SB 2.10.45-47

 Text 45: There is no direct engineering by the Lord for the creation and destruction of the material world. What is described in the Vedas about His direct interference is simply to counteract the idea that material nature is the creator.

Text 46: This process of creation and annihilation described in summary herein is the regulative principle during the duration of Brahmā’s one day. It is also the regulative principle in the creation of mahat, in which the material nature is dispersed.

Text 47: O King, I shall in due course explain the measurement of time in its gross and subtle features with the specific symptoms of each, but for the present let me explain unto you the Pādma-kalpa.

Śrīdhara Svāmi-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Vyākhyā

What is it? Because in the beginning of creation of this universe, the Supreme Lord does not have the nature of being the doer of actions. The scriptures also do not primarily establish this, but merely follow along. For what purpose? For the purpose of negating doership. Indeed, because it is superimposed by māyā (and in parentheses: illusion). As the scriptures state: "Partless, inactive, tranquil, flawless, untainted... Indra appears in many forms through his māyās (powers of illusion)", etc. (45)

He summarizes the stated meaning with "This however". The kalpa (world age) related to Brahmā, which is a great kalpa including sub-divisions, has been briefly mentioned as an example. Of what nature? In this great kalpa, there are the primary creations starting with mahat (the cosmic intellect), and in the sub-divisions are the secondary creations starting with immovable beings - this is the method. It is common with other great kalpas etc. (46)

He promises to explain in detail what is to be stated: "I will explain in detail later in the Third Canto the gross and subtle measurements, characteristics, divisions like manvantaras etc. of a kalpa. Now listen as I fully explain the Padma Kalpa." (47)

Śrī Vaṃśīdhara-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Prakāśa Vyākhyā

He states that this is not truly the Lord's action: In the creation etc. of this universe, the Supreme Lord does not have the nature of doership, but it is merely described everywhere in scriptures etc. For what purpose? To negate doership. Indeed, because it is superimposed by māyā alone, as creation etc. are effects of the guṇas. The doership of external māyā alone is superimposed on the Supreme Person. Though done by me, due to being under my control, it is said to be done by the Supreme Lord, but the Supreme Lord is not truly the doer in his essential nature - this is the meaning. He gives scriptural evidence for this with "And thus". Though it happens by his power alone, like a magnet, there is no transformation in him - this is the idea. It should be understood that superimposition and negation are described only for understanding the pure nature. As the scripture states: "The non-dual is elaborated through superimposition and negation." (45)

A kalpa is a day of Brahmā, as will be stated: "O king, a kalpa is where there are fourteen Manus." The description of kalpas is given in the Prabhāsa section of the Skanda Purāṇa: "The first is called Śveta Kalpa, the second Nīlalohita, the third Vāmadeva, then Gāthāntara, the fifth is called Raurava, the sixth is known as Prāṇa, the seventh is Bṛhat Kalpa, the eighth is called Kandarpa, then the ninth kalpa is Sadya, the tenth is known as Īśāna, the eleventh is called Dhyāna, then Sārasvata, the thirteenth is Udāna, then Garuḍa, the fifteenth is known as Kūrma, Prajāpati's full moon, the sixteenth is Nārasiṃha, then Samādhi, Āgneya, Viṣṇuja, Saura, then Soma Kalpa, the twenty-second is called Bhāvana, then Supumān, Vaikuṇṭha, Ārṣṭiṣa, then Valmīki Kalpa, the twenty-seventh is Vairāja, then Gaurī Kalpa, then Maheśvara is mentioned where Tripura was killed, then Pitṛkalpa at the end, which is known as Kuhū of Brahmā. Thus thirty kalpas are always enumerated as days of Brahmā. Past and future, and Vārāha is current now. The first half of the second part of Brahmā's day is stated." Here Śveta is Śvetavārāha, which is also called Vārāha. This same one is called Brāhma at the time of Brahmā's birth. The Pitṛkalpa is called Pādma in the first half due to the world being made of lotuses. Thus the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam being of the Sārasvata Kalpa is only generally so. (46)

He promises to give the answer to the question "How is the duration inferred?" in the middle itself: The measurement, i.e. the characteristics of kalpas, is the very form or body of that. Without the characteristics of kalpas etc., the measurement of time cannot be established - this is the meaning. The Pādma Kalpa belongs to the first half. (47)

Śrī Rādhā Ramaṇa dāsa Gosvāmi Viracitā Dīpanī Vyākhyā

"Is described" means: Repetition of the stated meaning for the purpose of restating it is anuvāda (restatement). And since negation of something not occurring is not possible, the restatement here is only for the purpose of negating what does occur. Intending this very thing, he says "For what purpose?" etc. For the purpose of negating doership - this means that when there is knowledge of the substratum, there is negation of what is superimposed on it. (45)

"Related to Brahmā" means: The great kalpa named Brāhma in which Brahmā was born - this is the meaning. "Common" means: In other great kalpas etc. also, creation occurs in this very way - this is the meaning. (46)

"Gross and subtle" - here "nature" is to be supplied. (47)

Śrīmad Vīrarāghava Vyākhyā

Indeed, is it not the case that the one who is to be created and the creator of creation are the same, as stated in passages like "He who knows me as unborn and without beginning, and also as the creator of that and the unchanging non-creator"? How can this contradiction between being created and being the creator or non-creator be resolved? To address this doubt and establish the proper domains of affirmation and negation, it is stated: No. The actions of creation of this world do not apply to the supreme Self in its essential nature. The supreme Self is not to be created in its own nature, but is said to be created in the sense of manifesting as the inner self of created entities. Therefore, there is no contradiction in the supreme Self being unborn in its essential nature while also being created through the medium of other entities. The contradiction between being the creator and non-creator is resolved as follows: Agency is superimposed on individual souls by māyā (and in parentheses: illusion), which is prakṛti (and in parentheses: primordial nature). 0

The agency attributed to individual souls, which depends on material instruments and bodies, is negated. But agency in the form of mere will is affirmed. Thus there is no contradiction. As stated in the sūtra "And not from desire, since there is no need for inference", the absence of agency dependent on prakṛti is indeed established for the purpose of negation. Here the word "purpose" refers to the domain, as it is well-known that "purpose means domain in contexts related to liberation." There is also a reading "The actions of birth etc. of the supreme Self are not prescribed for the purpose of negating agency." The meaning there is: It was stated that the supreme Self sees in a manner distinct from individual souls. How can this be reconciled with the fact that birth, actions etc. are observed for the supreme Self just like individual souls? To address this, it is stated: Not for this. The actions of birth etc. of this world consisting of conscious and non-conscious entities, or alternatively, birth etc. conforming to the world in the domain of action - these are not prescribed for the supreme Self. Birth etc. dependent on action like the world are not prescribed or established for the supreme Self by Vedānta statements like "Though unborn, he is born in many ways" etc. How is it known that birth etc. of the supreme Self are not dependent on action? To explain this, it is stated: Because agency etc. Indeed, since birth, actions etc. are superimposed on oneself by māyā, which is one's own will in the form of knowledge (here the word māyā is a synonym for knowledge, as in the usage "Through māyā I always know the auspicious and inauspicious deeds of beings"), for the purpose of negating agency, i.e. for the purpose of negating agency dependent on action. The meaning is that divine and human birth, actions etc. are taken on by one's own will alone, to demonstrate that "My birth, actions etc. are not dependent on action like those of individual souls." This is also sung by the Lord himself: "Though I am unborn and My Self is imperishable, though I am the Lord of all beings, yet by My own māyā I come into being." 45

He concludes the point stated earlier in "The Person would manifest" etc.: This indeed. This kalpa of Brahmā, which is a great kalpa with subdivisions and intermediate time periods, is stated as having days and nights as described. Creation in other kalpas is similar to this kalpa. He states the method: In which great kalpa there are the creations from the cosmic intellect etc. down to earth belonging to prakṛti, and the creations composed of modifications beginning with earth - this method is common to other great kalpas etc. Thereby the contradiction with śruti statements like "The Creator arranged the worlds with their guardians from the limbs of the Puruṣa" etc. that was raised earlier is resolved. Even though the identity of the Puruṣa's limbs and the worlds is taught for the purpose of meditation, there is no contradiction since creation follows the same pattern in every kalpa. 46

He promises to explain in detail what will be stated later: The measure. I will explain in detail later in the third book the subtle and gross measure of time, the characteristics of a kalpa - its nature and form, and the intermediate divisions like manvantaras etc., exactly as they are. Listen to the kalpa being explained in full. 47

Śrīmad Vijayadhvaja Tīrtha-kṛtā Pada Ratnāvalī Vyākhyā

The creatorship of birth etc. mentioned here, could it not be māyāmaya (illusory)? To this he says "na ca" (and not). The creatorship of this supreme being, birth and actions, just as they are for the purpose of negating bondage for jīvas (individual souls), are not prescribed in that way. Thus, creatorship, birth and action are indeed prescribed in the Vedas and other texts. Therefore, it is superimposed by māyā (here: will) according to one's own wish, eternally established, and not different from one's own nature. Creatorship is not indescribable. As it is said: "The creatorship of the supreme lord is by his own will alone, eternally established, of the nature of consciousness, for the purpose of negating the bondage of jīvas." From the root "ruh" meaning "to be above", and from usages like "having mounted Subhadrā on the chariot", and "natural knowledge, strength and action" - by this the word māyā is shown to mean "will", not "illusion". The word "hi" (indeed) indicates the previously stated "free from deception". (45)

Now he states the commonality of other brahma-kalpas with this brahma-kalpa mentioned, saying "ayam" (this). The construction is: This first kalpa of Brahmā has been described by me (iti śeṣaḥ). Of what kind? Savikalpaḥ (with modifications), accompanied by various kalpas like manvantaras etc., where the procedure is common for other brahma-kalpas and other kalpas, and where there are prākṛta (primary) and vaikṛta (secondary) creations. By this it is stated that the narration of prākṛta etc. creations is the reason for the commonality. (46)

For the sake of engaging the listener and for the purpose of the next section, he promises: "parimāṇam" (extent) etc. The characteristics of kalpas, their structure, extent, or the nature of the characteristics of a kalpa - I will explain properly later. First, listen to this Pādma Kalpa. This is the construction. (47)

Śrīmaj Jīva Gosvāmi-kṛtā Krama Sandarbha Vyākhyā

It is not. The agency of that belongs to the Supreme, not to any other. But it is merely mentioned to negate the agency of that. Since by māyā (illusion). Although all that happens is due to its influence, it does not undergo any change, like a magnet. This is the meaning. (45)

Now this. A kalpa is a day of Brahmā. Savikalpa means with differences. Now the counting of kalpas as per the Skanda Purāṇa, Prabhāsa Khaṇḍa:

The first is Śvetakalpa (1), the second is Nīlalohita (2). The third is Vāmadeva (3), then Gāthāntara (4). The fifth is called Raurava (5), the sixth is remembered as Prāṇa (6). The seventh is Bṛhatkalpa (7), the eighth is called Kandarpa (8). The ninth is called Satya (9), the tenth is remembered as Īśāna (10). The eleventh is called Dhyāna (11), then another is Sārasvata (12). The thirteenth is Udāna (13), the fourteenth is Garuṇa (14). The fifteenth should be known as Kūrma (15), the full moon of Prajāpati. The sixteenth is Nārasiṃha (16), then Samādhi is the next (17). Āgneya (18), Viṣṇuja (19), Saura (20), then Somakalpa is next (21). The twenty-second is called Bhāvana (22), and another is Supumān (23). Vaikuṇṭha (24) and Arciṣa (25), then Valmīkalpa is next (26). The twenty-seventh is Vairāja (27), then Gaurīkalpa (28). Māheśvara is also mentioned (29), where Tripura was slain. At the end is Pitṛkalpa, which is remembered as Kuhū of Brahmā (30). Thirty kalpas are enumerated as always the days of Brahmā. Past and future, and Vārāha is current now. It is said to be the beginning of the second half of Brahmā's day.

