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

"The Lord engages the living entity in pious activities."* According to Jaimini, the Supreme Lord does not give the results of actions, either directly or indirectly. The Lord creates only the actions themselves and the results are given by the actions. Here someone may object: Is it not so that actions are over in a moment, whereas there is often a great lapse of time before actions bear their karmic result? If the actions quickly cease to exist they cannot create the karmic results, for something that has ceased to exist cannot create something new. To this objection Jaimini may reply: No. It is not so. Even though the action itself comes to an end, it leaves behind a potential result. Only when this result is fulfilled is the action actually completed. Even if there is a considerable lapse of time, the action itself gives the result to the person, a result appropriate to that particular action. Thus actions are the givers of results. In the following words Śrīla Vyāsadeva, the author of the sūtras, gives His opinion. Sūtra 42 pūrvaṁ tu bādarāyaṇo hetu-vyapadeśāt pūrvaṁ—previous; tu—but; bādarāyaṇaḥ—Vyāsadeva; hetu—of the cause; vyapadeśāt—from the description. But Vyāsadeva holds the previous view, for the Lord is described as the cause. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Here the word "tu" (but) is employed to dispel doubt. Vyāsadeva holds the previous view, that the Supreme Personality of Godhead awards the fruits of action. Why so? The sūtra explains: "for the Lord is described as the cause". In the Praśna Upaniṣad (3.7) it is said: puṇyena puṇyaṁ lokaṁ nayati pāpena pāpam "The Supreme Lord takes the pious to the world of the pious and the sinful to the world of the sinful."

In this way the scriptures teach that the Supreme Lord awards the results of action. That is the meaning. Because they already have ceased to exist, the actions themselves cannot be the cause of the karmic results. Also, it is the Supreme Lord Himself who is the creator of karma, for the scriptures say: dravyaṁ karma ca kālaś ca "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is creator of matter, karma, and time. In this way it is proved that the Lord is the creator of karma. The idea that actions leave behind a potential result is a lame and foolish idea. Actions are inanimate and unconscious. They are like a block of wood or a stone, and therefore they have no power to award the results of actions. Also, the Śruti-śāstra never describes them as awarding the results of actions. Here someone may object: Is it not so that the demigods are worshiped in the performance of yajñas and it is the demigods themselves who give the results of these yajñas. If this is said, then I reply: It is by the sanction of the Supreme Lord that the demigods are able to give these results. This is clearly described in the Antaryāmī Brāhmaṇa. Therefore the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself awards the results of actions. The lotus-eyed Supreme Lord Himself affirms this in the following words (Bhagavad-gītā 7.21-22): yo yo yāṁ yāṁ tanuṁ bhaktaḥ śraddhayārcitum icchati tasya tasyācalāṁ śraddhāṁ tām eva vidadhāmy aham "I am in everyone's heart as the Supersoul. As soon as one desires to worship some demigod, I make his faith steady so he can devote himself to that particular deity.* sa tayā śraddhayā yuktas tasyārādhanam īhate labhate ca tataḥ kāmān mayaiva vihitān hi tān "Endowed with such a faith, he endeavors to worship a particular demigod and obtain his desires. But in actuality these benefits are bestowed by Me alone."*

