29. Both are Different

Adhyaya 1 - Pada 3 AdhikaraNa 11

At Both the Time of Dreamless Sleep and the Time of the JIva as Departure From the Material World the JIva and the Supreme Personality of Godhead Are Different


Introduction by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa



PUrvapakSha: So be it. Still, it cannot be held that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is different from the liberated jIva. This is said because of the overwhelming evidence of scripture. For example, in the BR^ihad-AraNyaka UpaniShad it is said:



katama Atmeti yo .ayaM vij~nAnamayaH puruShaH prANeShu
hR^idy-antar-jyotiH sa samAnaH sann ubhau lokAv anusa
carati



"Who is the Self? He is a person full of knowledge who stays in the life-breath. He is the splendor in the heart. Remaining always the same, he wanders in the two worlds."


Describing the conditioned jIva in this way, the text continues:


sa vA ayam AtmA brahma vij~nAnamayaH



"This Self is the omniscient Brahman."


In this way it says that the jIva is Brahman. It further says:


athAkAmayamAnaH



"He becomes free from all desires."


This described the liberated jIva.as condition. Then it says:


brahmaiva san brahmApyeti




"Being Brahman, he attains Brahman." In this way it is conclusively stated that he is identical with Brahman. Then, at the end it says:abhayaM vai brahma bhavati ya eva veda



"He who knows this becomes the fearless Brahman." The result of hearing the passage is given here.


The statement, in some passages, that the jIva and Brahman are different are like the sky within a pot and the great sky beyond it. When he is liberated, the jIva becomes the Supreme just as when the pot is broken the sky in the pot becomes the same as the great sky beyond. Because the jIva is thus the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he is the creator of the universes and everything else that the Supreme is. In this way there is no difference bewteen the libreated jIva and the Supreme Brahman.


SiddhAnta: To refute this, he says:


SUtra 42


suShupty-utkrAntyor bhedena


suShupti - in dreamless sleep; utkrAntyor - and in death; bhedena - because of the difference.




Because the difference is present in both death and dreamless sleep.

Purport by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa



The word vyapadeshAt (because of the description), which wasused in the previous sUtra, should be understood in this sUtra also. In the previously quoted passages it is not possible to dreaw the understanding that the liberated jIva is actually Brahman. Why? Because it is clearly explained that in the states of dreamless sleep and death the jIva and Brahman are different. The difference in dreamless sleep is described in these words (BR^ihad-AraNyaka UpaniShad 4.3.12):


prAj~nenAtmanA sampariShvakto na bAhyaM ki~ncana
veda nAntaram



"Embraced by the omniscient Self, he knows nothing else, either without or within."


The difference in death is described in these words from the same passage:


prAj~nenAtmanA anvArUDha utsarjan yAti



"Mounted by the omniscient Self, and groaning, he leaves."


The word utsarjan here means groaning. It is not possible that the jIva, who knows hardly anything, can be the omniscient Self by whom he is mounted. Because the jIva is not omniscient it is also not possible that the omniscient Slef here is another jIva.


If it is said "Because in these conditions the jIva is still influenced by material designations, your point is not proved," then the author replies:


SUtra 43


paty-Adi-shabdebhyaH

pati - Lord; Adi - beginning with; shabdebhyaH - because of the words.



Because of the use of Pati (Lord) and other words.

Purport by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa



In the same BR^ihad-AraNyaka UpaniShad, a little afterwards,the word "pati" and other similar words are used in these words (BR^ihad-AraNyaka UpaniShad 4.4.22):



sa vA ayam AtmA sarvasya vashI sarvasyeShaNaH sarvasyAdhipatiH
sarvam idam prashAsti yad idaM ki~nca sa na sAdhunA karmaNA
bhUyAn nAtra vAsAdhunA kanIyAn eSha bhUtAdhipatir eSha lokeshvara
eSha loka-pAlaH sa setur vidharaNa eShAM lokAnAm asambhedAya



"He is the Self, the dominator over all, the controller of all, the king of all. He rules over all. He is not made greater by pious work, nor lesser by impious work. He is the king of all that is. He is the master of the worlds. He is the protector of the worlds. He is the boundary so the worlds will not break apart."


From this is may be understood that Brahman, or the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is different from the liberated jIva. Because it cannot be said that the liberated jIva has dominion over all or control over all, and because sUtra 4.4.17 will say jagad-vyApAra-varjyam (The liberated jIva has not the power to create the universes), the idea the Brahman and the liberated jIva are identical is refuted. This idea is also refuted by the TaittirIya
UpaniShad, where it is said of Brahman:

antaH praviShTaH shastA janAnAm



"He is the controller in the living entities
hearts."


Neither can it be said that the difference between them is only because of the jIva.as identification with a material body, because the shruti-shAstra explains that the difference between them is present even after the jIva is liberated. In the aMshAdhikaraNa of this book (2.3.41) I will refute the identification of jIva and Brahman inmore detail.

The statement ayam AtmA brahma (the self is Brahman) simply means that the jIva has a small portion of Brahman as qualities. The phrase brahmaiva san brahmApyeti (Becoming Brahman, he attains Brahman) should be understood to mean that the jIva, by attaining a portion of eight of Brahman.as qualities, becomes like Brahman. Because the shruti-shAstra says paramaM sAmyam upaiti (He becomes like Brahman), and because of the previous explanation of brahmaiva san brahmApyeti, therefore thenature of Brahman is different from that of the liberated jIva.

In this proof that Brahman is different form the jIva in either conditioned or liberated states of existence, that the "sky" from which all names and forms have come is the Supreme Personality of Godhead and not the liberated jIva, is also proved. Any doubt that may have remained in spite of the statements of the sUtras netaro .anupapatteH (1.1.16) and bheda-vyapadeshAc ca (1.1.17) isdispelled by this proof that even at the time of liberation the jIva remains different from Brahman. Therefore there is no fault in the explanations given for these two (1.1.16 and 1.1.17) sUtras.