Sections 11–20

English witness · section(s) 11

TEXT 11

tac canumatam `tarkapratisthanat' ity-adau `acintyah khalu ye bhava na tams tarkena yojayet' ity-adau `sastra-yonitvat' ity-adau `srutes tu sabda-mulatvat' ity-adau pitr-deva-manusyanam vedas caksus tavesvara sreyas tv anupalabdhe ’rthe sadhya-sadhanayor api @vcontinue = ity-adau ca. The following scriptural statements confirm this conclusion [ TEXT 10]: 1. “Logic cannot provide final proof of anything” [Vedanta-sutra 2.1.11]. 2. “One should not use logic to try to understand what is inconceivable” [Mahabharata, Bhisma-parva 5.22]. 3. “Scriptures are the source of knowledge of the Absolute Truth” [Vedanta-sutra 1.1.3]. 4. “The Vedas are the source of knowledge of the Absolute Truth” [Vedanta-sutra 2.1.27]. 5. “O Supreme Lord, Your Veda is the supreme eye for the forefathers, demigods, and human beings. By it they can understand Your form and qualities, along with the highest goal of life and the means for attaining it, none of which can be ascertained otherwise” [Srimad-Bhagavatam 11.20.4].

COMMENTARY The Authority of the Vedas Here, using scriptural evidence, Srila Jiva Gosvami confirms the conclusion about inferential knowledge he reached in the previous Text. Having argued that logic is not the most reliable means of acquiring knowledge, and having used logic to establish this conclusion, he now presents appropriate Vedic references as the final proof. Again, one should not think that Jiva Gosvami is guilty of circular reasoning because he resorts to the Vedas themselves to confirm an assertion about the Vedas. The Vedas are self-luminous like the sun. Just as the sun illuminates itself, independent of any other source of light, so only the Vedas can establish themselves as an infallible pramana. As explained in the previous Text, this self-confirmation is not a defect in the process of sabda-pramana, or verbal revelation, because if the Vedas indeed convey knowledge of the Absolute Truth, we can justifiably look to the Vedas themselves to confirm their own authority. And those who have approached Vedic knowledge in the prescribed way have corroborated by their own realization that the Vedas do describe the Absolute Truth. Another consideration is that our objective is to know the inconceivable reality, and after analyzing all the sources of knowledge we find that no source but the Vedas affords us the opportunity for achieving this objective. If all the best logicians, nuclear physicists, astrophysicists, and other leaders in various departments of science and philosophy who lived in the past, live in the present, and will live in the future could somehow assemble and deliberate together, they would be unable to shed any light on the nature of transcendence. Any theory this assembly might propose would only be a subjective speculation, liable to endless refutations and counterrefutations. Understanding the futility of such endeavors, Srila Jiva Gosvami has gone directly to the heart of the matter by citing Vedic authority. Srila Vyasadeva presented the conclusion of all the Vedas in the concise aphorisms of the Vedanta-sutra, also called the Brahma-sutra. Sutra 2.1.11 is tarkapratisthanat: “Because reason has no sure basis.” In other words, logic has no absolute stance because its results are always subject to revision. Deductive reasoning is based on human perception and intelligence, which are both unreliable owing to the four inherent human defects mentioned earlier. And since different people have varying capacities and types of intelligence, the opinions they derive from their own intelligence also vary. Logical reasoning therefore has its limitations; it is inconclusive in transcendental matters except when supported by the scriptures. In his Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (1.1.46), Srila Rupa Gosvami quotes a verse from Bhartrhari’s Vakya-padiya (1.34) to this effect: yatnenapadito ’py arthah kusalair anumatrbhih abhiyukta-tarair anyair anyathaivopapadyate “Expert logicians may establish their proofs with great endeavor, but these proofs will simply be contradicted by stronger logicians establishing newer conclusions.” The truth of this statement is confirmed in the fields of modern science and philosophy, where there is endless theorizing about the origins of the universe and the meaning of life. Srila Jiva Gosvami also cites the Mahabharata’s claim that because logic is limited one should not use it to try to understand inconceivable realities. For example, by mere logic one will certainly fail to understand such childhood pastimes of Lord Krsna’s as His dama-bandhana-lila, in which His mother bound Him up with ropes. When mother Yasoda tried to tie Krsna to a grinding mortar, she was amazed to find that when she joined all her ropes together the new length of rope was still too short! Yet the black thread around Krsna’s waist did not break, nor did His waist become inflated. Such inconceivable behavior by the Absolute Person is entirely beyond the reach of all logical faculties; one can understand it only by accepting the authority of Vedic testimony, sabda-pramana. Still, although logical reasoning is not a reliable independent method in the quest for knowledge of the absolute, this does not mean all logic is useless. The very idea that logic is not fully reliable is itself known through the use of logic supported by scripture. We should certainly use our reason in trying to understand the statements of the Vedas. The Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad (2.4.5) thus states, atma va are drastavyah srotavyo mantavyo nididhyasitavyo maitreyi: “The Self, my dear Maitreyi, should be realized, and so it should be heard about, reflected on, and deeply meditated on.” Here the word mantavyah refers to logical understanding. We should apply logic to properly understand the Vedic injunctions, but we should reject logic that runs counter to their conclusions. Mere logic can never supersede the opinions of the Vedas, which are free of the human defects. While discussing this topic in his Sarva-samvadini, Srila Jiva Gosvami quotes the Kurma Purana: purvaparavirodhena ko ’nv artho ’bhimato bhavet ity-adyam uhanam tarkah suska-tarkam tu varjayet “Conjecturing about the meaning of a scriptural passage by referring to the statements preceding and following it is called proper logic. One should abandon dry logic, however.” We find excellent examples of dry logic among speculative philosophers. These thinkers generally use their reason to prove a preconceived opinion, and in their stubbornness they of course fail to maintain any objectivity. They disregard scriptural injunctions that do not support their conclusions. They have no success in applying their method to ultimate matters because no one can penetrate the inconceivable transcendental plane by any amount of speculation. Such persons’ interest in philosophy is a futile mental exercise with no tangible result. No matter how profound and mesmerizing their vision, it is inevitable that some other powerful logician will eventually defeat them. The Vedas enjoin, therefore, that those who seek the Absolute Truth should abandon dry logic, but not all logic. Indeed, in the Bhagavad-gita (10.32) Lord Krsna Himself declares that logic aimed at understanding the Absolute as it is presented in scripture is one of His opulences: vadah pravadatam aham. ”Among logicians I am the conclusive truth.” Thus Srila Jiva Gosvami is right in accepting anumana as one of the principal means of gaining valid knowledge. ’’’Jiva Gosvami next cites two more Brahma-sutras (1.1.3 and 2.1.27), which state emphatically that one can understand the Absolute Truth only from the revealed scriptures. He then concludes by quoting from Srimad-Bhagavatam to show that not only human beings but even superhumans like the demigods need the Vedas’ help. Thus he emphasizes the need for everyone—humans, subhumans, and superhumans—to rely on the Vedas as the flawless means for understanding the Absolute Truth. In the next TEXT Srila Jiva Gosvami begins his demonstration that the Puranas are even more important for us than the Vedas.

English witness · section(s) 12

TEXT 12.1

tatra ca veda-sabdasya samprati dusparatvad duradhigamarthatvac ca tad-artha-nirnayakanam muninam api paraspara-virodhad veda-rupo vedartha-nirnayakas cetihasa-puranatmakah sabda eva vicaraniyah. tatra ca yo va veda-sabdo natma-viditah so ’pi tad-drstyanumeya eveti samprati tasyaiva pramotpadakatvam sthitam. But at present it is difficult to study the Vedas in their entirety or to understand them. In addition, the great thinkers who have commented on the Vedas interpret them in contradictory ways. We should therefore study the Itihasas and Puranas, since they are Vedic in nature and are conclusive in determining the Vedas’ meaning. Moreover, with the help of the Itihasas and Puranas we can infer the meaning of the unavailable portions of the Vedas. Thus at present only the Itihasas and Puranas constitute the appropriate source of valid knowledge.

TEXT 12.2

tatha hi mahabharate manaviye ca `itihasa-puranabhyam vedam samupabrmhayet' iti `puranat puranam' iti canyatra. na cavedena vedasya brmhanam sambhavati na hy aparipurnasya kanaka-valayasya trapuna puranam yujyate. This is why the Mahabharata [Adi-parva 1.267] and Manu-samhita state, “One should complement one’s understanding of the Vedas with the help of the Itihasas and Puranas.” And elsewhere it is stated, “The Puranas are called by that name because they complete (purana).” One should not try to “complete” or explain the meaning of the Vedas with something that is not Vedic in nature, just as one should not finish an incomplete gold bracelet with lead.

TEXT 12.3

nanu yadi veda-sabdah puranam itihasam copadatte tarhi puranam anyad anvesaniyam. yadi tu na na tarhitihasa-puranayor abhedo vedena. ucyate visistaikartha-pratipadaka-pada-kadambasyapauruseyatvad abhede ’pi svara-krama-bhedad bheda-nirdeso ’py upapadyate. But, one may object, if the Itihasas and Puranas are actually included as part of the TEXT of the Vedas, we need to identify some other Puranas than those we are familiar with; otherwise the Itihasas and Puranas would not qualify as nondifferent from the Vedas [but would rather be wholly identical with them]. To this we reply that the Itihasas and Puranas are nondifferent from the Vedas inasmuch as both kinds of literary works have no human author and present the same detailed knowledge. Nonetheless, there is some difference between them with regard to intonation and word order.

TEXT 12.4

rg-adibhih samam anayor apauruseyatvenabhedo madhyandina-srutav eva vyajyate `evam va are ’sya mahato bhutasya nihsvasitam etad yad rg-vedo yajur-vedah sama-vedo ’tharvangirasa itihasah puranam' ity-adina.

The Madhyandina-sruti [Brhad-aranyaka Up. 2.4.10] implies the oneness of the Itihasas and Puranas with the Rg and other Vedas in terms of the apauruseya nature all these works share: “My dear Maitreyi, the Rg, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva Vedas, as well as the Itihasas and Puranas, all appear from the breathing of the Supreme Being.”