In this way worshiped by the performance of yajña, the Supreme Lord Himself gives the auspicious results to the worshiper. When He is thus pleased by devotion, the Supreme Lord will give everything, even Himself to His devotee. This will be described later on with quotes from the Śruti-śāstra. Thus, in these two padas has been seen: 1. the fault of the material world, which is an abode of many sufferings, beginning with repeated birth and death, 2. the faultless glories of the Lord, 3. the Lord's being the controller of all, 4. the Lord's form of pure spirit, and 5. the Lord's being not different from His attributes. By hearing of these things one develops a great thirst to attain the Lord's association and a great disgust for all that is far from the Lord. In this way one comes to attain the Lord. That is what was revealed in these two padas. Pada 3 Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa parayā nirasya māyāṁ guṇa- karmādīni yo bhajati nityam devaś caitanya-tanur manasi mamāsau parisphuratu kṛṣṇaḥ May Lord Kṛṣṇa, who with the aid of His transcendental potency pushes aside the influence of māyā, who has a host of transcendental virtues eternally, who enjoys eternal transcendental pastimes, and who has now appeared as Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, appear in my heart. In this pada will be revealed the way of worshiping the Lord's transcendental attributes. As in a vaidūrya jewel many splendid colors are always manifest, so in the Supreme Personality of Godhead many different transcendental forms, all perfect and without beginning, are also manifest eternally. Understanding that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is supremely perfect, complete, and pure, has many different forms, a devotee becomes attracted to one of the Lord's forms and directs his worship to that form. If the various scriptures describe transcendental virtues present in that form of the Lord, all those virtues may also be ascribed to that single chosen form. Thus a person who worships the Supreme Personality of Godhead as present in His powers and opulences, such as the mind and the other powers of the world, should review the scriptures' descriptions of the various qualities of these forms, but not of other forms of the Lord.

Others, however, speak in the following way: The one Supreme Personality of Godhead assumes different forms as an actor assumes different roles on the stage. In this way the Lord has many different names and abodes. For this reason all the qualities and pastimes of the different forms of the Lord, as described in the scriptures, may be ascribed to any one of the Lord's forms. Here someone may object: Is it not so that many of the qualities of many of the Lord's forms, qualities described in the scriptures, cannot be properly ascribed to all of the Lord's forms? Is it not so that sweetness, opulence, peacefulness, austerity, ferociousness, and other qualities may be mutually contradictory, and it may also be contradictory to ascribe the features of having a horn, tail, mane, tusk, or other features appropriate to the Lord's forms like Varāha and others to the Lord's humanlike forms, which carry a flute, conchshell, bow, arrows, and other paraphernalia? Therefore in the Mahābhārata it is said: yo 'nyathā santam ātmānam anyathā pratipadyate kiṁ tena na kṛtaṁ pāpaṁ caureṇātmāpahāriṇā "A person who ascribes to the Supreme Lord qualities that the Lord does not actually possess is a thief who robs himself. Does he not sin with his words?" Therefore, because of both the injunction of Smṛti-śāstra and the experience of the wise sages, one should not ascribe the qualities of one of Lord's forms to another of the Lord's forms. If this is said, then the following reply may be given: The qualities of one of Lord's forms may be ascribed to another of the Lord's forms only when the qualities are appropriate to that particular form. Ascribing the qualities of one of Lord's forms to another of the Lord's forms is of two kinds: 1. cintana, and 2. dhī- mātra. They who perform this first kind of meditation are called sva-niṣṭha, and they who perform the second kind of meditation are called ekāntī. In the next pada three kinds of wise devotees, headed by the sva-niṣṭha devotees, will be described. The sva-niṣṭha devotees have equal love for all the Lord's forms. They see all the qualities of all the Lord's forms present equally in each of the Lord's forms. They do not see anything improper in ascribing many contradictory qualities to each of the Lord's forms. They consider that the Lord by His great potency may possess many mutually contradictory qualities, just as a vaidūrya jewel may display many different colors. The ekāntī devotees, who are divided into two groups: pariniṣṭhita and nirapekṣa, do not have equal love for all the Lord's forms. They meditate only on the qualities of one form the Lord, the form they have chosen. They see the qualities of this form alone. Even though they are well aware of the Lord's other forms, they do not meditate or gaze upon them. On His part, the Lord generally does not reveal His other forms to these devotees. This will be reveled in another adhikaraṇa. As for the passage quoted from the Mahābhārata, its true meaning is

