SB 2.10.6-10

 Text 6: The merging of the living entity, along with his conditional living tendency, with the mystic lying down of the Mahā-Viṣṇu is called the winding up of the cosmic manifestation. Liberation is the permanent situation of the form of the living entity after he gives up the changeable gross and subtle material bodies.

Text 7: The supreme one who is celebrated as the Supreme Being or the Supreme Soul is the supreme source of the cosmic manifestation as well as its reservoir and winding up. Thus He is the Supreme Fountainhead, the Absolute Truth.

Text 8: The individual person possessing different instruments of senses is called the adhyātmic person, and the individual controlling deity of the senses is called adhidaivic. The embodiment seen on the eyeballs is called the adhibhautic person.

Text 9: All three of the above-mentioned stages of different living entities are interdependent. In the absence of one, another is not understood. But the Supreme Being who sees every one of them as the shelter of the shelter is independent of all, and therefore He is the supreme shelter.

Text 10: After separating the different universes, the gigantic universal form of the Lord [Mahā-Viṣṇu], which came out of the Causal Ocean, the place of appearance for the first puruṣa-avatāra, entered into each of the separate universes, desiring to lie on the created transcendental water [Garbhodaka].

Śrīdhara Svāmi-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Vyākhyā

He speaks of nirodha (cessation). The cessation or dissolution of this ātman (self), the jīva (individual soul), is its resting with Hari in yoga-nidrā (yogic sleep) along with the śakti-s (powers) and upādhi-s (limiting adjuncts). Otherwise, abandoning the superimposed form of doership etc. imposed by avidyā (ignorance), abiding in one's true nature as Brahman is mukti (liberation). || 6 ||

That from which the creation of appearances, cessation, and dissolution occur, is known, and is manifested, is called the āśraya (substratum), well-known as the supreme Brahman or Paramātman. || 7 ||

To clearly show the nature of the substratum through direct experience, he speaks of the division into adhyātma (individual) etc. The puruṣa (person) who is the adhyātmika (individual), the seer who identifies with the sense organs like the eyes, the jīva, is the same as the adhidaivika (divine) presiding deity of the senses like the sun etc. The separation of these two forms in one is the adhibhautika (physical) visible body characterized by the eyeball etc., which is the upādhi of the puruṣa or jīva. As the śruti (scripture) says: "Verily, this puruṣa consists of the essence of food." || 8 ||

He shows the multiplicity of these mutually dependent entities. Thus, without the seen object, the inferred instrument of perception is not established, nor the seer. And without that, the presiding deity like the sun inferred from the functioning of the instrument is not established. And without that, the instrument does not function, nor is the seen object perceived. Thus when one is absent, we do not perceive the other. He who knows this triad through the cognitive awareness that perceives it, is the witness, the supreme Self, the substratum. To distinguish from their mutual dependence, the qualifying phrase is used - self-dependent and not dependent on others, and the substratum of others. As the Lord will say: "That which in this body establishes mutually and independently in space, the soul which is different from these, which is primary, self-luminous - that is the established truth of all established truths." This also indicates their illusory nature due to changeability. This also resolves the contradiction stated in: "The worlds with their rulers were previously created from the limbs of the Puruṣa. His limbs were created from the worlds with their rulers." || 9 ||

Elaborating on the division of adhyātma etc. mentioned before, he describes the method of creation as promised in: "What you have asked me about this [universe] from the cosmic Puruṣa, I shall now explain how it came to be." The Puruṣa, having split open the cosmic egg, emerged separately. Seeking an abode, he created the pure waters called garbhodaka. || 10 ||

Śrī Vaṃśīdhara-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Prakāśa Vyākhyā

Ābhāsa iti. From which sthiti, poṣaṇa, etc. and also mukti are ascertained, that āśraya is indeed Lord Nārāyaṇa alone. Since creation etc. are seen from Him alone, He is called by another name according to the distinction of His worshippers - Para iti. The explanation of this should be given later.

Thus, here the ten topics are explained in the order of the First Skandha. Although āśrayatva is generally indicated, its special characteristic is indeed in Śrī Kṛṣṇa alone. For this purpose alone is the entire Śrīmad Bhāgavata Prakāśa.

Here in the First Skandha, in the question-answer between Śrī Śaunaka and Sūta, it is established as focused on Him alone. The first and second chapters follow that. The third chapter is clearly about Him, and the fourth chapter again specially introduces Him. Here occurs the dialogue between Śrī Śuka and Parīkṣit who are devoted to Him alone.

Therefore in the Second Skandha also, while generally praising the tattva of Bhagavān, it conveys the purport there itself, where the purport of Brahmā's catuḥślokī and Śrī Bhagavān is shown there itself. The beginning of the Brahmā Kalpa story is for that purpose alone.

In the Third, the story of the Padma Kalpa, in describing the beginning and end of the previous parārdha, when the knowledge of the middle kalpas is also in accordance with that, there is complete understanding of that story which is to be presented in the Tenth and Eleventh Skandhas.

Similarly, having described the Svāyambhuva and Cākṣuṣa Manvantaras in the Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Skandhas, the Eighth describes the ancient mixed Vaivasvata. The Ninth is only about the Vaivasvata dynasty which is the abode of His manifestation. The Twelfth is indeed full of samādhi-mudrā. The other stories there are only to nourish that, especially the stories of His incarnations.

Therefore, among sarga etc., the āśraya which is described sometimes through one means, sometimes through many means, is described as Śrī Kṛṣṇa's form, elevated from all, through the various means that are primarily narrations about Īśa in the Tenth Skandha etc. This is established. (7)

The explanation of tatra is ekasmin. In the Taittirīya Śruti, the use of the word puruṣa is seen even for the body. Thus the śruti "sa vā" etc. has a clear meaning.

Here is the context: Now to praise that very supreme form which is the characteristic of Bhagavān Himself as the āśraya, and to show the āśraya's nature in sthiti through direct experience via the individual, he shows the glory of the puruṣa who is His part as such, stating the divisions of adhyātma etc.

Before the creation of the body, due to the inability of the sense organs without a substratum, and also of the ego as the agent illuminating the organs and its assistant, due to the non-arising of the distinction in their functions, there is no difference from mere jīva-ness. Then the twofold separation of both, in the form of the ego identifying with the organs and their substratum, is from which - thus everything else is like a master.