Here Śveta is Śvetavārāha, which is the same as Vārāha. This should be known as called Brāhma at the time of Brahmā's creation. Similarly, Pitṛkalpa is called Pādma at the end of the first half due to the creation of lotus-born worlds. Therefore, the Śrīmad Bhāgavata being composed in the Sārasvata kalpa is merely a preliminary statement. (46) (47)

Śrīmad Viśvanātha Cakravarti-kṛtā Sārārtha darśinī Vyākhyā

Moreover, this is not truly an action of the Lord, he says. In the creation, maintenance and destruction of this universe, the agency of the supreme Lord is described everywhere in the Vedas and smritis. Why? To refute the notion of agency. Indeed, since creation etc. are the effects of the guṇas (qualities), the agency is attributed to the Supreme Person only externally through māyā (illusion). Though done by me, due to my lordship it is done by the supreme Lord alone, but the supreme Lord is not truly the agent in his essential nature - this is the meaning. As the śruti says: "Fruitless, actionless, tranquil, faultless, unstained." [45]

He concludes the topic: The kalpa related to Brahmā, consisting of 100 years which is Brahmā's maximum lifespan, and the vikalpa which is a subdivision in the form of a day of Brahmā, wherein occur the primary creations like mahat etc. in a mahākalpa (great kalpa) and the secondary creations of immobile beings etc. in an intermediate kalpa - this procedure is common to other mahākalpas etc. Thus the answer to the question "How long is a kalpa or vikalpa?" has been given briefly. [46]

But he promises to give a detailed answer to the question "How is time inferred?" in the middle: The measurement, which is the very definition of kalpas, whose form is the body - without the definition of kalpa etc., the measurement of time cannot be established, this is the meaning. As it truly is. Later in the third book. The Pādma kalpa belongs to the first half. The enumeration of kalpas should be known from the Skanda Purāṇa's Prabhāsa section, as follows: [Lists the names of 30 kalpas] These 30 kalpas are said to always constitute a day of Brahmā. The past and future ones, and the Varāha which is current now. The first day of the second half of Brahmā is declared to be happening now. There, Śveta is Śvetavarāha, which is the same as Varāha. This very one is called Brāhma at the time of Brahmā's birth. Thus the Pitṛkalpa, being at the end of the first half when the world was created as a lotus, is called Pādma. [47]

Śrīmac Chukadeva-kṛta Siddhānta Pradīpaḥ

The agency of the supreme Lord other than Bhagavān in the creation etc. of this universe is not prescribed by injunctive statements. Thus says the venerable author of the sūtras: "Because of the term 'looked', because construction is not possible" etc. How then is time, nature, destiny, chance, elements, or origin said to be the creator of the world by śruti? To refute their agency, to negate the agency of time etc. in creating the world, it is attributed through māyā (illusion), through compassion, for the sake of those desiring liberation, not as an established conclusion. Because in the remainder of the statement "The Person is to be contemplated", the Person is stated as the established conclusion. The details should be seen in the Vedāntakaustubha. [45]

He concludes the briefly stated creation of the universe etc.: This kalpa related to Brahmā that was indicated by describing creation etc., along with its subdivision, has been illustrated by way of example, wherein in this Brahmā kalpa with subdivisions occur the primary and secondary creations - in the mahākalpa the primary creations of mahat etc., and in the intermediate kalpa the secondary creations of immobile beings etc. This procedure is common to other mahākalpas with subdivisions. [46]

He promises to explain in detail what will be stated: The measurement, which is the very definition and form of kalpas, I will explain later in the third book exactly as it is, along with its divisions in the form of manvantaras etc. Listen to the full explanation of the Pādma kalpa. [47]

Śrīmad Vallabhācārya Viracitā Subodhinī Vyākhyā

There, he states the reason - nāsya karmāṇīti (his actions are not). His actions at the beginning of birth, etc. Of the supreme controller of māyā. Nānuvidhīyate (is not followed), anuvidhānaṃ na kriyate (following is not done). The meaning is that the supreme does not follow in the form of relation. When asked why, he says - māyayāropitaṃ hi tad iti (for that is superimposed by māyā). All worldly existences, etc. are in the form of objects of the deluding function of māyā. They are not the effects of the Lord, so there is no consideration of the Lord as the agent, etc. there. Then why is the Lord described as the creator of the world? To that he says - karttvapratiṣedhārtham iti (for the purpose of negating agency). The perceived agency is to be negated. The Lord only said later "I am the Self", not "It was done by me" or "I was born". It is described thus only for ease of understanding - "He creates through māyā" or "He is born by himself". Tajjatvād iti (born from that) also means the same - He is the birthplace, not born from that. Therefore, knowers of Brahman should know all as Brahman alone, free from notions of origin etc., not associated with conceptualization. Because it is superimposed by māyā. (45)

Thus, having explained the non-dualistic and theistic views, in response to the question in which kalpa (cycle) is such a form of the Lord, he answers it is in the Brahma-kalpa: śrayaṃ tu brahmaṇaḥ kalpa iti. "Sometimes all here becomes the Self alone, O Janārdana" - in the Brahma-kalpa. In the alternative view, in a sub-cycle of the Brahma-kalpa, He becomes all forms through māyā - thus both views are explained here. Hence it is said the kalpa of Brahman with alternatives is described. The word 'tu' (but) excludes other material kalpas. Therefore, the ten types of līlās (divine play) are equal here, but unequal in other kalpas. He states this: vidhiḥ sādhāraṇo yatra iti. Where in the Brahma-kalpa, the method of origination of material and evolved beings is common. Those born in a material or evolved kalpa are equal. But in other kalpas, there are only three material ones, others are evolved, and some like Kaumāra are of both natures. Those distinctions are not here. "Where the method is common" is one sentence. "Where the creations are material-evolved" is another. It means the material are themselves the evolved, not separate. (46)

With this, answers to all questions have been given. The time and kalpa have not been explained. Saying he will explain that later, he states: parimāṇaṃ ca kālasyeti. The measure of time from the atom to the two parārdhas, the cause of its measurement like the sun's motion, is to be explained. The 'ca' (and) indicates its nature and effects too. Kalpalakṣaṇavigraham iti. The characteristics of kalpas are the arrangements of dharma. The nature of dharma and activity in the Kṛta age is the characteristic. Vigraha means the body lasting so many yugas, like the Kṛta age comprising four thousand. These two I will explain later as before, or as in the previous kalpa. Thus introducing another kalpa to explain everything in detail, he says - padmaṃ kalpam atho śṛṇv iti. The details of creation etc. occur in the Padma kalpa. So listen attentively in a different sequence for elaborating the Lord's ten līlās. This instruction for attentive listening indicates a break for one day, as he advises listening in a different sequence. (47)

Śrīmad Gosvāmi Śrī Puruṣottama Caraṇa Viracitaḥ Śrī Subodhinī Prakāśaḥ

In "nāsya", the original fits thus: His actions at the birth etc. of this world, i.e. in creation, sustenance and dissolution, are for negating the agency of the supreme controller of māyā. The reason is that agency is superimposed by māyā. The reason for that is nānuvidhīyate - the supreme is not imitated by agency etc. The śruti "Him alone shining" speaks of others imitating the supreme, not the supreme imitating others. So agency through māyā does not exist, such is superimposed by māyā. Since it is so, those actions are for negating agency superimposed by māyā. Considering this, they say "para" etc. Elaborating on this, they say "jagad" etc. Here the original text is "ṛte'rtham". "Nāsti" means does not exist for knowers of Brahman. "Pratītam" means perceived as imitating. The reason for that is "bhagavān" etc. Then why are gross and subtle forms described in śruti and purāṇas? To that they say "buddhi" etc. "He creates through māyā" and "He is born by himself" - these two views should be understood in purāṇas and śrutis as applicable, not in sequence. This also indicates the view in the "pūrvavad" section is a partial view. To avoid contradiction with the śruti "tajjalān", they say "taj" etc. So there the seventh case compound is for ease of understanding. But actually the mayūravyaṃsaka compound alone is intended, so there is no contradiction. Thus it is indicated that the "ubhayavyapadeśa" sūtra alone is the conclusive sūtra according to Vyāsa. They state the conclusion with "tasmād" etc. Since the non-dual Brahman view alone is the purport of śruti, free from notions of origin etc. - "This entire world of the sages is imperishable, eternal, subject to manifestation and dissolution" - even the world aspect is free from such notions, that is the meaning. (45)

In "śrayam", "in which kalpa" means in which kalpa now, since the eternal creation of bliss is not perceived. (46)

Śrī Giridhara-kṛtā Bāla Prabodhinī

Thus, in response to the question why they cannot see it in that way, he says - No. The supreme Lord's agency in the action of creation etc. of this universe does not exist and is not primarily taught by the śruti, but is only described secondarily for the purpose of negating agency. Because that agency etc. related to qualities is superimposed there by māyā (illusion) due to delusion. Similarly, in the tenth canto, Vasudeva will also say "In you, the supreme Brahman, there is no contradiction, as it is the substratum, it is served by qualities." (45)

Concluding by fulfilling the expectation of which kalpa was referred to by "The puruṣa (Person) breaking through the egg" etc., he says - This however. This kalpa of Brahmā, which has divisions of minor kalpas, in which kalpa Brahmā was born, that kalpa has been cited as an example in brief. In response to how this kalpa is described leaving aside other kalpas, he says - The method. In which great kalpa the prākṛta (primary) creation from mahat to earth, and the vaikṛta (secondary) creations of movable and immovable beings starting from modifications of earth etc. - this method is common with other great kalpas. (46)

Thus, having concluded what was stated briefly, he promises to explain in detail - The measure. The gross and subtle nature which is the measure of time, the characteristics of a kalpa of this form, its duration, other views, divisions like manvantaras etc. - as it is, I will explain later in the third canto. All these details are in the Padma Kalpa. Therefore, listen to that kalpa from me - this is the connection. (47)

Hindī Anuvāda

After describing the creation and other activities, no connection of action or doership is attributed to the complete Supreme Being. That is only to negate agency, as it is superimposed by māyā (illusion). [45]

I have described Brahmā's mahākalpa (great age) along with its subordinate kalpas (ages). The order of creation is the same in all kalpas. The only difference is that at the beginning of a mahākalpa, mahat-tattva (great principle) and other elements are produced gradually from prakṛti (primordial nature), while at the beginning of kalpas, the natural creation remains as it is, and only a new creation of animate and inanimate beings takes place. [46]

Parīkṣit! We will describe the measurement of time, kalpa, and the manvantaras (ages of Manu) contained within it later on. Now listen carefully to the description of the Pādma-kalpa (lotus age). [47]

SB 2.10.41-44

 Text 41: According to the different modes of material nature — the mode of goodness, the mode of passion and the mode of darkness — there are different living creatures, who are known as demigods, human beings and hellish living entities. O King, even a particular mode of nature, being mixed with the other two, is divided into three, and thus each kind of living creature is influenced by the other modes and acquires its habits also.

Text 42: He, the Personality of Godhead, as the maintainer of all in the universe, appears in different incarnations after establishing the creation, and thus He reclaims all kinds of conditioned souls amongst the humans, the nonhumans and the demigods.

Text 43: Thereafter, at the end of the millennium, the Lord Himself in the form of Rudra, the destroyer, will annihilate the complete creation as the wind displaces the clouds.

Text 44: The great transcendentalists thus describe the activities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but the pure devotees deserve to see more glorious things in transcendence, beyond these features.

Śrīdhara Svāmi-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Vyākhyā

The text elaborates on the diversity of karmic paths based on the sattva and other qualities in one and a half verses. Sattva and the other two qualities represent the three paths, with words like "gods" etc. indicating prosperity and other qualities. When one's nature is overpowered by the other two qualities, it conforms to them. [41]

Having spoken of the creative aspect in the form of Brahma, it now describes the preserving aspect in the form of Vishnu. That same Lord, through incarnations as animals etc., establishes and protects this universe, nourishing it in the form of dharma and developing it through enjoyments. [42]

It describes the destructive aspect in the form of Rudra. From that, meaning from the Self, He withdraws and destroys this created universe. [43]

It describes the purity of the tenth by refuting agency etc. Through such a nature, as having the form of creator etc. This is expounded by śruti (scripture) statements like "From that, from this Self, space arose. He desired: 'May I become many, may I procreate'." But the wise are not able to see the Supreme solely in this form. [44]

Śrī Vaṃśīdhara-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Prakāśa Vyākhyā

Even among those three paths, each path is further divided threefold, making nine in total. By the other two natures: pure sattva, sattva mixed with rajas, sattva mixed with tamas; likewise pure rajas, rajas mixed with tamas, rajas mixed with sattva; and pure tamas, tamas mixed with rajas, tamas mixed with sattva. Just as a person of rajas nature becomes a Brahmin due to predominance of sattva mixture, a Kshatriya due to predominance of rajas, a Vaishya due to predominance of rajas and tamas, and a Shudra due to predominance of tamas. [41]

Dharma is Vishnu, as stated in the thousand names: "Dharma, the highest knower of dharma." It indicates that protection is through dharma, destruction through adharma, and creation through both dharma and adharma. "By the natures of animals etc." means even animals and birds protect their offspring, friends, mates etc. [42-43]

Some wise pure devotees are not able to see the Supreme solely in the form of creator of the universe etc., but rather as sporting with His beloveds etc. in His own abode like Vaikuṇṭha in the spiritual realm. [44]

Śrī Rādhā Ramaṇa dāsa Gosvāmi Viracitā Dīpanī Vyākhyā

[Here "even among those" should be understood as referring to the threefold division within each category.] "Divided threefold" is stated from a gross perspective. In reality, there are various paths according to the gradations of those qualities and corresponding gradations of merit and sin. "Conforms" means that even though humans are rajasic by nature, they appear sattvic or rajasic due to the influence of other qualities. [41-42]

["In the form of Kālāgni Rudra" means: Kāla is the time of dissolution, the fire that accomplishes that is the fire from Saṅkarṣaṇa's mouth, in which Rudra's soul is manifested in Rudra's form.] [43]

"In this form alone" means they do not see solely as the creator of the universe etc., but also see as pure according to śruti statements like "fruitless, inactive, peaceful, faultless, unstained" etc. [44]

Śrīmad Vīrarāghava Vyākhyā

It elaborates on this with "sattva" etc. The sattvic path, attainment of godhood as the fruit of karma, is highest due to abundance of happiness. The rajasic path is mixed with humanity. The word "hellish" indicates lower forms like plants etc. The tamasic path is hellish, meaning low. Even among the sattvic, rajasic, tamasic, divine, human and hellish paths, when one nature like sattva is overpowered by the other two remaining natures, then each is divided threefold. For example, some predominantly rajasic are purely rajasic, some are predominantly sattvic, some predominantly tamasic. Similarly the sattvic and tamasic are each threefold. This also answers "how many karmic paths." [41]

Having described creatorship as the indwelling Self of Brahma, it now directly describes preservership. "He" means the creator of the world. That same Lord, through incarnations as animals like boar, fish, tortoise, swan etc., as humans like Rama, Krishna etc., as gods like Vamana, Suyajna etc., establishing and protecting this universe, taking the form of dharma, nourishes and develops it. [42]

