Chapter two
|| 1.2.1 ||
vyäsa uväca—
iti sampraçnasaàhåñöo vipräëäà raumaharñaëiù |
pratipüjya vacas teçäà pravaktum upacakrame||
TRANSLATION
The son of Romaharñaëa (Süta or Ugraçravas), delighted at the questions of the sages, respecting their words, began to speak.
COMMENTARY
In the second chapter there is a description of three items: the process (abhidheya), bhakti; the goal (prayojanam), prema; and the object of worship, the Supreme Lord Bhagavän Kåñëa.
The son of Romaharñaëa was Ugraçravas (also called Süta).
|| 1.2.2 ||
süta uväca
yaà pravrajantam anupetam apeta-kåtyaà
dvaipäyano viraha-kätara äjuhäva |
putreti tan-mayatayä taravo ’bhinedus
taà sarva-bhüta-hådayaà munim änato’smi ||
TRANSLATION
Süta said:
I offer my respects to the sage Çukadeva, who has entered the mind of all beings, and to whom Vyäsa, his father, cried out with pain of separation “O son!” when Çukadeva, without even undergoing saàskäras, left home and could not be brought back. Even the trees, being attached to Çukadeva, called out “O son!”
COMMENTARY
Here Süta begins to reflect. I will speak the answer to the questions, the essence of all the scriptures, the very substance. They have asked for the essence which will please their intellects (yenätmä suprasédati SB 1.1.11). If their intellects are not satisfied with this, what will happen? Therefore among all the essences, I should seek out that which is pleasing to the intellect as decided by the most righteous persons. Even though some righteous persons will say that the intellect is pleased with Säìkhya, some will say the intellect is pleased with Mémäàsa, or with the Upaniñads, or the Vedänta-sütras which discern the conclusion of the Upaniñads, all that cannot be admitted. Among the sages, the chief is Kåñëa-dvaipäyana-vyäsa, who knows all the philosophies, wrote the Vedänta-sütras, and whose vision is based on clarity of mind. I should speak that scripture, which remained steady, without objections from anyone, since it gave pleasure to all the sages, after withstanding the tests of all the great luminaries, the greatest philosophers present in the assembly gathered around King Parékñit,which is pure like the jämbünadariver, I should speak theBhägavatam. Therefore I should surrender to Çré-çukadeva, the speaker of the Bhägavatam. He thus begins reciting this verse.
Çukadeva had departed leaving everything (pravrajantam). Though he was nearby, Vyäsa could not catch him (anupetam). He had not received his sacred thread (apeta-kåtyam) Vyäsa called out the protracted words, “O son!” But not only his father had great affection for him. Padma Puräëa says:
yenärcito haris tena tarpitäni jaganty api |
rajyanti jantavas tatra jangamäù sthävarä api ||
He who worships the Lord pleases all living entities. All moving and non-moving beings are controlled by him.[1]
Thus even the trees lamented. Being completely attached to Çukadeva (tan-mayatayä) the trees, since they were facing him, called out in the form of echoes “O son!” When a person is attached to something he is said to be tan-maya. Thus stré-maya means a person who is attached to women. This affection for a person who resides in the mind of all living beings, like the attraction for the all-attractive deity of the Lord, is not a material illusion.Thus it is not a fault if Vyäsa seemed to lose his sense of discrimination.
Or there is another meaning. The trees, as another form of Çukadeva (tan-mayatayä), called out in echo, “O son!” to answer Vyäsa. If I am your son, then you are also my son. Illusion is the cause of thinking “I am the father, you are the son. Who is the son of whom? Who is the father of whom?” Enlightening Vyäsa about this truth, they hint “Why are you bewildered?”
For establishing attachment to Çukadeva, it is then described that he had entered into the minds of all living entities (sarva-bhüta-hådayam munim) by the power of his yoga. That being so, let him also enter my heart and speak the Bhägavatam through my mouth! He who can enter into the dull trees and pacify his father by answering back can also enter my heart and please the intellects of all the hearers by the Bhägavatam. Implied here is the rule that at the time of lecturing, other speakers of Bhägavatam should also meditate in this way.
|| 1.2.3 ||
yaù svänubhävam akhila-çruti-säram ekam
adhyätma-dépam atititérñatäà tamo ’ndham |
saàsäriëäà karuëayäha puräëa-guhyaà
taà vyäsa-sünum upayämi guruà munénäm ||
TRANSLATION
I surrender to the son of Vyäsa, the incomparable guru of all the sages, who mercifully spoke the Puräëa full of hidden meanings, the essence of all the scriptures, the essence of hearing, for all the people of this world, even in the future; who spoke the Bhägavatam, which revealed the excellence of rasa to Çukadeva, and which is the revealer of ätmä for those desiring to cross dense ignorance with ease.
