Shrimad BhAgvat says... points to ponder about the Supreme Lord and His Creation

[smaranam]

|| om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya ||

praNAm

I am putting here, as food for thought, two verses (verse-sets) from the beautiful beginning sections of the Shrimad Bhagvat, where each verse is nectar and each word is a jewel, just as every word is a song and every gait (gamanam) is a dance on Shvetadveep - the ultimate goal of bhAgvats.

SB1.2.33

asau guṇamayair bhāvair
bhūta-sūkṣmendriyātmabhiḥ
sva-nirmiteṣu nirviṣṭo
bhuńkte bhūteṣu tad-guṇān

asau — that Paramātmā; guṇa-mayaiḥ — influenced by the modes of nature; bhāvaiḥ — naturally; bhūta — created; sūkṣma — subtle; indriya — senses; ātmabhiḥ — by the living beings; sva-nirmiteṣu — in His own creation; nirviṣṭaḥ — entering; bhuńkte — enjoys; bhūteṣu — in the living entities; tat-guṇān — those modes of nature.

The Supersoul enters into the bodies of the created beings who are influenced by the modes of material nature and causes them to enjoy (enjoys ?) the effects of these modes by the subtle mind.



Here, PrabhupAd translates 'bhunkte' as '[He] causes [jivas] to enjoy' rather than 'He enjoys' which would be the literal meaning. However, he explains in the purport:
In another sense, the living beings are parts and parcels of the Lord. They are therefore one with the Lord. In the Bhagavad-gītā the living beings in all varieties of bodies have been claimed by the Lord as His sons. The sufferings and enjoyments of the sons are indirectly the sufferings and enjoyments of the father. Still the father is not in any way affected directly by the suffering and enjoyment of the sons. He is so kind that He constantly remains with the living being as Paramātmā and always tries to convert the living being towards the real happiness.


--------------------

What SB 1.2.33 really implies is elaborated on by Lord BramhA (NArAyaNa's creative engineer) in
a) SB 2.6.13-16
b) SB 2.6.43-45 below (the key words to consider are in enlarged red font)


BG 2.6.13-16

ahaḿ bhavān bhavaś caiva
ta ime munayo 'grajāḥ
surāsura-narā nāgāḥ
khagā mṛga-sarīsṛpāḥ
gandharvāpsaraso yakṣā
rakṣo-bhūta-gaṇoragāḥ
paśavaḥ pitaraḥ siddhā
vidyādhrāś cāraṇā drumāḥ
anye ca vividhā jīvā
jala-sthala-nabhaukasaḥ
graharkṣa-ketavas tārās
taḍitaḥ stanayitnavaḥ
sarvaḿ puruṣa evedaḿ
bhūtaḿ bhavyaḿ bhavac ca yat
tenedam āvṛtaḿ viśvaḿ
vitastim adhitiṣṭhati

aham — myself; bhavān — yourself; bhavaḥ — Lord Śiva; ca — also; eva — certainly; te — they; ime — all; munayaḥ — the great sages; agra-jāḥ — born before you; sura — the demigods; asura — the demons; narāḥ — the human beings; nāgāḥ — the inhabitants of the Nāga planet; khagāḥ — birds; mṛga — beasts; sarīsṛpāḥ — reptiles; gandharva-apsarasaḥ, yakṣāḥ, rakṣaḥ-bhūta-gaṇa-uragāḥ, paśavaḥ, pitaraḥ, siddhāḥ, vidyādhrāḥ, cāraṇāḥ — all inhabitants of different planets; drumāḥ — the vegetable kingdom; anye — many others; ca — also; vividhāḥ — of different varieties; jīvāḥ — living entities; jala — water; sthala — land; nabha-okasaḥ — the inhabitants of the sky, or the birds; graha — the asteroids; ṛkṣa — the influential stars; ketavaḥ — the comets; tārāḥ — the luminaries; taḍitaḥ — the lightning; stanayitnavaḥ — the sound of the clouds; sarvam — everything; puruṣaḥ — the Personality of Godhead; eva idam — certainly all these; bhūtam — whatever is created; bhavyam — whatever will be created; bhavat — and whatever was created in the past; ca — also; yat — whatever; tenaidam — it is all by Him; āvṛtam — covered; viśvam — universally comprehending; vitastim — half a cubit; adhitiṣṭhati — situated.


