Text 1: Thereafter, all of them [the descendants of Vṛṣṇi and Bhoja], being permitted by the brāhmaṇas, partook of the remnants of prasāda and also drank liquor made of rice. By drinking they all became delirious, and, bereft of knowledge, they touched the cores of each other’s hearts with harsh words.
Text 2: As by the friction of bamboos destruction takes place, so also, at sunset, by the interaction of the faults of intoxication, all their minds became unbalanced, and destruction took place.
Text 3: The Personality of Godhead, Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, after foreseeing the end [of His family] by His internal potency, went to the bank of the river Sarasvatī, sipped water, and sat down underneath a tree.
Text 4: The Lord is the vanquisher of the distresses of one who is surrendered unto Him. Thus He who desired to destroy His family told me previously to go to Badarikāśrama.
Śrīdhara Svāmi-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Vyākhyā
In the fourth canto, hearing of the death of relatives, for attaining self-knowledge, by Uddhava's instruction, Vidura approached Maitreya. 1.
Permitted by those brahmins, (they drank) vāruṇī (liquor made from fermented rice) and paiṣṭī madirā (liquor made from flour). 1. Maireya is the same as vāruṇī. Due to its fault, when the sun was setting, there was crushing (conflict). 2. After sipping water in the Sarasvatī. 3. And I was previously told this in Dvārakā. 4.
Śrī Vaṃśīdhara-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Prakāśa Vyākhyā
Permitted by that Krishna to go to heaven, that is the truth. Their knowledge was deranged by vāruṇī, which is used here as a synecdoche, by the Lord himself. They (drank) paiṣṭī, made from barley and other grains. With harsh words to each other, is the remainder of the sentence. The meaning is they spoke painful, hurtful words to each other. 1. Of those Yadus. 2. Of his own māyā. The mausala-līlā was shown by the Lord like a magic trick. Through that, the eternal associates of his pastimes like Pradyumna and other Yadavas remained in Dvārakā itself. The gods who had entered their bodies were separated and brought to Prabhāsa in those forms and withdrawn. Because Rāma, Pradyumna and Aniruddha are expansions of the Lord. As stated in the Padma Purāṇa: "O beautiful one, all these Yadavas are indeed my associates. O goddess, they are always dear to me and possess qualities equal to mine. Just as Lakṣmaṇa and Bharata, just as Saṅkarṣaṇa and others, they are never born from their own abode by chance." And as Akrūra says in the Harivaṃśa: "For the benefit of the gods, we have attained human form." Because the Yadavas are eternal associates of the pastimes, and because the gods like the planets who had entered some of them like Sāmba are not fit to be destroyed in the middle of their term of office, this mausala-līlā, though illusory, even though illusory, in the absence of all illusory creation, being included within Śrī Kṛṣṇa's pastimes, approved by the inconceivable yogamāyā, should be known as eternal. 3. * By him who wished to withdraw, removing the distress of me who had taken shelter. 4.
Śrī Rādhā Ramaṇa dāsa Gosvāmi Viracitā Dīpanī Vyākhyā
Those whose knowledge was deranged by that vāruṇī, which is used here merely as a synecdoche, by the Lord himself. 1. 2. Of his own māyā. The mausala-līlā, like a magic trick, by his inconceivable will-power, the course, the occurrence characterized by disappearance from the manifest world. 3. * The word "ca" (and) here combines with another pastime characterized by teaching knowledge through himself. The purpose of the instruction to go to Badarī should be understood as "withdrawn from this world" etc. 4.
Śrīmad Vīrarāghava Vyākhyā
Then after bathing, giving charity etc., those Yadavas, permitted by the brahmins, having eaten and drunk vāruṇī and paiṣṭī liquor, with their knowledge deranged by that vāruṇī, having lost discrimination of self and others, touched vital spots with harsh words. 1. Then, due to the fault of maireya liquor, with their minds disturbed and deranged by intoxication, when the sun was setting, there was crushing of those Yadus, mutual conflict like the crushing of reeds. 2. The Lord, seeing the course of his own māyā, the result of his previous resolve, that destruction of his own clan, after sipping water in the Sarasvatī river, sat down at the foot of a tree, the foot of an aśvattha tree. 3. * "I" means I was told by the Lord, who removes the distress of those who have taken shelter, wishing to withdraw his own clan, "You go to Badarikāśrama." 4.
