«««Назад | Оглавление | Каталог библиотеки | Далее»»»

Прочитано: 56%

bhavanti hrtakarnarasayanah kathah /

  tajjosanad asv apavargavartmani

sraddha ratir bhaktir anukramisyati // iti /

lilaya srimadvyasarupena tu visistataya tad upadistavan ity anantaram evasyati anarthopasamam sasad iti / tasmad dvayor api tattatsamanjasam jneyam / nanu maya khalu saktih saktis ca karyaksamatvam tac ca dharmavisesah tasya katham lajjadikam / ucyate evam saty api bhagavati tasam saktinam adhisthatrdevyah sruyante yatha kenopanisadi mahendramayayoh samvadah / tad astam prastutam prastuyate //

33) And the Lord is unable to withhold His favor from maya who, being in charge of creation, has been His devotee from time immemorial. So, desiring that jivas turn within, even if out of fear of maya, He instructs them as follows: "This divine maya of Mine, composed of the three gunas, is indeed difficult to transcend. They cross over this maya who take refuge in Me alone." (Bh.G. 7/14) "As a result of holy company, conversations concerning My prowess take place, pleasing the heart and ear. By taking part in these, one quickly attains faith in the path of salvation, followed in turn by attachment and devotion." (Bh.P. 3/25/25) And as seen in the verse immediately following this, (Bh.P.1/7/6), the Lord taught this in a special way, by assuming the form of Vyasa, through His divine sport. Therefore, the respective activities of both (bhagavata and maya) should be deemed proper.
  But if maya is nothing but a sakti, and sakti is nothing but the capacity to perform a function, which is itself a kind of attribute, how can you speak of it as possessing such characteristics as embarrassment etc.?
  To this we reply: What you say is true. However, we do find mention in Sruti of the presiding deities of the saktis which reside in the Lord, such as in the dialogue detween Indra and Maya in the Kena Upanisad. But enough for now. Let us return to the topics already introduced.

34) tatra jivasya tadrsacidrupatve 'pi paramesvarato vailaksanyam tadapasrayam iti yaya sammohita iti ca darsayati //

34) Here, the phrases "maya resting outside of him" (Bh.P. 2/7/4) and "deluded by maya" (Bh.P. 2/7/5) indicate that the jiva, even though, like paramesvara, being essentially pure consciousness, is nevertheless distinct from paramesvara.

35) yarhy eva yad ekam cidrupam brahma mayasrayatabalitam vidyamayam tarhy eva tanmayavisayatapannam avidya- parabhutam cety ayuktam iti jivesvaravibhago 'vagatah / tatas ca svarupasamarthyavailaksanyena tad dvitayam mitho vilaksa nasvarupam evety agatam //

35) It is thus erroneous to contend that one and the same brahman, pure consciousness itself, is simultaneously the embodiment of knowledge, as it functions as the substratum of maya, as well as overpowered by ignorance, falling under the sway of that maya. In fact, this is the very sense in which the distinction between isvara and jiva is to be understood. It thus follows that, due to the respective differences in their natural capacities, the two (ie. isvara and jiva) are essentially distnct.

36) na copadhitaratamyamayaparicchedapratibimbatvadivyavasthaya tayor vibhagah syat //

36) Nor can the distinction between the two (i.e. isvara and jiva) be explained on the basis of limitation by, or reflection in, defferent grades of adjuncts, etc.

37) tatra yady upadher anavidyakatvena vastavatvam tarhy avisayasya tasya paricchedavisayatvasambhavah / nirdharmakasya vyapakasya niravayavasya ca pratibimbatvayogo 'pi upadhisambandhabhavat bimbapratibimbabhedabhavat drsyatvabhavac ca / upadhiparicchinnakasasthajyotiramsasyaiva pratibimbo drsyate na tu akasasya drsyatvabhavad eva //

37) Here, if the limiting adjuncts are objectively real, and not the result of ignorance, then braman, who is beyond the abjective realm, cannot be sobject to division by them. Furthermore, that which is attributeless, all-pervading, and without "limbs" cannot be reflected, since (what is attributeless) can have no connection with adjuncts, (what is all-pervading) admits of no distinction between the object and its reflection, and (what is without "limbs") cannot be perceived. The reflection of luminous bodies resting in the sky, sepsrated by their own adjuncts, alone can be seen, but never the reflection of the sky itself, for the simple reason that the sky possesses no visible attributes.