SB2.6.43-45
ahaḿ bhavo yajña ime prajeśā
dakṣādayo ye bhavad-ādayaś ca
svarloka-pālāḥ khagaloka-pālā
nṛloka-pālās talaloka-pālāḥ
gandharva-vidyādhara-cāraṇeśā
ye yakṣa-rakṣoraga-nāga-nāthāḥ
ye vā ṛṣīṇām ṛṣabhāḥ pitṝṇāḿ
daityendra-siddheśvara-dānavendrāḥ
anye ca ye preta-piśāca-bhūta-
kūṣmāṇḍa-yādo-mṛga-pakṣy-adhīśāḥ
yat kiñca loke bhagavan mahasvad
ojaḥ-sahasvad balavat kṣamāvat
śrī-hrī-vibhūty-ātmavad adbhutārṇaḿ
tattvaḿ paraḿ rūpavad asva-rūpam

I myself [Brahmā], Lord Śiva, Lord Viṣṇu, great generators of living beings like Dakṣa and Prajāpati, yourselves [Nārada and the Kumāras], heavenly demigods like Indra and Candra, the leaders of the Bhūrloka planets, the leaders of the earthly planets, the leaders of the lower planets, the leaders of the Gandharva planets, the leaders of the Vidyādhara planets, the leaders of the Cāraṇaloka planets, the leaders of the Yakṣas, Rakṣas and Uragas, the great sages, the great demons, the great atheists and the great spacemen, as well as the dead bodies, evil spirits, satans, jinn, kūṣmāṇḍas, great aquatics, great beasts and great birds, etc. — in other words, anything and everything which is exceptionally possessed of power, opulence, mental and perceptual dexterity, strength, forgiveness, beauty, modesty, opulence, and breeding, whether in form or formless —
may appear to be the specific truth and the form of the Lord, but actually they are not so. They are only a fragment of the transcendental potency of the Lord. (paraḿ rūpavad asva-rūpam - A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami PrabhupAd)
OR
are of the intrinsic nature of the Lord (paraḿ rūpavada sva-rūpam - Gita Press Gorakhpur)


Any thoughts? Can SB 1.6.13-16, 43-45 be a detailed justification for the 'bhunkte' in SB 1.2.33 ?

Not that it makes any difference to me
as long as there is only Govind and Shri
and as long as...
Govindam Adi Purusham Tam aham bhajAmi


_/\_

[philosoraptor]

Pranams,

In the shruti, there are many statements to the effect that The Lord created the devas, rules over them, etc. The difference between Brahman and the devas and other jIva-s is very clear from such statements. Yet, there are also other statements (not uncommonly in the very same shrutis) which say that The Lord became the devas, that He became the universe, that He became the jIva-s, etc. Certainly there may be different ways to reconcile these seemingly contradictory statements. One way is to accept what the shrutis say about The Lord being the indwelling controller of the jIva-s and non-sentient entities (BU 2.5.1-14). Thus, when He "becomes the universe," it refers to His projecting the universe and expanding Himself within it as its indwelling controller. Similarly for devas, other jIvas, etc. When He "enjoys" as the jIva it reflects the fact that, as the indwelling paramAtmA within jIvAtmA, anything jIvAtmA does should be for the pleasure of paramAtmA. When the jIvAtmA fails to understand this, and instead works for its own pleasure, bondage is the result. Because of this inseparable relationship between paramAtmA and jIvAtmA, the shrutis have to emphasize that the paramAtmA is transcendental to the guNa-s. Thus, The Lord does not suffer or become affected by the guNa-s while the jIva enjoys or suffers.

In one sense, it is very correct to say that The Lord is brahmA, that He is shiva, that He is indra, agni, vAyu, etc, only because He is the indweller within the jIva-s who take these posts. But He remains unaffected by the guNa-s which affected these entities, and so His superior position is an oft-repeated theme both in the shrutis and in the bhAgavata purANa.