COMMENTARY Difficulties in Studying the Vedas In the previous Texts Srila Jiva Gosvami has established that the Vedas—Rg, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva—constitute the valid means of acquiring knowledge about the Supreme. Here he points out the practical difficulties involved with studying them nowadays. The first difficulty is the unavailability of the complete TEXT of the Vedas. Originally the Veda was one, and at the advent of the current age, Kali-yuga, Srila Vyasadeva divided it into four: vyadadhad yajïa-santatyai vedam ekam catur-vidham (Bhag. 1.4.19). Then, as explained in the Kurma Purana (52.19–20), Vyasadeva’s followers further divided the four Vedas into 1,130 branches: eka-vimsati-bhedena rg-vedam krtavan pura sakhanam tu satenaiva yajur-vedam athakarot @vp= sama-vedam sahasrena sakhanam prabibheda sah atharvanam atho vedam bibheda navakena tu “Formerly the Rg Veda was divided into 21 branches, the Yajur Veda into 100 branches, the Sama Veda into 1,000 branches, and the Atharva Veda into 9 branches.” Each of these branches has 4 subdivisions called Samhita, Brahmana, Aranyaka, and Upanisad. So all together the Vedas consist of 1,130 Samhitas, 1,130 Brahmanas, 1,130 Aranyakas, and 1,130 Upanisads, a total of 4,520 titles. By the influence of time, however, many texts have been lost. At present only about 11 Samhitas, 18 Brahmanas, 7 Aranyakas, and 220 Upanisads are available. This constitutes less than 6% of the original Vedas. The second difficulty one faces in trying to study the Vedas concerns their language. There are two varieties of Sanskrit, vaidika (“Vedic”) and laukika (“worldly” or “ordinary”), and the Vedas contain only the former. Years of study are required to become an accomplished scholar of ordinary Sanskrit, but if such a scholar wishes to understand Vedic Sanskrit he has to learn extra rules of grammar and a different vocabulary, which may require years of additional study. And even when the language of the Vedic verses is fathomed, these verses are so cryptic that one cannot possibly decipher them without hearing them explained by a bona fide guru in disciplic succession. Another difficulty: Even before studying the Vedas one must study their six corollaries, or “limbs,” called Vedangas. These six limbs are siksa, the science of pronunciation; kalpa, the process of performing sacrifice; vyakarana, the rules of grammar; nirukta, the meanings and derivations of difficult words used in the Vedas; jyotisa, astronomy and astrology; and chandas, Vedic meters. Each of these limbs is extensive and requires serious study. To further complicate matters, with the advent of Kali-yuga human memory has grown weaker. In former times there were no books: a student could assimilate all knowledge from his spiritual master simply by hearing and remembering. But this is no longer possible. In this age the food, water, air, and even the very ether are all polluted, and all these factors have taken their toll on human memory, making it difficult to study even the available 6% of the Vedic texts, what to speak of the entire four Vedas and their branches. Srila Jiva Gosvami therefore concludes that although the four Vedas are perfect sabda-pramana, in the present age it is impractical to study them thoroughly and thereby ascertain the Absolute Truth. As an alternative, someone may suggest that since only a few of the Vedas are available and even they are difficult to understand, why not simply study the Vedanta-sutra, the definitive summary of the Vedic conclusions? To this Jiva Gosvami replies that various thinkers differ about the meaning of the Vedanta-sutra and so this method will likely just lead to confusion. Furthermore, important thinkers like Gautama, Kapila, and Jaimini adhere to other philosophies, so why should we accept only Vedanta rather than one of their theories? For all these reasons we must admit that even with the help of the Vedas and Vedanta we will not be able to understand sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana. To solve this dilemma Srila Jiva Gosvami proposes an alternative: study of the Itihasas and Puranas. But although the Itihasas and Puranas are one with the Vedas, this does not mean they are literally identical with them. Otherwise the words Itihasa and Purana would simply be names for certain special parts of the Vedas. The Vedas are written in Vedic Sanskrit, which necessarily involves three different tone accents—udatta (high), svarita (intermediate), and anudatta (low). In the Vedic language one word can actually be changed to another if the accent is changed. We see an example of this in the history of the demon Vrtra, who was created by the chanting of a mantra during a sacrifice. This demon was supposed to kill Indra, but during the sacrifice the priests pronounced the mantra indra-satro vivardhasva with the wrong accent. The result was just the opposite of what was intended: Indra killed Vrtrasura. Another significant difference between the four Vedas and the Itihasas and Puranas is the sequence of particular words, which is rigidly fixed in the Vedas. No one should change even one syllable of the Vedic texts, which have maintained their primeval arrangement of words since the beginning of creation. Techniques have been devised, such as pada-patha, krama-patha, ghana-patha, and jata-patha, for keeping the word order intact. But while no rewording or rearrangement of words is allowed in the Vedas, the Itihasas and Puranas need not be so rigidly preserved: their exact wordings are allowed to vary in different yuga cycles. Because no special techniques are used to keep the word order of the Puranas and Itihasas intact, we find slight differences from edition to edition. Srila Vyasa compiled the Itihasa called Mahabharata for people of this age specifically because they are not qualified to understand the Vedas. This is explained in Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.4.25): stri-sudra-dvija-bandhunam trayi na sruti-gocara karma-sreyasi mudhanam sreya eva bhaved iha iti bharatam akhyanam krpaya munina krtam “Out of compassion, the sage thought it wise to do something that would enable those who were ignorant of how to act for their own welfare to achieve the ultimate goal of life. Thus he compiled the great historical narration called the Mahabharata for women, laborers, and friends of the twice-born because they do not have access to the Vedas.” Srila Jiva Gosvami says that the Puranas are called so because they make the Vedas complete. Does he mean the Vedas are incomplete? No, but the Puranas are a form of explanatory, supplementary literature that help us understand the terse, cryptic message of the Vedas. Like the Vedas, they convey knowledge of the Absolute Truth, and to do so they must be transcendental like the Vedas. The Skanda Purana (4.95.12) indicates the equal transcendental status of the Puranas, Itihasas, and Vedas as follows: vede ramayane caiva purane bharate tatha adav ante ca madhye ca harih sarvatra giyate “In the Vedas, Ramayana, Puranas, and Mahabharata Lord Hari is glorified everywhere—in the beginning, middle, and end.” The conclusion is that because the Itihasas and Puranas emanate from the same source as the four Vedas and have the same purport, they are also equally authoritative. Next Srila Jiva Gosvami explains more about how the Itihasas and Puranas are not inferior to the Vedas.

English witness · section(s) 13

TEXT 13.1

ata eva skande prabhasa-khande pura tapas cacarogram amaranam pitamahah avirbhutas tato vedah sa-sad-anga-pada-kramah @V1= tatah puranam akhilam sarva-sastra-mayam dhruvam nitya-sabda-mayam punyam sata-koti-pravistaram nirgatam brahmano vaktrat tasya bhedan nibodhata @VCONTINUE brahmam puranam prathamam ity-adi. The Prabhasa-khanda of the Skanda Purana [2.3.5] therefore states: “Long ago, Lord Brahma, the grandfather of the demigods, performed severe penances, and as a result the Vedas appeared, along with their six supplements and their pada and krama texts. Then the entire Purana emanated from his mouth. Composed of eternal sound and consisting of one billion verses, it is the unchanging, sacred embodiment of all scriptures. You should know that of the various divisions of this Purana, the Brahma Purana is the first.”

TEXT 13.2

atra sata-koti-sankhya brahma-loke prasiddheti tathoktam trtiya-skandhe ca `rg-yajuh-samatharvakhyan vedan purvadibhir mukhaih' ity-adi-prakarane itihasa-puranani païcamam vedam isvarah sarvebhya eva vaktrebhyah sasrje sarva-darsanah @VCONTINUE = ity api catra saksad eva veda-sabdah prayuktah puranetihasayoh. The figure one billion cited here refers to the number of verses existing in Brahma’s domain. Srimad-Bhagavatam’s Third Canto gives a similar description in the passage starting with the words rg-yajuh-samatharvakhyan vedan purvadibhir mukhair: “Beginning from the front face of Brahma, gradually the four Vedas—Rg, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva—became manifest” [Bhag. 3.12.37]. In this passage we find the statement “Then Brahma created the fifth Veda—the Puranas and the histories—from all his mouths, since he could see all the past, present, and future” [Bhag. 3.12.39]. Here the word veda is used specifically in reference to the Itihasas and Puranas.

TEXT 13.3

itihasah puranam ca païcamo veda ucyate vedan adhyapayam asa mahabharata-païcaman @VCONTINUE = ity-adau. anyatha vedan ity-adav api païcamatvam navakalpyeta samana-jatiya-nivesitatvat sankhyayah. And elsewhere it is said, “The Puranas are the fifth Veda,” “The Itihasas and Puranas are called the fifth Veda” [Bhag. 1.4.20], and “He taught the Vedas along with the fifth of their number, the Mahabharata” [M.Bh. Moksa-dharma 340.21]. If the Itihasas and Puranas were not Vedic, it would have been inappropriate for the preceding verses to include them as the fifth Veda, since normally one counts together only objects of the same kind.

TEXT 13.4

bhavisya-purane `karsnam ca païcamam vedam yan mahabharatam smrtam' iti. tatha ca sama-kauthumiya-sakhayam chandogyopanisadi ca `rg-vedam bhagavo ’dhyemi yajur-vedam sama-vedam atharvanam caturtham itihasam puranam païcamam vedanam vedam' ity-adi. Also, the Bhavisya Purana states, “The fifth Veda, written by Sri Krsna-dvaipayana Vyasa, is called the Mahabharata.” Another reference is found in the Chandogya Upanisad of the Kauthumiya school of the Sama Veda: “Venerable sir, I have studied the Rg, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva Vedas, and also the Itihasas and Puranas, which are the fifth Veda” [Kauthumiya Chandogya Up. 7.1.2].

TEXT 13.5

ata eva `asya mahato bhutasya' ity-adav itihasa-puranayos caturnam evantar-bhutatva-kalpanaya prasiddha-pratyakhyanam nirastam. tad uktam `brahmam puranam prathamam' ity-adi. Thus is refuted the frequently raised objection that the Itihasas and Puranas, said in the Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad to emanate from the breath of the Supreme Being, are included in the four Vedas and therefore have no separate existence. The same is stated in the words “Brahma Purana is the first.<193>” [Skanda Pur.].