Śrīmad Vijayadhvaja Tīrtha-kṛtā Pada Ratnāvalī Vyākhyā
Then permitted by them, permitted by the brahmins for eating, those whose knowledge of self and others was deranged by that vāruṇī, described thus, touched, struck. The root spṛś means to afflict. 1. Due to the fault of maireya, due to the fault of drinking the liquor called maireya, when the sun was setting, there was crushing, conflict characterized by destruction, characterized by mutual clashing. 2. Then what did the Lord do? To answer that, it says "The Lord". Seeing the course of his own māyā, his own power, having known previously, it is implied, that which manifests in various things according to their fitness, Janārdana, a few years previously, through a series of instructions, sent Uddhava to Badarī. 3. He explains in brief "And I". By him wishing to withdraw, desiring to withdraw. By this, having elaborated that knowledge there, he again went to Dvārakā, by this statement it is clear that even before the ascent to heaven, by the Lord's order, there was going to Badarī. 4.
Śrīmaj Jīva Gosvāmi-kṛtā Krama Sandarbha Vyākhyā
By that, which is used as a synecdoche, their knowledge was deranged by the Lord himself. 1. 2. Of his own māyā means the mausala-līlā was indicated just like a magic trick. 3. "You go to Badarī". Here he will say "withdrawn from this world" etc. 4.
Śrīmad Viśvanātha Cakravarti-kṛtā Sārārtha darśinī Vyākhyā
Hearing of Hari's disappearance and his own clan's from Uddhava, in the fourth canto, for the sake of his instruction, Vidura followed Maitreya. 1.
Permitted by those brahmins or by that Krishna. "To each other" is the remainder of the sentence. 1. Maireya is the same as vāruṇī. Due to its fault, when the sun was setting, there was destruction. 2. Now, how could the Lord, an ocean of affection, who extremely protected his sons, grandsons etc., directly see the killing of Pradyumna etc.? To answer this, it says "The Lord". The course, the activity of māyā, that Pradyumna and other Yadavas immediately met destruction by killing each other, in the form of convincing all people. "His own" means that māyā which belongs to him would not delude even him. This is the meaning. Because māyā has the nature of not deluding its own shelter. And thus it was seen by the Lord: The eternal associates of his pastimes like Pradyumna and other Yadavas remained in Dvārakā itself. The gods who had entered their bodies were separated and brought to Prabhāsa in those forms. Having eaten and drunk, with permission obtained, they happily went to heaven. Therefore in the previous verse it says "permitted by him" meaning the truth is just "to go to heaven". Here, because Rāma, Pradyumna and Aniruddha are expansions of the Lord, as stated in the Padma Purāṇa: "O beautiful one, all these Yadavas are indeed my associates. O goddess, they are always dear to me and possess qualities equal to mine. Just as Lakṣmaṇa and Bharata, just as Saṅkarṣaṇa and others, they are never born from their own abode by chance." And as Akrūra says in the Harivaṃśa: "For the benefit of the gods, we have attained human form." Because the Yadavas are eternal associates of the pastimes, and because the gods like the planets who had entered some of them like Sāmba are not fit to be destroyed in the middle of their term of office, this mausala-līlā, though illusory, even though illusory, in the absence of all illusory creation, being included within Śrī Kṛṣṇa's pastimes, approved by the inconceivable yogamāyā, should be known as eternal. 3. * "And I was told previously in Dvārakā". "And I" means I was protected by a different manifestation of his own association. "And this was told" means Uddhava was engaged. The reason there: In the first case, "of me who had taken shelter" means by him who removes the distress, the pain of separation from him. In the second case, by the logic that will be stated "withdrawn from this world", of those who have taken shelter, the residents of Badarikāśrama, his partial expansions Nara-Nārāyaṇa etc., he removes the distress in the form of eagerness to hear about his activities, devotion, knowledge, detachment etc. 4.