Cakravartī however has stated the introduction to this in a different way. Thus: Now, "Having pervaded this entire universe with one part, I remain," as stated, to clearly show that very āśraya form which is situated in every body as the Inner Controller, as divided into adhyātma etc., he states with two verses.

The separation of both, in the form of sense organs and in the form of sound, touch etc., from which - that puruṣa, the jīva, because of being the upādhi everywhere, the word puruṣa is used - this is the distinction. (8)

By this very verse, due to the mutual deviation of those adhyātma etc. Therefore, due to being māyāmaya alone, contradiction indeed occurs between real things like light and darkness, but not between unreal things like a barren woman's son and a hare's horn.

Here is the context: Here the āśraya is stated by accepting the non-difference of the part and whole of the pure jīva and Paramātmā. Hence "Even the supreme considers it meaningless."

"The states of waking, dream and deep sleep are functions of the intellect based on the guṇas. The jīva is distinct from them, determined as the witness."

"The pure sees the impure agent" etc. - the āśrayatva of the pure jīva called the witness as stated thus should not be doubted.

Or, is there not indeed the āśrayatva of something else for the ādhyātmika etc.? True, but due to mutual dependence, there is no independence of āśrayatā there. They are not primarily called by the word āśraya. Regarding that he says - eka iti.

Then let the witness alone have āśrayatva. Regarding that he says - tritayam iti. That ātman, the witness, the jīva, who is self-dependent, not dependent on another, is the Paramātmā, He alone is the āśraya of which, that is such - it will be said: "The puruṣa knows everything and those guṇas, but does not know the omniscient, infinite, praiseworthy one."

Therefore what is stated by ābhāsa etc. - Paramātmā alone is the āśraya. All this triad, the puruṣa, the jīva knows - that is the meaning there.

Thus the ādhyātma etc. which are mutually dependent have the jīva as āśraya, Paramātmā as āśraya, and Paramātmā has Paramātmā alone as āśraya. Thus Paramātmā alone has āśrayatva. Thus "Having pervaded this entire universe" etc. as stated.

In the explanation that he whose own āśraya is Kṛṣṇa alone is Paramātmā, Śrī Kṛṣṇa has the primary āśrayatva. Due to being His part, Paramātmā also, and due to being the nirviśeṣa nature, Brahman also - thus there is one āśraya tattva which appears threefold due to the distinction of the worshipper. (9)

This is the meaning. The separate existence itself is the meaning of the word 'emergence'. Here Viśvanātha says - Thus, having described the distinction between the jīva and Īśvara through ten characteristics of the mahāpurāṇas, and having expressed that liberation for the jīvas is only through devotion to Īśvara, he begins the story to explain the promised subject "As I have seen you from the cosmic Puruṣa, I will narrate how this was" - puruṣo'ṇḍam (the Puruṣa and the cosmic egg).

Indeed, how is the story of the cosmic Puruṣa's adhyātma etc. elaborated again and again? Are the stories of the Lord's extremely sweet līlā (divine play), avatāra (incarnation), form, qualities etc. seen as insignificant? Truly, to whom should those stories be taught as relishable? Those great souls who are perfected in devotion to Him or are eternally perfected, they naturally play incessantly in the ocean of nectar of His beauty. But those who sleep on the bed of sensual pleasures, and those who faint in the waves of suffering from the fruits of evil deeds, how can they be awakened to be taught the Lord's līlās, by which instruction they would become practicing devotees? Thus, this crest jewel of Purāṇas, being greatly compassionate, repeatedly tries in some way to awaken them directly.

Just as a body burnt by fire is soothed by fire itself, and just as one possessed by a spirit is awakened by a spirit-mantra, similarly the sleep of māyā (illusion) in the jīvas departs only through the story of māyā. As it is said: "One who describes māyā with the Lord's approval, and one who listens with faith regularly, his self is not deluded by māyā."

Moreover, although by the shower of nectar of the Lord's līlā obtained through the grace of the Bhāgavata, even one sleeping in the happiness of māyā or fainting in the suffering of karma awakens, breathes, lives, dances with joy and becomes intoxicated, still that great grace is obtained and fulfilled only by some, not by all. Therefore, for the sake of liberation even for the lowest jīvas who have gained the desire to cross over saṃsāra by repeatedly hearing the adhyātma story and who have developed effort by taking shelter of the guru's feet, the repetition of the adhyātma story is done. For devotees who have faith, the entire Śrīmad Bhāgavata is to be relished like nectar.

Furthermore, this scripture is engaged not only in regard to Bhagavān, but also Brahman and Paramātmā who are His formless nature and part. As it is said at the beginning of the scripture: "It is called Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān." For the worshippers of Brahman and Paramātmā, the practice of adhyātma stories etc. is indeed useful. Moreover, due to the greatness of this scripture, even for the worshippers of Brahman and Paramātmā, devotion is produced. Therefore, even in the stage of fruition, as per "Even self-satisfied sages" etc., devotion mostly prevails. Hence its means and fruit should not be looked down upon but approved even by pure devotees.

Therefore, just as Śrī Kṛṣṇa who is full of the nature of Brahman and Paramātmā, many incarnations like Matsya and Kūrma, dharma, knowledge, strength, opulence, form, qualities, līlā and sweetness, is served by all types of devotees, similarly this text which reveals all principles like the nature of Brahman and Paramātmā, Matsya, Kūrma and other incarnations, Śrī Kṛṣṇa who is the root of all those, His form, qualities, līlā, sweetness, opulence, devotion which is the means to attain Him, love, dharma, knowledge, yoga, detachment etc., is also of essential nature - thus everything is consistent.