COMMENTARY The Itihasas and Puranas Are Vedic To substantiate the statement from the Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad quoted in TEXT 12.4 (B.a. Up. 2.4.10), which establishes the Vedic nature of the Itihasas and Puranas, Srila Jiva Gosvami here cites more evidence from the Puranas, Itihasas, and Upanisads. From these references the following is clear: The Puranas and Itihasas have the same source as the four Vedas and are in fact called the fifth Veda. Srila Jiva Gosvami here refers to the frequent objection that the Itihasas and Puranas cannot be the fifth Veda because they are part of the four Vedas. While explaining the above-mentioned statement from the Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad, some followers of the Mimamsaka school claim that the words Itihasa and Purana refer to historical passages found in some parts of the Vedas and not to separate works. Examples of sruti statements sometimes considered Puranic are yato va imani bhutani jayante (“from whom these beings take birth”; Taittiriya Up. 3.1) and sa brahmana srjati rudrena vilapayati harir adir anadih (“Lord Hari creates through Brahma and destroys through Rudra, but He Himself is the beginingless source of all”). These and similar passages are referred to as "Purana" because they deal with creation and destruction, which are among the subjects treated in the Puranas. Mimamsakas further argue that over an immense period many of these original Puranic portions of the Vedas were lost and those that remained became difficult to understand. Therefore, the Mimamsakas propose, Srila Vyasa mercifully wrote new Itihasas and Puranas for the benefit of the unintelligent people of Kali-yuga, and this is what is described in Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.4.25). Hence the Itihasas and Puranas mentioned in the Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad are part of the Vedas, not independent books, and therefore it is incorrect to conclude that they are the fifth Veda. This is the Mimamsakas’ argument. Srila Jiva Gosvami refutes this argument with references from the Vedas and also from the Itihasas and Puranas themselves. These citations confirm the Itihasas’ and Puranas’ status as the fifth Veda on the grounds that they emanated separately from Lord Brahma’s mouths. If they were only parts of the Vedas, there would be no reason for these authoritative scriptures to call them the fifth Veda. Moreover, there are many statements about the apauruseya, Vedic nature of the Itihasas and Puranas in the Vedic Samhitas, Brahmanas, Aranyakas, Upanisads, Kalpa-sutras, Dharma-sutras, and Grhya-sutras, as well as in the Puranas, Itihasas, and other smrti texts. Here are a few of these statements: rcah samani chandamsi puranam yajusa saha ucchistaj jajïire sarve divi deva divi-sritah “The Rg, Sama, Yajur, and Atharva Vedas appeared from the Supreme Lord along with the Puranas and all the demigods residing in the heavenly planets” (Atharva Veda 11.7.24). sa brhatim disam anu vyacalat tam itihasas ca puranam ca gathas ca itihasasya ca sa vai puranasya ca gathanam ca narasamsinam ca priyam dhama bhavati ya evam veda. “He approached the Brhati meter, and thus the Itihasas, Puranas, Gathas, and Narasamsis became favorable to him. One who knows this verily becomes the beloved abode of the Itihasas, Puranas, Gathas, and Narasamsis” (Atharva Veda 15.6.10, 12). EVAM IME SARVE VEDA NIRMITAH SA-KALPAH SA-RAHASYAH SA-BRAHMANAH SOPANISATKAH SETIHASAH SANVAKHYATAH SA-PURANAH. “In this way all the Vedas were manifested along with the kalpas, rahasyas, Brahmanas, Upanisads, Itihasas, anvakhyatas, and Puranas” (Gopatha Brahmana, Purva 2.10). nama va rg-vedo yajur-vedah sama-veda atharvanas caturtha itihasa-puranah païcamo vedanam vedah. “Indeed Rg, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva are the names of the four Vedas. The Itihasas and Puranas are the fifth Veda” (Chandogya Up. 7.1.4). mimamsate ca yo vedan sadbhir angaih sa-vistaraih itihasa-puranani sa bhaved veda-para-gah “One who thoroughly studies the Vedas along with their six limbs and the Itihasas and Puranas becomes a true knower of the Vedas” (Vyasa-smrti 4.45). In the next TEXT Srila Jiva Gosvami explains why the Itihasas and Puranas are counted as the fifth Veda.

TATTVA SANDARBHA

BY SRILA JIVA GOSWAMI

[PART3]

English witness · section(s) 14

TEXT 14.1

païcamatve karanam ca vayu-purane suta-vakyam itihasa-purananam vaktaram samyag eva hi mam caiva pratijagraha bhagavan isvarah prabhuh

eka asid yajur-vedas tam caturdha vyakalpayat caturhotram abhut tasmims tena yajïam akalpayat

adhvaryavam yajurbhis tu rgbhir hotram tathaiva ca audgatram samabhis caiva brahmatvam capy atharvabhih

akhyanais capy upakhyanair gathabhir dvija-sattamah purana-samhitas cakre puranartha-visaradah

yac chistam tu yajur-veda iti sastrartha-nirnayah @VCONTINUE = iti. In the Vayu Purana [60.16–18, 21–22] Suta Gosvami explains why the Itihasas and Puranas are considered the fifth Veda: “Srila Vyasadeva, the almighty Supreme Lord, accepted me [Suta Gosvami] as the qualified speaker of the Itihasas and Puranas. In the beginning there was only one Veda, the Yajur Veda, which Srila Vyasa divided into four parts. These gave rise to the four activities called catur-hotra, by means of which Srila Vyasa arranged for the performance of sacrifice. “The adhvaryu priests carry out their responsibilities with yajur-mantras, the hota priests with rg-mantras, the udgata priests with sama-mantras, and the brahma priests with atharva-mantras.” Suta Gosvami further states: “O best of the twice-born, thereafter Srila Vyasa, who best knows the meaning of the Puranas, compiled them and the Itihasas by combining various akhyanas, upakhyanas, and gathas. Whatever remained after Vyasa divided the Vedas into four parts was also Yajur Veda. This is the conclusion of the scriptures.”

TEXT 14.2

brahma-yajïadhyayane ca viniyogo drsyate ’misam `yad brahmananitihasa-puranani' iti. so ’pi navedatve sambhavati. ato yad aha bhagavan matsye kalenagrahanam matva puranasya dvijottamah vyasa-rupam aham krtva samharami yuge yuge @VCONTINUE = iti purva-siddham eva puranam sukha-sangrahanaya sankalayamiti tatrarthah. The Puranas are also used in the formal study of the Vedas called brahma-yajïa: “The Itihasas and Puranas are Vedas” [Taittiriya Aranyaka 2.9]. If the Itihasas and Puranas were not Vedic, they would not be used this way in the brahma-yajïa. n the Matsya Purana [53.8] the Supreme Lord says, “O best of the twice-born, foreseeing that the Purana will gradually be neglected, in every age I assume the form of Vyasa and abridge it.” This means that Srila Vyasa condenses the already existing Purana so that people can easily comprehend it.

TEXT 14.3

tad-anantaram hy uktam catur-laksa-pramanena dvapare dvapare sada tad astadasadha krtva bhur-loke ’smin prabhasyate

adyapy amartya-loke tu sata-koti-pravistaram tad-artho ’tra catur-laksah sanksepena nivesitah @VCONTINUE = iti. The Matsya Purana [53.9–11] continues by saying, “The Purana consisting of four hundred thousand verses is divided into eighteen parts, in which form it is passed on by oral recitation here on earth in every Dvapara-yuga. Even today the original Purana of one billion verses exists in the worlds of the demigods. The essential meaning of that Purana is contained in the abridged version of four hundred thousand verses.”

TEXT 14.4

atra tu `yac chistam tu yajur-vedah' ity uktatvat tasyabhidheya-bhagas catur-laksas tv atra martya-loke sanksepena sara-sangrahena nivesito na tu racanantarenety arthah. Suta’s statement [quoted in TEXT 14.1] that “whatever remained after Vyasa divided the Vedas into four parts was also Yajur Veda” indicates that the essence of the original Purana formed the abridged version of four hundred thousand verses in the world of mortals. It is not a different composition.

COMMENTARY The Itihasas and Puranas Are the Fifth Veda The Itihasas and Puranas are called the fifth Veda because they are derived from the original Veda, the Yajur Veda. This is explained in the section of the Vayu Purana that describes the catur-hotra priests. There are four kinds of rtviks, or priests, needed to perform a Vedic sacrifice, and their duties were originally all known from the Yajur Veda. But later on the Veda was divided into four parts for easy understanding and application. The duties of the four priests—adhvaryu, udgata, hota, and brahma—are known from each of these four divisions. The adhvaryu is associated with the Yajur Veda, and his duties include sanctifying the sacrificial paraphernalia and measuring the shape and size of the sacrificial arena. The udgata priest studies the Sama Veda and chants hymns during the sacrifice to propitiate the Lord. The hota priest decorates the altar, invokes the demigods, pours oblations, and chants the Rg Veda. The brahma priest is a student of the Atharva Veda and acts as the supervisor and coordinator of sacrificial ceremonies. After Srila Vyasa compiled the four Vedas, there still remained one billion verses from the original Yajur Veda. These verses became the original Purana, which is still available on the heavenly planets. Out of compassion for the people of Kali-yuga, Vyasadeva extracted five hundred thousand essential verses from this original Purana. Four hundred thousand of these He divided into the eighteen Puranas. The remaining verses formed the Itihasa called Mahabharata. The Itihasa and Puranas are therefore called the fifth Veda because they were produced from the original Veda. Another reason the Puranas and Itihasas are considered the fifth Veda, distinct from the other four, is that the priests of the four Vedas do not use the Puranas and Itihasas in sacrificial ceremonies, even though these works are studied along with the Vedas. In his COMMENTARY on the Visnu Purana (3.6.16), Srila Sridhara Svami defines the terms akhyana, upakhyana, and gatha: svayam-drstartha-kathanam prahur akhyanakam budhah srutasyarthasya kathanam upakhyanam pracaksate gathas tu pitr-prthivy-adi-gitayah “An akhyana is a narration of something witnessed by the speaker, while an upakhyana is a narration of something the speaker has not witnessed but rather heard about. Gathas are songs about the forefathers and earthly beings.” The words yac chistam tu yajur-vedah (“The remaining part was also called Yajur Veda”; Vayu Pur. 60.16.22) signify that the Itihasas and Puranas are apauruseya, not composed by any mortal; thus they have the same authority as the Vedas, having been compiled by Srila Vyasa from the Supreme Lord’s very breath. While compiling the Puranas and Itihasas He included some of His own statements to make the narration more easily comprehensible. For example, in the Bhagavad-gita the words “Arjuna said” and “Krsna said” are added by Srila Vyasa to help the reader understand. But we should not consider even these added statements to have been written by a mortal being, since Vyasa is an incarnation of the Supreme Lord. This is evident from the verse of the Matsya Purana quoted in the text. Someone might raise the objection that from the Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad (2.4.10) it is clear that the four Vedas individually appeared from the Supreme Lord. Why, then, is it said that Vyasadeva divided the one Veda into four parts? We reply that while it is true that each Veda individually emanated from the Lord, originally all four Vedas were collectively called the Yajur Veda because that Veda is much larger than the other three. Generally, the largest member of a set can represent the whole set. In Sanskrit this is called adhikyena vyapadesa bhavanti, or the law that the largest constituent represents the whole. A herd of cows with just a few buffaloes in it is still called a herd of cows, and the four fingers and one thumb are usually called the five fingers. Because the four Vedas had become disordered, Sri Vyasa rearranged the Vedic texts to help clearly define the duties of the four sacrificial priests. How the Vedas became mixed up because of a curse by Gautama Rsi will be told in TEXT 16. In the next TEXT Srila Jiva Gosvami further substantiates his conclusion about the Vedic nature of the Itihasas and Puranas, and he also explains the meaning of the name Veda-vyasa.

English witness · section(s) 15

TEXT 15.1

tathaiva darsitam veda-saha-bhavena siva-puranasya vayaviya-samhitayam sanksipya caturo vedams caturdha vyabhajat prabhuh vyasta-vedataya khyato veda-vyasa iti smrtah

puranam api sanksiptam catur-laksa-pramanatah adyapy amartya-loke tu sata-koti-pravistaram @VCONTINUE = iti. sanksiptam ity atra teneti sesah. Similarly, the Vayaviya-samhita of the Siva Purana indicates the Vedic nature of the Puranas by discussing their appearance along with the Vedas: “The ingenious Lord abridged the Veda and then divided it [vyasta] into four. Therefore He became known as Veda-vyasa. He also summarized the Puranas in four hundred thousand verses, but in the heavenly planets they still comprise one billion verses” [Siva Pur. 7.1.1.37–38]. Here the word sanksiptam (“condensed”) implies “condensed by Him.”

