Member's Commentaries on the Bhagavata

[Nitaidas]

Here is where our esteemed members can place their comments on this first verse of the Bhagavata Purana:

Let us meditate on the real supreme [the supreme lord] from whom comes the birth, [maintenance, and destruction] of this [universe] both directly and indirectly, who is completely aware of [all] objects, who is independent, who taught the sacred speech to the first poet through his heart, about whom even the learned are confused, in whom the tri-creation [three strands] is not false as in the substitution of fire, water, and earth for one another, and who by his own splendor always roots out deception. (1)

[We might want to discuss the terms of the translation first. I followed Sridhara as much as possible. Thus, real supreme as opposed to supreme reality. Real, here seems to mean existing in the past, present, and future (tri-kAla-satya).]

[Nitaidas]

[moved to this thread since it appears to be the first of our commentaries--admin]

I don't know much. According to my understanding the purusha Hari, Krishna or Vasudeva who is above tri-guna manifests the gunas and becomes Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva to manage this material world. This trinity of divine beings never separate. They will always perform their act together.
.Perhaps the Christian idea of divine trinity originates here.
Maya, the deluding potency also sprouts from the will of Hari, as well as pradhana (crude matter) vyakta (a shakti that causes material manifestation) kala ( time).
Brahma applies his creativity and eventually the material world comes into shape. but the purusha Krishna is only concerned with leela, nothing more. For this reason he stays separate. And the trio must do all the hard work.
The Vedas which are like the manuals pertaining to this manifestation were imparted to Brahma's heart. It is beginnningless. But apparently to fully understand all this, one must approach a guru in disciplic succession. This understanding lies beyond sensory perception. The knowledge is sabda pramana. Revealed knowledge, like a meaningful sound spoken by a trustworthy person. Sabda = revealed knowledge.
Sabda praman is the primary means of understanding things, used by the followers of Jiva. The other methods of acquiring knowledge are prone to the four defects of human nature - delusion, the tendency to make mistakes, the tendency to cheat, and imperfect senses.
But but but the other means of gaining knowledge are also approved like tradition, sense perception, inference. But the knowledge gained is limited, because only Krishna and the guru can reveal things that are beyond the sensory.

signed, the foolish donkey.
goddess.

[Nitaidas]

Good job, goddess. Any other commentaries? Subaldasji, kingcobra, madanmohanji, chandan, jd33 ?

[subaldas]

Let us meditate on the real supreme [lord] from whom comes
the birth, [maintenance, and destruction] of this [universe] both
directly and indirectly, who is completely aware of [all] objects,
who is independent, who taught the sacred speech to the first poet
through his heart, about whom even the learned are confused, in
whom the tri-creation [three strands] is not false as in the substitu-
tion of fire, water, and earth for one another, and who by his own
splendor always roots out deception. (1)

“Let us meditate” indicates the necessity of focusing our mind and maintaining a connection with the “supreme.” When we are in union (yoga), at-one-ment or communion with the supreme. This allows us to see the supreme in everything, and thus, everything is spiritualized and there is no more illusion.

“the real supreme [God-dess]” I think it is high time we overcome the patriarchal God language of the past. This is a matter of justice and equality. We are especially well situated in our tradition to do this. There are many places where Radha is exalted above or equal to Krishna. The Brahma-Vaivarta Purana, portrays Radha giving birth to the nascent universe. Radha and Krishna are one, two halves of the same whole “real supreme [God-dess] from whom comes the birth, of this [universe].”

Together, they create, form, maintain and destroy the universe from their very being. They are both transcendental and immanent. There is nothing but God-dess and their energies. They are the guiding, organizing, designing principle of and in all creation. They are the ground of all being, exist in all and guide all in their development towards spiritual realization.

“about whom even the learned are confused” This indicates the impossibility of really knowing God-dess fully in this life. God-dess is by definition beyond our ability to fully know. Even if we have a direct realization, as soon as we try to conceptualize it and put it into words, it is no longer direct revelation, but something else. That is why it is revealed by/to poets for expression, because poetic speech is not to be taken literally, but figuratively so as to point to something beyond the mere words.

“in whom the tri-creation [three strands] is not false” Seen in light of God-dess, the world is a wonderful beautiful creation. It is not merely a prison for rebellious souls, but a playground for God-dess who also enjoys the pastimes of all created beings. By giving up our false ego of material identification and taking up our true identity of servant of God-dess, we can see the reality of things also.