Reference: Now he shows the glory of the Puruṣa who is a part of that, to establish it as the supreme form which is the characteristic of the Lord Himself, as its shelter. When he emerged, as per the statement "The first avatāra is the Puruṣa of the Supreme", manifested from Śrī Bhagavān, then he began to separate from himself the collection of elements dissolved in the egg - this is the meaning. Or, having broken through the egg which is his own place of manifestation, Śrī Bhagavān, having become separate from that, emerged. The elements up to earth are meant. The earth should also be known as included in that. (10)

Śrī Rādhā Ramaṇa dāsa Gosvāmi Viracitā Dīpanī Vyākhyā

The fifth case is used to indicate reason. (7)

Viccheda means separation or difference. (8)

This explains that since the three - ādhyātmika etc. - are mutually dependent, they cannot be the āśraya (support). The meaning is that it is inferred from perception of the visible. Without that means without the instrument. Without them means without the presiding deities like the sun. That triad means the triad of ādhyātmika etc. "dṛgurūpamārkam" is the 31st verse of the 22nd chapter of the 11th skandha. "puruṣāvayavair" is the 10th verse of this skandha's chapter. The contradiction stated by that is resolved. The contradiction is: Since the worlds with their guardians are made of the parts of the Puruṣa, and the parts of the Puruṣa are made of the worlds with their guardians, there is mutual dependence. And when one is accepted, the other becomes established. The resolution is that both are made of māyā - this is a brief explanation. (9)

"yadutāham" is the last verse of the previous chapter. (10)

Śrīmad Vīrarāghava Vyākhyā

He defines nirodha: Nirodha means the subtle state of prakṛti where this individual self along with its karmic powers remains in a dormant state. He defines mukti: Mukti means abandoning forms like that of a deva etc. and abiding in one's true nature characterized by the eight qualities like freedom from sin etc. (6)

He defines āśraya: Ābhāsa means manifesting all around - the manifestation and dissolution of the world. From which means that which is known through valid means of knowledge, as stated "It is known through the alternatives of manifestation, disappearance, birth and destruction." And that which is referred to by words like parabrahman etc. is the āśraya. (7)

To state the omniscience of the āśraya, the Supreme Self, which is required for it being the cause, he states that the knower, known and instruments of knowledge are of the nature of the Lord in "ya" etc. The puruṣa who exists as the controller in the individual self, the knower, is himself the adhidaivika existing in the devas like Āditya etc. who are the presiding deities of the sense organs like the eyes etc. which are the instruments of knowledge. He alone is the known, different from both the knower and instruments of knowledge, existing in the elements like space etc. as sound etc. He who exists as the inner self in sound etc. is remembered as the adhibhautika. The meaning is that the knower, instruments of knowledge, and the known like sound etc. are of the nature of the Lord. (8)

Having stated thus that the three are of the nature of the Lord, to state His omniscience, he states the non-omniscience of individual souls in "ekam" etc. Just as in the absence of one, in the absence of instruments like the eye etc., we do not perceive, do not directly experience, one object - in the absence of instruments like the eye etc. we do not see even an object that is present. Individual souls have knowledge dependent on instruments when objects with the threefold proximity are present, but do not have knowledge of subtle and remote things, and do not have knowledge independent of instruments - this is the meaning. But the Supreme Self directly perceives the three types, he states in "tritayam" etc. There, then, he who knows, directly perceives, the triad - the triad of knower, instrument and known - he is the Self, the support of supports, the support of ignorance, the support even of the individual self. As stated in the śruti: "Just as the felly of a chariot wheel is fixed on the spokes and the spokes are fixed on the hub, similarly these elements are fixed on the vital forces, the vital forces are fixed on the individual self." If the reading is "svāśrayāśraya", it means he is the support of himself and also the support of others. (9)

Having thus stated the meanings up to āśraya, to begin stating the method of creation by the four-faced Brahmā as promised in "yathāsīttadupākhyasya", he starts with "puruṣa" etc. That Supreme Self in the form of the four-faced one, searching for, investigating, a place for himself, from that, he being pure himself, created pure waters. (10)

Śrīmad Vijayadhvaja Tīrtha-kṛtā Pada Ratnāvalī Vyākhyā

How does he define nirodha? Nirodha is said to be the sleep of this ātman (self), which is the collective of individual souls, along with its unmanifested powers of will etc., after entering into Śrī Viṣṇu. The supreme sleep of the soul, together with its own powers of will etc. that are not manifested, after entering [into Viṣṇu], defines mukti (liberation). Mukti is said to be the special state of existing in one's essential nature consisting only of consciousness and bliss etc., after abandoning the other forms like the subtle and gross sense organs etc. that are natural and modified. (6)

He defines the substratum as ābhāsa (appearance). That which is known in the Vedas etc. as the basis for the appearance of the world, creation from sound, maintenance and dissolution - all three - is called the substratum. What is this that is to be known? To that he says: the supreme Brahman. To distinguish it from liberation, [he says] the supreme Self. The meaning is that it is characterized as that by whose power and wherein creation, maintenance, dissolution and appearance are established, as stated in verses like "By whose power and wherein are established creation, maintenance and dissolution..." (7)

Intending to define the substratum in another way, he states the dependence of souls on the Lord, preceded by declaring the identity of the Lord's forms as adhyātmika (individual) etc.: The person Viṣṇu who is established as the controller in the eyes etc. related to the body is called adhyātmika. That same one established in the deities like the sun etc. is adhidaivika (divine). The one who, established in objects like pots etc., is the complete determiner of the connection between those two - the individual eye and the divine illuminator - is known as the adhibhautika (physical) Viṣṇu. (8)

He reveals the reason indicated by the word "hi" (indeed) which expresses cause: When one of these three is absent - either the eye etc., or illumination, or the object like pot etc. - we do not obtain knowledge, the cognition of objects like pots etc. Therefore, due to the absence of independence in knowledge, we are all dependent. Now, who is independent in knowledge? To that he says: "The triad". Among those dependent souls, the one who knows the triad of adhyātma etc. is the Self, Viṣṇu, the substratum. Now, let there be some other such knowledge, but not in deep sleep etc. - this itself is the answer to that: Even in deep sleep etc., the one who knows everything about the souls through knowledge of their essential nature alone, without depending on the senses, illumination or objects - that is the Self, the substratum. Now, since knowledge is possible for prāṇa (life-force) also without dependence on this triad, as per the śruti "The prāṇas alone are awake in this city", and since Lakṣmī is eternally liberated, and the liberated are bodiless, how does this definition distinguish the object to be defined? To that he says: "The substratum of its own substrata". By this independence, the omniscience that is inferred distinguishes the object to be defined from Lakṣmī etc., being the substratum of its own substrata which are the substrata of the liberated, namely the chief prāṇa etc. headed by Ramā. The Lord's knowledge of everything even in sleep etc. is established by śruti like "Having embraced the body, the unsleeping one watches over the sleeping." (9)