that it is a rebuke hurled at the impersonalists, who claim that the Supreme is consciousness and nothing else. The truth that the Supreme certainly does have qualities, and therefore the Lord's qualities should be sought out by they who seek liberation, is described in Chāndogya Upaniṣad (8.1.1-6). It is also said, in thw Taittirīya Upaniṣad (2.4.1): ānandaṁ brahmaṇo vidvān na bibheti kutaścana "He who knows that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is full of bliss never fears anything." This means that they who understand the qualities of the Supreme become free of fear. In this way the scriptures affirm that the Supreme certainly does have qualities. The impersonalists claim that the Lord's qualities are either falsely ascribed to Him or else are accepted only because of the material traditions of this world. However, because many of these qualities are present in the Lord alone and no one else, it cannot be said that these qualities are falsely ascribed to the Lord, and because the revelation of scripture does not describe them as such, it also cannot be said that the qualities of the Lord are accepted only because of the material traditions of this world. They who claim that the qualities of the Lord are imagined to facilitate worship of the Lord, as in the statement, "Imagining the goddess of speech to be a cow, one should worship her", are all fools. Their idea is destroyed by the simple statement of the scriptures: satyam etyopāsīta "Approaching the Supreme Reality, one should worship Him." Even the impersonalists, in their commentaries on sūtras 3.3.12 and 3.3.38, affirm that the Supreme is bliss and there is no difference between the individual souls and the Supreme. In this way they accept the idea that the qualities of the worshipable Supreme are real and not metaphors. When the scriptures say that the Supreme has no qualities (nirguṇa), the intention is that He has no material qualities. Because it is clearly stated that the Lord is not different from His qualities, this objection of the impersonalists should not be taken seriously. For the purpose of meditation the Lord's qualities should be understood to be of two kinds: aṅgi-niṣṭha (general qualities) and aṅga-niṣṭha (features of the Lord's form). It is said that one may collect from all the different parts of the Vedas descriptions of the Lord's qualities.

Adhikaraṇa 1 The Lord Should Be Sought Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Viṣaya (the subject to be discussed): To understand the Lord's qualities one should search all the texts of the Vedas. Saṁśaya (doubt): Should one learn about the Supreme by studying the branch (śākha) of Vedic texts in one's own community, or should one study all the branches of the Vedas? Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): Because all the branches of the Vedas are different, one should study only one's own branch of the Vedas. Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion: Sūtra 1 sarva-vedānta-pratyayaṁ codanādy-aviśeṣāt sarva—all; veda—Vedas; anta—end; pratyayam—meaning; codana— injunctions; ādi—beginning with; aviśeṣāt—because of not being different. Because the Vedic injunctions and all other sources of real knowledge are not genuinely different, therefore knowledge of Him is the conclusion of all the Vedas. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa The word "anta" (end) here means "conclusion". The word "anta" is also used in this way in Bhagavad-gītā (2.16): ubhayor api dṛṣṭo 'ntaḥ "This they have concluded by studying the nature of both."*

Thus knowledge of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the final conclusion taught by all the Vedas. Why is that? The sūtra explains: "because the Vedic injunctions and all other sources of real knowledge are not genuinely different." The "other sources of real knowledge" here refers to logic. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (1.4.7) it is said: ātmety evopāsīta "One should worship the Supreme." These words, as well as the promptings of logic, confirm the truth that these statements and many others like them in passages of all the Vedas, all describe the same Supreme Lord. The same Supreme Lord is described in the same way in the Kaṇva, Mādhyandina, and other recensions of the Vedas. Here someone may object: In one part of the Vedas (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.9.28) it is said: vijñānam ānandam brahma "The Supreme is knowledge and bliss." However, in another part of the Vedas (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 1.1.9) it is said: yaḥ sarva-jñaḥ sarva-vit "The Supreme knows everything." Because in this way each branch of the Vedas speaks differently of the Supreme, they do not all describe the same object as the Supreme. If this is said, the author of the sūtras gives the following reply. Sūtra 2 bhedād iti cen naikasyām api bhedāt—because of difference; iti—thus; cet—if; na—not; ekasyām—in one; api—also.