[Sudas Paijavana]

delete

[smaranam]

praNAm

Thanks for your post and i more or less agree with what you have said. The supremacy of the Supreme Absolute Truth in relation with jiv and jagat is uncontested, of course.

When He "enjoys" as the jIva it reflects the fact that, as the indwelling paramAtmA within jIvAtmA, anything jIvAtmA does should be for the pleasure of paramAtmA. When the jIvAtmA fails to understand this, and instead works for its own pleasure, bondage is the result.

This is true, however, i don't think that was the purport of SB 1.2.33
Therefore, i take 'bhunkte' to be a witnessing action only. Since the Lord is within a tree, parrot and snake, He is witnessing what is going on with each of them, and this itself is 'bhunkte'. Tree, parrot and snake are not expected to work towards the pleasure of paramatma.

Here, paramAtmA is watching the movie, popcorn in hand. The giant movie screen has actors. The wise actors are detached from the role, while some are entangled in the "saMsAr" of the role they are playing in the movie. In case of each actor, the paramAtmA is very closely watching and listening. This watching and listening indifferently itself is the 'bhunkte bhuteshu tadguNAn' for paramAtmA.

I think the verse is trying to show the choice that paramAtma is making - that of enabling shakti in allowing the tree, parrot, and snake to exist and then Himself voluntarily watching their activities. To Him the whole universal phenomenon is like simultaneous chemical reactions beyond time-space. Desires (vAsanA) are the respective catalysts. Karma is the law of thermodynamics.

* Here 'watching/witnessing' does not imply any involvement (emotional or otherwise). Otherwise it would imply that the [param]AtmA gets entangled which is not the case.

Hare KRshNa
_/\_

[philosoraptor]

This is true, however, i don't think that was the purport of SB 1.2.33
Therefore, i take 'bhunkte' to be a witnessing action only. Since the Lord is within a tree, parrot and snake, He is witnessing what is going on with each of them, and this itself is 'bhunkte'. Tree, parrot and snake are not expected to work towards the pleasure of paramatma.

Here, paramAtmA is watching the movie, popcorn in hand. The giant movie screen has actors. The wise actors are detached from the role, while some are entangled in the "saMsAr" of the role they are playing in the movie. In case of each actor, the paramAtmA is very closely watching and listening. This watching and listening indifferently itself is the 'bhunkte bhuteshu tadguNAn' for paramAtmA.

I think the verse is trying to show the choice that paramAtma is making - that of enabling shakti in allowing the tree, parrot, and snake to exist and then Himself voluntarily watching their activities. To Him the whole universal phenomenon is like simultaneous chemical reactions beyond time-space. Desires (vAsanA) are the respective catalysts. Karma is the law of thermodynamics.

* Here 'watching/witnessing' does not imply any involvement (emotional or otherwise). Otherwise it would imply that the [param]AtmA gets entangled which is not the case.

Pranams. Are you aware of any similar usages of "bhunkte?" Because otherwise that seems more of an indirect meaning than the one Prabhupada gave. No doubt the Lord in the heart is a witness. But witnessing the activities of the jIva and enabling the jIva to enjoy the guNa-s are two different things, not mutually exclusive, but imply different things. The paramAtmA does not merely witness, for it is due to His sanction that we can do anything at all, which is the sense I got from Prabhupada's translation. Then again, in his purport, he alluded to the inconceivable oneness and difference of paramAtmA with jIva as per gauDIya philosophy, but I'm not sure why he did this when he translated "bhunkte" as "causes to enjoy." It seems like he is offering that commentary to explain how the Lord can enjoy as the jIva, though I would argue that this isn't necessary even in that case.

[smaranam]

In any case both PrabhupAd's purport and your statements are helpful in explaining this. I also like what PrabhupAd said - "The sufferings and enjoyments of the son are indirectly those of the Father"

I think it is here that he is really hitting the nail. Because it is very true that KRshNa says to the devotee "Your sukh (happiness) is My sukh, your dukh (distress) is My dukh" When the devotee even involuntarily thinks of some sad past, tears well in KRshNa's eyes because He is hearing them think and feel.