38) tatha vastavaparicchedadau sati samanadhikaranyajnanamatrena na tattyagas ca bhavet / tatpadarthaprabhavas tatra karanam iti ced asmakam eva matasammatam //

38) Similary, if division and reflection are real, then they cannot be negated merely by thinking that the terms tat and tvam (indicating isvara and jiva respectively) refer to one and the same reality (namely, brahman). If it is maintained, however, that the extraordinary power of the being denoted by the term tat is responsible (for the removal of the limiting adjuncts), then their view concurs with our own.

39) upadher avidyakatve tu tatra tatparicchinnatvader apy aghatamanatvad avidyakatvam eveti ghatakasadisu vastavopadhimayataddarsanaya na tesam avastavasvapnadrstantopajivanam siddhantah sidhyati ghatamanaghatamanayoh sangateh kartum asakyatvat / tatas ca tesam tat tat sarvam avidyavilasitam eveti svarupam apraptena tena tena tat tad avasthapayitum asakyam //

39) If, on the other hand, the limiting adjuncts are caonsidered to be unreal, then the division etc. which they allegedly effect must also be unreal, since it simply could not take place. Thus, the doctrine of those who base thier position on the analogy of the unreal dream state cannot be substantiated with the help of analogies involving real limiting adjuncts, such as jars and space, etc., since no logical connection can be showm to exist between that which is possible and that which is not. And so, these notions of theirs are nothing but a phantas magoria, as it is not possible to establish the existence of various phenomena on the strength of these two theories, which are themselves not related with reality.

40) iti brahmavidyayoh paryavasane sati yad eva brahma cinmatratvenavidyayogasyatyantabhavaspadatvac chuddham tad eva tadyogad asuddhya jivah punas tad eva jivavidyakalpita mayasrayatvad isvaras tad eva ca tanmayavisayatvaj jiva iti

 virodhas tadavastha eva syat / tatra ca suddhayam city avidya 
tadavidyakalpitopadhau tasyam isvarakhyayam vidyeti tatha
vidyavattve 'pi mayikatvam ity asamanjasa ca kalpana syad
ityady anusandheyam //

40)  If one, then, tries to reduce everything to brahman and avidya alone, the end result is also a contradictory state of affair, namely that the one brahman which, as pure consciousness, is untainted due to a perfect absence of contact with avidya (ignorance), is none other than the jiva, who has become tainted through contact with avidya. Furthermore, this same brahman is caonsidered to be isvara when seen as the substratum for maya, which is itself superimposed by avidya belonging to the jiva, and is called jiva, when seen to fall within the domain of maya, which belongs to isvara. Thus, avidya is said to exist within pure consciousness, and vidya (knowledge) within that consciousness which is known as isvara, and which possesses upadhis superimposed by the aforementioned avidya. The unhappy result of all this is that he who is the embodiment of vidya is, nevertheless, held to be the source of illusion. This and other questions merit close scrutiny.

41)  kinca yady atrabhedavada eva tatparyam abhavisyat
tarhy ekam eva brahmajnanena bhinnam jnanena tu tasya
bhedamayam duhkham viliyata ity apasyad ity evavaksyat /
tatha sribhagavalliladinam vastavatvabhave sati srisukahrdaya-
virodhas ca jayate /

41)  Moreover, if the doctrine of Abhedavada ("non-difference") represented the actual significance here, then Vyasa would have seen that it is brahman alone which (appears) divided due to ignorance, and that the suffering which results from this (apparent) division within brahman can be removed by means of knowledge; and Suta would have described it as such. Also, if the lila etc. of the Lord were to be considered unreal, a contradiction would result with regard to the experience of Suka.

42)  tasmat paricchedapratibimbatvadipratipadakasastrany
api kathancit tatsadrsyena gaunyaiva vrttya pravarteran / am-
buvadagrahanat tu na tathatvam vrddhihrasabhaktvam antar-
bhavad ubhayasamanjasyad evam iti purvottarapaksamayanya-
yabhyam //

42)  Therefore, one should also make use of scriptures which teach such doctrines as Pratibimbavada and Paricchedavada, accepting these doctrines in a secondary sense, as indicating partial similarity (between the metaphor and the reality). This is corroborated by Brahmasutra 3/2/19 ("The jiva is not a reflection of the Supreme, like the sun reflected in water, because it is not so perceived") and 3/2/20,("The comparison is not appropriate in its primary sense but in its secondary sense of participating in increase and decrease, because the purposes sastra is attained by that and thus both comporisons become appropriate.") The former representing the apponent's objection, and the latter the author's reply.