Śrīmac Chukadeva-kṛta Siddhānta Pradīpaḥ
Permitted, approved by the brahmins. 1. Due to the fault of maireya, due to the delusion of vāruṇī. 2. The Lord, seeing the course of his own māyā's resolve, the result previously resolved, the destruction of the Yadu clan, after touching the Sarasvatī, sipping water in it. 3. "You go to Badarī" - I was told this in Dvārakā. 4. 5.
Śrīmad Vallabhācārya Viracitā Subodhinī Vyākhyā
In the fourth canto, for the sake of qualification, the intellect of the Lord is spoken of. That is described here in five ways for those qualified in five sections. 1. The essential nature and qualities are described, the result is determined here. Because the Lord would enter such a person. 2. Only then would all those connected to him be understood, not otherwise. Therefore, the cause of the Lord's creation is also determined here. 3.
First, the intellect characterized by memory arises by the Lord's will - this is stated in the first three verses. It is of three types in order: tāmasī, rājasī and sāttvikī. Previously, even though of this nature, they were free from all faults. By the Lord's will, the idea arose in them that fatigue should be removed. Then due to previous impressions, wrong understanding arose in them - this is stated with a different beginning. They, previously mentioned, were permitted by the brahmins. "Having eaten" etc. is connected to the previous. "Having drunk vāruṇī" indicates engaging in prohibited acts. The result of that is stated - "with knowledge deranged by that". Indeed all practices are useless if the intellect is destroyed. Then there is nothing that should not be done, this is certain even for great souls. 1. Therefore it is said here that this should not be done in this way. Hence in this scripture, the invalidity of memory is always to be known everywhere. 2. The result of derangement of intellect is stated - "they touched vital spots with harsh words". Harsh words means words indicating inferiority. What is not appropriate for someone, arising from carelessness, is called a vital spot. The meaning is they spoke such words of inferiority. Knowledge here is firm according to scripture, not lasting only three moments. Like smell with the nose, there is manifestation of its grasping by the mind. That is eternal in the Lord, but produced in others. Like food for the body, worldly affairs and scriptures etc. nourish it. The senses are its producers, practice is the cause of its increase. And that is of three types, divided into sāttvika etc. The six prohibited factors like place etc. are its destroyers, while the prescribed ones are causes of inner purification and nourishers. There it remains established by the soul's effort, like objects in a house. Sounds and sense objects are stimulators of what is produced, and in the form of ingredients for producing what is not yet produced. That alone is expressed by words like intellect, consciousness etc. That one is the form of the Lord. Its production is manifold. Though infinite, it is described tenfold, like a play. The main shelter form is unchanging, to be worshipped by all, the self of all. That alone, manifested in the form of the revealing quality, unchanging, is called the quality of the Lord. That alone again takes on the body of the Vedas for creation. That form too is infinite like the cosmic form. Later it also attains the state of a seed with a body. Then all words become modified like individual manifestations. That alone again takes shelter as the knower and the known. There, as the shelter of the known, it is infinite due to the infinity of the known. But as the form of the known it is one type, so it is called one. But in the knower it becomes fivefold, due to taking shelter in the inner organs and senses. In the inner organ it is fourfold, but in the sense it is onefold. The particulars become nourished twofold by knowledge of the shelter of objects. There, what is produced by the mind becomes of the nature of doubt, but the particulars here too are created by objects. The ego along with intellect sees sleep, so one's ignorance is sheltered in the ego. But the idea of body created by ego is sheltered in intellect. The mind alone sees the self in deep sleep, at other times it is absorbed, so objectless knowledge is sheltered in the mind. And its existence is determined by scriptures etc., so its destruction too is specifically described. The absence of the previously mentioned boundaries is destruction in general. The cause of that is māyā, which conceals knowledge itself. Its six shelters are time etc. Kali, Magadha, wine etc., demons, prohibited acts of the Śāktas. They destroy knowledge partially in their respective ways - by essential nature, by place, and by quality. In whom knowledge arises, in them alone it is destroyed. Therefore here by liquor, whatever knowledge of theirs was previously established in the knower sheltered in intellect, that fell from the hand, so there is derangement of knowledge. And by māyā, non-existent objects are presented in the intellect alone. Knowledge sheltered in intellect associated with that object becomes memory. By that, words related to that object become harsh words. And those along with the object touch the vital spot, the receptacle of the object's shelter. From the root "mṛṅ" meaning "to give up life", with doubling of the root for the sense of necessary death, with the affix "ḍan" added, it becomes "marma" (vital spot). There too, even a small blow created by words produces great pain in great souls. Due to intoxication, mere touch is mentioned, not striking. 1. Thus, having produced agitation by touch of words, with forgetting of one's true nature and remembering contrary objects, they also touched with weapons etc. - this is stated in "Of them". By the fault of maireya substance characterized by destruction of previous knowledge and production of contrary knowledge, even the steady conscious intellect became unsteady due to affection. Even knowledge sheltered in objects depends on the light of consciousness, so in its absence, that too did not nourish the senses - with this intention it is said "when the sun was setting". The fault became equal everywhere - this is stated in "like reeds". Crushing means destruction. 2.