COMMENTARY
He says that the reason for his inspiring Süta is his mercy. He should not only deliver Parékñit, but he should also deliver all the persons born in this world in the future. At that moment, Süta remembered all the future generations. And for those who desire to cross (atititérñatäm) the dense (andham) ignorance (tamaù) with great ease (ati), the Bhägavatam causes revelation (dépam) of the jéva (adhyätma) — he who controls (adhi) the elements of the body such as mahattattva. This refers to the secondary result of the Bhägavatam—destruction of ignorance—for the desirers of liberation. For the pure devotees, Bhägavatam contains the essence of all the çrutis, of all the Upaniñads, and taking another meaning of çruti, Bhägavatam is the essence for those who relish with the ear (çruti)by hearing. This is indicated by 1.1.3, where Bhägavatam is said to be the ripened fruit of the tree of the Vedas. For Çukadeva as well (sva), Bhägavatam revealed the power of abundant rasa (anubhävam). Thus it is said:
sva-sukha-nibhåta-cetäs tad-vyudastänya-bhävo
’py ajita-rucira-léläkåñöa-säras tadéyam
vyatanuta kåpayä yas tattva-dépaà puräëaà
tam akhila-våjina-ghnaà vyäsa-sünuà nato ’smi
Let me offer my respectful obeisances unto my spiritual master, the son of Vyäsadeva, Çukadeva Gosvämé. It is he who defeats all inauspicious things within this universe. Although in the beginning he was absorbed in the happiness of Brahman realization and was living in a secluded place, giving up all other types of consciousness, he became attracted by the pleasing, most melodious pastimes of Lord Çré Kåñëa. He therefore mercifully spoke this supreme Puräëa, Çrémad-Bhägavatam, which is the bright light of the Absolute Truth and which describes the activities of the Lord. SB 12.12.69
harer guëäkñipta-matir His mind also became attracted to the qualities of the Lord by studying Bhägavatam. (SB 1.7.11)
pariniñöhito ’pi nairguëyauttama-çloka-lélayä
gåhéta-cetä räjarñeäkhyänaà yad adhétavän
O saintly King, I was certainly situated perfectly in transcendence, yet I was still attracted by the delineation of the pastimes of the Lord, who is described by enlightened verses. SB 2.1.9
Or svänubhävam can mean “that which produced Çukadeva’s power.” This explanation indicates that Bhägavatam made Çukadeva superior to all other sages. Ekam means incomparable, without a second. Çukadeva became the guru of all the sages such as Närada and Vyäsa who were seated in the assembly of Parékñit and taught them Bhägavatam as if it had not been heard before. The Bhägavatam must be taught to them as well. The Tattva-sandarbha has pointed this out.
|| 1.2.4 ||
näräyaëaà namaskåtya naraà caiva narottamam |
devéà sarasvatéà vyäsaà tato jayam udérayet ||
TRANSLATION
Before reciting this Çrémad-Bhägavatam, which is the very means of conquest, one should offer respectful obeisances unto the Personality of Godhead, Näräyaëa, unto Nara-näräyaëa Åñi, the supermost human being, unto mother Sarasvaté, the goddess of learning, and unto Çréla Vyäsadeva, the author.
COMMENTARY
Having offered respects to guru, Süta offers respects to devatä, presiding deity, etc. Nara-näräyaëa are designated as the presiding deities of this work since they have authority over the place.[2]The devatä or subject of the Bhägavatam is Kåñëa (narottamam). Sarasvaté is the çakti.[3] The word ca indicates the åñi (sage) of the work, Vyäsa.[4] Some editions have the word vyäsam instead of caiva. That makes the meaning clear. The béja is oà and the meter is predominantly gäyatré, since the first verse of Bhägavatam begins with oà and reference to gäyatré. Having offered respects to these persons, one should utter “Jaya.” This is a verb form, calling out to Kåñëa with raised hands. (Jaya Çré-kåñëa! Victory to Kåñëa!) By using the potential case, Süta teaches other sages of the Puräëas to do the same. Jaya also refers to this scripture because one can conquer saàsära by studying it. So the meaning would be “One should then speak the Bhägavatam (jayam). In this verse, since the verb form namaskåtya indicates that another action immediately follows, the word tataù with the meaning of “next, then” would be superfluous. Therefore tataù describes the subject of the sentence. Tataù is a past participle of tan (to spread words, to speak). Thus tato jayam udérayet means “the speaker should utter jaya.” This is the opinion of some.
|| 1.2.5 ||
munayaù sädhu påñöo ’haà bhavadbhir loka-maìgalam |
yat kåtaù kåñëa-sampraçno yenätmä suprasédati ||
TRANSLATION
O sages! You have asked good questions about what is beneficial for the world, because you have asked questions all about Kåñëa, by which the intellect is immediately satisfied.