43) tata evabhedasastrany ubhayos cidrupatvena jivasamu-
hasya tadekatve 'pi durghataghatanapatiyasya svabhavikatada-
cintyasaktya svabhavata eva tadrasmiparamanuganasthani-
yatvat tadvyatirekenavyatirekena ca virodham parihrtyagre

muhur api tadetadvyasasamadhilabdhasiddhantayojanaya yojaniyani //

43) Therefore, those scriptures which propound non-difference can be employed to arrrive at the conclusion reached by Vyasa in samadhi, by avoiding the contradiction between the views that the jiva is either identical with or distinct from isvara; for despite the two of them being one with respect to their pure conscious nature, due to the inconceivable potency of the Lord, making even the impossible possible, jivas and isvara are both identical and distinct, like innumerable atomic rays and the sun.

44) tad evam mayasrayatvamayamohitatvabhyam sthite dvayor bhede tadbhajanasyaivabhidheyatvam ayatam //

44) Therefore, since isvara and jiva are thus shown to be distinct, the former as the substratum of maya and the latter as deluded by maya, it follows that the worship of isvara alone constitutes the abhidheya.

45) atah sribhagavata eva sarvahitopadestrtvat sarvaduhkhaharatvat rasminam suryavat sarvesam paramasvarupatvat sarvadhikagunasalitvat paramapremayogatvam iti prayojanam ca sthapitam //

45) And since the Lord alone teaches what is benefiecial for all, destroys all sorrow, represents the ultimate nature of all beings, like the sun with respect to its rays, and is endowed with a superabundance of virtues, he alone is deserving of the highest love; thus is the prayojana (of the Bhagavata) also established.

46) tatrabhideyam ca tadrsatvena drstavan api yatas tatpravrttyartham sribhagavatakhyam imam satvatasamhitam pravartitavan ity aha anartheti / bhaktiyogah sravanakirtanadilaksanah sadhanabhaktiyogah na tu premalaksanah // anusthanam hy upadesapeksam prema tu tatprasadapeksam iti / tathapi tasya tatprasadahetos tatpremaphalagarbhatvat saksad evanarthopasamanatvam na tv anyasapeksatvena yat karmabhir yat tapasa jnanavairagyatas ca yat ityadau sarvam madbhaktiyogena madbhakto labhate 'njasa / svargapavargam ityadeh / jnanades tu bhaktisapeksatvam eva sreyahasrtim bhaktim ityadeh / athava anarthasya samsaravyasanasya tavat saksad avyavadhanenopa samanam sammohadidvayasya tu premakhyasviyaphaladvaretyarthah / atah purvavad evatrabhidheyam darsitam //

46) And Vyasa also realized the abhidheya in this sense while in samadhi for, as explained by Suta in Bh. P.1/7/6, he undertood the writing of this Satvasamhita, known as the Bhagavata, in order to initiate that (i.e. the worship of bhagavat which forms the abhideya of the Bhagavata). The term bhaktiyoga in this verse indicated the preliminary stage of bhakti (sadhana bhakti), characterized by such practices as listening to the scriptures, singing the praises of the Lord, etc.; it is not characterized by the highest love of God, for devotional practices alone require instruction, while love of God depends soley on the grace of the Lord. Still, bhaktiyoga may be said to directly remove misery since, as the means of acquiring the grace of the Lord, it ultimately ripens into love for Him; it does not require the aid of anything else (to remove misery). This is verified in the following lines: "Whatever benefits come from the perfomance of rituals or austerity, from knowledge or renunciation, through the practice of yoga, charity or virtue, or any other righteous means, My devotee attains them all without effort, through bhaktiyoga aimed at realizing Me, whether it be heaven, liberation, My own abode, or whatever else he might desire." (Bh.P.11/20/32-33) Knowledge etc., on the other hand, are themselves dependent on bhakti, as indicated in the following verse : "Those,O Lord, who take pains solely to realize Brahman, rejecting the higher path of devotion, will receive as thier gain wasted effort alone, like those who engage in the husking of chaff." (Bh.P.10/14/4)
  Or it may be that bhaktiyoga removes only worldly suffering directly, i.e. without intermediary, but removes the double misery of delusion etc. by means of its effect, love of God. Thus, the abhidheya is presented here (Bh.P.1/7/6) just as it was earlier (Bh.P.1/7/4-5).