If it is said, "because they are different," then I reply, "It is not so, for it is also in one". Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa It is not so. That is so because these differences are seen even within the same branch of the Vedas. An example of this is the Taittirīya Upaniṣad, which gives the following two statements. satyaṁ jñānam anantaṁ brahma "The limitless Supreme is both knowledge and truth." ānando brahma "The Supreme is bliss." In this way the many different branches of the Vedas describe the same form of the Supreme Lord. They do not contradict each other at all. Sūtra 3 svādhyāyasya tathātvena hi samācāre 'dhikārāc ca svādhyāyasya—of Vedic study; tathātvena—by being so; hi—indeed; samācāre—in Vedic rituals; adhikārāt—because of being qualified; ca—also. Because of being qualified to study the Vedas and to perform rituals. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa In the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka (2.15) it is said:

svādhyāyo 'dhyetavyaḥ "One should study the Vedas." In this way one is ordered to study all the Vedas. In the Smṛti-śāstra it is said: vedaḥ kṛtsno 'dhigantavyaḥ sa-rahasyo dvijanmanā "A brāhmaṇa should study the entire Veda, including even its confidential portions." The word "samācāre" in this sūtra means "because all are qualified to perform all pious rituals". The Smṛti-śāstra confirms this in the following words: sarva-vedokta-mārgeṇa karma kurvīta nityaśaḥ ānando hi phalaṁ yasmāc chākhā-bhedo hy aśakti-jaḥ sarva-karma-kṛtau yasmād aśaktāḥ sarva-jantavaḥ śākhā-bhedaṁ karma-bhedaṁ vyāsas tasmād aciklpad "Following the path of all the Vedas, one should regularly perform pious rituals. Bliss is the result attained by this. The Veda was divided into different branches because the people were not able to perform all the pious deeds described in the Veda. That is why Vyāsa divided the Veda into many branches and the one collection of pious rituals into many collections." Therefore, if a person is able to do so, he may understand the Supreme by performing all the spiritual practices described in all the branches of the Vedas. In the next sūtra the author gives an example of indirect reasoning leading to the same conclusion. Sūtra 4 sava-vac ca tan niyamaḥ sava—yajñas; vat—like; ca—and; tat—that; niyamaḥ—rule.

That rule is like the yajñas. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa The "savas" here are the seven yajñas beginning with the saurya-yajña and ending with the śataudana-yajña which, because they are performed with only one fire, may be performed only by the followers of the Atharva Veda. The worship of the Supreme Lord, however, can performed by the followers of all the Vedas. The word "salila-vat" (like water) is an alternate reading of the first word in this sūtra. If this reading is accepted, then the sūtra means, "As all waters flow, without restriction, into the sea, so all the statements of the Vedas describe, as much as they have the power, the Supreme Personality of Godhead." In the Agni Purāṇa it is said: yathā nadīnāṁ salilaṁ śaktyā sāgaratāṁ vrajet evaṁ sarvāṇi vākyāni puṁ-śaktyā brahma-vittaye "As the water of rivers, as far as it has the power, always enters the sea, so all words, as far as their speaker has the power, should be employed to understand the Supreme Lord." Sūtra 5 darśayati ca darśayati—reveals; ca—also. It also reveals it. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa In the Kaṭha Upaniṣad (1.2.15) it is said:

sarve vedā yat-padam āmananti "All the Vedas describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead." This means that the Supreme Lord is known by all the Vedas, or, in other words, the Vedas reveal the truth of Lord Hari. The word "ca" (and) in this sūtra hints, "as far as one has the power". They who have the power may worship the Supreme Lord by performing the pious rituals described in all the branches of the Vedas. They who do not have the power must worship the Supreme Lord by performing the pious rituals described in their own community's branch of the Vedas. The conclusion is that the Supreme Lord is the final object of knowledge sought by all the branches of the Vedas. This truth was also described in the very beginning of Vedānta-sūtra (1.1.4): tat tu samanvayāt "But that (Lord Viṣṇu is the sole topic of discussion in the Vedas) is confirmed by all scriptures." This truth is thus repeated here in the discussion of the properness of studying the different qualities of the Supreme Lord. Because this repetition strengthens the argument here, there is no fault in it. Adhikaraṇa 2 The Lord's Qualities Are Described in Many Scriptures Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Now the author of the sūtras will show that the many qualities of the Lord may be understood by studying all the Vedas. For example, in the Atharva Veda's Gopāla-tāpanī Upaniṣad (1.8), the Supreme Lord is described as a cowherd boy dark like a tamāla tree, dressed in yellow garments, decorated with a Kaustubha jewel, wearing a peacock-feather, playing graceful melodies on a flute, and surrounded by gopas, gopīs, and surabhi cows. There He is the Deity of Gokula. In the Rāma-tāpanī Upaniṣad, however, He is described as the Lord whose left side is decorated by Jānakī-devī, holding a bow, the killer of Rāvaṇa and a host of demons, and the king of Ayodhyā. In the Rāma-tāpanī Upaniṣad it is said:

prakṛtyā sahitaḥ śyāmaḥ pīta-vāsā jaṭā-dharaḥ dvi-bhujaḥ kuṇḍalī ratna- mālī dhīro dhanur-dharaḥ "Decorated with earrings and a jewel necklace, His complexion dark, His garments yellow, and the hair on His head matted, saintly, two-armed Lord Rāma is accompanied by Goddess Sītā." In the scriptures the Lord's form as Nṛsiṁha is described as having a frightening face and filling His enemies with fear. The word "bhīṣaṇa" (frightening), which occurs in Lord Nṛsiṁha's mantra, is explained in the following words of the Nṛsiṁha-tāpanī Upaniṣad: atha kasmād ucyate bhīṣaṇam iti. yasmād yasya rūpaṁ dṛṣṭvā sarve lokāḥ sarve devāḥ sarvāṇi bhūtāni bhītyā palāyante svayaṁ yataḥ kutaścin na bibheti. bhīṣāsmād vātaḥ pavate bhīṣodeti sūryaḥ. bhīṣāsmād agniś cendraś ca mṛtyur dhāvati pañcamaḥ. "Why is the Lord called frightening? Because when all the demigods, all the worlds, and all living entities see His form, they all flee in fear. He fears no one. Out of fear of Him the wind blows and the sun rises. Out of fear of Him fire, the moon, and death all flee." The Lord's form as Trivikrama is described in the Ṛg Veda (1.154.1): viṣṇor nu kaṁ vīryāṇi pravocaṁ yaḥ pārthivāni vimame rajāṁsi yo askambhayad uttaraṁ sadhasthaṁ vicakramāṇas tredhorugāya "How can I describe all the glories and powers of Lord Viṣṇu, who created the heaven and earth, established the worlds above and below, and with three steps passed over all the worlds?" Therefore, like the yajñas, which are different because they are offered to different demigods, so the method of worship to be offered to the different forms of the Supreme Lord are all different because the qualities of the Lord's different forms are different. Saṁśaya (doubt): Should the Śruti-śāstra's description of the Lord's qualities in one kind of worship be added in another kind of worship, or not?

Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): The Śruti-śāstra's description of the Lord's qualities in one passage should be heard. One should not mix that description with other descriptions of the Lord in other passages. Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion. Sūtra 6 upasaṁhāro 'rthābhedād vidhi-śeṣa-vat samāne ca upasaṁhāraḥ—combination; artha—of meaning; abhedāt—because of non- difference; vidhi—of duties; śeṣa—remainder; vat-like; samāne—in being the same; ca—also. In what is common there may be combination, for the meaning is not different. This is like what is appropriate for the rules and regulations. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa The word "ca" (and) is used here for limitation. When the method of worship is the same, when the pure Supreme Personality of Godhead is the object of worship, and