TEXT 15.2

skandam agneyam ity-adi-samakhyas tu pravacana-nibandhanah kathakadi-vad anupurvi-nirmana-nibandhana va. tasmat kvacid anityatva-sravanam tv avirbhava-tirobhavapeksaya. tad evam itihasa-puranayor vedatvam siddham. The name of a Purana—Skanda, Agni, and so on—refers to its original speaker, as with the Katha Upanisad, which was promulgated by the sage Katha. Or else the name refers to the person who arranged the Purana’s contents. The reason the Puranas are occasionally described as impermanent is that they are sometimes manifest and sometimes not. In this way [by the arguments and evidence provided in Texts 13, 14, and 15.1–2] the Vedic nature of the Itihasas and Puranas is established.

TEXT 15.3

tathapi sutadinam adhikarah sakala-nigama-valli-sat-phala-Sri-krsna-nama-vat. yathoktam prabhasa-khande @VL1 = madhura-madhuram etan mangalam mangalanam @VL2 = sakala-nigama-valli-sat-phalam cit-svarupam @VL1 = sakrd api parigitam sraddhaya helaya va @VL2 = bhrgu-vara nara-matram tarayet krsna-nama @VCONTINUE = iti. Yet Suta and others who are not twice-born are qualified to recite the Puranas in the same way that every person is qualified to chant Lord Krsna’s holy name, the transcendental fruit of the creeper of all the Vedas. As stated in the Prabhasa-khanda [of the Skanda Purana]: “O best of the Bhrgu dynasty, the holy name of Krsna is the sweetest of the sweet and the most auspicious of the auspicious. It is the transcendental fruit of all the Vedas and is purely spiritual and conscious. Whoever chants it but once, whether with faith or with contempt, is liberated.”

TEXT 15.4

yatha coktam visnu-dharme rg-vedo ’tha yajur-vedah sama-vedo ’py atharvanah adhitas tena yenoktam harir ity aksara-dvayam @VCONTINUE = iti. atha vedartha-nirnayakatvam ca vaisnave bharata-vyapadesena hy amnayarthah pradarsitah vedah pratisthitah sarve purane natra samsayah @VCONTINUE = ity-adau. The Visnu-dharma Purana states: “A person who chants the two syllables ha-ri has already completed the study of the Rg, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva Vedas.” And the Visnu Purana affirms that the Puranas and Itihasas establish the meaning of the Vedas: “On the pre TEXT of writing the Mahabharata, Srila Vyasa has explained the Vedas’ meaning. Without doubt all the ideas of the Vedas are given a firm foundation in the Puranas.”

TEXT 15.5

kim ca vedartha-dipakanam sastranam madhya-patitabhyupagame ’py avirbhavaka-vaisistyat tayor eva vaisistyam. yatha padme dvaipayanena yad buddham brahmadyais tan na budhyate sarva-buddham sa vai veda tad-buddham nanya-gocaram Moreover, even if we count the Itihasas and Puranas among the books explaining the meaning of the Vedas, still they are unique because their compiler is so glorious. The Padma Purana says, “Brahma and others do not know what Bhagavan Veda-vyasa knows. Indeed, He knows everything known to others, but what He knows is beyond everyone else’s grasp.”

COMMENTARY The Itihasas, Puranas, and Vedas All Have the Same Origin The word sanksiptam in the verse cited here from the Siva Purana (7.1.1.37) is significant. It means “condensed,” not “composed.” Srila Veda-vyasa, the literary incarnation of God, condensed the already existing Vedas. Then He took unused verses from that abridged portion and made them into the Puranas. Thus He did not create the Puranas as an original composition. This confirms that the Puranas, by virtue of their transcendental origin, are equal to the four Vedas. They are eternal and apauruseya. One may protest that since the Puranas have names such as Skanda and Agni they must have been composed by these persons, and so they are neither eternal nor apauruseya. But if this were the case, the Vedas themselves would have to be considered noneternal compositions since their parts have names like Katha Upanisad and Aitareya Brahmana, which refer to the sages Katha and Aitareya. The explanation is that portions of the Vedas are named after certain sages not because they wrote those portions but because they were these portions’ main teachers and exponents. Since persons with names like Katha and Aitareya appear in every millennium, one should not think that before the appearance of the known Katha and Aitareya these names were meaningless words in the Vedas. In the same way, several of the Puranas are named either after their first teacher or the person who rearranged them. It may sometimes be that over the course of time a certain Vedic work becomes less popular or is completely forgotten on this planet. Eventually some sage or demigod again speaks it, and then the book becomes known by his name. An example of this is given in Srimad-Bhagavatam, where sage Yajïavalkya is described as receiving the Vajasaneyi-samhita of the Yajur Veda from the sun-god: “Satisfied by such glorification, the powerful sun-god assumed the form of a horse (vaja) and presented to the sage Yajïavalkya the yajur-mantras previously unknown in human society” (Bhag. 12.6.73). Just as the Lord seems to take birth and disappear like a mortal being, the Vedic literature similarly becomes manifest and unmanifest. Srimad-Bhagavatam had become unmanifest at the end of the Dvapara-yuga, five thousand years ago. At that time Narada Muni instructed Vyasa to again reveal the Bhagavatam. If the Bhagavatam had not existed before, Puranas older than the Bhagavatam would not refer to it by name. In the Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda, Gautama advises Ambarisa Maharaja, who reigned in the Satya-yuga, to study Srimad-Bhagavatam. Thus the Puranas are eternal, but sometimes they are manifest and sometimes unmanifest in human society. As the Lord is independent in His appearance and disappearance, so by His free will He speaks the revealed scriptures through the medium of various sages and gives these scriptures various names. Another objection to the Itihasas’ and Puranas’ Vedic status may be stated as follows: In Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.4.25) Suta Gosvami says, stri-sudra-dvija-bandhunam trayi na sruti-gocara<193>iti bharatam akhyanam krpaya munina krtam: “Women, laborers, and unqualified descendants of the twice-born have no access to the Vedas.<193>Therefore the sage [Vyasa] mercifully compiled the Mahabharata.” Since the Mahabharata, the foremost of the Itihasas, was written specifically for women and others with no access to the Vedas, how can the Itihasas be part of the Vedas? Moreover, in TEXT 13 of the same chapter, Saunaka Rsi says to Suta Gosvami, manye tvam visaye vacam snatam anyatra chandasat: “We consider you expert in all subjects except the Vedas.” So if Suta Gosvami was not expert in the Vedas yet was being requested to narrate the Puranas (specifically the Bhagavata Purana), how can the Puranas be part of the Vedas? Anticipating these objections, Srila Jiva Gosvami compares the privilege of studying the Itihasas and Puranas to that of chanting Krsna’s holy name, the choicest fruit of the Vedas. The holy name of Krsna is purely Vedic, yet anyone may chant it, including those who have no right to study the Vedas. Similarly, the Itihasas and Puranas are also purely Vedic, yet even a sincere sudra or outcaste can approach them, just as he or she may chant the holy name of the Lord. As one can gain all perfection simply by chanting Lord Krsna’s holy name, which is the ultimate fruit of the Vedas, so one can learn the essence of the Vedas by studying the Itihasas and Puranas, even without studying the Vedas themselves. If one could not do so, then knowledge of how to attain perfection would be inaccessible to those who are barred from studying the Vedas because they are not twice-born. Finally, even if one were to include the Itihasas and Puranas among other smrti scriptures written by saintly sages to explain the meaning of the Vedas, the Itihasas and Puranas occupy a unique place because of the eminence of their propounder, Srila Vyasadeva, an incarnation of the Supreme Lord. In the next TEXT Srila Jiva Gosvami elaborates on how the Itihasas and Puranas are superexcellent by virtue of their compiler’s divinity.

English witness · section(s) 16

TEXT 16.1

skande vyasa-citta-sthitakasad avacchinnani kanicit anye vyavaharanty etany uri-krtya grhad iva @VCONTINUE = iti. tathaiva drstam Sri-visnu-purane parasara-vakyam tato ’tra mat-suto vyasa astavimsatime ’ntare vedam ekam catus-padam caturdha vyabhajat prabhuh

yathatra tena vai vyasta veda-vyasena dhi-mata vedas tatha samastais tair vyasair anyais tatha maya

tad anenaiva vyasanam sakha-bhedan dvijottama catur-yugesu racitan samastesv avadharaya

krsna-dvaipayanam vyasam viddhi narayanam prabhum ko ’nyo hi bhuvi maitreya mahabharata-krd bhavet @VCONTINUE = iti. The Skanda Purana states, “Just as a person picks up things in his own house and uses them, many people have taken knowledge from the sky of Vyasa’s heart for their own use.” We also find this statement by Parasara Rsi in the Visnu Purana [3.4.2–5]: “Thereafter, during the twenty-eighth manv-antara, the Lord in the form of my son Vyasa took the one Veda, consisting of four sections, and divided it into four separate parts. Just as this intelligent Vyasa divided the Veda, previously all other Vyasas, including myself, also divided it. O best of the twice-born, understand that in every cycle of four yugas Vyasas come and arrange the Veda into various branches. But know, O Maitreya, that Sri Krsna-dvaipayana Vyasa is Lord Narayana Himself. Who else in this world could have written the great epic Mahabharata?”

TEXT 16.2

skanda eva narayanad vinispannam jïanam krta-yuge sthitam kiïcit tad anyatha jatam tretayam dvapare ’khilam

gautamasya rseh sapaj jïane tv ajïanatam gate sankirna-buddhayo deva brahma-rudra-purahsarah

saranyam saranam jagmur narayanam anamayam tair vijïapita-karyas tu bhagavan purusottamah

avatirno maha-yogi satyavatyam parasarat utsannan bhagavan vedan ujjahara harih svayam @VCONTINUE = iti. The Skanda Purana further states, “In Satya-yuga the knowledge that emanated from Lord Narayana remained pure. It became somewhat polluted in Treta-yuga, and completely so in Dvapara-yuga. When ignorance had covered that knowledge because of Gautama Rsi’s curse, the demigods became perplexed. Led by Brahma and Rudra, they approached Lord Narayana, the Supreme Person and faultless protector, and told Him why they had come. On the request of the demigods, Lord Hari then descended as the great yogi Vyasa, son of Satyavati and Parasara, and re-established the forgotten Vedas.”