47) atha purvavad eva prayojanam ca spastayitum purvoktasya purnapurusasya ca srikrsnasvarupatvam vyanjayitum granthaphalanirdesadvara tatra tadanubhavantaram pratipadayann aha yasyam iti / bhaktih prema sravanarupaya sadhanabhaktya sadhyatvat / utpadyate avirbhavati / tasyanusangikam gunam aha soketi atraisam samskaro 'pi nasyatiti bhavah / pritir na yavan mayi vasudeve na mucyate dehayogena tavat iti srisabhadevavakyat / paramapuruse purvoktapurnapuruse / kimakara ity apeksayam aha krsne / krsnas tu bhagavan svayam ityadi sastrasahasrabhavitantahkarananam paramparaya tatprasiddhimadhyapatinam casamkhyalokanam tannamasravanamatrena yah prathamapratitivisayah syat tatha tannamnah prathamaksaramatram mantraya kalpyamanam yasyyabhimukhyaya syat tadakara ityarthah / ahus ca namakaumudikarah krsnasabdasya tamalasyamalatvisi yasodayah stanandhaye parabrahmani rudhih iti //

47) Then, in order to clarify the nature of the prayojana, as was done earlier, and to reveal the fact that the purnapurusa mentioned in Bh. P. 1/7/4 is none other than Krsna, Suta utters the verse, Bh.P. 1/7/7, explaining another experience of Vyasa's by indicating the effects of listening to the Bhagavata.
  The word bhakti in this verses means preman, since it is the goal of sadhanabhakti in the form listening (to the Bhagavata); the verb utpadyate means "become manifest". Suta mentions a concomitant virtue of preman with the phrase " destroying grief, delusion, and fear", namely, that with the manifestation of preman, even the subtle impressions of grief, delusion, and fear are destroyed. For in the words of the Lord Rsabhadeva: "As long as one has no love for Me, Vasudeva, he will not be freed from association with a body." (Bh.P. 5/5/6)
  The paramapurusa mentioned in this verse is identical with the purnapurusa of Bh.P. 1/7/4. In answer to the question " What form does He take?", Suta replies, krsne. The idea is that His is the form which first comes to the mind, at the mere hearing of His name, of all those whose hearts have been nourished by thousands of scriptural statements, such as "But Krsna is Lord Himself" (Bh.P.1/3/28), as well as to those countless individuals who have fallen under the influence of His through an unbroken tradition; it is that which is visualized after uttering merely the first syllable of His name, in order to attract Hid attention. As the author of the Namakaumudi explains, "The word krsna primarily signifies 'black like the tamala tree', 'he who was suckled by Yasoda', 'the supreme brahman'."

48) atha tasyaiva prayojanasya brahmanandanubhavad api paramatvam anubhutavan / yatas tadrsam sukam api tadanandavaisistyalambhanaya tam adhyapayamasety aha sa samhitam iti / krtvanukramya ceti prathamatah svayam samksepena krtva pascat tu srinaradopadesad anukramena vivrtyetyarthah / ata eva srimadbhagavatam bharatanan aram yad atra sruyate yac canyatrastadasapurananantaram bharatam iti tad dvayam api samahitam syat / brahmanandanubhavanimagnatvat nivrttiniratam sarvato nivrttau niratam tatravyabhicarinam apityarthah //

48) Now, Vyasa realized that this prayojana (i.e. love of God) was superior even to the experience of the bliss of brahaman, and so taught the Bhagavata to Suka, who was accustomed to remaining absorbed in the bliss of brahman, so that he might realize the superiority of the bliss of the Lord. Thus is it described by Suta in Bh.P. 1/7/8.
  Here, the phrase "arfter composing and arranging" indicates that Vyasa first composed the Bhagavata himself, in an abbreviated form, and later, according to the instructions of Narada, expanded it serially. Thus, the statements which are found in the Bhagavata to the affect that the Bhagavata is later than the Mahabharata, and the statements found elsewhere that the Mahabharata is later than the eighteen Puranas can both be regarded as true.
  (Suka is described here as) "engaged in a life of renunciation" since he remained absorbed in the experience of the bliss of brahman; he was in all respects engaged in a life of renunciation and did not swerve from the ideal.