COMMENTARY
It has been said previously (1.2.1) that Suta respects the words of the sages. This verse describes that respect. O sages (munayaù)! The questions are very good because I have been asked about what is auspicious for the world. Why is that good? You have asked questions about Kåñëa, all sorts of questions about Kåñëa (sampraçnaù). And why is that good? By such questions about Kåñëa the intellect becomes satisfied. It is my experience that by such question about Kåñëa alone immediately the intellect becomes satisfied.
|| 1.2.6 ||
sa vai puàsäà paro dharmo yato bhaktir adhokñaje |
ahaituky apratihatä yayätmä suprasédati ||
TRANSLATION
That is the supreme dharma for all human beings (sädhana bhakti) by which prema-bhakti to the Lord arises, which is not caused by anything other than itself, cannot be obstructed, and which satisfies the mind completely.
COMMENTARY
This verse answers the second question of the sages: what is the final essence of all the scriptures. That essence is highest dharma for anyone who is a human being (puàsäm), meaning hearing and chanting about the Lord. It is said:
etävän eva loke ’smin puàsäà dharmaù paraù småtaù
bhakti-yogo bhagavati tan-näma-grahaëädibhiù
That is the only means for attainment of the final perfection of life. Therefore persons whose minds are fixed on the Lord engage in the intensive practice of devotional service. SB 6.3.22
By this statement, The word para along with dharma in the present verse can indicate only bhakti-yoga. Etavän eva indicates exclusion of other processes as para-dharma.The essence of scripture isbhakti-yogaby whichprema-bhakti (yataù bhaktiù) appears. It arises withoutcause (ahaituké). Mixed bhakti is excluded inthis definition (since it has cause). “But you are really evading the truth here(saying that prema is not caused by sädhana-bhakti).” No. Dharma consisting of hearing and chanting about the Lord is called sädhana-bhakti, and in the mature state it is calledprema. Both are calledbhakti,for it is saidbhaktyä saïjätayä bhaktyä bibhraty utpulakäà tanum: the devotee possesses a body with ecstatic symptoms by prema developed through sädhana-bhakti. (SB 11.3.31) In the verse being discussed, the former bhakti (paro dharmo) is the cause of the later type of bhakti (yato bhaktir adhokñaje), just as an unripe mango is the cause of a ripe mango. Considering one the cause of the other because of the difference in taste is simply a conception for understanding the different strengths of bhakti, though sädhana-bhakti and prema are not actually different things. The various states of infancy, youth and adulthood in one person are actually not conditions of cause and results of that cause(since the person remains). On the other hand, when pots, cloth and cooked rise arise, the originalnames and forms of mud, thread and raw rice disappear. One cannot compare these examples to bhakti and prema.
One also not say that the famous cause of bhakti is association of devotees, for association of devotees is part of bhakti. It is the second stage, as understood from the statement ädau çraddhä tataù sädhu-saìgo’tha bjajana-kriyä. (BRS 1.3.11) And later it will be said:
çuçrüñoù çraddadhänasya väsudeva-kathä-ruciù
syän mahat-sevayä vipräù puëya-tértha-niñevaëät
O twice-born sages, by serving those devotees who are completely freed from all vice, great service is done. By such service, one gains affinity for hearing the messages of Väsudeva. SB 1.2.16
Such things as charity, vows, austerity, sacrifices, and selfless performance of duties are to some degree causes of bhakti in sattva-guëa, practiced as an aìga of jïäna. But they are not causes of pure bhakti, because it is said:
yaà na yogena säìkhyena däna-vrata-tapo-’dhvaraiù |
vyäkhyä-svädhyäya-sannyäsaiù präpnuyäd yatnavän api ||
Even though one engages with great endeavor in the mystic yoga system, philosophical speculation, charity, vows, penances, ritualistic sacrifices, teaching of Vedic mantras to others, personal study of the Vedas, or the renounced order of life, still one cannot achieve Me. SB 11.12.9
Nor can it even be said that the mercy of the Lord is the cause of pure bhakti, for it is non-final cause, making one search out a further cause. One cannot say that the Lord’s mercy is absolute, without further cause, for then it would mean the Lord is unjust and prejudiced in choosing to give mercy without reason to certain individuals and not to others. However if one says that the cause of bhakti is the mercy of the devotee, it is not so incorrect. Though the uttama-bhaktas do not make distinctions and are thus not prejudiced, one does see the madhyama-bhakta making distinctions between the Lord, the devotee, the innocent and the demon. Thus because the Lord is dependent on the devotee, the Lord’s mercy follows after the mercy of the devotee. That is the correct conclusion.