If this is so with the devotees, it must be so to an extent with each jiva, and simultaneously, KRshNa is not involved or entangled, i.e. karma does not latch onto Him.

that seems more of an indirect meaning than the one Prabhupada gave. No doubt the Lord in the heart is a witness. But witnessing the activities of the jIva and enabling the jIva to enjoy the guNa-s are two different things, not mutually exclusive, but imply different things. The paramAtmA does not merely witness, for it is due to His sanction that we can do anything at all, which is the sense I got from Prabhupada's translation.

Yes. Although it appeared from my last post that i am suggesting bhunkte = witnessing, i am saying something similar to you and Shrila PrabhupAd except i put the burden of "allowing the triguNa experience" onto prakRti :

I think the verse is trying to show the choice that paramAtma is making - that of enabling shakti in allowing the tree, parrot, and snake to exist and then Himself voluntarily watching their activities.

KRshNa enables/empowers His external potency and She in turn makes the jivas experience life. i.e. He sanctions ultimately.

---------

Then again, in his purport, he alluded to the inconceivable oneness and difference of paramAtmA with jIva as per gauDIya philosophy, but I'm not sure why he did this when he translated "bhunkte" as "causes to enjoy." It seems like he is offering that commentary to explain how the Lord can enjoy as the jIva, though I would argue that this isn't necessary even in that case.

That is PrabhupAd. He does this with intention. Wherever the translation calls for more than direct sanskRt, he gives his verse interpretation first, which is for the disciples to whom his word is final, and considering their bhakti goal, the interpretation is their medicine. Later in the purport, he will explain the effect of taking the meaning in an alternate (or a more direct ?) way, so that others may not take objection to his translation.

e.g. When KRshNa explained how the AtmA (sah) carries the vasana-samskAr from one body to another just as wind carries flower fragrance (Gita 13.?), He used the word "ishvar"
PrabhupAd says ishvar = controller, and it is jivatma in this context. However in the purport he explains how someone may take it to be paramatma and how it works in that case.

_/\_

Govindam Adi Purusham Tam aham bhajAmi

[smaranam]

om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya

One more place where the BhAgvat shows ONE kshetrajna AtmA, as shown in this post:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...9&postcount=18

_/\_

[smaranam]

om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya

Subjects in this post:
1. NArAyaN Kavach proves eternal existence of flute-playing Govind.
2. Mantra given to Dhruva in Sat Yuga by Devarshi NArada was "om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya" thus showing eternality of vAsudev (all-pervading) as a name of the Supreme, not just becs He is son of Vasudev.

1. NArAyaNa Kavach was narrated by VishvarUpa, a half Rshi (grandson of prajApati Daksha, and half Daitya) to the devas headed by Indra when they needed protection in war against Asura / daitya

(sura = deva, godly, god, theist
asura = the non-godly
kavach = protecting sheild - here in form of a stotra)

This is a shloka (verse) in the kavach:

SB 6.8.20
māḿ keśavo gadayā prātar avyād
govindaāsańgavamātta-veṇuḥ
nārāyaṇaḥ prāhṇa udātta-śaktir
madhyan-dine viṣṇur arīndra-pāṇiḥ
May Lord Keśava protect me with His club in the first portion of the day, and may Govinda, who is always engaged in playing His flute, protect me in the second portion of the day. May Lord Nārāyaṇa, who is equipped with all potencies, protect me in the third part of the day, and may Lord Viṣṇu, who carries a disc to kill His enemies, protect me in the fourth part of the day.

TIME FACTOR: The NArAyaNa kavach (obviously eternal) was narrated during the reign and creation activity of prajApati Prechetas (son of the 10 pracheta) as Daksha. Indra was insulting and not courteous to Deva-Guru (spiritual master of Devas), BRhaspati (a.k.a. Guru), and BRhaspati gave up their company and left. This made the devas morose, insecure and unsteady. ShukrAcharya, spiritual master/receptor of the asura advised them to take the opportunity to attack Devas. Hence Devas, on Lord BramhA's advice, went to VishwarUpa.