It describes destructive power in Rudra's form. "From that" means at the appointed time at the end of the kalpa, He whose Self is Kālāgni Rudra, or who has become the Self of Kālāgni Rudra, withdraws and destroys the universe created from the Self as the material cause, like wind dispersing a mass of clouds. [43]

Lest one think the cosmic activity depends on karma like for souls, it states "In this way" etc. The most glorious Lord, full of knowledge etc., is properly described as having this nature of creator etc. The wise knowers of Brahman are not able to see the Supreme solely in this nature as composed of conscious and unconscious forms, but are able to see as distinct from that. The two adjectives "glorious" and "most glorious" distinguish from the soul, as the soul is not glorious and its activity depends on karma, while the Supreme's agency does not depend on karma. [44]

Śrīmad Vijayadhvaja Tīrtha-kṛtā Pada Ratnāvalī Vyākhyā

The aforementioned species are divided into three categories based on sattva. The three types of beings - devas, humans, and hell-dwellers - are understood to be caused by the three guṇas (qualities) of sattva, rajas, and tamas. The divine realm is the result of sattva and virtuous deeds; the human realm is the result of rajas and a mix of virtuous and sinful deeds; the hellish realm is the result of tamas and sinful deeds. By this, demons are implied to be hell-bound. He further states that there are three subdivisions within each category. The divine, human and demonic realms obtained through actions rooted in the three guṇas are each further divided into sāttvika, rājasa and tāmasa types. For instance, the principal demons of the kalpa are tāmasa-tāmasa; the chief servants of the principal devas are tāmasa-rājasa; the lesser-known demons are tāmasa-sāttvika. Humans who perform only sinful deeds are rājasa-tāmasa; those who perform mixed deeds are rājasa-rājasa; the noblest humans who perform only virtuous deeds are rājasa-sāttvika. Among the devas, those not widely known are sāttvika-tāmasa; those famous in the world but lacking true knowledge are sāttvika-rājasa; the devas with true knowledge are sāttvika-sāttvika. Even more sāttvika than these are Garuḍa and others in groups of three along with their wives. Even more sāttvika than them is Brahmā's wife Sarasvatī. And even more sāttvika than her is Brahmā. This gradation is understood by the śa-pratyaya (suffix) in "ekaikaśaḥ" (one by one). As stated: "The tāmasa-tāmasa are the principal daityas (demons), enemies of the devas", and so on. (41)

Having thus described the nature of the universe, he now speaks of the occasion for divine incarnations, saying "yadā" (when). When the sāttvika nature, which is one of the three, is oppressed by the other two - rajas and tamas - at that very time, the Sustainer, the performer of nurturing etc., the establisher of varṇāśrama dharma, the Lord, incarnates in the forms of animals, humans and devas like Matsya, Kūrma, Varāha, Rāma, Kṛṣṇa, Upendra etc. and nurtures this world, establishing it in sattva, protecting what is established. This is the meaning. Or it can be interpreted as: When one of those three natures - sāttvika-tāmasa, sāttvika-rājasa, or sāttvika-sāttvika - is oppressed by the tāmasa-rājasa, then those three sāttvika types are oppressed by the tāmasa and others, and the rājasa-tāmasa and others like daityas, dānavas, rākṣasas etc. At that time He incarnates in forms like Varāha etc. As stated: "When one of the three sāttvika types is obstructed", and so on. (42)

If dissolution is fixed by another, one might think it difficult to protect the world from that calamity. To dispel this doubt, he suggests that dissolution is carried out through His own predetermined forms, so there is no obstruction to the protection of the world, saying "tataḥ" (then). Then, after the period of maintenance, when the time of dissolution arrives, He who is the inner controller of Kālāgni Rudras, that Lord who is the inner controller of Brahmā, restrains this entire universe which was manifested from his own belly etc., just as the wind (restrains) a mass of clouds. As stated: "In the form of Matsya etc. He nurtures; as Nṛsiṃha He is established in Rudra", and so on. Kāla refers to Yama. (43)

He substantiates the stated meaning with "itthaṃbhāvena" (in this manner). The venerable ones like Brahmā, and superior to them the Lord endowed with divine qualities, the leader of the entire universe, the Supreme Person, is described thus in the Śrutis etc. - as the creator, sustainer and destroyer, as distinct from everything, as free from all faults. The source is "From whom indeed these beings are born" etc. He states the reason for such description: The wise are able to see the Supreme Self as distinct in this manner, not through non-dual knowledge. Hence such description is appropriate. Or, since the Lord is described as having the characteristics of being the creator of the universe etc., therefore the wise who see the ultimate truth are indeed able to see the Supreme in this distinct manner, not as non-distinct in the insentient. By this it is suggested that even direct perception by the knower is a valid means of knowledge for the stated meaning. (44)

Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī's Kramasandarbha commentary:

As the sustainer of the universe in the form of Viṣṇu, becoming the protector of dharma in its essential form, He nourishes through His incarnations as Matsya and others who imitate animals, etc. 41-43

Śrīmad Viśvanātha Cakravarti-kṛtā Sārārtha darśinī Vyākhyā

The qualities are indeed the cause of those states, as stated in "sattva". There are three states in order: gods, etc. Each state is divided into three, so there are nine in total. It is affected or followed by the other two natures, one by one. For example, even a person with a rajas nature can be a Brahmin due to a greater mixture of sattva nature, or a Shudra due to a greater mixture of tamas nature. (41)

Dharma is Viṣṇu (viṣṇuḥ). The word dharma refers to protection from dharma, destruction from adharma, and creation from both dharma and adharma. Animals etc. protect their offspring, friends, wives etc. with their own given natures. (42)

From that, meaning from the self, he withdraws what has been created. Ghanāṇīka (ghanānīkam) means a mass of clouds. (43)

In this manner, as the creator etc., or from that self, as stated in the shruti "From that self space was produced, he desired may I become many, may I be born" - some wise devotees do not wish to see the Supreme only as the creator of the universe etc., but rather as enjoying in his own abode like Vaikuṇṭha (vaikuṇṭha) etc. in the spiritual realm with his beloveds etc. (44)

Śrīmac Chukadeva-kṛta Siddhānta Pradīpaḥ

Now what is the reason for the threefold state? To this he says "sattva" etc. in one and a half verses. O king, there are three states - gods, humans and hell-beings - based on sattva, rajas and tamas. Even among those, each is divided threefold when one nature is overpowered by the other two qualities. (41)

Having described creation through his partial incarnation as Brahmā (brahmā), he now describes preservation through his avatars in "ta eva". That same Lord, the sustainer of the world, maintains this universe through his animal, human and divine incarnations like boar etc., Pṛthu (pṛthu) etc., and Yajña (yajña) etc., nourishing it with enjoyments while embodying dharma. (42)

He describes dissolution through his partial incarnation as Rudra in "tata". The Lord who is the refuge of Kālāgni (kālāgni) Rudras, being the controller of those parts, withdraws this created universe through the instrumental time of dissolution, like wind dispersing a mass of clouds. (43)

Thus the Lord has been described as the creator of the universe to corroborate Vedānta (vedānta) statements like "That from which these beings are born" etc. Now refuting other views, he says the same in two verses beginning with "ittham". The most glorious Lord, endowed with the six opulences mentioned in the smṛti (smṛti) as "The full wealth, righteousness, fame, prosperity, knowledge and detachment - these six are called bhaga", superior to all others who possess God-given opulence, has been described as the creator of the universe. Therefore the wise do not wish to see anything other than the Lord, like time, karma etc., as the cause of the universe in this manner. (44)

Śrīmad Vallabhācārya Viracitā Subodhinī Vyākhyā

Now only three states are mentioned, but there are crores of varieties. To this he says "tatrāpyekaikaśo rājan". I have counted many as threefold. Among those, each of the Prajāpatis (prajāpati) counted as threefold are also threefold. Or the reptiles are also threefold. The address "O king" is to indicate the many varieties of humans. Now how can one become many? To this he says "yadaivaika-tara". When one nature like sattva etc. is overpowered by the other two different from itself. There, due to degrees of overpowering strength, one takes many forms. (41)

Having thus established the threefold nature of the effect, he concludes by explaining the Lord's sattvic play of preservation in "sa evedam". That same threefold creator of the world is also threefold for that purpose. The Lord maintains this created world through his qualities denoted by the word bhaga, which are capable of preservation, while embodying dharma. Establishing through dharma, he nourishes it, makes it prosper. He nourishes constantly, every moment from the time of creation till the end. When demons arise to destroy it, he protects the entire universe through his threefold incarnations as animals like fish etc., humans like Rāma (rāma) etc., and gods like Vāmana (vāmana) etc. (42)

He describes the third play as "kālāgnirudrātma". Kāla (kāla) is the time of dissolution. The fire that accomplishes that is the fire from Saṅkarṣaṇa's (saṅkarṣaṇa) mouth. Taking the form of Rudra who stood there raising the excellent trident, he withdraws what was created from himself, like a spider's thread. Time is the instrument. Just as māyā (māyā) is the instrument in creation and avatars in preservation, time is the instrument in dissolution. To show that even after creation etc. up to dissolution, nothing is changed in the substratum, he gives an example - "ghanānīkamivānila". As wind disperses a mass of clouds. Just as it is not known where clouds dispersed by wind have gone, similarly he destroys all impressions. (43)

Having thus described creation, preservation and dissolution done by the Lord, he says this universe with its origin etc. is accepted by the proponents of Brahman as done by the Lord in "itthaṃbhāvena kathita". O most glorious ones! To instruct the king, we have described the Lord as the creator and sustainer of the universe in this manner, which he states in "itthaṃbhāvena kathita". The previously mentioned manner is itthaṃbhāva. Saying "the Lord" in that way is also not faulty. For he is understood and made understood by all according to their eligibility. "Most glorious ones" means those with the highest eligibility. Your purpose will be explained later. He says "netthaṃbhāvena". The wise knowers of Brahman do not wish to see the transcendental Lord, who is beyond māyā, as naturally being everything in the previously mentioned manner. (44)

Śrī Giridhara-kṛtā Bāla Prabodhinī

Regarding the question of where meritorious actions come from, it is said: From sattva. The word 'iti' here indicates causality. From the guṇas (and in brackets: qualities) like sattva as causes, through merit and sin, the three destinies of gods and others arise. The words 'gods etc.' are indicative of sages and others. Among these, from sattva, through meritorious action, the skilled and superior gods come into being; from tamas, through sinful action, the unskilled and inferior hell-beings come into being; from rajas, through action mixed with merit and sin, humans come into being - this is the distinction. Now, many destinies are observed, so why are only three mentioned? To this it is said: When one of the natures like sāttvika etc. is overpowered by the other two remaining natures, then even the single destinies are divided threefold - this is the connection. This too is said from a gross perspective. In reality, according to the gradations of those qualities and the corresponding gradations of merit and sin, various kinds of destinies arise - this is the meaning. The address 'O King' indicates agreement. 40-41

Having thus described the role of creator in the form of Brahma, the role of preserver in the form of Vishnu is now described: That same Lord, the creator of the world, bearing the form of dharma, being the protector of dharma, Vishnu bearing that form, establishing this universe in its proper limits, nourishes and protects it through incarnations as animals etc. Among these, the animal incarnations are boar, fish, tortoise, swan etc.; the human incarnations are Rama, Krishna, Parashurama etc.; the divine incarnations are Vamana, Suyajna etc. 42

The role of destroyer in the form of Rudra is described: Then, Time, the time of dissolution, aided by fire, the fire from Sankarshana's mouth, manifested in the form of Rudra, at that time withdraws this universe created by himself from his own self as the material cause, using that very Time as the instrument. An example of this independence is given: As the wind gathers the mass of clouds, so too [does he withdraw the universe]. 43

Having described creatorship etc., the purity of that which transcends these is now described in two verses: In this way, the Lord has been described in terms of creatorship etc., in accordance with scriptures like "From that Self, space arose. He desired, 'May I become many, may I propagate'". However, the wise are not able to see [the Lord] in this way. Rather, in accordance with scriptures like "Without parts, without activity, tranquil, faultless, untainted", they see only the pure [Brahman] - this is the idea. Since even with reference to the individual soul the term 'Lord' is sometimes used, to exclude that, the term 'most divine' is used, meaning one who eternally possesses the fullness of lordship and other qualities. 44

Hindī Anuvāda

From the predominance of sattva, divine beings are obtained; from the predominance of rajas, humans are obtained; and from the predominance of tamas, hellish beings are obtained. When one of these guṇas (qualities) overpowers the other two, then each state of existence is further divided into three categories. [41]

Those Lords, for the maintenance and nourishment of the world, accept the dharmic form of Viṣṇu (Vishnu) and incarnate in the forms of deities, humans, animals, birds, and others, and thus sustain the universe. [42]

When the time of dissolution arrives, those same Lords, assuming the form of Rudra as the fire of destruction, absorb this created universe into themselves, just as the wind absorbs a mass of clouds. [43]

Parīkṣit (Parikshit)! The great souls have described the Lord of inconceivable powers in this way. However, those who know the truth should not perceive Him only in the form of the creator, sustainer, and destroyer; for He is beyond even this. [44]

SB 2.10.36-40

 Text 36: He, the Personality of Godhead, manifests Himself in a transcendental form, being the subject of His transcendental name, quality, pastimes, entourage and transcendental variegatedness. Although He is unaffected by all such activities, He appears to be so engaged.