Thus, having caused their previous state to disappear through the relationship of means and end, and to conceal His own non-lordship, He speaks of the means and the end - "The Lord" (bhagavān). The reason for concealing non-lordship. The movement of māyā, that is, the activity of the effect and cause, of His own Self, which is the conscious part. That previously mentioned. "Having observed" is the means mentioned later. "He" means engaged in that purpose. The concealment of non-lordship happens in two ways, through the Vedas and through the Vaiṣṇavas. He did both of these, as stated: "Having touched Sarasvatī, he sat down at the root of a tree." Sarasvatī is the embodiment of the Vedas, she is also a river, touching her means bathing. By this it is said that He established Himself in the Vedas. The second is stated: "at the root of a tree." According to the śruti: "The trees are indeed Vaiṣṇavas." Its root is the seed-form by which form of Viṣṇu they were generated. The meaning is that He established the essential part in Viṣṇu who is in seed form there. Thus, having established lordship and other qualities in one place, and His own form in another place, He removed non-lordship through lack of a substrate. But why did the Lord establish Himself in the seed? He should have established Himself in Vaikuṇṭha. To this he says: "He sat down." It is impossible to perform the play of creation while situated near, in Vaikuṇṭha, therefore He entered there completely, in all ways, near it for the purpose of creation, etc. For this purpose. For this purpose alone this story was told first. Just as the Lord enters the seed with His lordship. This indeed is the subject. Greatness, (own) form, play, object, character, senses, entering the cause with His own part, intellect - this creation in seed form. "Born from Viṣṇu are the Vaiṣṇavas," and "These belong to Viṣṇu." Therefore the Lord Himself, sitting at the root of the tree, having established the seed that is the cause of creation, also established the seed that is the cause of liberation, having first contemplated the Vaiṣṇava Uddhava. "Of the nine plays, the first is to be done by Me, the last by him, and the middle ones by Time, etc." And Uddhava's desire is "Take me also to Your abode." Where He resides at that time, that is His abode. Now He Himself is situated in Viṣṇu who is in seed form as the cause. And He considered that he (Uddhava) should remain in the vicinity of penance, which is the sole means of liberation, for the experience of bliss in Badarī, which is of the nature of the immortal stream, in the causal form. || 3 ||
For him also there is indeed destruction of the previous state, and He desired that he should come to Prabhāsa, the place of destruction. Therefore, determining the second seed, He speaks of the intellect which is of the nature of certainty in nineteen verses. For when the eighteen branches of knowledge are transcended, the intellect rests on certainty. There, the seven limbs along with Mīmāṃsā, the twelve-fold self independently due to its illuminating nature. By this alone the previous state departs, thus it is made known. But in liberation, due to the inexpressibility of the cause, He spoke of this very play differently. And from the seed there is expansion in the fruit. Therefore, first He states what was said by the Lord - "And I was told." Others of His own were also told to go to Prabhāsa, "and I was told, 'You go to Badarī.'" From the word "and," the implication is "having gone to Prabhāsa." By "by the Lord," the necessity for accomplishing the task is indicated in His words. Now, why did He speak thus? Anticipating this, he says: "by the remover of the distress of the surrendered." He spoke thus [thinking], "I will remove the distress, all affliction, of the surrendered in creation by giving all lordship." The reason is wonderful, the goal is achieved by the opposite means. Badarī is also of the nature of a forest, and is immortal for the sake of fruit. That immortality's cave is Badarī. "You go" is specifically indicated. Going forth means without remembering the meaning of words. As for the rest, one's own family is one's own group. They are useful only in creation, therefore wishing to properly abandon [them] for one's own sake, otherwise endless creation would not occur. || 4 ||
Śrīmad Gosvāmi Śrī Puruṣottama Caraṇa Viracitaḥ Śrī Subodhinī Prakāśaḥ