गोपालतापनी उपनिषद् में कहा गया है: एकोऽपि सन् बहुधा योऽवभाति । "यद्यपि वे एक हैं, तथापि अनेक रूपों में प्रकाशित होते हैं।" इस प्रसंग में भगवान् रामचन्द्र तथा अन्य अवतारों के रूपों को भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण के ध्यान में समाहित किया गया है। श्रीमद्भागवत में भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण के प्रति कहा गया है: नमस्ते रघुवर्याय रावणान्तकराय च ॥ "रघुश्रेष्ठ तथा रावण का वध करने वाले आपको नमस्कार है।" ऐसे अनेक अन्य वचन उद्धृत किये जा सकते हैं जो उन ध्यानों को दर्शाते हैं जहाँ भगवान् के विभिन्न रूपों के वर्णनों को एक साथ लाया गया है। यहाँ पूर्वपक्ष (आपत्ति): बृहदारण्यक उपनिषद् (१.४.७) में कहा गया है: आत्मेत्येवोपासीत । "परमात्मा के रूप में ही उपासना करनी चाहिए।" अतः केवल एक ही रूप की उपासना करनी चाहिए और उपासना की अपनी पद्धति में अन्य रूपों का समावेश नहीं करना चाहिए। यदि ऐसा कहा जाए, तो सूत्रकार (सिद्धान्त रूप में) निम्नलिखित उत्तर देते हैं: ॥ सूत्रम् ७ ॥ अन्यथात्वं शब्दादिति चेन्नाविशेषात् ॥ अन्यथात्वम् — अन्यथा (भेद), शब्दात् — श्रुतिशास्त्र के कारण, इति चेत् — यदि ऐसा कहें, न — तो ऐसा नहीं है, अविशेषात् — (भगवद्रूपों में) विशेष भेद न होने के कारण। यदि कोई कहे कि "श्रुति-शास्त्र के कारण ऐसा अन्यथात्व (भेद) है", तो उत्तर है "ऐसा नहीं है..."

not so, for there is nothing specific". Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa If someone claims that Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (1.4.7) refutes the idea of thus bringing together the Lord's qualities, then I reply: No. It is not so. Why not? The sūtra explains: "for there is nothing specific". This means that no scriptural passage declares, "the Lord's qualities should not be worshiped together." The word "eva" (indeed) in Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (1.4.7) means that one should not worship what is not the Supreme Lord. It does not mean that the Lord's qualities can not be worshiped together. If it is said, "The king alone is seen", that does not mean that the king's royal parasol and other royal paraphernalia were absent. It is said: tasmād yathā-śakti-guṇāś cintyāḥ "Therefore, as far as one is able, one should meditate on the Lord's various transcendental qualities." In this way it is proved that one may bring together the various qualities of the Lord. As a vaidūrya jewel manifests many different colors, so the Supreme Lord manifests many different forms. Each of these forms is the same perfect, complete, and pure Supreme Lord. In some forms the Lord displays all His qualities, and other forms the Lord does not display all His qualities. Therefore a wise devotee may meditate on all the Lord qualities, as described in the scriptures, as being present in the particular form of the Lord that is chosen for worship. Adhikaraṇa 3 The Ekāntī Devotees Do Not Meditate On All the Lord's Qualities Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Although they are learned in the many branches of the Vedas, still the ekāntī devotees meditate only the Lord's qualities as revealed in their own Upaniṣads, which they have carefully studied. Even though they are aware of other qualities, they do not meditate on them. In this way there is an exception to what was previously described.