Having thus stated the definition of Purāṇa, now intending to describe the origin of Virāj known as Viriñci, he first narrates the descent of Hari called Puruṣa who is the seer of that, and then states his creation: When that Puruṣa, having entered the egg along with the created principles, having broken it open, having divided it, emerged manifested with the name Puruṣa itself, then the ever-pure Lord, seeking a resting place up to Śeṣa in another form from himself, like one lamp from another lamp, created the pure waters which are fit to be the means of his own worship and are the resting place for himself. The meaning is: The Viṣṇu who entered the egg, he manifested after breaking the egg, etc. (10)

Śrīmaj Jīva Gosvāmi-kṛtā Krama Sandarbha Vyākhyā

nirodha iti. After the state of existence, the ātman (soul) along with its powers and its upādhis (limiting adjuncts), and this Hari's lying down, meaning lying down in accordance with Hari's sleep, is called nirodha. Here, Hari's sleep should be understood as closing the eyes towards the manifest world, and the sleep of the jīvas and others as their dissolution therein. In that very nirodha, otherwise - abandoning ignorance etc. superimposed by avidyā (ignorance), abiding in one's true nature is called direct realization of one's true nature, as that mere abiding exists even in the state of saṃsāra (worldly existence), and since the state of being otherwise is only due to ignorance of that, it culminates in knowledge of that. And the true nature here is primarily the characteristic of the supreme Self, just as the sun is for its rays, for that alone is the supreme Śiva form for the jīvas. As stated by Śrī Garbhodaśāyī to Śrī Brahmā: "When he sees the self devoid of the elements, senses and their qualities, united with me in its true nature, he attains sovereignty." Here "united" simply means "connected" - this is the clear meaning. "He indeed is rasa (essence). For having obtained rasa, one becomes blissful" - thus says the śruti. (6)

ābhāśaś ceti. ābhāsa means creation, nirodha means dissolution, from which it is ascertained, experienced, and manifests in the sense organs of the jīvas - that is called the āśraya (substratum), well-known as Brahman or the supreme Self. The word iti indicates a type (belonging to the āśraya). Therefore, this should be elaborated later as "Bhagavān". Thus, here ten topics are explained according to the sequence of the first skandha, as follows: Although the āśrayatva (being the substratum) is generally characterized, its speciality is only in Śrī Kṛṣṇa - for that purpose alone is the entire illumination of Śrī Bhāgavata. There, in the first skandha, in the question-answer between Śrī Śaunaka and Sūta, when that truth is established, the first and second chapters follow that alone. The third chapter is clearly again for introducing that specially. There is the dialogue between Śrī Śuka and Parīkṣit who are solely devoted to that. Therefore, the second skandha, while praising the general truth of Bhagavān, carries the purport there itself, where the purport of Brahmā, the speaker of the catuḥślokī, and Śrī Bhagavān is shown there itself. The beginning of the story of Brahmā's kalpa is for that purpose alone. In the third, the story of Padma kalpa, by describing the beginning and end of the past parārdha, when the knowledge of the middle kalpas is in accordance with that, there is proper understanding of that story to be presented in the tenth and eleventh. Similarly, having gone through the Svāyambhuva and Cākṣuṣa manvantaras, in the third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh. Having explained in the eighth the ancient mixed Vaivasvata. The ninth is only in the lineage of Vaivasvata which is the abode of His manifestation. The twelfth is indeed full of samādhi mudrā. There, the other stories are only supportive of that, especially the stories of those avatāras. Therefore, among creation etc., sometimes through one means, sometimes through many means, whatever āśraya is explained, that is explained as the form of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, surpassing all through the predominance of the stories of Īśa etc. in the tenth and other skandhas. This is established. (7)

Now, to praise that very āśraya which is the supreme form characterized as Bhagavān Himself, (and to clearly show the nature of the āśraya through direct experience even through the individual perspective), showing the glory of the puruṣa who is His part as being of that nature, he states the division of adhyātma etc. in two verses beginning with yo 'dhyātmiko 'yam. This puruṣa who is ādhyātmika, the seer who identifies with the sense organs like the eyes etc., the jīva - he alone is the ādhidaivika, the presiding deity of the sense organs like the sun etc. for the eyes. Before the creation of the body, due to the absence of a substratum for the sense organs, being incapable, both of them who have the ego of being the illuminator of the organs and its assistant, due to the non-arising of the difference in their functions, there is no distinction in their mere jīva nature. Therefore, the ādhbhautika is the visible body characterized by the eyeball etc., which is the upādhi (limiting adjunct) of the puruṣa, the jīva. "This puruṣa is made of the essence of food" - thus says the śruti. (8)

ekam ekatarābhāve - This shows their non-self nature due to their mutually dependent existence. Thus, without the visible, the organ inferred from its cognition is not established, nor the seer. Nor without that is the presiding deity like the sun inferred from the functioning of the organ established. Nor does the organ function without that. Nor is there the visible without that. In the absence of one, we do not perceive the other. There, then, that triad - he who knows through the perceptual cognition, who sees as the witness, he is the supreme Self, the āśraya. Since they also have mutual dependence, to exclude that, the qualification svāśraya (self-dependent) is given - having no other support and being the support of others. There, the āśraya is stated by accepting the non-difference of part and whole, the pure jīva and supreme Self. Hence, even the other considers it purposeless, as stated: "Waking, dream and deep sleep are the states of the intellect based on the guṇas. The jīva is distinct from these, intended as the witness." Thus, the āśrayatva of the pure jīva called the witness, as stated before in "the pure sees, the impure acts", should not be doubted. Or, indeed the ādhyātmika etc. also have āśrayatva. True. Yet, due to mutual dependence, there is no exclusivity of āśrayatā there. So they are not primarily called by the word āśraya. This is stated in ekam. Then let the witness alone have āśrayatva. To this he says tritayam. That ātman who is the witness and the jīva, who is svāśraya (self-dependent), having no other support, the supreme Self alone - he who has that as his āśraya is such. It will be said: "The puruṣa knows all and the qualities, but the all-knowing one does not know the infinite one I praise." Therefore, the supreme Self mentioned by ābhāśaś ca etc. alone is the āśraya. (9)

Now, to praise that very āśraya which is the supreme form characterized as Bhagavān Himself, he shows the glory of the puruṣa who is His part as being of that nature in puruṣa iti. When that first avatāra, the puruṣa, manifested from the supreme Lord as stated earlier in "The supreme puruṣa" etc., then he began to separate from himself the egg (cosmos) which was merged in him - this is the meaning. Or, when the egg, having split apart from its manifestation place, Śrī Bhagavān, emerged separately from there, then the elements up to water - this is the meaning. Earth should also be understood as included in that. (10)