Now, desiring to explain the fourth chapter, due to the clarity of the story connection, they explain the connection appropriate to the meaning of the skandha, etc. with three verses - Fourth, etc. By Bhagavata, i.e. by Vyāsa or Śuka. Thus, the occasion is the connection. In order to state in what form it must necessarily be spoken, they recount the meaning of the previous chapter, saying - In five ways, etc. In five ways means in the form of memory, certainty, doubt, and two errors. The reason for that is - Five, etc. Since such was stated in the previous chapter, therefore the form of such is "the result is determined here." And thus, it must necessarily be stated in the form favorable to that intellect, is the meaning. But when the particular intermediate creation is to be stated here, what is the purpose of determining the result? To this they say - Of this kind, etc. As, i.e. properly. Thus, to show fitness for possession, their nature and qualities were stated at the end of the previous chapter. When it would possess, then their qualities can be properly understood, therefore the result in the form of divine possession in them is stated for the purpose of making known their qualities - this is the meaning that this alone is the purpose. They state another result of this possession - Therefore, etc. Since it is to be brought down into one's own company for the sake of play, therefore in the creation of qualified intellect done by the Lord, this possession is also determined as the cause. Thus, this possession is only for the sake of future play - this is its purpose, is the meaning. And thus, the other connection in the form of causality is also made known.
Now in "atha". They say that in the original text, the word "atha" also indicates the immediacy after the previously mentioned acts ending in salutation - Previously related, up to eaten. But what is the purpose of mentioning loss of knowledge, etc. when the intellect useful for qualification is to be determined here? To this they say - All, etc. Thus the intellect is spoken of here. Thus, by indicating loss of knowledge etc., the intellect that prohibits prohibited conduct is suggested in this verse - this indication and showing the fault of contemplating one's own greatness is the purpose, is the meaning. Having established this, they state another purpose - Therefore here, etc. Since here in this verse the intellect that turns away from prohibited conduct is intended to be created, and that alone is authoritative, therefore it is also suggested that in all scripture, memory that is contrary to that, which produces engagement in the prohibited, is never authoritative - this is the meaning. But since memory arises from impressions, and that arises from experience, through that impression it produces memory of the same form as itself, so how can memory be non-authoritative when the experience that generates it is authoritative? Anticipating this objection, in order to establish the non-authoritativeness of memory even when produced by authoritative experience, they first establish the stability of established knowledge - Knowledge and, etc. The word "ca" means "also". But if knowledge is stable, there would always be awareness of it, so they say - By the vital breath, etc. Just as smell, though pervading a house etc. and connected to the nose, is only manifest when grasped by inherence in conjunction or by conjunction, but not always due to the dullness of the grasping faculty in extreme connection, similarly there is manifestation when grasped by the mind through inherence in conjunction or as a conjoined qualifier, but non-manifestation due to dullness of the grasping faculty in extreme connection. Thus there is not always that consequence, is the meaning. But let it be so, still how can constant manifestation of objects be prevented? To this they say - That, etc. Thus since eternal knowledge of all objects is accepted for the Lord in other views, there is no need to prevent that there. But for others, since it is produced, being a modification of existence, even there it must be stated that there is manifestation of objects in its origination, nourishment and firmness, and absence of that in their absence - thus that is prevented, is the meaning. Nourishment means combination with similar things, and firmness means the density that establishes stability of similar things. This being so, in this view there is no need for impressions to generate memory. Since memory is possible later from that very knowledge which is firm due to practice, produced by the senses, nourished by worldly and scriptural sources, and awakened by awakeners, and in the impression view there is the fault of assuming infinite impressions, their productions, destructions etc., the impression is just knowledge in a subtle state, obscured by contrary functions. And in the case of continuous flow, that alone is manifest as one - this is the result. Having thus established stability, in order to show the nourishment and destruction of that, they