49) tam etam srivedavyasasya samadhijatanubhavam srisaunakaprasnottaratvena visadayan sarvatmaramanubhavena sahetukam samvadayati atmaramas ceti / nirgrantha vidhinisedhatita nirgatahankaragranthayo va / ahaitukim phalanusandhirahitam / atra sarvaksepapariharartham aha itthambhuta atmaramanam apy akarsanasvabhavo guno yasya sa iti / tam evartham srisukasyapy anubhavena samvadayati harer guneti / srivyasadevad yatkincicchrutena gunena purvam aksipta matir yasya sah / pascad adhyagad mahad vistirnam api / tatas ca
 tatsamkathasauhardena nitya visnujanah priya yasya tathabhuto va tesam priyo va svayam abhavad ityarthah / ayam bhavah brahmavaivartanusarena purvam tavad ayam garbham arabhya srikrsnasya svairitaya mayanivarakatvam jnatavan / tatah svaniyojanaya srivyasadevenanitasya tasyantardarsanat tannivarane sati krtartham manyataya svayam ekantam eva gatavan / tatra srivedavyasas tu tam vasikartum tadananyasadhanam sribhagavatam eva jnatva tadgunatisayaprakasamayams tadiyapadyavisesan kathancic chravayitva tena tam aksiptamatim krtva tad eva purnam tam adhyapayamaseti sribhagavatamahimatisayah proktah / tad evam darsitam vaktuh srisukasya vedavyasasya ca samanahrdayam / tasmad vaktur hrdayanurupam eva sarvatra tatparyam paryalocaniyam nanyatha / yad yat tadanyatha paryalocanam tatra tatra kupathagamitaiveti nistankitam /1/7 srisutah //

49) In answer to Sri Saunaka's question Sri Suta explained the experience of Vyas, born of samadhi or trascendental trance, as superior to the bliss of Brahman and he further corroberates it by the experiences Atmaramas, with logic in Bh.P.1/7/10.
  Here, the word nirgrantha ("free from ties") means either "beyond all injunctions and prohibitions" or "free from the bonds of egoism". Ahaituki ("motiveless") means "not seeking any results". In order to remove any doubt, he explains, "The nature of Hari is such that even those who rejoice in the Self alone feel an attraction for Him".
  This same fact is related in Bh.P. 1/7/11 by explaining Suka's own experience. Suka had earlier had his heart captivated by what little he had heard of Hari's nature from Vyasa. Later he studied the Bhagavata, despite its great length. Thereafter his nature became such that the devote of Visnu became dear to him, due to the friendship which grew out of daily discourses with him about the Lord. Or (the expression visnujanapriyah) may mean that Suka had himself become dear to them.
  The idea is this: According to the accounts of the Brahmavaivarta Purana, even prior to this, while still lying in his mother's womb, Suka realized that Krsna was capable of subduing maya at will. Thus, according to Suka's own order, Vyasa brought Krsna there, who revealed Himself to Suka (still lying in his mother's womb). Being thus freed from the bonds of maya, and considering his goal of life accomplished, Suka (took birth) and retired to a secluded spot. Now, Vyasa relized that the Bhagavata was the only affective means to captivate him, and so somehow managed to have him hear a few selected portions of the Bhagavata, in which the gratness of Hari's nature is particularly evident. By this means, Vyasa captivated Suka's heart, and taught him the whole of the Bhagavata. Thus (the example of Suka) also speaks of the extreme greatness of the Bhagavata.
  It is thereby demonstrated that Suka, the narrator of the Bhagavata, and Vyasa shared the same sentiments (with regard to the Bhagavata). Therefore, in every instance, the significance of this work must be evaluated in accordance with the understanding of its narrator, Suka, and not otherwise. Whatever interpretations are found to be contrary to this should be considered mere deviations from the proper path.