Śrīmad Viśvanātha Cakravarti-kṛtā Sārārtha darśinī Vyākhyā

After the jīva's (ātmanaḥ jīvasya) yoganidrā of Hari, along with his own conditioning factors, sleep is restraint. Thus after existence, during the great dissolution, the absorption of jīvas into the Supreme Lord is stated. Otherwise, abandoning the two illusory gross and subtle forms, existence as one's pure essential nature or as an associate of the Lord for some is liberation. Thus the nine topics beginning with creation relating to the jīva have been stated. (6)

Having characterized all jīvas as the subjects of the nine topics beginning with creation through their definitions, he characterizes the Supreme Lord through the definition of the single shelter. The shelter from which emanation, creation, and through the word "ca" maintenance, nourishment, etc., dissolution, and through the word "ca" liberation are ascertained, is Lord Nārāyaṇa alone, as creation etc. are seen to come from Him alone. He states another name for Him based on different types of worshippers as "Supreme". (7)

Now, as it is said "Having pervaded this entire universe with one portion, I remain", to clearly show that very shelter form as divided into adhyātma etc. which is situated as the inner controller in every body, he speaks with two verses. The word "ādhyātmika" has the affix ṭhak in the sense of "one's own" due to the rule "vinayādi". "Ādhyātmika puruṣa" means the sense organs like the eyes which are adhyātma. He himself is the adhidaivika, the presiding deities of the senses like the sun. Both the senses and their presiding deities are of one form as portions of the sun, etc. Among those principles, that in which there is division of both the adhyātma and adhidaiva forms is the adhibhūta, the visible body characterized by the eyeball etc. Or, that which has division of both the eyeball form and the form of sound, touch etc. The word "puruṣa" is used everywhere because it is the limiting adjunct of the jīva. As the śruti states "This puruṣa is made of the essence of food". (8)

"One does not exist without the other" - thus he shows their non-Self nature as they are mutually dependent for their establishment. For the instrument of perception is not established without something to be perceived, by which it is inferred. Nor is there a perceiver. And without that, the presiding deity like the sun which is inferred from the functioning of the instrument is not established. And without that, the instrument does not function. And without that, there is nothing to be perceived. Thus when we do not perceive one when another is absent, he who knows that triad is the Self, the jīva, which is established independently of them. As it is said:

"The body, life airs, senses, mind, elements -
The Self and another know these as supreme.
Man knows all these and their qualities,
But I praise the all-knowing, infinite one unknown."

The meaning there is that the puruṣa, the jīva, knows all this triad. Similarly:

"Waking, dream and deep sleep are states of the intellect.
The jīva is determined to be distinct from them, as their witness."

What is he like? He whose shelter is himself alone. He whose shelter is the Supreme Self alone. The meaning is: The jīva is the shelter of the mutually dependent adhyātma etc. The Supreme Self is the shelter of the jīva. The Supreme Self alone is the shelter of the Supreme Self. Thus the Supreme Self alone is the principle of shelter. As it is said "Having pervaded this entire universe with one portion, I remain", in the explanation that "He whose shelter is Kṛṣṇa himself alone is the Supreme Self", Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the principal shelter, and because the Supreme Self is without attributes and Brahman also, the one principle of shelter appears in three ways due to differences in worshippers. (9)

Thus having determined the division of jīva and Īśvara through the ten characteristics of the mahāpurāṇas, and having revealed that devotion to Īśvara alone is the deliverance of jīvas, in order to state the meaning promised as "I will explain how this arose from the cosmic Puruṣa as you have asked", he begins the story with "puruṣo'ṇḍam". Now why is the story of the cosmic form's adhyātma etc. elaborated again and again? Have the stories of the Lord's extremely sweet līlā incarnations, forms, qualities etc. been seen as insignificant? True. To whom indeed should those stories be taught as something to be relished? Those great souls who are perfected in devotion to Him or eternally perfected naturally play without cessation in the ocean of nectar of His beauty and pastimes. But those who sleep on the bed of sensual pleasures, and those who faint in the waves of suffering resulting from evil deeds, are impossible to awaken from that. How can the Lord's pastimes be taught to them? This crest jewel of Purāṇas, being greatly compassionate, strives again and again in various ways to awaken them from that, so that from the very teaching they may become practicing devotees. Just as a limb burned by fire is soothed by fire itself, and one possessed by a spirit is awakened by spirit mantras, so too the sleep of māyā in jīvas departs through the story of māyā itself. As it is said:

"One who regularly hears with faith
The description of māyā of this Lord,
With His sanction, is not deluded
By māyā in his Self."

Moreover, although one sleeping in māyā's pleasure or unconscious from karma's pain awakens, becomes still, lives, dances and becomes intoxicated with bliss only by the rain of nectar of the Lord's pastimes obtained by the grace of devotees, that grace of great souls is obtained and fulfilled only by some, not by all. Therefore, so that even inferior jīvas who have gained the desire to cross over saṁsāra by repeatedly hearing the adhyātma story and have made effort to take shelter of the guru's feet may be delivered, the adhyātma story is repeated. For devotees of the Lord who have faith, the entire Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is to be relished like nectar. Furthermore, this scripture is engaged not only with respect to the Lord, but also Brahman and Paramātmā who are His attributeless form and portion. As it is said at the beginning of the scripture: "It is designated as Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān." Thus the practice of the adhyātma story is useful even for worshippers of Brahman and Paramātmā. Moreover, due to the greatness of this scripture, even for worshippers of Brahman and Paramātmā, devotion is produced. Even in the state of their result, as in "Even self-satisfied sages", devotion mostly prevails. Therefore its practice and result should not be looked at askance even by pure devotees, but rather approved. Therefore, just as Śrī Kṛṣṇa who is complete in Brahman-ness, Paramātmā-ness, many incarnations like Matsya and Kūrma, dharma, knowledge, detachment, strength, opulence, form, qualities, and the sweetness of pastimes is served by all types of devotees, so too this text which reveals all principles like Brahman, Paramātmā, incarnations like Matsya and Kūrma, the forms, qualities, pastimes, sweetness and opulence of Śrī Kṛṣṇa who is the root of all those, and the means to attain Him - devotion, love, dharma, knowledge, yoga, detachment etc. - is also His essential form. Thus all is consistent.