But then how is bhakti said to be without cause (ahaitukum) in this verse? Because the Lords mercy is included in the mercy of the devotee, and because that mercy is included in association with devotees, and because devotee association is an aìgaof bhakti, bhakti is said to be without cause (since an aìga of bhakti causes bhakti). Moreover the cause of devotee’s mercy is but the bhakti present in the heart of the devotee, because without that bhakti in his heart there is no possibility of his mercy arising. In all ways therefore, bhakti is the cause of bhakti. Therefore bhakti is said to be without cause. From the point of view of bhakti, the devotee, bhakti, the Lord, and his mercy are not separate items.Even though bhakti appears by bhakti (thus being self-manifesting), it does not negate the fact that bhakti’s self-manifesting nature comes from the Lord.
This bhakti cannot be prevented by anything (apratihatä). This is mentioned in the following verse:
mad-guëa-çruti-mätreëamayi sarva-guhäçaye
mano-gatir avicchinnäyathä gaìgämbhaso ’mbudhau
Just as the water of the Ganges flows naturally down towards the ocean, such devotional ecstasy, uninterrupted by any material condition, flows towards the Supreme Lord. SB 3.29.11
Çré Rüpa Gosvämé has also said sarvathä dhvaàsa-rahitaà saty api dhvaàsa-käraëe: bhakti is without destruction, though it is the cause of destruction of obstacles. (Ujjvala-néla-maëi 14.63) Apratihatä can also mean that this prema-bhakti is not contaminated by jïäna or karma. By that bhakti (yayä) the mind (ätmä) becomes completely satisfied (suprasédati). Because of the impossibility of the mind being satisfied with the presence of material desires, it is evident that this bhakti being discussed is without any material desires.
|| 1.2.7 ||
väsudeve bhagavati bhakti-yogaù prayojitaù |
janayaty äçu vairägyaà jïänaà ca yad ahaitukam ||
TRANSLATION
Bhakti dedicated to Lord Kåñëa, endowed with special moods, quickly produces detachment from material goals and knowledge of the Lord devoid of the desire for liberation.
COMMENTARY
What form does that satisfaction of the mind take? This satisfaction of the mind is filled with knowledge and experience of the form, qualities and sweetness of the Lord, which cause complete disgust with all inferior objects. That is explained in this verse. This bhakti is endowed (yojitaù) in an excellent manner (pra for prakarñeëa), with däsya, sakhya and other loving emotions. Another meaning of bhakti-yogaù prayojitaù is “bhakti-yoga has been made the only goal (prayojana).” Separate endeavor for attaining knowledge and detachment are not necessary in the practice of bhakti, for bhakti itself produces them. Very quickly (äçu) at the time of performing bhakti, they are attained, for it is said:
bhaktiù pareçänubhavo viraktiranyatra caiña trika eka-kälaù|
prapadyamänasya yathäçnataù syus tuñöiù puñöiù kñud-apäyo’nu-ghäsam ||
Devotion, direct experience of the Supreme Lord, and detachment from other things—these three occur simultaneously for one who has taken shelter of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in the same way that pleasure, nourishment and relief from hunger come simultaneously and increasingly, with each bite, for a person engaged in eating. SB 11.2.42
There is an objection that if one possesses knowledge, one attains liberation. In answer to this, the verse says that this knowledge is ahaitukam, without motivation for liberation. Ahaitukam comes from hetu, meaning cause or purpose, just as one can say “He lives for eating.” This means “He lives with the goal of eating.” Thus in this verse jnänam ahaitukam means “knowledge without the goal of liberation.” Therefore by practicing bhakti in which knowledge also manifests without the goal of liberation, the liberation of merging does not take place. Knowledge in this case means knowledge and experience of the Lord’s form, qualities and sweetness.
Thus it is said in the Fourth Canto:
väsudeve bhagavati bhakti-yogaù samähitaù |
sadhrécénena vairägyaà jïänaà ca janayiñyati ||
The real interest of the living entity is to get out of the nescience that causes him to endure repeated birth and death. The only remedy is to surrender unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead through His representative. Unless one renders devotional service unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Väsudeva, one cannot possibly become completely detached from this material world, nor can he possibly manifest real knowledge. SB 4.29.37
One should practice bhakti with only that goal in mind (sadhrécénena), devoid of desire for liberation or other goals. The next verse shows that this type of bhakti is the cause of another type of bhakti.
so ’ciräd eva räjarñe syäd acyuta-kathäçrayaù |
çåëvataù çraddadhänasya nityadä syäd adhéyataù ||
O best of kings, one who is faithful, who is always hearing the glories of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is always engaged in the culture of Kåñëa consciousness and in hearing of the Lord’s activities, very soon becomes eligible to see the Supreme Personality of Godhead face to face. SB 4.29.38
Thus it is established in this verse that bhakti alone functions as both the cause and the goal (and not knowledge or detachment).