Texts 37-40: O King, know from me that all living entities are created by the Supreme Lord according to their past deeds. This includes Brahmā and his sons like Dakṣa, the periodical heads like Vaivasvata Manu, the demigods like Indra, Candra and Varuṇa, the great sages like Bhṛgu, Vyāsa and Vasiṣṭha, the inhabitants of Pitṛloka and Siddhaloka, the Cāraṇas, Gandharvas, Vidyādharas, Asuras, Yakṣas, Kinnaras and angels, the serpentines, the monkey-shaped Kimpuruṣas, the human beings, the inhabitants of Mātṛloka, the demons, Piśācas, ghosts, spirits, lunatics and evil spirits, the good and evil stars, the goblins, the animals in the forest, the birds, the household animals, the reptiles, the mountains, the moving and standing living entities, the living entities born from embryos, from eggs, from perspiration and from seeds, and all others, whether they be in the water, land or sky, in happiness, in distress or in mixed happiness and distress. All of them, according to their past deeds, are created by the Supreme Lord.

Śrīdhara Svāmi-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Vyākhyā

What was said by the Lord to Brahmā as "yadrūpaguṇakarmaka" (of what form, qualities and actions), to elaborate on that, he describes the forms of Brahmā etc. and their actions with "sa" etc. up to "itthaṃbhāvena" in the previous text. That Lord, assuming the form of Brahmā, holds names as signifier and signified, forms as the signified, and actions. The meaning is that he creates. Though active with activities through māyā (illusion), he is actually without action. || 36 ||

He elaborates on this with "prajāpatīn" etc. in three and a half verses. The accusatives are to be connected with "dhatte" (holds). There, the names of Prajāpati etc., their corresponding forms, and their respective actions are to be understood separately according to their particular distinctions. || 37 || 38 ||

After "girīn", there is the vocative "nṛpa" (O king). || 39 ||

They are of two types: immovable and movable. Among them, there are four types: born from womb, egg, sweat, and sprout. He also holds those whose abodes are water, land, and sky - this is to be connected with the previous. And what was asked by the king, "How many are the destinies of actions, O best of twice-born?", the answer to that is also given here due to relevance. Kuśalā (skillful) means superior, akuśalā (unskillful) means inferior. Miśrā is another word. Miśrā means middling, the destinies or fruits of actions that are mixtures of merit and sin. || 40 ||

Śrī Vaṃśīdhara-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Prakāśa Vyākhyā

Now he describes the sustenance and dissolution of individuals with "sa" up to "itthaṃbhāva". That supreme person, the creator of mahat etc., though without action and devoid of material activities, assuming the form of Brahmā, becomes active with activities and holds, meaning creates, the individual souls to be mentioned. The root "dhā" is used even for creation due to the multiple meanings of verbal roots. In this context, by connection, saying that everything related to that is imagined as the form of the Lord itself, it is explained that in "yadrūpaguṇakarmaka", the transcendental forms promised by the Lord himself in the four verses are shown. || 36 ||

This multiformity of qualities and actions. The connection of three and a half verses. Prajāpatīn means Dakṣa etc. Manūn means Svāyambhuva etc. Devān means Indra etc. Ṛṣīn means Marīci etc. Pitṛgaṇān means Agniṣvātta etc. Siddhān means Kapila etc. Cāraṇān means Sujña etc. Gandharvān means Citraratha etc. Vidyādharān means Sudarśana etc. Asurān means Namuci etc. Guhyakān means Kāmuka etc. || 37 ||

Kinnarān means Markaṭa etc. Apsarasas means Mañjughoṣā etc. The subdivisions of Nāga, Sarpa, and Uraga should be known from the Sarpa-siddhānta text. Nāgāś means Śeṣa etc. Sarpās means Takṣaka etc. Uragāḥ means Kuṇḍadhara etc. Kiṃpuruṣāḥ means forest-dwelling men etc. Mātaro means Brāhmī etc. Rakṣāṃsi means Sumālya etc. Piśācā means Ghaṇṭākarṇa etc. Pretā means those who died unnatural deaths. Bhūtā means Bhṛṅgī etc., the attendants of Rudra. Vināyakā means particular obstacles. || 38 ||

Kūṣmāṇḍāḥ means Khaṭvala etc. Unmādāḥ means Kālakarṇa etc. Vetālāḥ means Suvega etc., a type of Śiva's attendants. Yātudhānā means a type of demon, like Mṛgakarṇa etc. Grahā means child-afflicting spirits like Pūtanā etc., old-age afflicting spirits like Vairūpya etc., or the planets like Sun etc. Khagā means Garuḍa etc. Mṛgā means deer etc. Paśavo means cows etc. Vṛkṣā means Aśvattha etc. Girayo means Meru etc. Sarīsṛpāḥ means thousand-legged creatures etc. O Nṛpa (king) - the idea is that kings generally know everything due to their involvement in ruling. || 39 ||

If asked how he creates such objects, he says - These are the destinies of actions: kuśalāḥ (skillful) means resulting in merit, akuśalāḥ (unskilled) means resulting in sin, miśrās (mixed) means having both forms. Souls attain destinies according to their respective actions. What fault is there of the creator? This is the idea. || 40 ||

Śrī Rādhā Ramaṇa dāsa Gosvāmi Viracitā Dīpanī Vyākhyā

"Yadrūpa" etc. is the thirty-first verse of the previous chapter. || 36 ||

Prajāpatīn means Marīci and others. || 37-40 ||

Śrīmad Vīrarāghava Vyākhyā

He explains the creatorship etc. of the Lord Himself in the form of Brahmā etc. to establish the grossness as the form of the Lord Himself, saying "sa" (he). The Lord, established as the signified and signifier - established as the signified due to having the universe as His body, and established as the signifier in the form of ākāśa (space) qualities and words due to having ākāśa as His body - assumes the form of Brahmā and bears names, forms and actions. By "assuming the form of Brahmā" the previously mentioned individual form of the four-faced one etc. is understood. He bears the names like those of gods etc., forms like those of gods etc., and their actions and functions. He elaborates the names and actions up to Himself, meaning He manifests them. As it is said: "In the beginning, He created the elaboration of the names and forms of beings and their functions from the Vedic words alone." How does He do this? Without action, not controlled by action, with action, engaged merely through will. (36)

He elaborates on the bestowal of names, forms and actions with "prajāpatīn" etc. These are to be connected with "bears" as accusatives. There, the names like Prajāpati etc., their signified forms, and their actions are to be understood separately according to their particular divisions. After "girīn", there is a vocative addressing the king. (37-39)

The fourfold are in the forms of viviparous, oviparous, sweat-born and plant-born. That fourfold is: not a god, not a human, not an animal, and not a plant. Or the fourfold division is as mentioned before in the forms of gods etc. He bears those who dwell in water, on land, and in the sky - this connects with the previous. If asked why He does not bear just one form, he says with "kuśala" etc. The supreme, attainable destinations of karmas (actions), which are in the form of the merit and demerit of the knower of the field, are the fruits - skillful (highest), unskillful (lowest), and mixed (middling). The idea is that due to the variety of karmas, their fruits are also varied. (40)

Śrīmad Vijayadhvaja Tīrtha-kṛtā Pada Ratnāvalī Vyākhyā

He refutes the misinterpretation that in the illusory world, the wise do not grasp or accept both the effect and cause forms, saying "sa vācye" (he as the signified). Hari, the one ruler, controls the names which are signifiers, and also the forms and actions which are signified. "He is with action due to being the agent, without action due to being fruitless" - the verse is explained thus. "Fruitless" means not dependent on the fruits of actions. If asked how one can be the agent of various names, forms and actions without illusion, it is said "brahma" (the absolute). It means He manifests due to being the bearer of the form denoted by the word Brahman which pervades inside and outside. Or due to being enveloped by the mass of Vedic and other words, since Brahman is said to be "the Veda, austerity, and truth", as the manifest world is established by the Veda etc. and thus real, if it were illusory the Veda etc. would be invalid, and the unity it proclaims would also be so, therefore it logically follows that the universe itself is real - this is what is being stated. (36)

He clarifies what was said with "prajāpati" etc. It connects with the previous "He bears all names, forms and actions, starting from those of Prajāpati etc." (37) Mothers are Aditi etc. or the Brāhmī goddesses etc. Piśācas (goblins) are Ghaṇṭākarṇa etc. Bhūtas (spirits) are the followers of Rudra like Bhṛṅgi etc. Vināyakas are Vighna etc. (38) Kūṣmāṇḍas are Rukmāṅka etc. Unmādas (maniacs) are Kālakarṇa etc. Yātudhānas are a type of demon like Bhṛgukutsa etc. Grahas are the 18 or 9 planets. O king, kings are Priyavrata etc. Sarīsṛpas (reptiles) are Sahasrapāda etc. (39) As it is impossible to count, he indicates generally with "dvividhā" (twofold). The word "nabhas" (sky) is used in both genders, as stated in the lexicon: "The sky with sound as its quality is called vyoma, ṛkṣapatha, ākāśa, nabhas, puṣkara, gagana, Viṣṇu's abode, dyaus, and ātra." He states the reason for their being highest etc. with "kuśala" etc. These mentioned species are the destinations or fruits of skillful etc. karmas. (40)

Śrīmaj Jīva Gosvāmi-kṛtā Krama Sandarbha Vyākhyā

Therefore everything related to this is conceived as the form of the Lord alone, he says with "sa vācye" (he as the signified). But in "of which form, qualities and actions", the transcendental ones promised by the Lord Himself in the four verses have already been explained as shown by Himself. (36) "Prajāpatīn" etc. is one and a half verses. (37-40)

Śrīmad Viśvanātha Cakravarti-kṛtā Sārārtha darśinī Vyākhyā

Now he describes the creation, maintenance and dissolution of the individual beings with "sa" (he) up to "ittham-bhāvena" (in this way). That creator of mahat etc., the supreme person, the supreme Lord, though without action (without material activity), assuming the form of Brahman, becomes active (engaged). As the signified and signifier - as the signified He bears the forms and actions, as the signifier the names - He creates the individual souls to be mentioned. (36) He shows those very ones with "prajāpatīn" etc. These accusatives connect with "bears". (37-38) "Nṛpa" is a vocative address. Twofold means in stationary and moving forms. Fourfold means in viviparous, oviparous, sweat-born and plant-born forms. And threefold means in forms dwelling in water, on land and in the sky. He bears others too - this connects with the previous. (39) If asked why He creates such objects, he says: These are the destinations of karmas - skillful means resulting in merit, unskillful in sin, and mixed in both. Souls attain destinations according to their individual karmas - what fault is there of the creator? This is the idea. This should be understood as the answer to the king's question "How many destinations of karma are there, O best of twice-born?" (40)

Śrīmac Chukadeva-kṛta Siddhānta Pradīpaḥ

The Lord answers the king's question about the various paths of karma and the nature of the twice-born by showing, through his partial incarnations Brahmā and Rudra and his full avatars, that he is the creator of the names and forms to be attained, etc. He restrains them in time like the wind gathering clouds.

That Lord, assuming the form of Brahmā, establishes names, forms and actions through the relationship between words and their meanings - he establishes names as signifiers, and forms and actions as the signified, meaning he creates them. He is active, engaged in activity. But lest one think he is bound by karma like ordinary beings, it is said he is akarmaka (free from karma). This means he is not controlled by karma. The reason for this is that he is para (supreme), meaning he is complete. 36

He elaborates on the creation of names and forms, starting with "prajāpatīn" (the progenitors). The accusative forms are connected with "dhatte" (he establishes). Here, the names like Prajāpati etc., their corresponding forms, and their actions should be understood as separate according to their respective subdivisions. 37-39

"Others" refers to the two types: sthāvara (immobile) and jaṅgama (mobile). The well-known four types are jarāyuja (viviparous), aṇḍaja (oviparous), svedaja (born of sweat), and udbhijja (born from sprouts). Those dwelling in water, land and sky are of three types: aquatic, terrestrial and aerial. He also establishes these, connected with the previous statement. These paths of karma, characterized by the names and forms of Prajāpati etc., performed by living beings and mixed with merit, are kuśala (skillful/good), uttama (superior), akuśala (unskillful/bad), nīca (low), and miśra (mixed), madhyama (middling) - these are the results. 40

Śrīmad Vallabhācārya Viracitā Subodhinī Vyākhyā

If one asks how the Lord assumes such a form, he responds: "sa vācyavācakatayā" (He, through the relationship between words and meanings). That Lord, by establishing names and forms in that which is without name and form, and becoming thus, performs the protection etc. of the world. While remaining undiminished in his essential nature, bearing the form of Brahman which is sat-cit-ānanda (existence-consciousness-bliss), he establishes names, forms and actions for all living beings. He makes names, forms and actions similar to himself. He himself is active, but not in the same way as ordinary beings. Because in reality he is akarmaka (free from karma), devoid of all karma. He is also the controller of all. Though such, to produce everything, he assumes a form consisting of the three guṇas and the unmanifest. 36

If one asks who are those for whose sake he himself became threefold, he responds with three verses starting with "prajāpatīn". Some are predominantly of one quality. Some are mixed. He enumerates the individual types in three verses. There is a gradual decrease in superiority. First are the Prajāpatis like Marīci etc. up to the Guhyakas, representing a decrease in sattva. Kinnaras etc. up to Vināyakas are rajasic. Kūṣmāṇḍas etc. up to reptiles are tamasic. Others mixed in these various categories he counts as two types: immobile and mobile. The four types are born from wombs, eggs, sweat and sprouts. Those other than the previously mentioned should be understood as of mixed origin. Still, there is a threefold division based on location: those dwelling in water, land and sky. Water etc. are their abodes. Those in water are rajasic. Those on land are sattvic. Those in the sky are tamasic. 37-39