This was most likely the beginning of the manavantar (beginning of prajA - population, when the prajApati - manu has just started populating the world on the Lord's behest)
eaons before the advent of Shri KRshNa on earth in DvApar Yuga. So it shows that Govind, not just as a name of the Supreme NArAyaNa as "One who gives pleasure to the cows and senses" but as that Beautiful Transcendental Person, Govind Who plays the Flute! VeNu-mAdhav.

So what's the point, smaranam? BhAgvat is smRti. Doesn't prove a thing. Bramha-vaivarta purAN goes on and on about KRshNa, Radha, Gopa-Gopis and surabhi cows in eternal Goloka.

Yes, but Bramha-vaivarta is a rAjasik purAN so people feel free to reject it. But those who accept Shrimad BhAgvat mahApurAN as the crown jewel, will not reject this.

More places in NArAyaNa kavach: KRshNa is mentioned, but it was always an eternal name of the Supreme (all-attractive - jagad-vashe vartatedam kRshNasya charAcharam). But there is more...

SB 6.8.25
tvaḿyātudhāna-pramatha-preta-mātṛ-
piśāca-vipragraha-ghora-dṛṣṭīn
darendravidrāvayakṛṣṇa-pūrito
bhīma-svano 'rer hṛdayānikampayan

O best of conchshells, O Pāñcajanya in the hands of the Lord, you are always filled with the breath of Lord Kṛṣṇa. Therefore you create a fearful sound vibration that causes trembling in the hearts of enemies like the Rākṣasas, pramatha ghosts, Pretas, Mātās, Piśācas and brāhmaṇa ghosts with fearful eyes.

The pAnchajanya is mentioned, and KRshNa is always always seen driving away inauspiciousness by blowing His pAnchajanya conch (shankha).
Here on earth, at the gates of Shri DwArakA to notify the residents, His dear ones that He is back home.
At the beginning of the kurukshetra war Mahabharat.
Many other occasions.

Note, veNu-gopAl does not blow conch, DwArkAdheesh does.


2. NArad Muni gave 5 year old Dhruva the mantra "om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya" Dhruva lived back in Sat Yuga. So, figure. VAsudev is eternal AS vAsudev - be He four-handed (chaturbhuja) or two-handed(dvi-bhuja).

SB 4.8.54
oḿ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya
mantreṇānena devasya
kuryād dravyamayīḿ budhaḥ
saparyāḿ vividhair dravyair
deśa-kāla-vibhāgavit

Oḿ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya. This is the twelve-syllable mantra for worshiping the Lord. One should install the physical forms of the Lord, and with the chanting of the mantra one should offer flowers and fruits and other varieties of foodstuffs exactly according to the rules and regulations prescribed by authorities. But this should be done in consideration of place, time, and attendant conveniences and inconveniences.


---------------

From these and more places in the BhAgvat, it can be seen that the Lord Govinda, Adi Purusha, is beyond time and space. Time-factor cannot bind Him - like NArAyaNa appeared AS Govinda in Dwapar of 28th chaturyuga of this manvantar and left - a one-time event. These verses show otherwise.

Same can be said of the name Shri RAm, and RAm Himself.


_/\_

Govindam Adi Purusham Tam aham bhajAmi ~

[smaranam]

om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya

Subjects in this post:
1. NArAyaN Kavach proves eternal existence of flute-playing Govind.

TIME FACTOR: The NArAyaNa kavach (obviously eternal) was narrated during the reign and creation activity of prajApati Prechetas (son of the 10 pracheta) as Daksha.

In fact VishvarUpa was the son of an Aditya called TvaShTA - one of the 12 sons of Aditi in that manvantar. Also, the following verse spoken by NArAyaNa Himself, says Dadhichi Rshi narrated the NArAyaNa Kavach to TvashTA and TvashTA taught his son VishvarUpa, who gave the kavach to the devas. So even Dadhich Rshi (more ancient that those mentioned) knew that Govinda plays the flute in Goloka and Shri KRshNa blows the pAnchajanya conch.