50) atha kramena vistaratas tathaiva tatparyam nirnetum sambandhabhidheyaprayojanesu prathamam yasya vacyavacakatasambandhidam sastram tad eva dharmah projjhitakaitavah ityadipadye samanyakaratas tavad aha vedyam vastavam atra vastu iti / tika ca atra srimati sundare bhagavate vastavam paramarthabhutam vastu vedyam na tu vaisesikadivad dravyagunadirupam ity esa / 1/1 srivedavyasah //

50) Now, in order to determine the significance of the BHagavata in the manner just indicated, the sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana will be ascertained, one after the other, and in detail, in these six sandarbhas. The first of these (i.e. the Tattvasandarbha) will deal with the sambandha,or the relationship between the principle being taught and the medium through which it is taught. The substance of this relationship is described by Vyasa in a general manner in Bh.P. 1/1/2 with the phrase vedyam vastavam atra vastu ("The absolute reality is to be discovered in the BHagavata.."). According to the commentary of Sridhara: "Here, in this beautiful Bhagavata, the absolute reality, i.e. vastu in the highest sense, is to be discovered, and not vastu in the sense of substance or attribute, as interpreted by the Vaisesikas etc."

51) atha kimsvarupam tad vastutattvam ity atraha
  vadanti tat tattvavidas tattvam yaj jnanam advayam / iti/ jnanam cidekarupam / advayatvam casya svayamsiddhatadrsatadrsatattvantarabhavat svasaktyekasahatatvat paramasrayam tam vina tasam asiddhatvac ca / tattvam iti parama-

 purusarthatadyotanaya paramasukharupatvam tasya bodhyate /
ata eva tasya nityatvam ca darsitam /1/2 srisutah //
 51)  Then, in reply to the question, "What is the nature of this principle of reality (tattva)?", Suta states: "The knowers of reality declare non-dual   consciousness to be reality." (Bh.P.1/2/11)

  Here, jnana ("consciousness") means "having pure consciousness as its essential nature". This consiousness is termed advaya ("non-dual") for the reasons that there exists no other self- existent tattva, either similar or dissimilar; it represents the sole support for its saktis; and without this consciousness as their ultimate substratum, these saktis could not exist.
  Since the term tattva indicates the highest goal of life, this conscousness is understood to be of the nature of supreme bliss. Consequently it is also shown to be eternal.

52) nanu nilapitadyakaram ksanikam eva jnanam drstam tat punar advayam nityam jnanam katham laksyate yan nistham idam sastram ity atraha
  sarvavedantasaram yad brahmarmaikyatvalaksanam
  vasrv advitiyam tan nistham kaivalyaikaprayojanam //iti/ satyam jnanam anantam brahma iti yasya svarupam uktam yenasrutam srutam bhavati iti yadvijnanena sarvavijnanam pratijnatam sad eva saumyedam agra asit ityadina nikhilajagadekakaranata tad aiksata bahu syam ityanena satyasan- kalpata ca yasya pratipadita tena brahmana svarupasaktibhyam sarvabrhattamena sardham anena jivenatmana iti tadiyoktav idantanirdesena tato bhinnatve 'py atmatanirdesena tadatmamsavisesatvena labdhasya badarayanasamadhidrstayukter atyabhinnatarahitasya jivatmano yad ekatvam tat tvam asi ityadau jnata tadamsabhutacidruparvena samanakarata tad eva laksanam prathamato jnane sadhakatamam yasya tathabhutam yat sarvavedantasaram advitiyam vastu tan nistham tad ekavisayam idam sribhagavatam iti praktanapadyasthenanusangah / yatha janmaprabhrti kascid grhaguhavaruddhah suryam vividisuh kathancid gavaksapatitam suryamsukanam darsayitva kenacid upadisyate esa sa iti etat tadamsajyotihsamanakarataya tan mahajyotir mandalam anusandhiyatam ityarthas tadvat / jivasya tatha tadamsatvam ca tadacintyasaktivisesasiddhatvenaiva paramatmasandarbhe sthapayisyamah / tadetajjivadilaksanamsavisistatayaivopanisadas tasya samsatvam api kvacid upadisanti / niramsatvopadesika srutis tu kevalatannistha / atra kaivalyaikaprayojanam iti caturthapadas ca kaivalyapadasya suddhatvamatravacanatvena suddhatvasya ca suddhabhaktitvena paryavasanena pritisandarbhe vyakhyasyate / 12/13 srisutah //