Having thus established the threefold nature of all beings in terms of their essential nature and location, he also states their threefold nature in terms of results: kuśala (skillful), akuśala (unskilled) and miśra (mixed). The threefold path of karma is divided based on sattva etc. Sattvic karma with auspicious results is called kuśala. Tamasic karma with inauspicious results is called akuśala. Rajasic karma with mixed results is called miśra. Thus the paths of karma, the types of means and results of karma, are threefold. Kuśala and akuśala together are kuśalākuśala. Miśra are undivided. These alone are the paths of karma, not others. He states their root names as sattva, rajas and tamas. These are the root names of kuśala, akuśala and miśra. Sattva is the name for kuśala. Tamas for akuśala. Rajas for miśra. The bodies created by these are also threefold: sura (celestial), nṛ (human) and nāraka (hellish). Sattva, rajas and tamas connect with both. Suras are sattva. Humans are rajas. Hell-beings are tamas. There are only these three. Animals etc. are included among the hell-beings. 40

Śrīmad Gosvāmi Śrī Puruṣottama Caraṇa Viracitaḥ Śrī Subodhinī Prakāśaḥ

Regarding "sa vācyavācakatayā": If one asks how he directly assumes all forms himself while using māyā as an instrument, this explains the method. The explanation of vācyavācakatva (the relationship between words and meanings) is "anāmarūpātmani nāmarūpe" (names and forms in that which is without name and form). Thus, having established names and forms in the imperishable which is without name and form through the connection with māyā, and becoming of such a nature with the qualities of various avatars etc., he performs various acts accordingly. This is the method in creation for the sake of others. 36

Regarding "dvividhā": Even so, in the twofold and fourfold divisions. 39

Śrī Giridhara-kṛtā Bāla Prabodhinī

To strengthen the aforementioned all-pervading nature of the Lord, His role as the creator of the universe in the form of Brahmā and others is stated, beginning with "sa" (He). By "itthambhāvena" (in this manner), it refers to the previous text. He, who is supreme, free from association with material qualities, and without action or any activity, yet assuming the form of Brahmā, becomes active and engaged. He creates the names of beings such as devas (gods) and humans as their designators, their forms as the designated, and their respective actions as the means for attaining their respective fruits according to their status. That is, He creates them. (36)

This is further elaborated in the next three and a half verses. The accusative-ending words are to be connected with "dhatte" (holds or creates). Here, the names like Prajāpati and others, their designated forms, and their respective actions should be understood. Separately, according to their subdivisions. (37, 38)

After "girīn nityasya", the vocative "nṛpa" (O king) is used to inspire confidence. (39)

And those others who are different from the aforementioned, of two types - stationary and mobile, of four kinds - born from wombs, eggs, sweat, and sprouts, whose abodes are water, land, and sky - these too He creates, as connected with the previous statement. And as it was asked by the king, "How many are the paths of karma, and of what nature, O best of the twice-born?", the answer to this is also given here incidentally - "kuśala" (skilled). These are the paths or fruits of actions - virtuous, sinful, and mixed. (40)

Hindī Anuvāda

In reality, God is inactive. He becomes active only through His own power. Then, assuming the form of Brahma or Virat, He manifests as the expressed and the expresser - the word and its meaning - and accepts many names, forms, and actions. [36]

O Parikshit! All the names and forms that exist in the world belong to God alone, such as Prajapati, Manu, deities, sages, ancestors, siddhas (accomplished beings), caranas (celestial singers), gandharvas (celestial musicians), vidyadharas (bearers of knowledge), asuras (demons), yakshas (nature spirits), kinnaras (celestial beings), apsaras (celestial nymphs), nagas (serpent beings), serpents, kimpurushas (half-human, half-animal beings), uragas (serpent beings), matrikas (divine mothers), rakshasas (demons), pisacas (evil spirits), pretas (ghosts), bhutas (spirits), vinayakas (obstacles), kushmandas (type of demons), unmadas (types of spirits), vetalas (vampires), yatudhanas (sorcerers), grahas (planets), birds, wild animals, domestic animals, trees, mountains, reptiles, and so on. [37-39]

In the world, there are two types of beings - mobile and immobile - and four types based on their birth - jarayuja (born from a womb), andaja (born from eggs), svedaja (born from sweat), and udbhijja (born from the earth). All aquatic, terrestrial, and aerial creatures, whatever they may be, are the fruits of their respective auspicious, inauspicious, or mixed actions. [40]

SB 2.10.31-35

 Text 31: The seven elements of the body, namely the thin layer on the skin, the skin itself, the flesh, blood, fat, marrow and bone, are all made of earth, water and fire, whereas the life breath is produced by the sky, water and air.

Text 32: The sense organs are attached to the modes of material nature, and the modes of material nature are products of the false ego. The mind is subjected to all kinds of material experiences (happiness and distress), and the intelligence is the feature of the mind’s deliberation.

Text 33: Thus by all this, the external feature of the Personality of Godhead is covered by gross forms such as those of planets, which were explained to you by me.

Text 34: Therefore beyond this [gross manifestation] is a transcendental manifestation finer than the finest form. It has no beginning, no intermediate stage and no end; therefore it is beyond the limits of expression or mental speculation and is distinct from the material conception.

Text 35: Neither of the above forms of the Lord, as just described unto you from the material angle of vision, is accepted by the pure devotees of the Lord who know Him well.

Śrīdhara Svāmi-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Vyākhyā

Having thus divided the differences between adhideva and others, he now describes the nature of dhātus and other elements that are parts of it in two verses beginning with "tvak". Tvak is the gross skin, and the subtle skin situated above it. The seven dhātus starting with tvak and ending with asthi are mentioned in dvandva compound as one. These dhātus are made of earth, water and fire. Although they are made of five elements, it is stated thus because air and ether do not contribute to their nourishment through food etc. [31]

Guṇātmakāni means those whose nature is oriented towards guṇas like sound etc. It means their nature is oriented towards sense objects. The guṇas like sound etc. arise from the ahaṃkāra of bhūtādi progressively. Just as the beautiful nature imagined by ahaṃkāra is not real, that is the purport. Here is the reason - because mind alone is the essence of all modifications. Buddhi is in the form of knowledge of such objects, but does not grasp the supreme truth - this is said for the purpose of detachment. By this, the nature of buddhi and manas is also stated. [32]

He concludes: Etat (This). With prakṛti, the eight. [33]

Having stated the gross, he now describes the subtle, the collective liṅga śarīra. Ataḥ param means beyond this. The subtle, imperceptible cause of this gross, which is avyakta (unmanifest). Why is it so? Because it is without attributes, without beginning, middle or end, devoid of origin, existence and dissolution, eternal, always of one form, free from decay etc. is the meaning. Therefore, beyond speech and mind, which are in dvandva unity. [34]

He refutes the two forms superimposed on the Lord for worship. Amunī means they do not really accept, as they are created by māyā. [35]

Śrī Vaṃśīdhara-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Prakāśa Vyākhyā

Nourished by ether and water means the prāṇas are indeed air, that is the meaning. The plural instrumental case is used for emphasis. [31]

Ityarthaḥ means in reality, since sound etc. are bondage-causing, they have no beauty - this is the purport. Here, regarding the unattractiveness of the guṇas, the idea is that mind alone enlivens all modifications. It makes saṃkalpa-vikalpa only in tamasic objects, not in discrimination between what is to be accepted or rejected. Buddhi is in the form of knowledge of such objects, but does not grasp the supreme truth. By this the nature of buddhi and manas is stated. The context is that modifications are joy, sorrow etc. Vijñāna is the power of discrimination. As stated in "buddhīndriyamanaḥ prāṇān" etc. It should be known that it can also be of the supreme truth. [32]

With mahī etc. - earth, water, fire, air, ether, mahat, ahaṃkāra and prakṛti - each having ten qualities progressively more. [33]

Ataḥ sthūlāt means from this gross. Asya sthūlasya means of this gross. Tadavyaktatvam means its unmanifest nature. Nirviśeṣaṇam means devoid of color, form etc. That which is with the gross. To say it is not associated with individual origin etc., he states Anādi etc. Therefore, in relation to that, though eternal, due to being attributeless, it is beyond speech and mind. Thus by saying it is most subtle and unmanifest, two are obtained here - subtle and very subtle. Subtle is the liṅga śarīra, very subtle is in the form of māyā. Nirviśeṣaṇam etc. - it is described by four adjectives. [34]

Amunī in dual number, as the gross collective and individual are one, and the two subtle are also one. Na gṛhṇāti means they do not accept as attainable, but only for worship in the initial stage, as they are created by māyā. The third very subtle, which is the cause, is indeed māyā. But the wise devotees do not accept even in the initial stage, but only the pure sattva form of Rāma, Kṛṣṇa, Nārāyaṇa, Nṛsiṃha etc. in both the means and goal stages. [35]

Śrī Rādhā Ramaṇa dāsa Gosvāmi Viracitā Dīpanī Vyākhyā

Tvak sthūlam etc. - The subtle skin above is tvak. The gross skin is inside, that is the meaning. Evam uktam means the earthiness etc. of the three elements is stated. [31]

Sarvavikarāṇām means of desire, anger, greed, delusion, sorrow etc. [32] [33]

Avyaktam means not manifested by eyes etc. [34] [35]

Śrīmad Vīrarāghava Vyākhyā

Thus, having described the division of the collective and individual parts from the body of Brahman, although they are common to all beings, he states their nature based on the predominance of particular elements, saying "tvak" (skin). The outer thick skin is tvak. The thin skin situated above it is tvak. These seven dhātus (tissues) from tvak (skin) to asthi (bone) are mentioned in dvandva compound as one. These seven dhātus are made of earth, water and fire, while prāṇa (life force) is composed of ether, water and air. (31)

Guṇātmā (of the nature of qualities) means the sense organs are of the nature of qualities, having the nature of perceiving sound and other qualities. What are those qualities made of? He says "bhūtādi" (the primordial elements). Bhūtādi is ahaṃkāra (ego), from which the qualities like sound originate. The sense organs, being produced from that, are of that nature. Manas (mind) is the basis of all modifications like desire, will, etc. Buddhi (intellect) is in the form of vijñāna (consciousness), the mahat-tattva, by which one knows. Buddhi is called mahān (great) as per the statement "Truly, buddhi is characterized as great". (32)

He concludes with "etad" (this). This material universe containing gods and other individual beings, which is of the nature of consciousness, is enclosed in this egg-like shell made of the Vedic meters. It is externally covered by the eight coverings of earth, water, fire, air, ether, ego, intellect and unmanifest nature. This gross form of the Lord has been properly explained to you by me. (33)

He says "ataḥ" (hence) to indicate there is another form different from this. This verse refers to the individual soul, as the unmanifest has been mentioned, otherwise the equal number would not be justified. There is another subtler form of the Lord beyond this gross form, established as superior, described in the scriptures as "finer than a hundredth part of a hair's tip", which is the nature of the liberated self. Why is it subtler? It is avyakta (unmanifest), not manifest to the senses. Why? It is nirviśeṣaṇa (without attributes), lacking qualities like sound, touch, form, etc. Why is it without attributes? It is beyond speech and mind, beyond the comprehension of gods, humans, etc. Why is that? It has no beginning, middle or end - no origin, intermediate state or destruction. Why is that? It is eternal, unlimited by time. (34)

Having thus described the nature of the liberated self that has transcended the realm of prakṛti (nature), he negates its status as an object of auspicious meditation for both the bound and liberated souls, as the bound are enveloped by ignorance and the liberated lack inherent purity, saying "amunī" (these two). The worshippers do not grasp or meditate on these two gross and subtle forms of the Lord described by me to you. Why? Because the wise know that bondage and liberation depend on the will of the all-knowing Brahman, whose creation is based on māyā (illusion) and saṃkalpa (will). The embodied bound soul is impure due to being enveloped by ignorance, and the liberated self inherently lacks purity, so they are not fit objects of meditation. Rather, only the manifest form of the Supreme Self established in Vedānta as "of the color of the sun" etc. is to be meditated upon. Thus Śaunaka has negated the status of objects of auspicious meditation for the four-faced Brahmā, Sanaka and others within the world who are enveloped by ignorance, as well as for those who later attain enlightenment through yoga and realize their true nature, due to their lack of inherent purity, saying: "All beings from Brahmā down to a blade of grass situated within the world are subject to transmigration produced by karma. Therefore they are not helpful in meditation for meditators. All of them are encompassed by ignorance and within the realm of saṃsāra. Even those who later attain enlightenment are helpful only through meditation. Their knowledge is not natural, as it comes from an external source. Therefore that pure Brahman alone, which is naturally enlightened, is to be primarily meditated upon." However, meditation on them as the glories of the Lord is certainly approved. (35)

Śrīmad Vijayadhvaja Tīrtha-kṛtā Pada Ratnāvalī Vyākhyā

The seven dhātus (tissues) starting from tvac (skin) have become the cause of the body's stability, is the remaining meaning. Their source is stated as bhūmi (earth). The cause of the gross form of prāṇa (vital force) which is presided over by the main prāṇa is stated as prāṇa. The gross prāṇa presided over by the main prāṇa is created by ether, water and air, is the remaining meaning. (31)

The cause of the sense organs is stated as guṇa (qualities). Guṇas are sattva and others. The cause of the guṇas is stated as buddhi (intellect). It is in the form of vijñāna (discernment) and niścayajñāna (decisive knowledge). (32)