state the types of conclusion from the Gītā etc. - And that, etc. By this the validity of the distinction of similar and dissimilar is shown. But let it be so, still if there is no destruction of that by knowledge of another object immediately after, how should its destruction be stated? To this they say - Place, etc. But if so, since one of those destroyers like place etc. is easily available in each case, the stability of that is indeed very difficult, so they say - Prescribed, etc. Thus since there are nourishers as well as destroyers, stability is not difficult - this is the meaning. By this, the status as mental properties of all these - modesty, wisdom, fear etc. - as taught by the śruti "The mind alone is all these" is also reminded. They state what is established by that - There, etc. There means in the inner organ. By effort means by the act of establishing. Having thus stated the cause of stability, they clarify the reason for the absence of constant manifestation of everything - In a house, etc. Thus since the coincidence of stimulants is not constant, there is not constant manifestation of everything - this is the meaning. But if the senses are producers, why is there not always production of all cognitions? Anticipating this question, they state the auxiliary nature of these - Of the unproduced, etc. Due to the absence of coincidence of the totality of causes, there is not always production - this is the meaning. In order to state the types of its modes later, they state its names and nature - That very, etc. Anticipating the objection that if it is one, its existence as different in each body is not possible, they say - Of that, etc. Possibility is to be supplied. Thus there is no impossibility due to differences in manifestation - this is the meaning. By this its pervasiveness is also indicated. Thus by the maxim of seed and womb cognition, and by the maxim of space in a pot, the oneness and limitedness of one itself is established due to limiting conditions. Even though it is infinite, they state the means of knowing its modes - In infinity, etc. Thus knowledge of its modes is easily accomplished by division into groups - this is the meaning. They clarify the ten types - Abode, etc. Primary means causal. This one is objectless. The second is eternal with an object, in the form of the Lord's qualities. By this it is also indicated that knowledge in the form of the individual soul is part of the first, while that in the form of its properties is part of the second. That very means in the form of qualities. Also for creation, i.e. for creation of names, or for Vedic creation. Thus the third is qualified by a verbal body consisting of the Vedas. Endless means infinite, due to the śruti "The Vedas are indeed endless." This very one is stated as the form of Vaikharī speech, the manifestation in "This indeed is the soul born from the aperture" as consisting of the Vedas. Then they state the creation of words - Afterwards, etc. Since it is stated thus in the smṛti "But He, the great Lord, created in the beginning all their names and forms separately from the Vedic words", therefore it is so - this is the meaning. This fourth is qualified by a modified verbal body. To state the forms from the fifth onwards, they state the difference in abode of that alone - That very, etc. Takes refuge means manifests in the world in the form of illuminating meaning, it resides in both of those. They state the fifth form - There, etc. Abode of the object of knowledge means limited by the object of knowledge, due to pervasiveness. They state the other five - Morning, etc. By this the non-pervasiveness of these is indicated. In one way means as non-conceptual. But since the external senses are five in number, and various non-conceptual cognitions are seen to be produced by them, how is it one there? To this they say - The particulars, etc. The particulars which are conceptual forms are illuminated in that form which is the twofold nature produced by the knowledge which is the object-based form of the object of knowledge - when knowledge arises by initial contact, then for examination of the object, when there is subsequent fourfold contact, the distinctive knowledge that arises is of that form. Thus since they are produced by other auxiliaries, there is no violation of the oneness of knowledge by those senses - this is the meaning. Then, in response to the question of how it is fourfold in the inner organ, they state the differences there by differences in form - There in the mind, up to abode of the mind. Other means the manner of dissolution of the mind in waking and dream states is to be clarified in the 27th. Having thus stated the ten types of knowledge and