“who by her own splendor always roots out deception.” God-dess is very graceful and merciful towards the living entities. She is always trying to impart true wisdom and understanding to us. God-dess realization is not so much an effort on our part, as an opening to God-dess’ grace which is always available to us.

[Nitaidas]

Good job, Subalji. It is good to see that way you work in and use your bigendered understanding of the supreme deity. I find that the verse in question rather permits such interpretations by its generality. Krsna is not mentioned by name, nor is Visnu. One is almost invited to replace the param with whatever highest truth one recognizes. Thus, members of other religious traditions might well respond to this verse in their own ways and not find much to quarrel with in its characterization of the supreme being. An atheist who believes in a cause of the universe might also agree with this verse. The only place where such a person might disagree is in the word abhijna, knowing or conscious. Even the meditation on the real supreme or highest could be understood as scientific investigation.

Anyway, good job.

[Nitaidas]

madanmohandas said:

I wish we could stop calling the Skandhas as Cantos. As far as I understand the Skandhas should be called Books and Cantos are the chapters within the Books, but could just be left as chapters.

And Nitai, what about your 'doctrinal annotation' and Sridhara. I really like those verses of Srinatha in the opening of his tika, especially that one about, not refuting opponents and neither flattering followers; cool!

Good point. There is no need to continue a flaky practice. Books and chapters are as good as anything.

As for the doctrinal annotation, I am still working on it. I am about a third of the way through Sridhara. It probably would have been a good idea to wait for this kind of exercise until everyone has had a chance to read the commentaries of our antecedents. It is good to at least be aware of the ancient opinions even if one takes a different stand at the present day. I will try to have that done soon. Bear in mind that all commentators can change their commentaries in the light of what is said in the ancient commentaries or in the commentaries of our fellow members. Don't feel you can't add to or subtract from what has already been written. The process should be relational, capable of being changed by interaction with others. Once we have refined our commentaries in this way, we might want to close them at some point, too.

[Nitaidas]

madanmohandas said:

om
'tri-creation'? three gunas sattva, raja and tama(?) This bit confounds me. Is it alluding to sarga as one of the ten Puranic themes?
That would be to do with all those narratives of the Sankhya theory of evolution and involution perhaps.(?) So, 'in whom the tri-creation is not false', might imply, 'who is not a false phenomena, like the tri-creation'.(?)

Good job, madanmohanji. You take a more traditional approach. I'm going to focus on that one section you were unclear about and tell you what I think it means. Perhaps that will help you come to some decision on what it means for you. The tri-creation or triple creation (tri-sarga) means the world that is composed of the three strands. The verse says that in the supreme the tri-creation appears real like the way that earth is sometimes confused with water and so forth. The example in Sridhara is a desert mirage. In that case the appearance of water is false, but the earth is really there. Thus, reality is lent to water by the real presence of the earth. Another example given by Sridhara is glass. In glass which is earth one has the perception of water and vice versa in water one has the perception of glass. The perceptions of water or glass are false, but because they are founded in real earth and water, they appear quite real. Thus, if the verse is interpreted in this way, the creation composed of the three guNas is false but because it is project on the supreme it appear real. This is a standard advaita vedantic interpretation of the world. The snake and the rope.

Another way of taking the verse is to replace amRSA (real) for mRSA (false). This is a real possibility because of the operation of Sanskrit grammar in that instance. So if the word is taken as mRSA instead of amRSA, this creation composed of the three strands appears false when compared to the supreme. In other words the creation is real, but comparatively unreal when compared with the real supreme. How the example of the three substances, fire, water, and earth work in that case I am not sure. Sridhara does not entertain that option as far as I have seen. Perhaps Srinatha does. I have yet to transcribe his commentary on the first verse.

Hope this helps.

[Nitaidas]

I will post my commentary later. It will be long and boring compared to the ones so far presented.

[Deleted]

"Let us meditate on the real supreme [lord] from whom comes
the birth, [maintenance, and destruction] of this [universe] both
directly and indirectly, who is completely aware of [all] objects,
who is independent, who taught the sacred speech to the first poet through his heart, about whom even the learned are confused, in whom the tri-creation [three strands] is not false as in the substitu-tion of fire, water, and earth for one another, and who by his own splendor always roots out deception." (1)


The verse seems to be calling our attention to the limitless power of the Lord "at the moment of creation" and the infusion of knowledge into the heart of Brahma (the first poet), who represents not just another incarnation of the Lord, ( the trinity; Brahma, V, S.) but he is also the representation of all living entities, as the purest heart within the universe.