This clarifies that Brahman's body is the image of the Lord. This gross virāṭ-named body of Brahman, covered by eight sheaths consisting of the five elements, ahaṃkāra (ego), mahat-tattva and prakṛti, is the image form of Lord Nārāyaṇa - this has been explained to you by me, is the construction. The gross form of the Lord is called Brahman's body, as stated in the tantras. (33)

Now then, what is Hari's own form like? It is explained here: Beyond this body of Brahman, though distinct, is it not gross? No, it is stated as sūkṣmatama (subtlest). Subtler than even the subtle, as per the śruti "aṇor aṇīyān". Being imperceptible due to lack of large dimensions, devotees' desire to see and worship would be futile, hence it is stated as avyakta (unmanifest). Even if having large dimensions, it would not be visible without His grace, is the meaning. As per the śruti "mahato mahīyān" and "yamevaiṣa vṛṇute tena labhya", and "subtle, bearing conch, disc and mace". How can this apply if some other superlative attribute is possible? Hence it is stated as nirviśeṣaṇa (without attributes). That from which distinguishing attributes have departed is so called, as seen in "poets are unable to describe this poem". Even for such an entity, could it not have a beginning and end like a pot? To remove this doubt of the dull-minded, it is stated as anādi (beginningless). Without beginning, middle or end. This is not figurative, hence stated as nitya (eternal). Eternal means indestructible. As per the śruti "nityo nityānām". Even if not visible by nature, it could be an object of speech etc., hence stated as beyond speech and mind, beyond the scope of speech and mind, or superior to Sarasvatī and Rudra. (34)

He concludes with the idea that both are to be grasped by the discerning, saying amunī (these two). These two forms of the Lord, gross and subtle, have been described by me to you. In this world created by māyā and prakṛti by the Lord's wish, those who are avipaścitaḥ (unwise), weak in knowledge, do not grasp or know both these forms, is the construction. (35)

Śrīmaj Jīva Gosvāmi-kṛtā Krama Sandarbha Vyākhyā

Tvak means the subtle skin above the gross skin called carma. Prāṇa is made of ether etc. (31)

Incidentally, the nature of the senses is stated as guṇātmaka. Their innate nature is connection with the guṇas or sense objects. Vikāras are joy, sorrow etc. Vijñāna is the power of discrimination. As stated "intellect, senses, mind, vital forces" etc., it should be known to be ultimately real also. (32-33)

"Beyond this" means free from attributes like color, form etc. It does not have origin etc. along with the gross in individuals, hence stated as anādi (beginningless). Thus it is eternal, but being attributeless, it is beyond speech and mind. Hence it is subtlest. Hence it is unmanifest. (34)

Amunī means these two. (35)

Śrīmad Viśvanātha Cakravarti-kṛtā Sārārtha darśinī Vyākhyā

Having divided the difference between adhideva and others, he describes the nature of dhātu and others which are parts of it in two verses beginning with "tvag". The difference between tvak and carma should be understood as gross and subtle. The seven dhātus from tvak to asthi are made of earth, water, and fire. Although they are made of five elements, it is said so because air and ether do not contribute to their nourishment through food etc. Prāṇa (with English translation: vital air) means that the air nourished by ether and water is called prāṇa. The third person plural is archaic. (31)

Guṇātmaka means those whose nature is to function in guṇas like sound etc. Guṇas like sound etc. come prominently from bhūtādi ahaṃkāra. The mind alone animates all modifications, that is the meaning. Vijñāna (with English translation: discernment) is the power of discrimination in that form. (32)

Sthūla refers to the collective. By mahyādi it means the great collective, the very gross. (33)

Having described the gross, he describes the subtle with "ata". From "sūkṣmatama" itself, both subtle and very subtle are obtained. Here, sūkṣma means the subtle body, atisūkṣma means the form of māyā, described by four adjectives like nirviśeṣaṇa etc. (34)

He negates the two forms superimposed on the Lord for the purpose of worship. "Amunī" is in dual number because of the oneness of the gross collective and great collective. They do not accept as attainable, but only for worship in the initial stage. Because they are created by māyā. The third, which is very subtle, is the cause - māyā itself. Moreover, the wise devoted to pure devotion do not accept even in the initial stage, but accept only the pure sattva form of Rāma, Kṛṣṇa, Nārāyaṇa, Nṛsiṃha etc. in both the stages of practice and accomplishment. (35)

Śrīmac Chukadeva-kṛta Siddhānta Pradīpaḥ

Having thus divided the difference between the collective body parts, heart, senses etc., he describes the nature of dhātu etc. which are parts of it in two verses beginning with "tvag". Tvak is gross skin, carma is subtle above it. From tvak to asthi are mentioned as a compound in singular. Those seven dhātus are made of earth, water and fire. Although they are made of five elements, it is said so because earth etc. are found in abundance and air and ether do not contribute to their nourishment through food etc. But prāṇa is endowed with ether, water and air, a special state of air produced from ether. The body is unable to exist without water, that is the idea. (31)

Guṇātmaka means those whose nature is inclined towards guṇas. Although the sense organs of knowledge are inclined towards sound etc., the organs of action are also characterized by guṇas as they are useful in grasping the Lord's form etc. and in activities like walking etc. Guṇas like sound etc. come prominently from bhūtādi, the tamasic ahaṃkāra. The mind, born from vaikārika, is the cause of all modifications, the cause of bondage and liberation. As it is said - "The mind alone is the cause of bondage and liberation for humans. Attached to sense objects it leads to bondage; devoted to the Supreme Person, to liberation." Buddhi is in the form of vijñāna, the instrument of knowledge mentioned in "The man of wisdom surrenders unto Me" etc. (32)

He concludes the description of the collective form with "etad". This previously mentioned gross form of the Lord, the substratum of the elements, enclosed by eight coverings made of earth, water, fire, air, ether, ahaṃkāra, mahat and prakṛti, has been described by me to you. This means - this body belongs to the Lord mentioned earlier by words like Puruṣa, Nārāyaṇa etc. The attributes of individual souls mentioned there like "exhaling, he created hunger" etc. refer to the four-faced Brahmā presiding over the collective body. Mentions of individual bodies like "two hands grew" etc. indicate that the same process applies to individual bodies too. (33)

Having described the gross collective body, he describes the subtle collective body. Beyond this gross form, there is another most subtle form which is without attributes, devoid of specifications from mahat to earth, without beginning, middle or end, devoid of the three states, eternal, beyond speech and mind as their cause, unmanifest, in the form of the Lord's power called pradhāna. (34)

Thus, to remove attachment, aversion etc. which obstruct liberation in gods, humans etc. who are parts of the cosmic body, and to establish the distinct nature beyond the two forms, these two gross and subtle forms of the Lord have been described by me to you. The wise devoted to the Lord who is distinct from the two illusory forms do not accept these for worship, as they are created by māyā. As it is said - "Until devotion arises in this supreme Lord of the universe, the seer, one should remember with effort the grosser form of the Puruṣa at the end of activities." The meditation on the gross form and its injunction have been shown earlier. (35)

Śrīmad Vallabhācārya Viracitā Subodhinī Vyākhyā

Thus, having described the threefold nature of everything, the physical nature of the spheres, the spiritual nature of the senses, and the divine nature of the deities, the combined threefold nature is explained. Suspecting that the skin and other parts are made only of food and thus not threefold, he states their threefold nature: tvak (skin), carma (hide), and māṃsa (flesh) (skin, leather, and meat). Tvak is the outermost layer. Carma is thick. Although blood exists before it, māṃsa is described first due to its solid state. Medas (fat) is well-known in growth and other processes. Majjā (marrow) is inside the bone. Asthi (bone) is well-known. Snāyu (sinew) is not well-known and is included within fat. It forms a covering for bones. All these seven are made of fire and food. He states: "They are made of earth, water, and fire." Earth is like food. Although made of five elements, they have a threefold nature in order. Or they are simply threefold. He describes the threefold nature of prāṇa (life force): "By space, water, and air." Prāṇa is also threefold through space, water, and air, as it pervades the entire body, nourishes it, and is of the nature of air. (31)

He also describes the threefold nature of the senses: "The senses are of the nature of the guṇas (qualities)." All senses are indeed made of the three guṇas. Thus they generate worldly activity, dharma, devotion, and knowledge. He also describes the threefold nature of ahaṅkāra (ego): "The guṇas originate from bhūtādi." Bhūtādi is ahaṅkāra. Where the origin of the elements is. Or those whose origin is from the elements. The threefold nature of ahaṅkāra is clear from the differences in bhūtādi, etc. Or bhūtādi itself means ahaṅkāra. The origin of the three guṇas from it is clear. Thus its three-guṇa nature is clear as it generates the guṇas. He describes the threefold nature of the mind: "The mind is of the nature of all modifications." All modifications are indeed threefold. Being made of that, the mind is also threefold. He states that buddhi (intellect) is also threefold: "Buddhi is of the nature of vijñāna (discernment)." Vijñāna is diverse knowledge. As that is threefold, buddhi, which is of its nature, is also threefold. (32)

Thus, having established the threefold nature of everything, he concludes: "This is the form of the Lord." All this previously described threefold nature is the gross body, the form of the Lord. The meaning is that I have explained this to you for your sake. The description in terms of the three guṇas is explained according to your qualification. Indeed, the form of the Lord appears as all forms according to the qualification of all, as the śruti states: "They worship Him according to their understanding." (33)

Having thus described the threefold nature to the king, he now describes the subtle form and the unmanifest form beyond that for those of even higher qualification: "Beyond this." This controller is superior to and distinct from the gross form consisting of the seven coverings starting with earth. It is extremely subtle, even more subtle than space, etc. Its specific form should not be described. Since it is avyakta (unmanifest), not revealed by any quality. Anticipating that its specific qualities will then be revealed, he states: "Without attributes." Free from all attributes. The meaning is that it is free from all distinguishing qualities. He states that it has no origin, etc.: "Without beginning, middle, or end." It is free from beginning, middle, and end. It is eternal, always of one form. It is beyond speech and mind, transcending all interactions. (34)

Thus, the subtle form has been described as similar to the gross in all ways. He concludes both: "These two forms of the Lord." As before, I have described these to you for your sake. But we have no use for this. He states: "The wise do not accept either." The reason for this: "They are created by māyā." They have become thus only through connection with māyā in the form of cause and effect. Because they are direct knowers of the true nature. (35)

Śrīmad Gosvāmi Śrī Puruṣottama Caraṇa Viracitaḥ Śrī Subodhinī Prakāśaḥ

In tvakcarmeti, only three forms are mentioned. This is because in the Chandogya Upanishad, only trivṛtkaraṇa (tripartite creation) is mentioned. Thus, the pañcīkaraṇa (quintuplication) view refers to a different kalpa (cosmic cycle). (31)

Regarding guṇātmakāni, the statement "qualities originate from bhūtādi" does not imply that qualities existed before puruṣa (primordial being), which would contradict the initial proposition of dividing one puruṣa into three. Rather, as bhūtādi commonly refers to ahaṅkāra (ego), it is this threefold division that is intended here. To address the issue of plural usage, they explain that the qualities originating from the elements, senses, and mind are the threefold ahaṅkārika qualities, referring to the threefold nature of their cause. This applies to both interpretations. They cite the threefold nature of ahaṅkāra as authoritative evidence for this explanation. The second view is supported by the mention of bhūtādi, referring to the primordial ahaṅkāra. (32)

In etad bhagavato rūpam, the phrase "te vyāhṛtam" is explained as referring to the triguṇa (three qualities) nature. The reasoning is as follows: If the king had asked about the nature of Puruṣottama, how to seek refuge in him, and how to worship him, Śuka would have described the main transcendental form and pastimes. However, the king asked what should be done wholeheartedly and what should be done by those about to die. Śuka understood the first question as relating to the primary means of attaining the main goal, and the second as stemming from a desire for quick liberation due to fear of worldly existence. Realizing that fearlessness was the main goal, Śuka determined that the king was not yet qualified for hearing about the main pastimes, but was qualified for hearing about Vāsudeva's pastimes. Thus, he instructed the practice of devotion to Vāsudeva along with his pastimes, including śravaṇa (hearing) and other practices. Even if the king had been qualified, Śuka did not describe the main pastimes as mentioned in "aham evāsam eva" because the king would not have understood due to lack of qualification. (33)

In ataḥ param, mahyādi refers to the seven upper coverings. There is no contradiction between the previous mention of seven coverings and the current mention of eight, as the previous statement referred to the specific seven coverings, while here the general category is included, making eight. Ādimadhyāvasānarahitam means without limitations. Sthūlasadṛśam implies similarity to the manifest, as the term avyakta (unmanifest) excludes the manifest. (34)

Regarding amunī, to address how it can have a beginning, middle, and end without being created by māyā (illusion), they explain that while its form is a reflection created by māyā, its essential nature possesses the previously mentioned qualities, thus reconciling both aspects. As for why learned people don't perceive it as the form of Bhagavān (the Supreme Lord), they explain that it is not relevant for those with primary qualification, who therefore don't perceive it as such, rather than considering it unreal. (35)

Śrī Giridhara-kṛtā Bāla Prabodhinī

Having thus divided the differences between the divine and other aspects, he now describes the nature of the components such as dhātu (dhatu) and others - with two verses beginning with tvak (skin). Tvak is the subtle outer skin. Carma (skin) is the thick skin underneath. The seven dhātus (tissues) from tvak to asthi (bone) are mentioned in dvandva compound as one. They are made of earth, water and fire elements. Although they are made of five elements, since air and ether do not contribute to their nourishment in the form of food etc., they are said to be products of only the three elements of earth etc. Prāṇa (vital air) is made of ether, water and air - this is to be understood. || 31 ||