the manner of production of the produced, they establish with authority the manner of its persistence and destruction - And of that, etc. By scriptures etc. means by scriptures like "He whose intellect is steady, he is not deluded", "For one with a tranquil mind, intellect soon becomes established", by the corroborating reasoning of otherwise inexplicability of memory, and by the reasoning of undesirability that refutes momentariness - this is the meaning. Is cognized means is stated after indicating the reason. They state the manner of destruction - Previously stated, etc. Absence of previously stated limit means absence of connection with prescribed objects. There means in the absence of limits or in general destruction. But previously the destructive nature of place etc. was stated, how is it now stated of māyā? To this they say - Of that, etc. But if that alone destroys knowledge, then these are useless and what was previously stated is inconsistent - anticipating this objection, they say - They, etc. As appropriate means by place and time in essence; by substance and agent in location; by mantra and action in quality. Thus since they are useful in particular destruction, what was previously stated is not inconsistent - this is the meaning. Having thus explained destruction, in order to show that here there is not general destruction of their intellect, but particular, they state that particularity - Therefore, etc. Abode of intellect means the form of identification with the body. Fallen below means fallen in the impure tamasic portion of the intellect. Thus when the identification with the body fell in the impure place, it was destroyed in essence partially by time, and destroyed in quality partially by the prohibited act of drinking. Then when their excellence in themselves and inferiority in others appeared, the manifestation of those particular faults occurred. They state another effect of that - By māyā, etc. Abode and support of the object means that of which the object is the fault, its abode is the person, that is its support. Thus when the fault portion was previously manifested, then when non-existence of opposition was presented in the intellect by māyā, they touched the vital spot with such words. Therefore even though arising from valid knowledge, due to combination with the heterogeneous by māyā, there was cessation of its quality portion, and the memory born from that became non-authoritative. Thus by its causing that, such memory is non-authoritative in essence, quality and result - this is the meaning. (1)
Of those, here. Tejaḥ (light) depends on illumination. It depends on that for its own production due to the destruction of darkness through contact with the illumination of objects || 2 ||
Of the Lord, here. Thus "of those" etc. Having concealed the state of the Yādavas' affection and current existence as the effect in the form of the specific mental state called incorrect memory due to drinking liquor, which is the opposite of the previously mentioned method, and in order to conceal the Lord's power to establish the current existence of the Yādavas, which causes such concealment, he desired to see the path of his own self, which is the means of concealing his divine power, and the concealment of inability which is its effect. Of his māyā means of his deluding māyā. Previously mentioned means the crushing discussed in "mutually what". Later means in the effect to be stated. By two means by establishing the nature of the qualities. He refuted powerlessness by the absence of a basis. The meaning here is this: When the Lord wishes to conceal his form, pastimes, or both, he expands the deluding māyā of the conscious portion. Concealment is by māyā alone. Its six bases were mentioned before. Among those, due to the absence of place, agent and mantras in this context, he raised time, substance and action. Then delusion arose in their minds through that. Then appearing as opposing, those sense objects convinced their respective minds. Then extracting the embodied residents of Vaikuṇṭha from the material bodies of those bewildered participants in the pastimes that were altered through weapon blows, he brought them to his abode. Thus their existence and pastimes, and the eternality related to that, is known through Vedic statements establishing that and association with knowledgeable Vaiṣṇavas. By establishing power through establishing qualities in the Vedas, and establishing the basis of power by establishing the essential nature among Vaiṣṇavas, he refuted the powerlessness that would be obtained by the absence of a basis for power, by his divine nature. In the seed means in the imperishable self manifested from pure goodness. If it