Viṣaya (the subject matter): The subject matter here is a passage of Gopāla- tāpanī Upaniṣad. Saṁśaya (doubt): In the worship performed by the ekāntī devotees, should all the qualities of the Supreme Lord be brought together or not? Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): Because the Lord's qualities are to be praised, the ekāntī devotees should meditate in this way, if they are able. Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion. Sūtra 8 na vā prakaraṇa-bhedāt parovarīyastvādi-vat na—not; vā—or; prakaraṇa—of devotion; bhedāt—because of differences; parovarīyastva—greater than the greatest; ādi—beginning with; vat—like. Certainly not. Because of the differences in devotion. Like the Parovarīya and others. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa The word "vā" (or) is used in the sense of “certainly". The ekāntī devotees do not bring the qualities of the Lord's other forms into the specific form they have selected to worship. In this way the ekāntī devotees who are exclusively devoted to Lord Kṛṣṇa do not think of Lord Nṛsiṁha's mane, teeth, fearsomeness, and other qualities as present in Lord Kṛṣṇa. In the same way the ekāntī devotees who are exclusively devoted to Lord Nṛsiṁha do not think of Lord Kṛṣṇa's flute, stick, peacock-feather, and other qualities as present in Lord Nṛsiṁha. Why is that? The sūtra explains: “prakaraṇa-bhedāt" (because of the differences in devotion). The word "prakaraṇa" here means "the most exalted (pra) activity (karaṇa)." Therefore the word “prakaraṇa" here refers to devotional service. The word “bhedāt" here means "because of the differences". Because it is more intense and deep, the devotion of the ekaṇtī devotees is more exalted than the devotion of the svaniṣṭha devotees. Here the author of the sūtras gives and example. He says: "Like the Parovarīya and others." This means that the ekāntī devotees who are exclusively devoted to the Lord's form as the Hiraṇya Puruṣa in the sun planet do not ascribe to their object of worship the qualities of the Lord's form as Parovarīya, a form worshiped by the worshipers of Udgītha. The

word Parovarīya means "greater than the greatest". The example here is of the worshipers of Ugītha in relation to Parovarīya. Here someone may object: Is it not so that the ekāntīs and svaniṣṭhas are both called devotees of the Lord and therefore they must both meditate on all the Lord's qualities just as they who call themselves brāhmaṇas must all meditate on the Gāyatrī-mantra? If this is said, then the author of the sūtras gives the following reply. Sūtra 9 saṁjñātaś cet tad uktam asti tu tad api saṁjñātaḥ—by the name; cet—if; tat—that; uktam—spoken; asti—is; tu—but; tat—that; api—also. If it is because of the name, then I reply, "But it was already said. That also." Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa The word "tu" (but) is employed here to dispel doubt. If it is said that all who worship the Supreme must meditate on all His qualities, then the answer was already given in the previous sūtra. The answer is, "Certainly not. Because of the differences in devotion." Although they are certainly included in the general category of the Lord's devotees, the ekāntīs are the best of the devotees, and therefore they do not meditate on all the qualities of the Lord. If it were otherwise then they would not be the best of the devotees. Because the ekāntī devotees are passionately devoted to one particular form of the Lord, they are superior to the svaniṣṭha devotees who are in a general way devoted to all the forms of the Lord. Also, even the svaniṣṭha devotees are not able to meditate on every single one of the Lord's qualities. In the Ṛg Veda (1.154.1) it is said: viṣṇor nu kaṁ vīryāṇi pravocaṁ "How can I describe all the glories and powers of Lord Viṣṇu?" In the Smṛti-śāstra it is said:

नान्तं गुणानामगुणस्य जग्मुर् योगेश्वरा ये भवपाद्ममुख्याः। "ब्रह्मा, शिव, देवगण तथा योगेश्वर भी प्राकृत गुणों से अतीत भगवान् के दिव्य गुणों का अन्त नहीं पा सके।" सूत्र व्याख्या करता है, "अस्ति" (है), जिसका यहाँ अर्थ है, "सभी भक्त केवल 'भक्त' नाम धारण करने के कारण सर्वथा एकसमान हैं—यह विचार 'हेतोरन्वयव्यभिचार' नामक हेत्वाभास (तार्किक दोष) है।" जिस प्रकार भगवान् के परोवरीय स्वरूप के उपासक तथा हिरण्मय स्वरूप के उपासक दोनों ही उद्गीथ के उपासक माने जाने पर भी भगवान् के विषय में भिन्न धारणाएँ रखते हैं, उसी प्रकार स्वनिष्ठ और एकान्ती भक्तों की भी भगवान् के विषय में भिन्न धारणाएँ होती हैं; स्वनिष्ठ भक्त भगवान् के समस्त गुणों का ध्यान करते हैं तथा एकान्ती भक्त केवल अपने अभीष्ट-उपास्य रूप के गुणों का ही ध्यान करते हैं। यही इन दोनों अधिकरणों का सिद्धान्त-निष्कर्ष है। अधिकरण ४ भगवान् का बाल्य एवं यौवन श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण द्वारा अवतरणिका अब सूत्रकार भगवान् की बाल्यावस्था आदि के गुणों के ध्यान में उपसंहार (संग्रह) के विषय में विचार आरम्भ करते हैं। गोपालतापनी उपनिषद् में कहा गया है: कृष्णाय देवकीनन्दनाय ॐ तत् सत्। भूर्भुवः स्वस्तस्मै वै नमो नमः। "ॐ तत् सत्। भूर्भुवः स्वः। देवकीनन्दन भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण को नमस्कार है।" नाम-कौमुदीकार 'कृष्ण' शब्द का लक्षण इस प्रकार करते हैं: कृष्णशब्दस्तु तमालनीलत्विषि यशोदास्तनन्धये रूढिः। "कृष्ण शब्द का अर्थ है: यशोदा के स्तनन्धय (शिशु) पुत्र, जो तमाल वृक्ष के समान श्यामवर्ण हैं।"

In the Rāma-tāpanī Upaniṣad it is said: oṁ cin-maye 'smin mahā-viṣṇau jāte dāśarathe harau raghoḥ kule 'khilaṁ rāti rājate yo mahī-sthitaḥ "Oṁ. Born as Daśaratha's son in King Raghu's dynasty, the spiritual Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is known as Mahā-Viṣṇu and Hari, was splendidly manifested on the earth. He delighted everyone." In this way the Śruti-śāstra describes the qualities of the Supreme Lord in His childhood and other ages. Many similar descriptions are also found in the Smṛti- śāstra. Saṁśaya (Doubt): Should one meditate on these descriptions of the Lord in His childhood and other ages, or should one not meditate on them? Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): One should not meditate on the form of the Lord in His different ages, for then the Lord's form would be sometimes large and sometimes small. This would contradict the Śruti-śāstra's advice that in one's meditation the features of the Lord should be harmonious. Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion. Sūtra 10 vyāpteś ca samañjasam vyāpteḥ—becasue of being all-pervading; ca—also; samañjasam—proper. It is proper because He is all-pervading and for other reasons also. Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa It is proper to meditate on the Lord in His childhood and other ages because the Lord is all-pervading and because the Lord is not limited to His features in His different ages. In sūtra 3.2.38 the Lord's all-pervasiveness was confirmed. The

Lord's so-called "birth" is not in reality a change of condition for Him. In the Puruṣa-sūkta prayer it is said: ajāyamāno bahudhā vijāyate "Although He is never born, the Lord takes birth again and again in many different forms." Therefore the word "birth" here means "the appearance of the Supreme Lord, who never really takes birth." The word "ca" (also) in this sūtra means, "also because He is the reservoir of transcendental mellows." This is confirmed in the Taittirīya Upaniṣad (2.7.1): raso vai saḥ "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the reservoir of transcendental mellows."* By His inconceivable potency, the Supreme Lord appears in a particular form appropriate to the mellows and pastimes His devotees desire. This is perfectly proper. The Lord has numberless devotees, beginning with the liberated souls. This is described in the Ṛg Veda (1.22.20): tad viṣṇoḥ paramaṁ padaṁ sadā paśyanti sūrayaḥ "The wise and learned devotees always see the supreme abode of Lord Viṣṇu."* The Supreme Lord, who is always one, simultaneously appears in His different ages before His different devotees. Something similar is seen in Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (5.2.1-3), where the syllable "da" was interpreted in three ways by the demigods, human beings, and demons. In this way, because the Supreme Lord is all-pervading and because the Lord always remains one, one should certainly meditate on the Lord's pastimes of childhood and other ages. Adhikaraṇa 5 The Lord's Activities Are Eternal