TEXT 16.3

veda-sabdenatra puranadi-dvayam api grhyate. tad evam itihasa-purana-vicara eva sreyan iti siddham. tatrapi puranasyaiva garima drsyate. uktam hi naradiye vedarthad adhikam manye puranartham varanane vedah pratisthitah sarve purane natra samsayah

puranam anyatha krtva tiryag-yonim avapnuyat su-danto ’pi su-santo ’pi na gatim kvacid apnuyat @VCONTINUE = iti. Here the word veda also indicates the Itihasas and Puranas. Thus it is established that studying the Itihasas and Puranas is supremely beneficial. And of these two, the Puranas are more excellent. As stated in the Naradiya Purana, “O lovely one, I consider the Puranas more important than the Vedas because the Puranas firmly establish all the Vedic meanings. There is no doubt of this. One who disrespects the Puranas will take birth as a subhuman; even if he can expertly control his senses and mind, he can attain no good destination.”

COMMENTARY The Compiler of the Itihasas and Puranas is Unique To a large extent one can know the quality of a product by assessing the quality of the person who made it. By this criterion the Puranas and Itihasas are supremely excellent, since they were compiled by Lord Narayana Himself in the form of Srila Vyasadeva. Here Srila Vyasa’s mind is compared to the unlimited sky, indicating that just as the sky accommodates all objects, so Vyasa’s mind contains all knowledge. Another significance of comparing Vyasa’s mind to the sky is that the sky is the medium for sound, which transmits knowledge. In other words, Vyasa’s mind is the medium for transcendental sound, which is the basis of all kinds of knowledge. All other thinkers, both on this planet and on higher planets, simply make use of the knowledge Srila Vyasa has given. According to one Sanskrit saying, vyasocchistam jagat sarvam: “The whole world tastes the remnants of Vyasa’s knowledge.” Any “new” idea one may find or conceive of already exists in His writings. Thus all the writers throughout history have borrowed from Him, directly or indirectly. According to Parasara Muni, at the beginning of each Kali-yuga in the repeated cycle of four yugas, a vyasa, or “compiler,” arranges the Vedas. In the present reign of Manu, Parasara himself was the twenty-sixth Vyasa, and Sri Krsna-dvaipayana is the twenty-eighth. Of the twenty-eight Vyasas who have appeared until now, Krsna-dvaipayana is special because He is an incarnation of Lord Narayana. He appeared on the request of the demigods at the end of the Dvapara-yuga, after a curse spoken by Gautama Muni caused ignorance to cover the Vedic knowledge. Chapter 171 of the Varaha Purana relates how Gautama Muni underwent severe austerities during a famine to please Lord Brahma. When Brahma offered Gautama a boon, the sage asked that he would be able to feed all his guests. The boon was granted, and benevolent Gautama fed his many brahmana guests for the duration of the famine. When rains finally came, the brahmanas wanted to leave his hermitage. As is the custom, however, Gautama asked them to stay a little longer, and they agreed. After some time they again wished to leave, but once again Gautama prevailed on them to stay a while longer. This happened a few times. Finally the brahmanas, determined to leave, devised a plan. They made an illusory cow and left it near Gautama’s asrama. In the early morning, when the sage was going to bathe, the animal blocked his path, and to drive her away he threw a few drops of water at her. At the first touch of the water, the cow fell down dead. The brahmanas immediately raised a hue and cry, declaring “We cannot stay here and accept food from a cow-killer!” and then they left for their respective residences. Later Gautama performed an atonement, and by his mystic power he could understand that he had been tricked. So he angrily cursed the brahmanas that they would lose all their Vedic knowledge. In this way the Vedic knowledge became covered by ignorance during the Dvapara-yuga, and thus it was necessary for Vyasa to send forth the Vedas again. From Lord Siva’s statement that the Puranas are more important than the Vedas because they explain them, we should not conclude that absolutely no one should study the Vedas. Still, Vyasadeva’s verdict is that in Kali-yuga people are not intelligent enough to understand the true message of the Vedas, especially since there exists no authentic disciplic succession through which to acquire this understanding. We find, in fact, that those who attempt nowadays to study only the Vedas and Upanisads often end up taking to ordinary, fruitive activities or else to meditation on the impersonal Brahman, with the aim of merging into it. They do not come to the Vaisnava siddhanta, the perfect conclusion of Vedic understanding, which is realization of unalloyed devotional service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The failure of modern-day students of the Vedas to understand their real message is proof that this message is not easy to discern in the present age. As Lord Krsna says in Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.3.44), paroksa-vado vedo ’yam: “The Vedas speak indirectly.” Therefore, if we wish to learn the true conclusion of the Vedas in this age, it is more practical to study the Puranas. However, a serious student who wants to understand the Puranas’ siddhanta must still seek out a guru in disciplic succession. This basic prerequisite of Vedic study is not waived when one approaches the Puranas. Indeed, Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.3.21) emphatically declares, tasmad gurum prapadyeta jijïasuh sreya uttamam: “One who seriously wants to learn about the highest good in life must take shelter of a bona fide spiritual master.” Next, Srila Jiva Gosvami explains the three divisions of the Puranas.

English witness · section(s) 17

TEXT 17.1

skande prabhasa-khande ca veda-van niscalam manye puranartham dvijottamah vedah pratisthitah sarve purane natra samsayah

bibhety alpa-srutad vedo mam ayam calayisyati itihasa-puranais tu niscalo ’yam krtah pura

yan na drstam hi vedesu tad drstam smrtisu dvijah ubhayor yan na drstam hi tat puranaih pragiyate

yo veda caturo vedan sangopanisado dvijah puranam naiva janati na ca sa syad vicaksanah @VCONTINUE = iti. Furthermore, the Prabhasa-khanda of the Skanda Purana [5.3.121–24] states: “O best of the twice-born, I consider the meaning of the Puranas to be as well established as that of the Vedas. Without doubt all the Vedas are given a firm foundation in them. Once, long ago, the Vedas became afraid of those who might hear from her insufficiently, and she thought, ‘This sort of person will distort my meaning.’ But then the Itihasas and Puranas helped the Vedas by firmly establishing her meaning. What cannot be found in the Vedas is found in the smrti, and what cannot be found in either is clearly explained in the Puranas. A person is not considered learned if he does not know the Puranas, O learned brahmanas, even if he has studied the four Vedas along with the Vedangas and Upanisads.”

TEXT 17.2

atha purananam evam pramanye sthite ’pi tesam api samastyenapracarad-rupatvan nana-devata-pratipadaka-prayatvad arvacinaih ksudra-buddhibhir artho duradhigama iti tad-avastha eva samsayah. Next we must consider the following doubt concerning the status of the Puranas: Although their authority has been thus established [in the previous Texts], still it is difficult for the less intelligent men of the modern age to comprehend their ultimate meaning. The reasons for this difficulty are that the Puranas, like the Vedas, are only partially available and that in general the Puranas try to establish the supremacy of various deities.

TEXT 17.3

yad uktam matsye païcangam ca puranam syad akhyanam itarat smrtam sattvikesu ca kalpesu mahatmyam adhikam hareh

rajasesu ca mahatmyam adhikam brahmano viduh tadvad agnes ca mahatmyam tamasesu sivasya ca sankirnesu sarasvatyah pitènam ca nigadyate @VCONTINUE = iti. As stated in the Matsya Purana [53.65, 68–69]: “A history is called a Purana if it has the five defining characteristics; otherwise it is called an akhyana. The sattvic Puranas primarily glorify Lord Hari; the rajasic Puranas, Lord Brahma; and the tamasic Puranas, Lord Siva and Durga, along with Agni. The Puranas in mixed modes glorify Sarasvati and the Pitas.”

TEXT 17.4

atragnes tat-tad-agnau pratipadyasya tat-tad-yajïasyety arthah. sivasya ceti ca-karac chivayas ca. sankirnesu sattva-rajas-tamo-mayesu kalpesu bahusu. sarasvatya nana-vany-atmaka-tad-upalaksitaya nana-devataya ity arthah. pitènam `karmana pitr-lokah' iti srutes tat-prapaka-karmanam ity arthah. Here the word agni refers to the Vedic sacrifices performed by making offerings into various sacred fires. The word ca (“and”) in the phrase sivasya ca implies the wife of Lord Siva. Sankirnesu (“in the mixed”) means “in the various Puranas in the mixed modes of sattva, rajas, and tamas combined.” Here sarasvatyah (“of Sarasvati”) means “of the presiding deity of speech” and, by implication, “of the various deities referred to in the numerous scriptural texts she embodies.” According to sruti, karmana pitr-lokah: “By fruitive activities one can attain the abode of the forefathers.” Thus here the word pitènam (“of the forefathers”) refers to the fruitive rituals meant for attaining to the planet of the forefathers.

COMMENTARY Three Divisions of the Puranas The verse from the Matsya Purana cited in TEXT 17.3 mentions the five subjects that characterize a Purana. Another verse of the Matsya Purana (53.65) lists those subjects: sargas ca pratisargas ca vamso manvantarani ca vamsyanucaritam caiva puranam païca-laksanam “The five subjects that characterize a Purana are creation, dissolution, genealogy, reigns of Manus, and the activities of famous kings.” Texts 57 and 61 of Sri Tattva-sandarbha discuss these five subjects in detail. In the verses cited above from the Matsya Purana, the word kalpa means “scripture” or “Purana.” This is one of the various meanings of this word, as listed in the Medini Sanskrit dictionary (1.21.2): kalpah sastre vidhau nyaye samvarte brahmane dine. “Kalpa means `scripture,’ `rule,’ `logic,’ `dissolution,’ and `day of Brahma.’” The Puranas are divided according to the modes of material nature. The list of the Puranas belonging to each mode is given in the Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda (236.18–21): vaisnavam naradiyam ca tatha bhagavatam subham garudam ca tatha padmam varaham subha-darsane

sattvikani puranani vijïeyani subhani vai brahmandam brahma-vaivartam markandeyam tathaiva ca

bhavisyam vamanam brahmamrajasani nibodha me matsyam kaurmam tatha laingam saivam skandam tathaiva ca

agneyam ca sad etani tamasani nibodha me “[Lord Siva said:] `O beautiful lady, know that the Visnu, Narada, Bhagavata, Garuda, Padma, and Varaha Puranas are in the mode of goodness, the Brahmanda, Brahma-vaivarta, Markandeya, Bhavisya, Vamana, and Brahma Puranas are in the mode of passion, and the Matsya, Kurma, Linga, Siva, Skanda, and Agni Puranas are in the mode of ignorance.’” The verses Srila Jiva cites from the Skanda Purana imply that the Puranas are as good as the Vedas and should be accepted as such by anyone who accepts the Vedas’ authority. There are many commentaries on the Vedas, but the Puranas are the natural COMMENTARY because they were compiled by the Vedas’ compiler, Srila Vyasa. Therefore one can understand the message of the Vedas by studying the Puranas alone, even without directly studying the Vedas. But study of the Vedas is incomplete in this age without study of the Puranas; therefore studying the Puranas is even more appropriate and practical for us than studying the Vedas. Furthermore, the statement from the Skanda Purana quoted in TEXT 17.1—that no one can become learned without studying the Puranas—suggests that the Puranas are also more important than the Itihasas. But just as we meet with difficulties in studying the Vedas in this age, we also encounter difficulties in studying the Puranas. The eighteen major Puranas and eighteen minor ones constitute a vast body of literature, and there are no current disciplic successions or authentic commentaries for most of these works. Portions of some Puranas are not available, and other Puranas have variant readings and interpolations. As with the Vedas, independent study of the Puranas yields no clear conclusion, because each Purana seems to establish a different deity as the supreme. The Siva Purana proclaims Lord Siva supreme, the Visnu Purana, Lord Visnu, and so on. The result is confusion for one who studies them without proper guidance. Such a student will not know whether to worship Siva, Visnu, Devi, or some other deity. Srila Jiva Gosvami gives the solution to this problem in the next Text.