Like for example inside the heart of the individual living being, the Lord acts as Paramatma, here Brahma is the heart of the universe , where the Lord starts expanding His creation, just like the blood circulating from the heart inside the entire body, infusing life to every particle...

On a similar perspective, according to the Srimad Bhagavatam, Skandha 2, in the Chapter 1 "The First Step in God Realization" Sukadeva Gosvami's perceptions on the Visvarupa (universal Form), is that Brahma is the genital of the Universal Form:

Text 32:

Modesty is His upper lip, His chin the hankering, religion is His breast, and the way of irreligion His back. Brahmâ is His genitals, His testicles are the Mitrâ-varunas, His waist the oceans and the stack of His bones are the mountains.

Therefore, besides Lord Brahma being the heart of the universe, where transcendental knowledge is received for the benefit of all living beings, he is also a direct and indirect representation of Lord's Genital, in whom the mystical powers (of creation) science, arts, etc are mercifully infused into the heart. Thus as an efficient tool for Lord's wonders, Brahma according to the power of his heart's content, expand the creation.

[subaldas]

admin said:

Good job, Subalji. It is good to see that way you work in and use your bigendered understanding of the supreme deity. I find that the verse in question rather permits such interpretations by its generality. Krsna is not mentioned by name, nor is Visnu. One is almost invited to replace the param with whatever highest truth one recognizes. Thus, members of other religious traditions might well respond to this verse in their own ways and not find much to quarrel with in its characterization of the supreme being. An atheist who believes in a cause of the universe might also agree with this verse. The only place where such a person might disagree is in the word abhijna, knowing or conscious. Even the meditation on the real supreme or highest could be understood as scientific investigation.

Yes, the generality of the verse does allow broad interpretation and that is good. As we translate this material and make it available to a wider audience, it might be good to emphasize these more universal aspects since they most likely represent God-dess a little closer perhaps than some of the more specific details. By bringing out these general areas of agreement for thinking persons to understand, we will be able to form areas of common understanding which can form a basis for interfaith cooperation to address the world's problems as well as attract seekers who are intelligent and seek an intelligent spiritual path.

I read an interesting book a few months ago, The G.O.D. Experiments by Gary Schwartz, an agnostic, Jewish scientist, who came to the conclusion through science that there must be a G.O.D., a guiding, ordering, designing principle to the universe and engaged in scientific experiments to prove it. It's really quite good, easy reading. It supports a panentheistic view which is gaining ground in the West.

You know, Joseph Campbell said that the Hindu creation story with Vishnu and Brahma corresponds best with contemporary scientific views of any of them. We should also try to point out such correspondences wherever possible.

Radhe! and Aloha.

[kingcobra]

Cosmogony in the Bhagavata Purana is on two levels. At the top level:
The direct act of creation is accomplished via Vishnu who lies on the vast ocean of milk (the Milky Way galaxy? - a good point to research) and exudes universes from his pores like eggs emerging from the wombs of cows with each inhalation. The direct act of destruction is via each of his exhalations and those same universes receding back into his pores.

On the next level down:

Each universe goes through an active and dormant phase in an immensely long cycle. Each day of Brahma is ended with a dance of destruction, in which Bhagavan dances a dance that destroys the cosmos for the duration of a night of Brahma. Each universe has its own Brahma, who is not a jiva, but who is also not Vishnu-tattva either.

On the next level down:
Prajapati creates the various species of life that populate the cosmos. In the Bhagavata, each universal egg is encased in a solid shell. There is an anecdotal account that during World War II, Hitler after having learned of such Puranic concepts of the universe actually had his scientists train radio telescopes directly overhead in hopes of being able to use the returning signals that would bounce of that shell to pinpoint the location of enemy ships on the other side of the globe. When the experiment failed, he ordered the scientists to be sent to the death camps. Apparently Hitler was not exactly dealing with a full deck, if that account is true.

On the next level down:
The devatAs descend to earth as rain and enter grain crops, which are consumed by humans.

[kingcobra]

kingcobra said:

Cosmogony in the Bhagavata Purana is on multiple levels. At the top level:
The direct act of creation is accomplished via Vishnu who lies on the vast ocean of milk (the Milky Way galaxy? - a good point to research) and exudes universes from his pores like eggs emerging from the wombs of cows with each inhalation. The direct act of destruction is via each of his exhalations and those same universes receding back into his pores.