All the sense organs like the eye etc. are of the nature of guṇas (qualities), products of rajo-guṇa (rajas quality), and hence are naturally inclined towards their objects like sound etc. which are also products of guṇas (qualities). But it is well-known that the sense organs like eye etc. and their objects like sound etc. are products of ahaṅkāra (ego). So how can they be products of guṇas (qualities)? To answer this, he says - "guṇas (qualities) originate from bhūtādi (elements)". The guṇas (qualities) originate from bhūtādi which is ahaṅkāra (ego). The idea is that they are products of guṇas (qualities) through the medium of ahaṅkāra (ego). Therefore, being products of guṇas (qualities) through ahaṅkāra (ego), the mind itself is the essence of all modifications like desire, anger, greed, delusion, sorrow etc. Even buddhi (intellect) is of the nature of various types of knowledge, but does not grasp the ultimate reality. || 32 ||

He summarizes what was said - with etad (this). This gross form of the Lord in the form of the universe, enclosed by the eight coverings increasing tenfold, consisting of mahī (earth) etc., namely earth, water, fire, air, ether, ahaṅkāra (ego), mahat and avyakta (unmanifest), has been explained by me to you - this is the connection. || 33 ||

Having thus described the gross form, he now says that there is also a subtle collective subtle body different from this - with ataḥ param (beyond this). Beyond this gross form, there is another causal form of His which is eternally existent, of one form, free from decay etc., beyond speech and mind, that is, beyond their reach, transcending all worldly dealings - this is to be connected with the rest. He gives the reason for it being beyond worldly dealings - avyakta (unmanifest). It is not manifested by eyes etc. He gives the reason for that - sūkṣmatamam (most subtle). He gives the reason for that too - nirviśeṣaṇam (without attributes), meaning devoid of all distinguishing characteristics. He gives the reason for its eternality - anādimadhyanidhanam (without beginning, middle or end), meaning free from origin, sustenance and dissolution. || 34 ||

He refutes the two forms of the Lord described for the purpose of worship - with amunī (these two). These two gross and subtle forms of the Lord have been described by me to you for the purpose of worship. The wise ones do not accept both of these as ultimate reality. Why? Because they are created by māyā (illusion), meaning they are products of prakṛti (nature). || 35 ||

Hindī Anuvāda

In the body of the Virāṭ Puruṣa (Cosmic Being), seven elements appeared from earth, water, and fire - skin, flesh, blood, fat, marrow, bone, etc. Similarly, the vital forces originated from ether, water, and air. [31]

All senses like the ear, etc., are capable of perceiving their respective objects like sound, etc. These objects have originated from ahaṅkāra (ego). The mind is the source of all modifications, and the intellect is responsible for cognizing all objects. [32]

I have described to you this gross form of the Lord. It is surrounded by eight coverings from the outside - earth, water, fire, air, ether, ahaṅkāra (ego), mahat-tattva (cosmic intelligence), and prakṛti (primordial nature). [33]

Beyond this is the extremely subtle form of the Lord. It is avyakta (unmanifest), nirviśeṣa (without attributes), without beginning, middle, or end, and eternal. Speech and mind cannot reach there. [34]

I have described to you these two forms of the Lord - gross and subtle, manifest and unmanifest. Both of these are created by the Lord's māyā (illusion). Therefore, wise people do not accept either of these. [35]

SB 2.10.26-30

 Text 26: Thereupon, for sexual pleasure, begetting offspring and tasting heavenly nectar, the Lord developed the genitals, and thus there is the genital organ and its controlling deity, the Prajāpati. The object of sexual pleasure and the controlling deity are under the control of the genitals of the Lord.

Text 27: Thereafter, when He desired to evacuate the refuse of eatables, the evacuating hole, anus, and the sensory organ thereof developed along with the controlling deity Mitra. The sensory organ and the evacuating substance are both under the shelter of the controlling deity.

Text 28: Thereafter, when He desired to move from one body to another, the navel and the air of departure and death were combinedly created. The navel is the shelter for both, namely death and the separating force.

Text 29: When there was a desire to have food and drink, the abdomen and the intestines and also the arteries became manifested. The rivers and seas are the source of their sustenance and metabolism.

Text 30: When there was a desire to think about the activities of His own energy, then the heart (the seat of the mind), the mind, the moon, determination and all desire became manifested.

Śrīdhara Svāmi-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Vyākhyā

Offspring, pleasure, bliss, sexual enjoyment, immortality, heaven, etc. are desired by those who seek them. The penis is the seat, the genitals are the sense organ, and Prajāpati is the presiding deity. This should be known. The pleasure related to desires depends on both the sense organ and the deity. (26)

For one wishing to expel the waste products of consumed food etc., the anus and excretion are the seat, sense organ, deity and object. It depends on both (organ and deity). (27)

For one wishing to transmigrate from this body to other bodies and go everywhere, the navel is the passage. Separation through the downward moving breath is death. The navel etc. are the seats etc. It is well-known that death occurs when the bond between prāṇa (life breath) and apāna (downward moving air) in the navel is broken. (28)

For one wishing to consume food and drink, the stomach, intestines and channels were created. The stomach is the seat, the intestines are the organ for collecting food, and the channels are for collecting liquids. Their deities are rivers and oceans respectively. Satisfaction is filling the stomach, nourishment is the transformation of essence into bulk. It depends on both causes. For one desiring to collect food, there are four: stomach, intestines, ocean, satisfaction. For one desiring to collect drink: stomach, channels, rivers, nourishment. This is the distinction. (29)

For one wishing to contemplate deeply, desire is the longing, and heart, mind, moon, and thoughts are the seat etc. (30)

Śrī Vaṃśīdhara-kṛtā Bhāvārtha-dīpikā Prakāśa Vyākhyā

Here the word ānanda (bliss) refers to women who are its cause. Women are directly objects of enjoyment. The other two (offspring and pleasure) are causes of enjoyment by producing it. Heaven etc. are produced by the duties of household life, women, and offspring. The pleasure of desire depending on both is subject to the sense organ and deity. (26-27)

Next, through the downward path. This indicates that even for one born through the upward path, the navel is the seat, apāna is the organ, death is the deity, and dying is the object. (28-29)

Māyā (illusion) is the illusory object. Saṃkalpa (thought) is contemplation of various things. Kāma (desire) is longing for various objects. The heart is the seat, mind is the organ, moon is the deity, and thought is the object. Here the heart alone is the seat, and consciousness, ego and intellect are the organs. Their deities Vāsudeva, Rudra and Brahmā should be known from the third book. Thus the well-known eighteen sense organs should be known as only eleven. (30)

Śrī Rādhā Ramaṇa dāsa Gosvāmi Viracitā Dīpanī Vyākhyā

"It depends on both causes" means: Satisfaction depends on intestines and oceans. Nourishment depends on channels and rivers. (29-30)

Śrīmad Vīrarāghava Vyākhyā

He describes the creation of the individual genital organ: "It was separated". Offspring, mere children, sexual pleasure. Since it is the cause of bliss. The nectar-like pleasure from them. Or offspring, pleasure, bliss-like nectar is desired. From Brahmā's collective genital organ, the individual genital organ place was separated, this is the meaning. The mention of penis also indicates the female organ. Penis is the seat, genitals are the organ, Prajāpati is the presiding deity, sexual pleasure is the action, and bliss is the object - though not stated, this is implied. The pleasure related to desires like enjoyment of women depends on both, meaning it depends on the organ and deity. Or "depending on both" means depending on male and female. Or it means depending on the organ and its location. (26)

He describes the creation of the individual anus: "For one wishing to expel". The waste product, the impure essence of consumed food etc. For one wishing to expel, the anus, the location of the earthly sense organ, was separated. Then from the anus, the organ of excretion and Mitra the presiding deity were produced. Expulsion is elimination. It depends on both the organ and its location, meaning the elimination of bodily waste. (27)

Having described the creation of both knowledge and action organs, he describes the creation of other individual organs like the navel: "For one wishing to transmigrate". From the body, before other bodies, for Brahmā wishing to transmigrate and go everywhere, the navel passage place was separated. There in the navel passage, the downward moving air is like an organ. From that downward air, death is the presiding deity. Separation is leaving the body. It depends on both prāṇa and apāna, as the separation of prāṇa and apāna breaths causing death is well-known in other Purāṇas. (28)

He describes the creation of the individual stomach, intestines and channels: "For one wishing to consume". For Brahmā wishing to consume and collect food and drink, stomach, intestines and channels were produced. The stomach is the seat, intestines are the instrument for collecting food like an organ, and channels are for collecting liquids. For those two groups of channels and intestines, rivers and oceans are the deities respectively. Satisfaction is the feeling of fullness. Nourishment is bodily growth. It depends on rivers and oceans as they cause crops etc. (29)

He describes the creation of the individual mind: "For one wishing to contemplate". For one wishing to contemplate and examine one's own māyā, the power concealing one's true nature, the lotus-shaped heart was the seat. From that, mind the organ, the moon deity, thought which is the function of mind were produced, this is the meaning. (30)


Śrīmad Vijayadhvaja Tīrtha-kṛtā Pada Ratnāvalī Vyākhyā

Offspring is progeny. The pleasure related to it produces joy, which is indeed nectar. The tendency to desire it is called prajānandāmṛtārthin (seeker of the joy and nectar of progeny). For that creator, the penis is the seat of the senses. In that penis, the desires find their dear object, attaining pleasure externally. Such a genital organ is the basis for both. The pleasure and joy based on the penis and genitals were the means of enjoyment for desires. (26)

For one wishing to expel the bodily waste called feces, the anus is the exit. From that, in the anus, the organ named vāyu (wind) is there. After that organ, the deity named Mitra is based on both. By this, he reminds of the statement that sometimes for the attainment of Brahmaloka, he created from desire for himself, and from that came into being for all. (27)

He explains the method of entering another body: For one wishing to enter, from the body previously inhabited, into another body, into a specific channel named puri, for the creator wishing to enter, as described earlier for yogis, the navel opening became opened. From that navel opening, the downward moving air, from that death, and based on both, separation and the state of attaining another body arose. Here, death means dying, and apāna (downward moving air) is what leads to it. This should be understood as not for Brahma, but for embodied beings. (28)

For food and drink, for the creator wishing to take them, the stomach and intestines became the place of blood. The intestines are divided into seventy types through channels. In those stomach and intestines, oceans and rivers existed. Satisfaction and nourishment were based on them - satisfaction based in the stomach, nourishment based in the intestines. (29)

For one wishing to meditate on his own māyā (illusion), the glory of Vishnu's creation, etc., the heart became the dwelling place of the mind. From that heart came the mind, and from the mind came the moon as the presiding deity. Resolve and desire, which are specific functions of the mind, came into being. The word 'iti' is for including the unmentioned. (30)

Śrīmaj Jīva Gosvāmi-kṛtā Krama Sandarbha Vyākhyā

The subjects are praja (offspring), ānanda (pleasure), and amṛta (immortality). By the word ānanda, women who are the cause of it are meant. Among these, women are the direct objects of enjoyment, while the other two are objects as causes of enjoyment. Heaven etc. arise from the accessories of offspring and women that are part of householder dharma. 26.

Utsarga means excretion of waste. 27.

"Āsisṛpsoḥ apānataḥ" - The two qualifiers refer to the desire for action and the action itself separately. Pṛthaktva means death related to the sense organ and deity, is the remainder. 28.

"Āditsoḥ" - Food and drink are the objects, drinks meaning water. Tuṣṭi (satisfaction) and puṣṭi (nourishment) are two separate actions for both. 29.

"Nididhyāsoḥ" - Even before the birth of mind, desire arises based on the causal state of mind. Ātmamāyā means māyā related to the self along with its effects. The object here is ātmamāyā itself. Kāma (desire) and saṅkalpa (resolve) are the desire and action. 30.

Śrīmad Viśvanātha Cakravarti-kṛtā Sārārtha darśinī Vyākhyā

Prajā means offspring, ānanda means pleasure, amṛta means heaven etc. For one desiring these, the penis is the base, the genitals are the sense organ, and Prajāpati is the presiding deity. The object is the pleasant enjoyment related to sexual union with women, which is the essence of bodily fluids like semen from consumed food. Both of these depend on the sense organ and deity. 26.

For one wishing to excrete waste, the anus is the base, the excretory organ is the sense organ, Mitra is the deity, and excretion is the object. 27.

Āsisṛpsoḥ means desiring to go everywhere. Apānataḥ means through the downward moving air, implying also through the upward moving air, as death is known to occur when prāṇa and apāna separate. The navel is the base, apāna is the sense organ, Death is the deity, and separation or death is the object. 28.

For one desiring to take in food and drink, the stomach and intestines and channels arose. Among these, the stomach is the base for collecting food, while the channels are for collecting liquids, as the sense organ. Rivers and oceans are their respective deities. Satisfaction is filling the stomach, while nourishment is corpulence from the transformation of essence. These are the respective objects. The satisfaction and nourishment depend on the sense organ and deity. 29.

For one wishing to contemplate the self's māyā and illusory objects, the heart is the base, mind is the sense organ, Moon is the deity, and resolve, desire etc. are the objects. Here in the heart as the base, the intellect, ego and consciousness are the sense organs, and their deities Vāsudeva, Rudra and Brahmā should be known from the third canto. Thus, eighteen sense organs are well-known, but only eleven should be understood. 30.