English witness · section(s) 18

TEXT 18.1

tad evam sati tat-tat-kalpa-katha-mayatvenaiva matsya eva prasiddhanam tat-tat-purananam vyavastha jïapita. taratamyam tu katham syad yenetara-nirnayah kriyeta. sattvadi-taratamyenaiveti cet `sattvat saïjayate jïanam' iti `sattvam yad brahma-darsanam' iti ca nyayat sattvikam eva puranadikam paramartha-jïanaya prabalam ity ayatam. This being the case[—that Puranas are in various modes of nature—]the Matsya Purana classifies them in three divisions based on the stories found in them. But how can we determine the relative importance of the Puranas so that we can then learn about the other subjects under discussion, namely, sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana? If we use the three modes of nature as the basis for categorizing the Puranas, depending on such statements as “the mode of goodness produces knowledge” [Bg. 14.17] and “the mode of goodness leads to realization of the Absolute Truth” [Bhag. 1.2.24], we will conclude that the Puranas and other such literature in the mode of goodness are superior means for gaining knowledge of the Absolute Truth.

TEXT 18.2

tathapi paramarthe ’pi nana-bhangya vipratipadyamananam samadhanaya kim syat. yadi sarvasyapi vedasya puranasya cartha-nirnayaya tenaiva Sri-bhagavata vyasena brahma-sutram krtam tad-avalokenaiva sarvo ’rtho nirneya ity ucyate tarhi nanya-sutra-kara-muny-anugatair manyeta. kim catyanta-gudharthanam alpaksaranam tat-sutranam anyarthatvam kascid acaksita tatah katarad ivatra samadhanam. But even then, how can we reconcile the different inconclusive views regarding the Absolute Truth that the various Puranas put forward? Someone may propose study of the Vedanta-sutra as the solution, claiming that Bhagavan Vyasadeva compiled the Vedanta-sutra to present the decisive conclusion of both the Vedas and the Puranas concerning the Absolute Truth. But then the followers of sages who wrote other sutras may be dissatisfied. Moreover, since the aphorisms of the Vedanta are terse and extremely esoteric, and since they are also subject to varying interpretations, someone will always express a contrary idea about their meaning. What, then, can resolve disputes concerning the Vedanta-sutra?

TEXT 18.3

tad evam samadheyam yady ekatamam eva purana-laksanam apauruseyam sastram sarva-vedetihasa-purananam artha-saram brahma-sutropajivyam ca bhavad bhuvi sampurnam pracarad-rupam syat. satyam uktam. yata eva ca sarva-pramananam cakravarti-bhutam asmad-abhimatam Srimad-bhagavatam evodbhavitam bhavata. This problem could be solved if there were one scripture that had the characteristics of a Purana, that had no human origin, that presented the essence of all the Vedas, Itihasas, and Puranas, that was based on the Vedanta-sutra, and that was available throughout the land in its complete form. Well said, sir, because you have reminded us about our revered Srimad-Bhagavatam, the emperor of all pramanas.

COMMENTARY Srimad-Bhagavatam Is the Best of All Puranas The Matsya Purana, Chapter 53, gives the number of verses in each Purana and describes the benefits of donating each one on special days. In that same chapter Suta Gosvami speaks two and a half verses containing a formula for dividing the Puranas into three classes according to which one of the three modes of nature predominates. These three classes of Purana glorify various deities, and commentators often try to establish their own favorite among these deities as supreme, arguing on the basis of logic and apparently conclusive scriptural references. One consequence of this partiality is that commentators tend to denigrate Puranas in a category different from their own: proponents of tamasic Puranas tend to reject the authority of the rajasic and sattvic Puranas, and proponents of rajasic and sattvic Puranas likewise reject the Puranas outside their group. But there cannot actually be several Absolute Truths; therefore the question of which Puranic deity is the one Supreme Truth remains to be settled. For the unbiased seeker of the truth, Srila Jiva Gosvami shows how to resolve the matter. He explains that sattva, or the mode of goodness, is clearly superior to passion and ignorance, as Lord Krsna confirms in the Bhagavad-gita (14.17): sattvat saïjayate jïanam rajaso lobha eva ca pramada-mohau tamaso bhavato ’jïanam eva ca “From the mode of goodness, real knowledge develops; from the mode of passion, greed develops; and from the mode of ignorance develop foolishness, madness, and illusion.” Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.2.24) also states, tamasas tu rajas tasmat sattvam yad brahma-darsanam: “Passion is better than ignorance, but goodness is best because it can lead to realization of the Absolute Truth.” In the passage where this verse appears, Suta Gosvami is explaining which form of worship produces the ultimate good. His opinion is that one can achieve the ultimate good only by worshiping Lord Krsna, the personification of pure goodness. The citation from the Matsya Purana in the previous TEXT states that the sattvic Puranas glorify Lord Hari, Krsna. By contrast, the rajasic and tamasic Puranas recommend worship of other deities. Such worship is in the lower modes of nature and does not lead to realization of the Absolute Truth. Thus one can tell the modal quality of a Purana by seeing which deity it recommends for worship. Another way to tell is by seeing how it opens. In a sattvic Purana the questioner will approach a learned speaker and inquire from him about the Absolute Truth. In this vein the questioner may ask the speaker to elaborate on the nature of ultimate reality, the supreme religion for all, the ultimate benefit a human being can aspire for, how one should prepare for death, and so on. These questions allow the Purana’s speaker full freedom to explain these topics; as a self-realized teacher, free from all gross and subtle material desires and concerned only with the welfare of the inquirer and those who will hear the discourse, either then or in the future, the speaker replies with answers that are specific and unambiguous, leaving no room for misinterpretation or confusion. Examples of such sattvic Puranas include the Padma Purana, the Visnu Purana, and, most prominently, the Bhagavata Purana, or Srimad-Bhagavatam. In the rajasic and tamasic Puranas, however, the questioners inquire about limited topics, those that do not address the ultimate concerns of life. In the Linga Purana, for example, the sages at Naimisaranya ask Suta Gosvami to narrate the glory of Linga, Lord Siva. Although Suta Gosvami has fully realized the Absolute Truth and is perfectly competent to explain it, the questions here restrict him to speaking on the particular topic of Linga. He is not free to explain the deeper meaning of life. Since all rajasic and tamasic Puranas have this shortcoming, they cannot be reliable sources of knowledge about the essential topics of sambandha, abhidheya, and prayojana. The Puranas were arranged in different modes in response to the various desires and interests of the conditioned souls. Nevertheless, every Purana contains glorification of Lord Hari, the Absolute Truth. Srila Veda-vyasa included this glorification so that even persons in the lower material modes can gradually develop interest in the Supreme Personality of Godhead by hearing or reading the tamasic and rajasic Puranas. Someone might object that the statement cited above concerning the classification of the Puranas according to the modes does not itself come from a sattvic Purana and so should not be taken as authoritative. We reply that this classification is supported by numerous other statements as well, including some from such sattvic scriptures as the Padma Purana, which we have already cited in the previous Text. Nor is it true that the Puranas in the lower modes give no valid knowledge at all, since even they give some insight into absolute reality, what to speak of the insights they give into lesser topics. In addition, no statement in the Vedic literature specifically contradicts the verses cited here classifying the Puranas according to the modes of nature, and so we are left with no compelling reason to doubt the authenticity of this classification. From this analysis we can conclude that in our quest for the ultimate sabda-pramana we need consider only the sattvic Puranas. As the Padma Purana states, sattvika moksa-dah proktah: “The Puranas in the mode of goodness lead to liberation.” But even these sattvic Puranas have been understood in many ways by great thinkers. Some interpreters have found that they glorify the path of yoga as the best, others have concluded that they recommend bhakti as the highest path, and yet others have found that they promote the path of jïana (knowledge) as supreme. Next Srila Jiva Gosvami suggests the Vedanta-sutra as a possible basis of reconciliation. The Vedanta-sutra, written by Vyasadeva, certainly incorporates the essential understanding of the Vedas and the Puranas. But we must also consider that the dedicated followers of other sages who wrote philosophical sutras, such as Gautama and Pataïjali, might not accept the Vedanta-sutra’s ideas. Even if these followers of other philosophers could somehow be convinced to change their minds by logical proof of the greater authority of the Vedanta-sutra, the situation is still problematic: The sutras of the Vedanta being terse and esoteric, acaryas of various persuasions have commented on them, and so it is difficult to decide whose opinion agrees with that of Srila Veda-vyasa, the author. For the seeker who has come this far along the way but finds himself sinking in the marshy confusion created by the various scriptures and their myriad commentators, Srila Jiva Gosvami finally points out the high ground of the Srimad-Bhagavatam. The Bhagavatam has the ten characteristics of a major Purana (discussed in TEXT 56); it is apauruseya; it is the natural COMMENTARY on the Vedanta-sutra and thus constitutes the purport of all the Vedas, Itihasas, and Puranas; it is available in its entirety; it is respected by all Vaisnava acaryas, and also many others; it is the most popular of the Puranas; it has an intact tradition of Vaisnava commentaries; and it is the culmination of Srila Veda-vyasa’s literary output, composed in His maturity. By establishing Srimad-Bhagavatam as the last word in Vedic scripture, Srila Jiva Gosvami fulfills the will of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, who accepted the Bhagavatam as “the spotless Purana,” the supremely authoritative text. In the next TEXT Jiva Gosvami explains that Srimad-Bhagavatam has not been composed by a mortal and that it is the natural COMMENTARY on the Vedanta-sutra.

English witness · section(s) 19

TEXT 19.1

yat khalu sarva-purana-jatam avirbhavya brahma-sutram ca praniyapy aparitustena tena bhagavata nija-sutranam akrtrima-bhasya-bhutam samadhi-labdham avirbhavitam yasminn eva sarva-sastra-samanvayo drsyate sarva-vedartha-sutra-laksanam gayatrim adhikrtya pravartitatvat. Indeed, Lord Vyasa was not satisfied even after compiling all the Puranas and the Vedanta-sutra. He therefore wrote Srimad-Bhagavatam, which was revealed to Him in trance, as the natural COMMENTARY on His own sutras. In Srimad-Bhagavatam we find the consistent reconciliation of all scriptures. That the Bhagavatam gives the essence of all scriptures is shown by its opening with the Gayatri mantra, the essential TEXT incorporating the message of all the Vedas.