is asked what is the authority for stating such entry for the sake of creation, they say: For this purpose etc. The meaning is that it is stated thus to indicate the meaning stated by "As" etc. If it is asked what is the use of authority even for entry for the sake of creation, they say: This etc. This means existing in the intellect. Form means the elements. Objects means the subtle elements. If it is asked how they have the form of elements etc. useful for authority, they say: Seed etc. Thus the meaning is that their entry in the form of seeds in various places establishes their authority, so they have that nature. To indicate that the consideration to be stated later in "On the pretext of Brahmā's curse" is the cause of authority, they state the form indicated by sitting at the tree root etc.: Of Viṣṇu etc. Therefore means having established the seed which is the cause of creation of authority of Vaiṣṇavas and scholars among his own people through the skill of the means in the form of sitting at the tree root, he did so in order to establish the seed which is the cause of liberation among his own devotees through the act of instruction. In the nine etc. These pastimes should be understood as experienced in seed form. And him means "also". Thus the form of consideration is summarized up to "did so" || 3 ||
In "maham" etc. Therefore the second seed means the seed in the form of certainty that the command alone which is the cause of liberation is to be done, from the form of desire. Twelve-fold self because of the śruti "This is indeed the triple knowledge that shines, the golden person within the sun." By this alone means by transcending the place of lower knowledge alone, because of the śruti "One should not meditate on many words." If this alone is the cause of abandoning the previous state, why is it stated differently in the 11th canto, to this they say: In liberation etc. Because it is not to be stated means because it is not to be stated again since it was stated here. Otherwise means through detachment preceded by serving the gopīs. Thus he stated it differently for elaboration. Having the nature of Araṇya means having its nature as Brahmaloka, because of the śruti "Ara and Ṇya are the two oceans in Brahmaloka" and the smṛti "Ara is named the nectar ocean, Ṇya is named the nectar sea." By not forgetting the meaning of the words means by causing forgetfulness of the etymological meaning of Badarī || 4 ||
Śrī Giridhara-kṛtā Bāla Prabodhinī
By Uddhava's instruction, at Gaṅgādvāra in the fourth, the meeting with Maitreya, son of Mitrā, is now described || 1 ||
Then after bathing, giving charity etc., those Yādavas, permitted by the brāhmaṇas, ate food and drank vāruṇī, paiṣṭī and madirā liquors. Their knowledge was deranged by that liquor, losing discrimination of right and wrong. In that state, they pierced each other's hearts with harsh, insulting words sharp as arrows || 1 ||
Those Yādavas whose minds were deranged and disturbed by the intoxication of the maireya liquor, as the sun was setting, there was crushing destruction among them by mutual friction. He gives an example - like of reeds || 2 ||
That Lord also, seeing the course of his māyā in the form of resolve of his own inner faculty, having touched (bathed in) the Sarasvatī, sat at the root of a fig tree || 3 ||
The Lord, remover of devotees' distress, wishing to withdraw his own clan, had previously told me in Dvārakā itself "You go to Badarī". Though knowing his intention of destroying his clan etc., I followed behind him. The word "ca" means "also". If asked why he spoke thus, he says: By the remover of devotees' distress. The meaning is: For removing the suffering of those surrendered to the Lord through instructing the secrets of devotion etc. He indicates the wonder of the Lord's affection with "Ha" || 4 ||
Hindī Anuvāda
Uddhavaji's departure and Viduraji's visit to Sage Maitreya
Uddhavaji said - Then, after receiving the blessing of the Brahmins, the Yadavas ate food and drank vāruṇī (alcoholic drink) liquor. Due to this, their wisdom was destroyed, and they began to hurt each other's hearts with abusive language || 1 || * * Their intellect was corrupted by the intoxication of liquor, and just as friction between bamboos causes fire, in the same way, as the sun was setting, they began to fight and kill each other || 2 || * * The Lord, seeing this strange turn of events of his māyā (illusion), performed ācamana (ritual sipping) with the water of the Sarasvati and sat down under a tree || 3 || * * Even before this, Lord Śrīkṛṣṇa (Krishna), who removes the sorrows of those who seek refuge, had told me, when he desired to destroy his own clan, to go to Badrikashram || 4 ||
SB 3.4.1-4