When the Puruṣa, the creator who glances at prakṛti, having created the egg, broke through it and emerged outside separate from the Self which is His essential form, then seeking a resting place for Himself in that very egg, He created the pure waters called garbhoda. Being pure Himself, the waters were pure, not like the salty ocean etc. (10)

Śrīmac Chukadeva-kṛta Siddhānta Pradīpaḥ

The third power of this embodied ātman (self) or jīva (individual soul) is called avidyā-karma (ignorance-action), as stated in the sentence. Resting together with these powers called karma is dissolution or cessation. Otherwise, the form taken as the self - the form of the body etc. connected to prakṛti (primordial nature) in the form of effect and cause - is abandoned, and abiding in one's true nature that has attained the state of the Lord is liberation. (6)

Ābhāsa (manifestation) means appearing or manifesting all around, arising. Nirodha (cessation) means dissolution. The "and" implies inclusion of existence etc. That which is ascertained, known through scripture, is the āśraya (support). If asked what is the proof for that support, he says "param" (supreme). It is expressed by the eternal word (Veda) as Brahman due to being supreme, as Paramātmā (Supreme Self) due to being the support of great qualities etc., and as the Self of all. (7)

Showing the "otherwise form" by explaining the true nature of the self as distinct from the body etc., he shows abiding in the support in one's true nature in two verses starting with "yaḥ" (which). That which is well-known as the collection of sense organs like the eyes etc. in the body is ādhyātmika (relating to the self). That which is the group of presiding deities like the sun etc. for the eyes etc. is ādhidaivika (relating to the divine). That which is different from both, the body, is remembered as the ādhibhautika (relating to the elements) puruṣa (person). (8)

Without the ādhibhautika, the ādhyātmika collection of sense organs like the eyes etc. cannot be inferred and established. Nor can their presiding deities be inferred without it. Nor can the group of sense organs function without it. Nor can forms etc. be perceived without the group of sense organs. Thus, when we perceive one in the absence of another but do not directly experience it, the knower of that triad is the jīva (individual soul), the seer of the self, body, senses etc. To negate its independence and show its dependence on the Lord, it is said "svāśrayāśraya" - one whose support (āśraya) is the Lord (svāśraya). (9)

Having thus explained the purposes of creation etc., the distinction of the jīva from the body etc., the Lord as the support of the support, and the dependence of the jīva on the Lord, he now explains the manner of creation as stated earlier in "I will now explain how this came about from the cosmic Puruṣa as you have asked." That Puruṣa, having split open the egg (brahmāṇḍa), emerged separately. Seeking a place (ayana) for himself, he created the pure primordial waters called garbhodaka. (10)

Śrīmad Vallabhācārya Viracitā Subodhinī Vyākhyā

He defines nirodha (cessation) as: This is the Lord's resting afterwards, having made the powers rest for His enjoyment. "This" refers to what was mentioned earlier, appearing as the self and pointed to. Of the self means of the body. "Together" applies to both. The powers of the body are the 72 types of channels. His own are the 12 like Śrī etc. Resting is of three types - waking, dream and deep sleep. Thus there are 87 types.

He defines liberation as: Abandoning the "otherwise form" and abiding in one's true nature. The "otherwise form" is the form of the principles, abandoning that is one form. The state is twofold - general and specific. The definition combines both. Even there, first is abandoning the principles, which are 28. Thus there are 31 types. (6)

He defines āśraya (support) as: Manifestation etc. The support is twofold - approached through scripture by surrender or union, or by creation, sustenance and dissolution. Approaching through action is fivefold. Approaching through knowledge is eightfold. Due to the dual nature of the mind, it is connected to both. Among the inner organs, ego is not a cause of support. Thus it is thirteenfold. Even so, it consists of two groups based on action and knowledge. First he explains support through action: "Manifestation etc." Manifestation means creation. "And" implies darkness too. The word manifestation indicates that creation etc. are actually only of the illusory, not of the self, showing support through being the object. Cessation is of those two only. This support is through being the agent. Only then is there support through action. Manifestation and cessation are creation and dissolution. Other modifications are included in these. Abandoning the prior form is the beginning of the second. Both are declared unified in the world by growth etc. "Is ascertained" means not only do these modifications arise from the Lord, but they are also illuminated by the Lord alone. "And" implies their nature is also accomplished. Thus existence, manifestation and being dear are the three actions of the Lord, so He is the support as their cause. This itself is His being the substratum. So he says "He is the support." He is the support because He has the nature of existence, consciousness and bliss, from which the aforementioned qualities arise. This very Lord is referred to by other names in other scriptures, so to reconcile all he gives other names. "Supreme Brahman" in the Veda. "Paramātmā" in the smṛti. Only the word differs, the meaning is one. "Supreme" is to negate the four-faced Brahmā of the Veda. The second is to negate the individual soul. (7)

Thus, having described the locus of action, he now describes the locus of knowledge with two verses. In order to describe knowledge later, the object of knowledge is described here. The object of knowledge is of three types, based on the distinction of adhyātmika (relating to the self) and others. The self is adhyātma (relating to the self). The senses, internal organs, and prāṇas (vital breaths) that reside in the body presided over by the self are adhyātmas. The embodied self that presides over them is ādhyātmika. This same person is referred to as the hearer and speaker. The inner controller of this is ādhidaivika (relating to the deities). The one who resides presiding over the deities that control the senses as their regulator is ādhidaivika. This is also the same one. The one who presides over both the senses and the deities controlling the senses is referred to by two terms. Therefore, the inner controller's ability to preside over the deities is described as an object of worship. The ādhibhautika (relating to the elements) is the cause for the usage of two terms, being the distinguisher of both types for the same one. The forms etc. that reside presiding over the elements are adhibhūtas, and their aggregate body is the ādhibhautika body. The sense of being the controller of the senses and their activator exists in the body itself. Otherwise there would be only one self. The remembrance of the great ones is proof of its being the distinguisher of both. He states this - "It is remembered" (8).