TEXT 19.2

tathapi tat-svarupam matsye yatradhikrtya gayatrim varnyate dharma-vistarah vrtrasura-vadhopetam tad bhagavatam isyate

likhitva tac ca yo dadyad dhema-simha-samanvitam prausthapadyam paurnamasyam sa yati paramam gatim astadasa-sahasrani puranam tat prakirtitam @VCONTINUE = iti. The characteristics of Srimad-Bhagavatam are further described in the Matsya Purana [53.20–22]: “That Purana is known as Srimad-Bhagavatam which explains the topmost principles of religion with reference to the Gayatri mantra and which tells of the killing of the demon Vrtra. This Purana has eighteen thousand verses. Whoever writes out a copy of Srimad-Bhagavatam, places it on a golden lion-throne, and presents it to someone on the full-moon day of the month of Bhadra (August-September) will attain the supreme goal.”

TEXT 19.3

atra gayatri-sabdena tat-sucaka-tad-avyabhicari-dhimahi-pada-samvalita-tad-artha evesyate sarvesam mantranam adi-rupayas tasyah saksat kathananarhatvat. tad-arthata ca `janmady asya yatah' `tene brahma hrda' iti sarva-lokasrayatva-buddhi-vrtti-prerakatvadi-samyat. dharma-vistara ity atra dharma-sabdah parama-dharma-parah `dharmah projjhita-kaitavo ’tra paramah' ity atraiva pratipaditatvat. sa ca bhagavad-dhyanadi-laksana eveti purastad vyakti-bhavisyati. Here the word gayatri indicates the meaning of the Gayatri mantra, which includes the word dhimahi. Dhimahi is an indicator of Gayatri, implying its purport; it would be improper to directly utter Gayatri itself, the origin of all Vedic mantras. The first verse of Srimad-Bhagavatam [1.1.1] alludes to the meaning of Gayatri by the phrases janmady asya yatah (“by Him this universe is created, maintained, and destroyed”) and tene brahma hrda (“He revealed Vedic knowledge in the heart”). These phrases express the same meaning as Gayatri, describing the Lord as the basis of all the universes and as He who inspires everyone’s intellect. The word dharma in the compound dharma-vistara refers to the supreme religion, as expressed in the Bhagavatam’s words dharmah projjhita-kaitavo ’tra paramah [Bhag. 1.1.2]: “the supreme religion, devoid of all cheating propensities.” And, as will become clear in upcoming Texts, this dharma is indeed characterized by meditation on the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

COMMENTARY Srimad-Bhagavatam Is the Natural COMMENTARY on the Vedanta-sutra Srimad-Bhagavatam contains the story of its own appearance as the crowning achievement of Srila Vyasadeva’s literary efforts. First Srila Vyasadeva arranged the four Vedas, and then He composed the great epic Mahabharata for the benefit of women, sudras, and others who cannot study the Vedas. Next He compiled the Puranas, the natural COMMENTARY on the Vedas, and then He provided the essence of the Vedas and Puranas in His Vedanta-sutra. But even after all this literary output, Veda-vyasa felt discontented, although He did not know why. Then His spiritual master, Narada Muni, came to His rescue: krtavan bharatam yas tvam sarvartha-paribrmhitam “Your inquiries were full and your studies were also well fulfilled, and there is no doubt that you have prepared a great and wonderful work, the Mahabharata, which is full of all kinds of Vedic sequences elaborately explained” (Bhag. 1.5.3). yatha dharmadayas cartha muni-varyanukirtitah na tatha vasudevasya mahima hy anuvarnitah “Although, great sage, you have very broadly described the four principles beginning with religious performances, you have not in the same way described the glories of the Supreme Personality, Vasudeva” (Bhag. 1.5.9). Following Narada Muni’s instruction, Srila Vyasa meditated, and while He was in trance Srimad-Bhagavatam was revealed to Him. Thus it is clear that Srimad-Bhagavatam, which gave solace to Vyasadeva, is knowledge descended from the transcendental realm. In upcoming Texts Sri Jiva will show that it is also the natural COMMENTARY on the Vedanta-sutra. Various Puranas mention the relationship between Srimad-Bhagavatam and the Gayatri mantra. Considered the essence of the Vedas, Gayatri is supposed to be recited at dawn, noon, and dusk by every twice-born person (brahmana, ksatriya, and vaisya). According to Sridhara Svami in his Bhavartha-dipika, Srimad-Bhagavatam begins with the Gayatri mantra. Commenting on the first verse of the Bhagavatam, he writes, dhimahiti gayatrya prarambhena ca gayatry-akhya-brahma-vidya-rupam etat puranam iti darsitam: “That the Gayatri phrase indicated by the word dhimahi begins this Purana shows that this work has the nature of the brahma-vidya [Vedic knowledge of the Supreme] called Gayatri.” Because Srimad-Bhagavatam is based on Gayatri, the cream of the Vedas, it explains the topmost principles of religion. The Bhagavatam (1.1.3) thus calls itself “the ripened fruit of the wish-fulfilling tree of the Vedas” (nigama-kalpa-taror galitam phalam). The recitation of Gayatri and other Vedic mantras is governed by strict rules regarding the person, time, and place, and also the purity of the chanter, but such restrictions do not apply to Srimad-Bhagavatam. Since anyone may read the Bhagavatam, strictly speaking it would be improper for the Gayatri mantra to appear there in its original form. Gayatri is among the Vedic mantras, which only the twice-born are allowed to chant. That is why Srila Vyasadeva expressed the form and idea of Gayatri in the Bhagavatam without using the actual mantra. Only one word from Gayatri, dhimahi, has been kept to indicate his intention, because it is a compulsory word in the mantra and carries its essence. Another reason Vyasa did not write the original Gayatri in Srimad-Bhagavatam is that doing so would have invited misinterpretation. Various schools of thought have explained Gayatri differently—as a meditation on impersonal Brahman, on the sun, on the fire-god, on Lord Siva, and so forth. Only rarely is it understood to be a meditation on the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Vasudeva. But in Srimad-Bhagavatam, Srila Vyasadeva’s own COMMENTARY on the Vedanta-sutra, Vyasadeva delivers the complete and unambiguous meaning of Gayatri in the opening verse. He reveals that Gayatri is a meditation on the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His eternal consort, Sri Radhika. This meditation is indeed the highest dharma. In the 105th TEXT of Sri Paramatma-sandarbha, Srila Jiva Gosvami will explain the Gayatri mantra in detail, and in the Krsna-sandarbha he will thoroughly analyze the Bhagavatam’s first verse and show it to be a meditation on Sri Sri Radha-Krsna. In the next TEXT of the Tattva-sandarbha, Srila Jiva Gosvami further introduces the Srimad-Bhagavatam, describing its distinguishing features and supporting his statements with scriptural references.

TATTVA SANDARBHA

BY SRILA JIVA GOSWAMI

[PART4]

English witness · section(s) 20

TEXT 20.1

evam skande prabhasa-khande ca `yatradhikrtya gayatrim' ity-adi sarasvatasya kalpasya madhye ye syur naramarah tad-vrttantodbhavam loke tac ca bhagavatam smrtam

likhitva tac ca @VCONTINUE = ity-adi ca. @V1 - astadasa-sahasrani puranam tat prakirtitam @VCONTINUE = iti. tad evam agni-purane ca vacanani vartante. In the Skanda Purana, Prabhasa-khanda [7.1.2.39–42] we find a description of Srimad-Bhagavatam similar to the one in the Matsya Purana: “The Purana known as Srimad-Bhagavatam recounts the deeds of humans and demigods in the Sarasvata-kalpa, explains the supreme religion in terms of Gayatri, and narrates the slaying of Vrtrasura. It has eighteen thousand verses.<193>Whoever writes out a copy of the Bhagavatam, places it on a golden lion-throne, and presents it to someone on the full-moon day of the month of Bhadra will attain the supreme destination.” These verses are also found in the Agni Purana [272.6–7].

TEXT 20.2

tika-krdbhih pramani-krte puranantare ca grantho ’stadasa-sahasro dvadasa-skandha-sammitah hayagriva-brahma-vidya yatra vrtra-vadhas tatha gayatrya ca samarambhas tad vai bhagavatam viduh @VCONTINUE = iti. Yet another Purana, cited by the Bhagavatam commentator Sridhara Svami, describes the characteristics of Srimad-Bhagavatam thus: “The Purana known as Srimad-Bhagavatam has eighteen thousand verses divided into twelve cantos, begins with Gayatri, describes the Hayagriva-brahma-vidya, and narrates the slaying of Vrtrasura.”

TEXT 20.3

atra `hayagriva-brahma-vidya' iti vrtra-vadha-sahacaryena narayana-varmaivocyate. hayagriva-sabdenatrasva-sira dadhicir evocyate. tenaiva ca pravartita narayana-varmakhya brahma-vidya. tasyasva-sirastvam ca sasthe `yad va asva-siro nama' ity atra prasiddham narayana-varmano brahma-vidyatvam ca etac chrutva tathovaca dadhyann atharvanas tayoh pravargyam brahma-vidyam ca sat-krto ’satya-sankitah @VCONTINUE = iti svami-tikotthapita-vacanena ceti. The Hayagriva-brahma-vidya mentioned here (meaning “the doctrine of the Supreme taught by Hayagriva”), is “The Armor of Narayana” (Narayana-varma), since it is narrated in the same con TEXT as the killing of Vrtra. The word haya-griva here refers to Dadhici, the sage with a horse’s head. He taught the knowledge of Brahman called Narayana-varma. His accepting a horse’s head and receiving the name Asvasira (“horse-headed one”) are mentioned in Srimad-Bhagavatam’s Sixth Canto [6.9.52], where these words are spoken: “he who has the name Asvasira.” From a verse Sridhara Svami cites in his COMMENTARY on this Bhagavatam TEXT we get further confirmation that the Narayana-varma is in fact a standard teaching about the Absolute: “Upon hearing this and feeling honored, Dadhici, anxious not to break his promise, instructed the twin Asvini-kumaras in the knowledge of the Pravargya sacrifice and Brahma-vidya.”

TEXT 20.4

Srimad-bhagavatasya bhagavat-priyatvena bhagavatabhistatvena ca parama-sattvikatvam. yatha padme ambarisam prati gautama-prasnah puranam tvam bhagavatam pathase purato hareh caritram daitya-rajasya prahladasya ca bhu-pate @VCONTINUE = tatraiva vaïjuli-mahatmye tasya tasminn upadesah ratrau tu jagarah karyah srotavya vaisnavi katha gita nama-sahasram ca puranam suka-bhasitam @V1PLUS = pathitavyam prayatnena hareh santosa-karanam Since Srimad-Bhagavatam is pleasing to the Supreme Lord and is His devotees’ favorite book, it is the supremely sattvika scripture. As stated in the Padma Purana, in Gautama Rsi’s question to Maharaja Ambarisa, “O lord of the earth, do you recite the Bhagavata Purana before the Deity of Lord Hari, especially the history of the king of the demons, Prahlada Maharaja?” (Padma Pur., Uttara-khanda 22.115). Again in the Padma Purana, Gautama further instructs Ambarisa, in the section glorifying the vow of Vaïjuli Maha-dvadasi: “One should stay awake throughout that night and hear scriptures that narrate stories of Lord Visnu and His devotees, especially Bhagavad-gita, the thousand names of Lord Visnu, and the Purana narrated by Sukadeva [Srimad-Bhagavatam]. One should recite these with care, since they are pleasing to Lord Hari.”

