यं वा स्यात्, सर्वथाऽचैतन्यं वा, अन्यतरस्यैव वा परिमितः सद्भावः प्रसज्येत। लोके हि चैतन्याचैतन्ययोर्द्वयोरप्युपलब्धिः सर्वसिद्धा वर्तते। यदि चिन्मात्रः सर्वव्यापी चैक एवात्मा सर्वस्य हेतुरिष्यते, तर्हि युगपत् सर्वत्र सर्वैः चैतन्यमचैतन्यं चोपलभ्येत। केवलचैतन्यहेतुत्वे कस्यापि कदापि सुषुप्त्यादिषु अचैतन्यं न स्यात्; केवलाचैतन्यहेतुत्वे च कस्यापि कदापि चैतन्यं नोपपद्येत। इन्द्रियसंयोगादौ सति चैतन्यं तदभावे चाचैतन्यमिति चेत्, तन्न; सर्वगतस्यात्मनः सर्वैरिन्द्रियैः सह नित्यसंयोगाविशेषात्। किञ्च, जीवस्य विभुत्वे सर्वजीवगत-सुखदुःखादीनां सांकर्यं स्यात्, भोगनियमः, कर्मफलव्यवस्था, बन्धमोक्षव्यवस्था च विनश्येत्। अतः प्रतिशरीरं भिन्नः, अणुपरिमाणश्चायं जीवात्मा इति सिद्धान्तः सुदृढो भवति। अणुरपि सन् स्वगुणभूतेन ज्ञानेन सकलशरीरं व्याप्य सुखदुःखाद्युपलब्धिं करोति यथा प्रदीपः प्रभारूपेण सर्वं गृहं प्रकाशयति। हिन्दी-अनुवाद: यदि जीवात्मा केवल चैतन्य-स्वरूप और सर्वव्यापी (विभु) होता, तो वह सर्वदा चैतन्ययुक्त रहता अथवा सर्वदा अचेतन ही रहता। अथवा उन दोनों में से किसी एक का सीमित अस्तित्व ही सम्भव हो पाता। इसका तात्पर्य यह है कि संसार में चेतनता और अचेतनता (सुषुप्ति, मूर्च्छा आदि) दोनों की प्रत्यक्ष अनुभूति सभी को होती है। यदि इसका कारण केवल चिन्मात्र और सर्वव्यापक आत्मा होता, तो सम्पूर्ण विश्व में प्रत्येक क्षण चेतनता और अचेतनता की अनुभूति एक साथ होनी चाहिए थी। यदि वह सर्वव्यापी आत्मा केवल चेतनता का कारण होता, तो कोई कभी अचेतन नहीं होता; और यदि केवल अचेतनता का कारण होता, तो कोई कभी चेतन नहीं होता। यह भी नहीं कहा जा सकता कि इन्द्रियों के सम्पर्क से चैतन्य और असम्पर्क से अचैतन्य होता है, क्योंकि सर्वव्यापक होने पर इन्द्रियों से नित्य संयोग रहेगा। इसके अतिरिक्त, यदि जीवात्मा विभु होता, तो एक के सुख-दुःख का अनुभव सभी को एक साथ होने लगता। ऐसी स्थिति में व्यक्तिगत कर्म, व्यक्तिगत भोग और व्यक्तिगत अदृष्ट की व्यवस्था ही छिन्न-भिन्न हो जाती। अतः जीवात्मा सर्वव्यापी नहीं है, अपितु प्रति-शरीर भिन्न और अणु-परिमाण (सूक्ष्म) है। अणु होने पर भी आत्मा अपने धर्मभूत ज्ञान के द्वारा सम्पूर्ण देह में व्याप्त होकर सभी सुख-दुःखादि संवेदनों को ग्रहण करता है।

॥ अथ चतुर्दशं कर्त्राधिकरणम् (१४) ॥

अधिकरण-विषय: जीवात्मनः कर्तृत्व-विचारः (जीवात्मा कर्ता है या नहीं?) श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण-कृत अवतरणिका (भूमिका): अथेदानीं सूत्रकारो जीवात्मनः कर्तृत्वं विचारयति। तैत्तिरीयोपनिषदि (२।५।१) श्रूयते— श्रुति-प्रमाणम्: "विज्ञानं यज्ञं तनुते । कर्माणि तनुतेऽपि च ॥" (तैत्तिरीयोपनिषद् २।५।१) श्रुत्यर्थ एवं हिन्दी-व्याख्या: 'विज्ञानम्' अर्थात् विज्ञानमयः चेतनः जीवात्मा, यज्ञं तनुते (यज्ञादि वैदिक कर्मों का विस्तार/अनुष्ठान करता है) तथा लौकिक कर्माणि अपि तनुते (लौकिक कर्मों का भी सम्पादन करता है)। संशय: किमिदं कर्तृत्वं प्रकृतेः (बुद्धेः) वा, उत चेतनस्य जीवात्मन एव? पूर्वपक्ष: सांख्य-मतानुसारिणः प्राहुः—प्रकृतेर्गुणानामेव कर्तृत्वं न तु पुरुषस्य, पुरुषस्तु केवलम् अकर्ता साक्षी निर्लेपश्चेति। सिद्धान्त-सूत्रम्: ॥ कर्ता शास्त्रार्थवत्त्वात् ॥ २।३।३३ ॥ सूत्रार्थ: जीवात्मा ही वास्तविक कर्ता है, क्योंकि ऐसा मानने पर ही विधि-निषेधात्मक शास्त्रों की सार्थकता (शास्त्रार्थवत्त्व) सिद्ध होती है। यदि जड़ा प्रकृति या बुद्धि कर्ता होती, तो चेतन जीव के लिए उपदिष्ट 'यजेत', 'उपासीत' आदि शास्त्र-वचन व्यर्थ हो जाते।

"Consciousness performs yajñas. Consciousness performs actions." Saṁśaya (doubt): Does the individual soul, indicated in this passage by the word "consciousness", perform actions or not? Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): In the Kaṭha Upaniṣad (2.18) it is said: hantā cen manyate hantuṁ hataś cen manyate hatam ubhau tau na vijānītau nāyaṁ hanti na hanyate "Neither he who thinks the living entity the slayer nor he who thinks it slain is in knowledge, for the self slays not nor is slain."* These words clearly declare that the individual spirit soul never performs actions. In the Bhagavad-gītā (3.27) it is said: prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni guṇaiḥ karmāṇi sarvaśaḥ ahaṅkāra-vimūḍhātmā kartāham iti manyate "The spirit soul bewildered by the influence of false-ego thinks himself the doer of activities that are in actuality carried out by the three modes of material nature."* In the Bhagavad-gītā (13.21) it is also said: kārya-kāraṇa-kartṛtve hetuḥ prakṛtir ucyate puruṣaḥ sukha-duḥkhānāṁ bhoktṛtve hetur ucyate "Nature is said to be the cause of all material causes and effects, whereas the living entity is the cause of the various sufferings and enjoyments in this world."* Therefore the individual spirit soul does not perform actions. When a person understands the truth he understands that all actions are actually performed by the material energy and the individual spirit soul is merely the person who experiences the fruits of action.