Having thus described the object of knowledge, he now describes its locus as the basis of knowledge about it - "One, due to the absence of the other" etc. The one who knows the triad there is the locus. But the individual self also knows the triad. So does the inner controller. Thus thinking the definition of locus is too broad, he says: We do not perceive one of the three as absent, but only as present. Even one is perceived along with the existence of the other two, not with their absence. Then, "that which is dependent is ineffective", so neither of them is capable of knowing the triad. Even the inner controller, engaged in his own activity and entered into the triad, does not know the triad. Just as ignorance of the duality of body and soul is universal, so should be understood for the inner controller too. Thus, the one who knows the triad is the locus. He also states another name for this - ātmā (self). Ātmā is that which pervades. Hence, due to its being play, ātmā is counted as a manifestation. "I am the Self, O Gudakesha" - this is one form of the Lord. Or the Lord himself is described as the Self in being the locus of knowledge. But due to the absence of self-knowledge and knowledge of its own controller, wouldn't that also need another locus? To this he says - "self-dependent". But he abides depending only on himself, not requiring another locus. By this it is stated that he is self-luminous (9).

Having thus described the ten characteristics, he now describes the previously mentioned Virāj along with reasoning to explain the triad - "The Person, the egg" etc. In "As large as this Person", name and form are implied for him like the individual soul. To describe the difference from the individual soul, he refutes the similarity to the individual soul by stating that his name and senses are by his own will. First he gives the etymology of the name - "The Person, the egg" in two verses. Puruṣa is Virāj. When he emerged breaking open the cosmic egg, separating from the shell like a coconut, he became capable in all his activities. Or he emerged breaking open the egg itself. Then there was no arrangement of water etc. coverings in the egg. Following other Purāṇas, it is explained as situated in the supreme egg. But in reality he emerged breaking open the shell itself. Hence the need for another shelter for the self. Previously the egg itself was the shelter. When that broke, seeking another shelter, he created the waters. Being pure and full of knowledge himself, the incarnation of the Lord created a pure shelter. As everything is purified by water, he created water. The purity of water is in being free from foam, waves etc. (10).

Śrīmad Gosvāmi Śrī Puruṣottama Caraṇa Viracitaḥ Śrī Subodhinī Prakāśaḥ

Regarding "nirodha", they explain the meaning of "asya" in the original text as referring to the self, saying "of the self, of the body", meaning the body non-different from that which manifests as the self. Regarding "both", they state the indicator for the simultaneous presence of both types of powers in sleep: "In the body" etc. The 72 types are well-known in the Praśna Upaniṣad as "72,000 branches of nāḍīs". Thus, by taking the main ones, that is meant. By that, the simultaneous presence of both types of powers is also indicated by the chapter enumeration. By the distinction of general and specific means: The general state is divine opulence, the specific states are the maryādā and puṣṭi forms. The characteristics coincide in both means the characteristics of liberation are the same in both states. But in the specific state, the presence of ego etc. is seen, so how is there agreement of characteristics? To this they say: "Even there" etc. "Even there" means in the puṣṭi state. This is explained by the teachers in the verse "As this is so, mine is supreme". That should be understood from my commentary on it. As the chapter enumeration is not suitable for the 25 tattvas view, they state another enumeration: "The tattvas" etc. (6)

If it is ābhāsa (appearance), then regarding this. Now, if one asks how the support has two characteristics, they say "The support..." etc. In the scripture, there are two paths that lead to God - the path of devotion and the path of knowledge. The word "support" here is derived from the action, indicating the substratum as established by śruti statements like "As all waters have the ocean as their destination" etc. The meaning is that there are two characteristics due to the two types - in the path of devotion, the support is through surrender, while in the path of knowledge, it is through union. If so, the third path followers and the inert would not have support. Disliking this, they state an alternative view starting with "Origin..." etc. Thus, it is supported through surrender or union via knowledge, and through origin etc. via the action of self-creation. Hence there are two characteristics. They state the chapter division starting with "Action..." etc. Now since the mind is also an organ of action, how can it be five? To this they say "Of the mind..." etc. The connection is as the facilitator. Thus, since it is primary in that action, it is five. Even so, since the inner organ is fourfold, it should be stated as ninefold with knowledge. To this they say "Inner..." etc. Since the word "dissolution" is well-known for dissolution, why is the word ābhāsa (appearance) used along with it to indicate origin, instead of just saying "origin"? To this query they say "By the word ābhāsa..." etc. The support-ness of objectness means being the substratum of two objectnesses. "Of those two" means of the two objectnesses of the forms of the world and darkness. It is supported as the substratum of self-creating actions through origin etc., not as self-support. They clarify this meaning saying "This..." etc. Support-ness means being the basis for attaining one's own nature. The meaning is that origin etc. depend on that which is the agent of the world's birth, sustenance and dissolution for attaining their own nature, and that is the support. They state the meaning of "and" in "and dissolution" as "Appearance and dissolution..." etc. By growth etc. means by growth, transformation and decay. Then what is the distinction from the four-faced one? To this they say "It is ascertained..." etc. "Therefore" means because of manifestation and accomplishing its own nature. "Three" means the triad pertaining to objectness. "This very" means accomplishing the nature of existence, consciousness and bliss. Thus, in the original by "whence", indicating the cause that generates origin etc. and manifests, support-ness is stated for that qualified by objectness-coloring existence. The meaning is that by entering the objectness that is the form of the world produced by prakṛti and puruṣa, which is the accumulator of objectness, and accomplishing its nature as existence etc. in the form of those aspects, that itself is being entered and being the substratum. They clarify that this is agreed upon in other scriptures too, saying "This..." etc. "For coherence of all" means for the sake of all proofs having one meaning. Thus, by this verse, the fact of such a one being worthy of surrender as support is mostly conveyed. "In smṛti" means in the Gītā. "For excluding jīvas" means for excluding liberated souls. (7)

Regarding "which is adhyātmika (pertaining to the self)". Now, even if there is no contradiction with the śruti "Having entered that, it became the real and the unreal" in stating the inner controller nature of the one soul that has entered, the śruti "Two birds..." contradicts. To this they say "For this very reason..." etc. "Of the inner controller" is in the fifth case. Since even in the view of both entering, in another śruti "Drinking the truth...", the individual soul is stated to be ineffective due to being shadow-like. For this very reason, this one's capacity of being the substratum of deities is from the inner controller alone. Thus he is described as worshipable for this one too in another śruti. Thus since the statement is for conveying that relationship of subject and predicate, there is no contradiction with that. In the original, in "separation of both", to indicate that "separation of both from which" is a bahuvrīhi compound with different loci, they say "Agent of separation of both". (8)