TEXT 20.5

tatraivanyatra ambarisa suka-proktam nityam bhagavatam srnu pathasva sva-mukhenapi yadicchasi bhava-ksayam @VCONTINUE = skande prahlada-samhitayam dvaraka-mahatmye Sri-bhagavatam bhaktya pathate hari-sannidhau @V1PLUS = jagare tat-padam yati kula-vrnda-samanvitah And elsewhere in the Padma Purana we find this statement: “O Ambarisa, if you wish to end your material existence, then every day you should hear the Bhagavatam that was narrated by Sukadeva, and you should also recite it yourself.” Finally, we find the following statement in the Prahlada-samhita of the Skanda Purana, in the section describing Dvaraka’s glories: “A person who stays up [on the night of Ekadasi] and recites Srimad-Bhagavatam with devotion before the Deity of Lord Hari goes to the Lord’s abode along with all his family members.”

COMMENTARY The Characteristics of Srimad-Bhagavatam In this TEXT Jiva Gosvami gives special attention to establishing that the Bhagavatam glorified in the Puranas is Srimad-Bhagavatam. He does this because some scholars of his time held that the Devi Bhagavatam, rather than Srimad-Bhagavatam, was actually the Bhagavatam glorified in the Puranas. Like Srimad-Bhagavatam, the Devi Bhagavatam is a Purana with twelve cantos, 18,000 verses, and an account of Vrtrasura’s death, although its account of how Vrtra was killed differs from the one in Srimad-Bhagavatam. Also, when some traditional scholars read in the Puranas that on the full-moon day of the month of Bhadra one should donate the Bhagavatam mounted on a golden lion (hema-simha), they take this to mean the Devi Bhagavatam. This seems quite fitting, since Devi, or Durga, rides on a lion. (In the case of Srimad-Bhagavatam, hema-simha is understood to mean “golden lion-throne.”) Srila Jiva Gosvami solves the controversy by citing references that list distinctive features of Srimad-Bhagavatam: it begins with the Gayatri mantra, it contains the Hayagriva-brahma-vidya, it narrates events that happened in the Sarasvata-kalpa, and it was first spoken by Sri Sukadeva Gosvami to Pariksit Maharaja. Jiva Gosvami further supports his opinion by quoting from the Bhavartha-dipika, Sridhara Svami’s COMMENTARY on Srimad-Bhagavatam. The Devi Bhagavatam opens with a statement that appears to be based on Gayatri: om sarva-caitanya-rupam tam adyam vidyam ca dhimahi, buddhim ya nah pracodayat. There are two reasons this statement should not be equated with Gayatri: First, nothing in it corresponds to the words savituh, varenyam, and bhargas from Gayatri. (By contrast, in Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.1.1 there is such a correspondence.). Second, this statement is a meditation on Devi, but as Sri Jiva will show in the next Text, the object of meditation in Gayatri is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Visnu. Like Srimad-Bhagavatam, the Devi Bhagavatam narrates the killing of Vrtrasura, but in its account Indra kills Vrtra with ocean foam empowered by Devi. Vrtrasura performed severe penances for hundreds of years to please Lord Brahma. When Brahma appeared before him and offered a boon, Vrtra asked that he would not be slain by any weapon made of iron or wood, or one that was dry or wet. After Lord Brahma granted this boon, Vrtra attacked Indra and defeated him. Indra subsequently took help from Lord Visnu, who entered Indra’s thunderbolt and also advised him to take the help of Devi and make a truce with Vrtra. Indra then apparently befriended Vrtrasura. But one day at dusk Indra surprised Vrtrasura on a beach and slew him with his thunderbolt covered with foam, which was not a weapon of iron or wood and was neither wet nor dry. The Devi Bhagavatam also makes no mention of the Hayagriva-brahma-vidya (the Narayana-varma). For all these reasons it is clear that the Bhagavatam referred to in the verse cited by Sridhara Svami is not the Devi Bhagavatam. Hemadri, Ballal Sena, Govindananda, Raghunandana, Gopala Bhatta Gosvami, and Sanatana Gosvami have each written noteworthy dharma-sastras (books and essays on religious duties), in which they quote frequently from Srimad-Bhagavatam but never from the Devi Bhagavatam. Ballal Sena states in his Dana-sagara that only a few verses of Srimad-Bhagavatam specifically recommend acts of charity. In contrast, the entire thirtieth chapter of the Devi Bhagavatam’s Ninth Canto deals exclusively with the glory of giving various kinds of charity. In addition, with the exceptions of Ramanujacarya and Nilakanthacarya, all the great saintly commentators on Prasthana-trayi either wrote about Srimad-Bhagavatam directly or at least cited it as a standard reference in their books. By contrast, neither Sankara, Madhvacarya, Vallabha, Lord Caitanyadeva, or any other notable acarya ever cited the Devi Bhagavatam to support or prove any important statement. The ninety-sixth chapter of the first part of the Naradiya Purana lists the topics of all twelve cantos of the Bhagavatam in order. This list fits Srimad-Bhagavatam but not the Devi Bhagavatam. And the Padma Purana (Uttara-khanda 193.3), states: puranesu tu sarvesu Srimad-bhagavatam param yatra prati-padam krsno giyate bahudharsibhih “Among all the Puranas, Srimad-Bhagavatam is the best. In every line great sages glorify Lord Krsna in various ways.” All this leaves no doubt that the Bhagavatam mentioned in the quoted Puranic verses is Srimad-Bhagavatam. Srimad-Bhagavatam and other Puranas mention a demon named Hayagriva, and there is also an incarnation of Lord Visnu called Hayagriva, who had a horse’s head. But because the Hayagriva mentioned in this section of Tattva-sandarbha is connected with the slaying of the demon Vrtra, Srila Jiva Gosvami has identified him as the sage Dadhici. As told in the Sixth Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam, after Vrtra had conquered the demigods they approached Lord Visnu for help. The Lord advised the chief of the demigods, Indra, to go to Dadhici and ask him for his body, which had been made firm by vows, penances, and knowledge of Brahman. The Lord told Indra to fashion from Dadhici’s bones a thunderbolt strong enough to kill Vrtrasura. Dadhici had previously taught the knowledge of Brahman to the Asvini Kumara twins, although Indra had earlier forbidden him to teach them transcendental knowledge on the grounds that their medical profession disqualified them from learning it. Indra had threatened to behead Dadhici if he disobeyed, but Dadhici had already promised to teach the twins. The Asvini- Kumaras had solved Dadhici’s dilemma surgically: they severed his head and grafted a horse’s head in its place, knowing that Indra would eventually cut off that head and enable them to restore Dadhici’s original head. Dadhici then instructed them through the horse’s head. Dadhici became known as Hayagriva or Asvasira (“horse-headed one”), and the transcendental knowledge he imparted became famous as the Hayagriva-brahma-vidya. As planned, Indra later severed Dadhici’s horse head and the Asvini Kumaras restored his original head. Then, on the request of the demigods, Dadhici offered his body to Indra, who used his bones to make a thunderbolt with which he killed Vrtrasura. Earlier Dadhici had taught Tvasta the same knowledge he had previously taught the Asvini Kumaras, and Tvasta in turn taught it to his son Visvarupa. Visvarupa taught it to Lord Indra as the Narayana Armor, which helped Indra defeat Vrtrasura. Thus the Hayagriva referred to here is Dadhici, and the Brahma-vidya is the Narayana Armor. This is all described in the Sixth Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam and in the Bhagavatam commentaries of the Vaisnava acaryas.

ϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖϖOf the eighteen Puranas, six are meant for persons in the mode of ignorance, six for those in the mode of passion, and six for those in the mode of goodness. But Srimad-Bhagavatam occupies a place of honor even among the sattvic Puranas. It is considered nondifferent from Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and therefore it is parama-sattvika, a manifestation of pure goodness without any tinge of the material modes. Hareh santosa-karanam: it is pleasing to Hari, the transcendental Lord, who cannot be pleased by anything material. It is relished by His devotees, who scoff at the bliss of liberation, what to speak of the pleasure derived from reading something mundane. For this reason the sage Gautama recommends reciting Srimad-Bhagavatam on Ekadasi, which is also called Hari-vasara, the day of Lord Hari. As the Skanda Purana (Visnu-khanda 6.4.3) states: Srimad-bhagavatasyatha Srimad-bhagavatah sada svarupam ekam evasti sac-cid-ananda-laksanam “Srimad-Bhagavatam and the Personality of Godhead are always of the same nature—possessed of eternal existence, full knowledge, and complete bliss.” And the Padma Purana (Uttara-khanda 198.30) confirms, Srimad-bhagavatakhyo ’yam pratyaksah krsna eva hi: “Without a doubt Srimad-Bhagavatam is directly Lord Krsna.” That Srimad-Bhagavatam is nondifferent from Lord Krsna is confirmed in the Bhagavatam itself (1.3.43), where Suta Gosvami states that after the Lord’s disappearance the Bhagavatam appeared as His representative to enlighten the benighted people of Kali-yuga. The Padma Purana also confirms the oneness of the Bhagavatam and the Lord with this passage equating the Bhagavatam’s cantos with Krsna’s limbs: @vpl1 = padau yadiyau prathama-dvitiyau @vpl2 = trtiya-turyau kathitau yad-uru @vpl1 = nabhis tatha païcama eva sastho @vpl2 = bhujantaram dor-yugalam tathanyau

@vpl1 = kanthas tu rajan navamo yadiyo @vpl2 = mukharavindam dasamam praphullam @vpl1 = ekadaso yas ca lalata-pattam @vpl2 = siro ’pi yad dvadasa eva bhati

@vpl1 = namami devam karuna-nidhanam @vpl2 = tamala-varnam su-hitavataram @vpl1 = apara-samsara-samudra-setum @vpl2 = bhajamahe bhagavata-svarupam “The Bhagavatam’s First and Second Cantos are Lord Krsna’s feet, and the Third and Fourth Cantos are His thighs. The Fifth Canto is His navel, the Sixth Canto is His chest, and the Seventh and Eighth Cantos are His arms. The Ninth Canto is His throat, the Tenth His blooming lotus face, the Eleventh His forehead, and the Twelfth His head. “I bow down to that Lord, the ocean of mercy, whose color is like that of a tamala tree and who appears in this world for the welfare of all. I worship Him as the bridge for crossing the unfathomable ocean of material existence. Srimad-Bhagavatam has appeared as His very self.” Next Srila Jiva Gosvami demonstrates that Srimad-Bhagavatam is the natural COMMENTARY on the Vedanta-sutra.