52) But consciousness is seen to be absolutely momentary, taking the form of a blue object (one moment) and a yellow object (the next). How can such a consciousness be characterized as non-dual and eternal, as the Bhagavata is intent on doing?(Objection raized by ksanik visnanvadis)
  To this Suta replies: "The Bhagavata has for its subject matter that non-dual reality which forms the essence of all the Upanisads, and is characterized by the oneness of atman and brahman; its sole purpose is to bring about the attainment of kaivalya." (Bh.P.12/13/12) That is, this Bhagavata has for its nistha, i.e. its sole concern, that non dual reality which forms the essence of all the Upanisads. Its primary and most efficacious teaching is characterized as oneness between the jiva and brahman. This oneness is understood, in such statements as tat tvam asi ("You are that," Ch.U.6/8/7), to be an identity of form, since the jiva, being a portion of brahman, shares his conscious nature. Due to his nature and power, brahman is the most extensive of all. He is that whose esential nature has been described by the words satyam jnanam anantam brahma ("Brahman is truth, knowledge, and infinity," Tai.U. 2/1/1); by knowing whom, all is said to be known: yenasrutam srutam bhavati ("...by learning about whom, the unheard become heard..."Ch.U.6/1/3); who is declared to be the single cause of the universe: sad eva saumyedam agra asit ("In the beginning, my boy, this was being alone," Ch.U. 6/2/1); and who has been described as being able to create by a mere wish: tad aiksata bahu syam ("He looked about and thought, 'May I be many.'"Ch.U.6/2/3). That the jiva is not absolutely non-different from brahman has been established by arguments based on Vyasa's vision in samadhi. Still, he is one with brahman in that he represents a particular portion of Him. This is demostrated by the phrase, anena jivenatmana ("by this living self",Ch.U.6/3/2), in which the employment of the pronoun idam ("this") implies difference from brahman while the use of the word atman ("self") indicates inclusion within brahman.
  The edea is this: Suppose someone who has been confined to a dark room froom his birth wishes to know the nature of the sun. Then, someone points out to him a tiny ray of light which has somehow managed to peep through a small hole, and instructs him as follows:"This is that (sun). Seek to realize the sun as agreat sphere of light, identical in nature with this ray of light, which is but a particle of that sun." We will demonstrate in the Paramatmasandarbha that the jiva similarly represents a portion of the paramatman, owing his very existence to a particular aspect of His unthinkable power. Therefore, the Upanisads teach in places that brahman possesses parts, but only in the sense that He is qualified by these parts, characterized as "jiva" etc. The Sruti texts, on the other hand, which indicate brahman, to be partless are concerned only with His absolute aspect.
  The fourth pada of this verse, kaivalyaikaprayojanam ("its sole purpose is to bring about the attainment of kaivalya"), will be analyzed in the Pritisandarbha by taking kaivalya to mean "purity" alone, and by showing "purity" to be synonymous with "pure bhakti".

53) tatra yadi tvampadarthasya jivatmano jnanatvam nityatvam ca prathamato vicaragocarah syat tadaiva tatpadarthasya tadrsatvam subodham syad iti tad bodhayitum anyarthas ca paramarsah iti nyayena jivatmanas tadrupatvam aha /
  natma jajana na marisyati naidhate 'sau
         na ksiyate savanavid vyabhicarinam hi /
  sarvatra sasvad anapayy upalabdhimatram
         prano yathendriyabalena vikalpitam sat // atma suddho jivah na jajana na jatah janmabhavad eva tadanantarastitalaksano vikaro [pi nasti / naidhate na vardhate vrddhyabhavad eva viparinamo 'pi nirastah / hi yasmat / vyabhicarinam agamapayinam balayuvadidehanam devamanusyadyakaradehanam va / savanavit tattatkaladrasta / na hy avasthavatam drasta tadavastho bhavatityarthah / niravasthah ko 'sau atma / ata aha upalabdhimatram jnanaikarupam / kathambhutam / sarvatra dehe sasvat sarvada anuvartamanam iti / nanu nilajnanam nastam pitajnanam jatam iti pratiter na jnanasyanapayitvam / tatraha indriyabeleneti / sad eva jnanam ekam indriyabalena vividham kalpitam / niladyakara vrttaya eva jayante nasyanti ca na jnanam iti bhavah / ayam agamapayatadbadhabhedena prathamas tarkah / drastrdrsyabhedena dvitiyo 'pi tarko jneyah / vyabhicarisv avasthitasyavyabhicare drstantah yatheti //