Now since the inner controller is of the nature of light, it will have knowledge of the triad apart from itself - to this doubt, they state the purport indicated by the subject-predicate relationship, saying "The inner controller..." etc. "Triad" means the triad apart from itself. "To be known" means to be inferred due to having entered the triad. "Self" - to indicate that this is its etymological name, they say "It goes..." etc. "For this very reason" means because of pervading the triad. "This" is characterized by the second characteristic of support. Based on the word "support of one's own support" later, they state an alternative view - "Or the Lord himself". The compound "support of one's own support" can also be stated as a ṣaṣṭhī-tatpuruṣa avoiding the letter "a". Thus, when the support is for play, this characteristic of the imperishable is for indicating the non-separation of both in the Supreme Person, as stated in the original characteristic. They state the purpose of the word "support of one's own support" in the first view, saying "Now..." etc. Thus it should be known that by these two verses, the support-ness of this one through union is elaborated. That being so, in the path of devotion, the Lord who is the efficient and material cause of the world is to be resorted to through surrender. In the path of knowledge, the self-luminous one who is of the nature of glory, or himself, is to be resorted to through union as per qualification. To convey this, two characteristics are stated here. (9)

Regarding "puruṣa (person)". "Ten characteristics" means the ten characteristics of the Purāṇa. "Separating" means separating its own form, since it is seen thus in "Breaking through the throat, they came out" etc. Now in the fifth chapter, the special point is that after stating the creation of the egg by "From the transforming primordial waters, the one with smell arose" etc., by "That very person, breaking out of the egg, came forth", the person stated there is deliberated on here. So for its own existence, the creation of water should be stated for that very one. When its emergence in the form of being capable of its effects like a coconut is accepted, then due to the existence of the egg-shaped abode, the statement "Desiring an abode for the self" becomes contradictory. Disliking this, they state an alternative view saying "Or..." etc. They state a flaw in this view too, saying "Then..." etc. In the view of breaking the egg, by the cessation of the egg, there is no arrangement of the coverings of water etc. there. Thus, by not accepting that, there is an equal contradiction with statements like "This external egg shell extends fifty crores, where he entered like an atom with ten more" etc. Even though the flaws are equal, they state the basis for the first explanation that was given: "But..." etc. They say that the second view itself is intended here in reality: "In reality..." etc. Thus, the statements supporting that view refer to other kalpas. (10)

Śrī Giridhara-kṛtā Bāla Prabodhinī

The nirodha (restraint) of this ātman (soul), the individual soul, is its dissolution in the Lord along with its powers such as the senses and internal organs, and its total dedication to Him with forgetfulness of worldly existence, as is evident in the tenth skandha which describes restraint. Otherwise, liberation is the establishment in one's true nature as existence-consciousness-bliss by abandoning the ego-sense of identifying with bodies of gods, humans, etc., which is a form of ignorance. [6]

Ābhāsa (manifestation) is the complete illumination, the appearance of the world and its dissolution. That in which this is ascertained by valid means of knowledge is the substratum. When asked what that is, it is said - In the Veda it is called the supreme Brahman, and in the Smṛti (smrti; traditional texts) it is called the supreme Self. [7]

To clearly show the nature of the substratum through direct experience, he explains the division of adhyātma (adhyatma; relating to the self) etc. - This puruṣa (purusa; person) who is the adhyātmika (adhyatmika; individual), the seer identifying with the senses like the eye, is the same as the adhidaivika (adhidaivika; divine), the presiding deity of the senses like the sun. The visible body characterized by the eyeball etc., which is the twofold division of the individual and divine in one entity, is known by the knowers of truth as the adhibhautika (adhibhautika; material) puruṣa (purusa). Its being called puruṣa (purusa) should be understood as due to it being the limiting adjunct of the jīva (jiva; individual soul), as per the śruti (sruti; revealed text) "This puruṣa (purusa) is made of the essence of food" etc. [8]

By stating "one in the absence of the other", he indicates that these are non-self due to their mutually dependent existence. Thus - Without the visible, the instrument inferred by its cognition is not established, nor the seer, nor without that the presiding deity like the sun inferred by the functioning of the instrument, nor does the instrument function without that, nor is there the visible without that - thus when in the absence of one, we do not perceive even one, then he who knows that triad of individual etc. through the cognition of perception, as a witness, is indeed the supreme Self, the substratum of substrata - this is the connection. To exclude their mutual dependence, the qualification "self-dependent" is used, meaning He depends on no other and is the substratum for others. The Lord will say the same in the eleventh skandha - "He who in space establishes mutually the eye as the seer, the sun as the visible, and the pupil as the aperture, He who is different from them, who is the original, who is self-luminous - He is the established of all establishments." [9]

Thus elaborating on the division of adhyātma (adhyatma) etc. that was stated, he explains the mode of creation that was promised in "I shall now describe how this [universe] originated from the cosmic Puruṣa (Purusa) as you have asked." That Puruṣa (Purusa), having broken out of the egg and emerged separately at the beginning before creation, seeking a resting place for himself, since he was pure, created the pure waters called garbhodaka, free from foam and waves. [10]

Hindī Anuvāda

When the Lord accepts yoganidrā (divine sleep) and lies down, the dissolution of this individual soul along with its conditioning factors into Him is called 'nirodha' (dissolution). Abandoning the non-self notions of doership, enjoyership, etc. imagined due to ignorance and becoming established in one's true nature as the Supreme Self is 'mukti' (liberation). || 6 ||

O Parīkṣit! The Supreme Brahman alone is the 'āśraya' (substratum) from which the creation and dissolution of this animate and inanimate world are illuminated. In the scriptures, that alone is called the Supreme Self. || 7 ||

The individual soul, which is the conscious observer identified with the eyes and other senses, is also present in the form of the presiding deities of the senses like the sun, etc. And the visible body equipped with eyeballs, etc. is what separates these two. || 8 ||

If even one of these three were to be absent, the other two could not be perceived. Therefore, the Supreme Self, who knows these three, is alone the substratum, the 'āśraya' (foundation) of everything. It is its own support, there is no other. || 9 ||

When the aforementioned Cosmic Person emerged by breaking open the cosmic egg, He began to search for a place to reside. And desiring a location, that pure-willed Person created extremely pure water. || 10 ||