SB 6.9.51: O Maghavan [Indra], all good fortune unto you. I advise you to approach the exalted saint Dadhyañca [Dadhīci]. He has become very accomplished in knowledge, vows and austerities, and his body is very strong. Go ask him for his body without delay.

SB 6.9.52: That saintly Dadhyañca, who is also known as Dadhīci, personally assimilated the spiritual science and then delivered it to the Aśvinī-kumāras. It is said that Dadhyañca gave them mantras through the head of a horse. Therefore the mantras are called Aśvaśira. After obtaining the mantras of spiritual science from Dadhīci, the Aśvinī-kumāras became jīvan-mukta, liberated even in this life.

SB 6.9.53: Dadhyañca's invincible protective covering known as the Nārāyaṇa-kavaca was given to Tvaṣṭā, who delivered it to his son Viśvarūpa, from whom you have received it. Because of this Nārāyaṇa-kavaca, Dadhīci's body is now very strong. You should therefore beg him for his body.


om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya

[smaranam]

Subjects in this post:
1. NArAyaN Kavach proves eternal existence of flute-playing Govind.
1. NArAyaNa Kavach was narrated by VishvarUpa, a half Rshi (grandson of prajApati Daksha, and half Daitya) to the devas headed by Indra when they needed protection in war against Asura / daitya

TIME FACTOR: The NArAyaNa kavach (obviously eternal) was narrated during the reign and creation activity of prajApati Prechetas (son of the 10 pracheta) as Daksha.

In fact VishvarUpa was the son of an Aditya called TvaShTA - brother of VAman and one of the 12 sons of Aditi in this Vaivasvat manvantar. Also, the following verse spoken by NArAyaNa Himself, says Dadhichi Rshi narrated the NArAyaNa Kavach to TvashTA and TvashTA taught his son VishvarUpa, who gave the kavach to the devas. So even Dadhich Rshi (more ancient that those mentioned) knew that Govinda plays the flute in Goloka and Shri KRshNa blows the pAnchajanya conch.

SB 6.9.53: Dadhyañca's invincible protective covering known as the Nārāyaṇa-kavaca was given to Tvaṣṭā, who delivered it to his son Viśvarūpa, from whom you have received it. Because of this Nārāyaṇa-kavaca, Dadhīci's body is now very strong. You should therefore beg him for his body.


om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya

Found the exact time : As it was very easy to guess earlier, the battle between Devas and VRtAsur's army (post VishvarUp-vadha by Indra) took place during the first ChaturYuga of the current i.e. Vaivasvat Manu.

SB 6.10.16
tataḥ surāṇām asurai
raṇaḥ parama-dāruṇaḥ
tretā-mukhe narmadāyām
abhavat prathame yuge

Thereafter, at the end of Satya-yuga and the beginning of Tretā-yuga of the FIRST CHATURYUGA (prathama yuge), a fierce battle took place between the demigods and the demons on the bank of the Narmadā.

PURPORT by Shrila PrabhupAd

...The words prathame yuge mean "in the beginning of the first millennium," that is to say, in the beginning of the Vaivasvata manvantara. In one day of Brahmā there are fourteen Manus, who each live for seventy-one millenniums. The four yugas — Satya, Tretā, Dvāpara and Kali — constitute one millennium. We are presently in the manvantara of Vaivasvata Manu, who is mentioned in Bhagavad-gītā (imaḿ vivasvate yogaḿ proktavān aham avyayam/ vivasvān manave prāha [Bg. 4.1]). We are now in the twenty-eighth millennium of Vaivasvata Manu, but this fight took place in the beginning of Vaivasvata Manu's first millennium. One can historically calculate how long ago the battle took place. Since each millennium consists of 4,300,000 years and we are now in the twenty-eighth millennium, some 120,400,000 years have passed since the battle took place.

--------

120,400,000 earth-years ago the devas and BramhaRshis like Dadhichi knew that in Goloka, Govinda plays the flute and He (Shri KRshNa) blows the pAnchajanya conch.

Time I Am, says the eternal Govinda. I swallow time. You cannot put Me on a time-line.

Govindam Adi Purusham Tam aham bhajAmi