Śrīmac Chukadeva-kṛta Siddhānta Pradīpaḥ

"Prajānandāmṛtārthinaḥ" means for one desiring offspring, pleasure and immortality-causing heaven etc. The penis was separated as the base, the genitals as the sense organ, and Prajāpati as the presiding deity should be inferred though not explicitly stated. The pleasant enjoyment related to sexual union with women depends on both the genitals and Prajāpati, or on the penis and genitals. 26.

Dhātumala means the essence of consumed food etc. For one wishing to excrete it, the anus was separated as the base, from which the excretory organ is the sense organ, Mitra the presiding deity. Excretion depends on both the anus and excretory organ. 27.

For one wishing to depart in all directions from the body to other bodies, the navel opening was separated. There, for one departing through apāna, leaving the connection with prāṇa, separation depends on the mutually separated prāṇa and apāna. The separation of the soul from the body is called death. The navel etc. are the base etc. 28.

For one wishing to take in food etc., the stomach etc. arose. There the stomach is the base, the intestines are the instrument for collecting food like a sense organ, while the channels are for collecting liquids. For these intestines and channels, rivers and oceans are the respective deities. Satisfaction is the feeling of fullness after filling the stomach, while nourishment is corpulence from the transformation of essence. It depends on the rivers and oceans. The distinction is: For one desiring food, the stomach, intestines, oceans and nourishment are the base, instrument, deity and object. For one desiring drink, the stomach, channels, rivers and satisfaction are the base, instrument, deity and object. 29.

For one wishing to deeply contemplate ātmamāyā, which is to be experienced in the form of nature, body etc., the heart was separated as the base, from which mind is the sense organ, Moon the deity, and resolve is the object. Kāma means desire. 30.

Śrīmad Vallabhācārya Viracitā Subodhinī Vyākhyā

At first, one organ of action, speech, was described. Now the hands and feet have been described. The remaining ones are described in two verses. The genital organ is a globular structure. Due to its unchanging form, to remove doubt about its existence, the word "vai" is used to affirm it. If it did not exist in the cause, how could it exist in the effect - in men and others? Therefore, there should be no doubt about its existence. The joy which is in the form of progeny is either the pleasure of sexual union or that which produces offspring. Progeny and joy, or immortality. As per the Vedic text: "They are born again through progeny, that is your mortal immortality." Or immortality means liberation, achieved by discharging the three debts. As it is said: "There is no world for one without a son." Statements like "Eighty-eight thousand..." are in praise of celibates. For Vedic scholars, the Veda alone is authoritative. Therefore, immortality means liberation. The organ emerged for one desiring the three (progeny, joy, immortality). The sexual organ is the sense organ. The pleasure related to desires, especially sexual union with women, has both the deity and sense organ as its locus. Alternatively, it means that was previously stated to be the abode of desires. Desire is the deity. Some say it is the presiding deity. The main conclusion is that desire itself is the deity. In its absence, the experience of pleasure through the mere sense organ is established by direct perception. [26]

The remaining one is described: "Of one desiring to excrete." The waste products of the bodily elements. The elements are the skin and others up to bone marrow. They are constantly digested by time etc. Food etc. are nourishing. Therefore, when nourishment is done by food etc., the non-essential portion that remains when the essence enters there is waste, not of food, since it serves its purpose. Thus it is the waste of the bodily elements. The anus is a particular flesh in the anal region. It becomes visible when it prolapses due to disease etc. After that is the anus, which is the sense organ there. Mitra is the deity. Indeed, there could be no such deity in its entirety other than Mitra. Excretion is the action. It has both (deity and organ) as its locus as before. [27]

Thus nine apertures have been described. Among the ten sense organs, three do not have apertures. Both (deity and organ) are together in one case. Three have two each. Thus the number of sense organs and apertures is not equal. Therefore, another aperture is mentioned for regulating the prāṇa (prāṇa) (vital air) etc.: "Of one desiring to be born." There are two types of waste - that produced daily and that produced in a lifetime. The anus is for eliminating daily waste. The navel is the aperture for eliminating the waste in the form of the body produced in a full lifetime. Pura means bodies. For one desiring to exit from the body (purī), the navel became the aperture. This is the connection. Just as one kills till death. Therefore that aperture arose from the apāna (apāna) (downward moving air). There apāna (apāna) is the sense organ, death is the deity. Separation is the dissociation of prāṇa (prāṇa) and apāna (apāna), which is death. It has both as its locus as before. The body exits through the navel aperture. Or one forcibly abandons this body like waste through the navel aperture. Just as this body remains for a long time and generates its nourishment etc., food and drink etc. also remain for some time and generate nourishment of the bodily elements. Thus the Lord was born desiring to receive and retain food and drink. Then his stomach and intestinal tubes came into being. There the stomach is the globular inner space of the abdomen. The intestines are sense organs for retaining food. The tubes are for drink. Rivers and oceans are their deities. Rivers are for the tubes. Oceans are for the intestines and stomach. Hence the word "ca" (and) is for both. As per the statement: "The tubes are rivers with blood." And "The stomach is an ocean for hunger and thirst." Satisfaction is gratification. Nourishment is growth of the body from food. Satisfaction and nourishment have both (sense organ and deity) as their locus. The Self's illusion which creates the world. What is this, how will I become its replica - such contemplation on the Self's illusion. Then the heart, which is globular, split open. From that arose the mind as the sense organ. The moon is the deity. Resolve is in the form of knowledge. Desire is in the form of action. The mind has both natures, so both functions are specified. Desire is the effect of resolve, as knowledge is the cause of action. Hence the word "eva" is for emphasis. The word "ca" (and) is for agreement with the sense organ. [28, 29, 30]

Śrīmad Gosvāmi Śrī Puruṣottama Caraṇa Viracitaḥ Śrī Subodhinī Prakāśaḥ

nirabhidyate is used here because there is no other form for it, as virāj (cosmic person) has no feminine characteristic form. In the world, prajānanda (joy of progeny) is seen in many ways, so to indicate its existence at the root, they say "prajā" (progeny) etc. in many ways. Here there are four options. In the first two options, there is a compound with elision of the latter word, "prajānandena amṛtam" (immortality through the joy of progeny), which is a tatpuruṣa compound with instrumental case. In the third, it is a dvandva compound. In "amṛtaṃ vā" it is just a simple dvandva. In the first three of these four options, since ānanda (joy) is worldly pleasure, the word amṛta (immortality) refers to superior procreation in the form of sons, grandsons, etc. To indicate this, they say "prajām anvi" etc. In the fourth option, they state a different meaning of amṛta, saying "amṛtam" etc.

Now, if this is so, what is the fate of the statements prescribing lifelong celibacy etc.? In expectation of this question, they say "śraṣṭāśīti" etc. But if there is no result, even praise is futile - to address this they say "traividye" etc. For those solely devoted to the path of activity, like Dakṣa and others, only the earlier section is authoritative, so due to the dullness arising from faith in just that much, they speak thus. This does not mean other statements are purposeless.

This shows that for those solely devoted to the path of activity, the attainment of immortality in the world of truth mentioned in the statement "abhayaṃ kṣemam amṛtam" is like that of those who perform a thousand horse sacrifices, not the attainment of true immortality. "Living in a pure place with family, studying the Vedas, performing righteous acts, establishing all senses in the self, not harming any beings except at holy places, one who lives thus for the full lifespan attains the world of Brahman and does not return" - following this concluding statement for householders, they state another option. In "śruto mokṣo vāmṛtam," a fifth tatpuruṣa compound should be understood. In this view, the two actions in "nirabhidyatāsīd" are not very purposeful.

If desire is not considered the ego of the senses, there is contradiction with direct perception. Disliking this, they state another option with "athavā" etc. Here, by mentioning two deities, the three functions of the reproductive organ - progeny, immortality, and pleasure - are indicated as the work of desire. All three, being impossible without a woman, also indicate the creation of woman, like the creation of food etc. with various tastes - this implication should be understood. (26)

In "utsisṛkṣoḥ" - Now, since excretion of waste is also seen through that opening, the word dhātu (element) seems meaningless. Addressing this doubt, they explain the meaningfulness of dhātu in virāj who lacks waste, saying "dhātavaḥ" etc. The śruti says "Food eaten becomes threefold; its grossest part becomes feces" - since this indicates dhātu status for a part of food, food itself is even more so a dhātu. How is this enumeration appropriate? Addressing this doubt, they say "annādi." Thus, since dhātu status is established by sustaining and nourishing alone, and since medical texts say "Men's strength depends on waste," dhātu status is possible only for the food portion, not for food itself merely by nourishing.

Now, even if this is so, what is the purpose of mentioning digestion? To address this, they say "śruta" etc. When there is depletion due to digestion, nourishment becomes necessary. "Tan malam" refers to the waste of the dhātus that nourish skin etc., as stated in medical texts: "Sweat, nails, hair, ear wax, and eye discharge are the wastes of the dhātus in order." "Ataḥ" - because there is no non-essential portion in extraordinary food like oblations. Thus the word dhātu is indeed meaningful. This waste is expelled by the cosmic person through the anus, not through ears etc. Since it is said "That body is the receptacle of material essences and beauty," and beauty would be lost if associated with waste, it should be known that it is expelled only through that opening, as stated "The anus is known as the place of defeat, unrighteousness, and hell." (27)

In "āsisṛkṣoḥ" - "trayāṇām" refers to skin, hands and feet. "ubhayam" means speech and tongue. "trayāṇām" refers to eyes, nose and ears. For the remaining two, anus and genitals, one each should be understood. "māraka" is different from the ten senses, from observing the vows of prāṇa. "tac charīram" means the subtle body. (28)

In "āditsoh" - Earlier, thirst and hunger were mentioned, and since they have the form of desire for food and drink, what is the purpose of mentioning desire for food and drink again here? To address this expectation and explain its nature, they say "yathā" etc. "tasya" refers to the subtle body. "iti" indicates reason - for nourishing the gross body. "pānārtham" means for storing drink. Hence the word "ca" (and) serves both purposes. Due to the difference in senses, "samudrasca" - the word "ca" is to indicate they perform separate functions. "tuṣṭiḥ āpyāyanam" refers to drink (implied). (29)

In "nididhyāsoḥ" - nididhyāsana means specific knowledge through contemplation. Now, later it is said "What arises from will is desire" - this indicates desire is the effect of will. So how are both mentioned equally here? To address this, they say "śruta eva" etc. Thus, since will is an activity, the restriction is stated here. "indriyānurodhaḥ" means compliance with the external senses. (30)

Śrī Giridhara-kṛtā Bāla Prabodhinī

Offspring, pleasure of sexual union with women, and immortality. According to the saying "Having discharged the three debts, one should direct the mind towards liberation", liberation is achieved by discharging the three debts. For one desiring that, the genital organ was formed as the seat. There, the upastha (sexual organ) was the sense organ, and Prajāpati should be known as the presiding deity. The pleasure of sexual union with women, which is dear to those desiring desires, depends on both the sense organ and the deity. (26)

For one wishing to expel the impure essence of consumed food etc., the anus was formed as the seat. Then the pāyu (anus) became the sense organ there. Then Mitra became its presiding deity. Excretion in the form of eliminating waste is the object. It depends on both the deity and sense organ. (27)

For one wishing to depart from the body to other bodies, the navel-shaped door was formed from the apāna (downward-moving) breath. There the apāna became the sense organ. Then Death became its presiding deity. Separation in the form of dissociation of prāṇa (life-breath) and apāna, which is death, depends on both the sense organ and deity. (28)

For one wishing to consume food and drink, the stomach is the seat, the intestines and channels are the sense organs, and rivers and oceans are respectively their deities. Satisfaction is filling the stomach, while nourishment is the transformation into essence and increase in bulk, both depending on that. Thus for one desiring to consume food, there is the set of four: stomach, intestines, ocean, and satisfaction. For one desiring to consume drink, there is the set of four: stomach, channels, rivers, and nourishment. This is the distinction. (29)

For one wishing to deeply contemplate the illusion of the self in the form of the effects of prakṛti (primordial nature), the lotus-shaped heart was formed as the seat. Then the mind was born there as the sense organ. The moon is its presiding deity. Then saṅkalpa (volition) is the contemplation of various objects. From that alone arises kāma (desire), which is longing for those objects. (30)

Hindī Anuvāda

When there was a desire for offspring, sexual pleasure, and enjoyment of heaven, the liṅga (penis) originated in the body of the Virāṭ Puruṣa (Cosmic Being). In it, the upastha indriya (genital organ) and Prajāpati deity, as well as kāmasukha (sexual pleasure) residing in both of these, appeared. [26]

When they desired to excrete waste, the anal opening appeared. Subsequently, the pāyu indriya (anus) and Mitra deity were produced in it. It is through these two that the act of excretion is accomplished. [27]

When there was a desire to pass from one body to another through the apāna mārga (downward-moving air passage), the navel opening appeared. From it, the apāna (downward-moving air) and Mṛtyu (Death) deity emerged. It is through the support of these two that the separation of prāṇa (life-breath) and apāna, meaning death, occurs. [28]

When the Virāṭ Puruṣa desired to consume food and water, the stomach, eyes, and blood vessels were produced. Along with them, the deity of the belly, Samudra (ocean), the deities of the blood vessels, Nadīs (rivers), and Tuṣṭi (contentment) and Puṣṭi (nourishment) - these two as their dependent objects - were created. [29]

When they wished to contemplate their māyā (illusion), the heart was produced. From it emerged the mind as an organ, and from the mind its deity, the Moon, as well as the objects of desire and saṅkalpa (resolve). [30]