On the next level down:

Each universe goes through an active and dormant phase in an immensely long cycle. Each day of Brahma is ended with a dance of destruction, in which Bhagavan dances a dance that destroys the cosmos for the duration of a night of Brahma. Each universe has its own Brahma, who is not a jiva that is caught in the wheel of samsAra (cycle of birth, death and rebirth), but who is also not Vishnu-tattva either.

On the next level down:
Prajapati creates the various species of life that populate the cosmos. In the Bhagavata, each universal egg is encased in a solid shell. There is an anecdotal account that during World War II, Hitler after having learned of such Puranic concepts of the universe actually had his scientists train radio telescopes directly overhead in hopes of being able to use the returning signals that would bounce of that shell to pinpoint the location of enemy ships on the other side of the globe. When the experiment failed, he ordered the scientists to be sent to the death camps. Apparently Hitler was not exactly dealing with a full deck, if that account is true.

On the next level down:
The devatAs descend to earth as rain and enter grain crops, which are consumed by humans.

[Deleted]

Hey Madanmohan-ji, what is wrong about my perception on Lord Brahma, the creator?

Should I make an appointment with a therapist for Sukadeva, too?

[kingcobra]

The concept of the 3 cosmic strands (guNas) predates the Pauranic period. It is discussed in various Upanishads, which are of the Vedic period. Vishnu emerged as prominent in the Pauranic period, as Indra and other gods were relegated to more minor roles. The Bhagavata Purana laid the foundation for later bhakti movements founded by medieval period luminaries such as Sri Caitanya in Bengal and Vallabhacharya in Gujarat. It also was a source for the Gita Govindam by Jayadev of Orissa, from whom Krsnadas, author of Caitanya Caritamrta derived inspiration. Radharani came to the forefront with GG, and the BP sets the stage in the 10th book, which focuses on the Krsna avatAra of Vishnu and his exploits in human form.

The concept of mAdhurya rasa, or the relationship with Krsna as lover, was fully developed by Rupa in his Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu. The erotic dalliances of Krsna with the gopis is very tame in the Bhagavata Purana, whereas Jayadev goes into explicit and graphic detail, and illustrations of his text are in the same vein as earlier erotic sculpture adorning early Hindu temples. Persons who do not understand the cultural context of these explicit portrayals might consider them to be lurid and perhaps even pornographic. However, they are considered to be sacred depictions that serve to free the jivas from samsAra, whereas as human sexuality is considered to be a stumbling block to mukti. The tantric schools consider sexuality as sAdhana to be a vehicle for mukti, which distinguishes such practices as distinct from sex for procreation. The pancharAtrika school emphasis chastity as a virtue.

[Deleted]

kingcobra said:

2-) On the next level down:

Each universe goes through an active and dormant phase in an immensely long cycle. Each day of Brahma is ended with a dance of destruction, in which Bhagavan dances a dance that destroys the cosmos for the duration of a night of Brahma. Each universe has its own Brahma, who is not a jiva, but who is also not Vishnu-tattva either.



3-) On the next level down:
The devatAs descend to earth as rain and enter grain crops, which are consumed by humans.

2-) Somehow I always thought that that unique position was a privilege of Shiva as Shiva-Tattva, not Brahma, who is but the best of all living beings inside a particular universe... I also heard that the Brahma of this universe is a pure-jivatma. Thus, in the absence of a qualified Jivatma the (Brahma) post is filled with a Vishnu expansion...

Here is something that corroborates:

From the point of view of Lord Siva’s function as the god of annihilation, and also that of Brahma as the secondary creator of the universe, Siva and Brahma are actually posts. Lord Brahma and Lord Siva are not ordinary human beings, but their posts are like that of the president or prime minister of a nation, wherein the man representing the post has to perform a certain defined job.

Both as the post and the person, Siva is superior to Brahma. Lord Siva is an expansion of Lord Visnu, but sometimes a jiva may become Siva’s expansion known as Rudra. If a man purely performs the duties of varnasrama for one hundred births, he may become Brahma.*[ end note 3]

In other words, he may attain the position or post of Brahma. In turn, when a person in the post of Brahma carries out his function expertly for one hundred births, he becomes qualified to perform the function of Siva in his manifestation as Rudra. Siva’s post is therefore superior to that of Brahma, and this is also evidence that Siva is more powerful than Brahma.
www.purebhakti.com/lectures/lecture19970703b.shtml

3-) Thanks for sharing that next time when it rains, I will keep my eye on it and I surely will try to be more respectful when eating grains...