Explanation on the "Sat-sandarbhas" of Srila Jiva Goswami given by Satyanarayana dasa in February of 1992.

In Indian philosophical system there are atheistic and theistic philosophies. The philosophy of Carvaka Muni, the Buddhist philosophy and the Jain philosophy come under the category of atheistic philosophies. And then there are the philosophies which are defeating them and they are considered as theistic philosophies in which we have six systems mainly. These six systems are divided in three pairs: sankhya and yoga, nyaya and vaisasika, and purva and uttara-mimamsas. Most of the theistic philosophies fall in these classes athough each one of them have many subdivisions. But predominantly all the theistic philosophies can be classified unto the six systems. Sankhya the philosophy of Kapila. There are two Kapilas. One is considered also as an atheist in the sense that he does not accept the existence of God as the Cause behind creation. He is not denying Him but he is not worried about Him. He explains his philosophy without considering the existence of God. In Indian philosophy a person is called theist if he does accept the Vedas even if he does not accept God. In that sense the so-called atheist Kapila is counted among the theist philosophers because he accepts the Vedas even if he does not prove that God is the ultimate Cause behind creation. This is why we refer to him as an atheist. Then there is Kapila that we know from SrimadBhagavatam, the son of Devahuti. - Yoga the philosophy of Patanjali who is considered its main propounder although the Yoga system was existing before him. But the present philosophy of Yoga is coming from Patanjali who is also considered as an incarnation of Sesa Naga. He has done a work on Sanskrit grammar and wrote commentaries known as "Maha-bhasya". He also wrote books on Ayur-veda (--?-samhita is attributed to Patanjali). He also wrote the "Patanjali Yoga sutras". Nyaya, logic, the philosophical system of Gautama who was a great sage. His wife was cursed by himself to become a stone piece who later on came back to life by the touch of Lord Ramacandra's lotus foot. Vaisasika started by a sage name Kannada. This philosophy is similar to logic. They are considered as twins. The new system of logic which was mainly started at Navadvipa around 500 years ago, at the time of Lord Caitanya's, advent is a mixture of both Nyaya and Vaisisika. Now it is called as "Nava Nyaya" or the Newer

Logic System. Purva-mimamsa was propounded by the sage Jaimini one of Srila Vyasadeva's disciples who put him in charge of the Soma-veda. This philosophy is generally called as Karma-kanda system or the system which explains the various rituals since birth until the sraddha ceremony after death. In his philosophy, Jaimini more or less speaks about karma. He has given lots of importance to karma, means performing activity. He also does not give very much importance to the Lord. He believes that basically if one performs karma, then karma is bound to give him the result. It is not necessary to accept a personality behind everything who is controlling and arranging the result of our karma. Jaimini says that by performing karma there is some kind of 'adrsya', invisible result which is accrued by the person and he will get it later on in this life or in the next. Uttara-mimamasa is the Vedanta-sutras or Brahmasutras of Sri Badranarayana Rsi, Sri Vyasadeva. In his work Vyasadeva gives the conclusion of all the knowledge of the Vedas, what is the ultimate reality. The first sutra is:"atatho brahma-jijnasa", "now we will enquire into Brahman or the Supreme Reality". "Now" means "after going through the other philosophies and not being satisfied with them, we propound this". Because most of the sutras in the Vedanta-sutra are not very explicit in their meaning different people have writen commentaries on them. These commentaries are mainly divided in two divisions: personalists and impersonalists. The impersonalists are mainly headed by Sankaracarya. He wrote "Sariraka-bhasya" or "Sankara-bhasya", commentaries on Vedanta-sutra and from that there are also further branches. The personalists are mainly the Vaisnavas and we have four main schools: school of Ramanujacarya who wrote "Sri-bhasya"; school of Madvacarya who wrote ...?-bhasya"; school of Nimbarka; school of Visnusvami. There are no commentaries available of these last two, but later there are commentaries writen by Vallabhacarya from the Visnusvami sampradaya and some acarya from Nimbarka school has writen a commentary which is attributed to Nimbarka himself by some people. These commentaries on the Vedanta-sutra give different explanations about the ultimate reality. As Gaudiya-vaisnavas we follow Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu who proposed the natural commentary of Vedanta-sutra writen by Srila Vyasadeva himself which is called Srimad-Bhagavatam. Therefore if we want to

understand the highest Absolute Truth we must study this Srimad-Bhagavatam. If an author writes a book we should know what is his opinion, what he wants to say, not that we take his words and write commentary and say something which may not agree with the author. When we make a statement it may have many meanings but what is the meaning which the author wants to convey that is best understood if we can read his own commentary. But when we come to Srimad-Bhagavatam we find that also many people have writen commentaries and again they have propounded various philosophies. Even the impersonalist have writen commentaries on the SrimadBhagavatam. Although Sankaracarya himself did not comment on Srimad-Bhagavatam, later on some acaryas on his line have commented on it and they gave impersonal conclusion from Srimad-Bhagavatam. Again the same problem comes. The ultimate purpose for which Srila Vyasadeva has writen all this huge ammount of literature, the Vedas, the Puranas, the Itihasas, the Sutras, the Samhitas, the Upanisads, and finally the Vedanta-Sutra and its commentary the SrimadBhagavatam has been covered again. What does he want to say? So, our Goswamis being ordered by Sri Mahaprabhu, analized Srimad-Bhagavatam to put forward the opinion of the author himself. These 'sat-sandarbhas' (sat means six) are also known originally as 'Bhagavat-sandarbha'. They are the books writen by Srila Jiva Goswami to give an analysis of Srimad-Bhagavatam. If we want to understand the hidden meaning of Srimad-Bhagavatam, the real fundamental message conveyed by Sri Vyasa, then we have to study the "sat-sandharbas'. These previous explanations were meant to show how the sat-sandarbhas fit on the all scene of literature and what is the purpose in writing them. The message that Srila Jiva Goswami conveys in his 'sat-sandarbhas' is actually the heart of Srila Vyasadeva. He himself said "now I am going to analyze the heart of Vyasadeva, now I am going to analyze the heart of Sukadeva Goswami and the heart of Suta Goswami", because these three are the main personalities who have composed and taught Srimad-Bhagavatam. Then he proves that whatever he says is what they have said and all three are in harmony. He explains how all of them have said the same thing. Sandarbha means a book which explains the hidden meanings which gives the essence and the various explanations of the subject matter. Srimad-Bhagavatam is not a book that can be understood very esily. In sanskrit community there is famous saying: "the test of

one's scholarship is Srimad-Bhagavatam". This means that if one can understand Srimad-Bhagavatam and he can explain it, he must be a scholar. All great Vaisnavas in India wrote commentaries on Srimad-Bhagavatam because this is one of the means to show or test their scholarship which unables them to give the message to others. Although we worship Krsna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead and we quote the verse from S.B. "krsnas tu bhagavan svayam", but in SB itself there are so many statements which say that Krsna is an incarnation of hair of Lord Visnu, He is an incarnation of Garbhodakasayi Visnu, He is an incarnation of Anirudha, He is an incarnation of Lord Ramacandra..., so many statements. So, how to understand the real meaning behind that? All this analizis is done in the Sandarbhas. Jiva Goswami was the son of Anupama and the nephew of Srila Rupa Goswami and Srila Sanatana Goswami. He was born in 1518 in the village of Ramakeli. He saw Lord Caitanya when He came to Ramakeli to meet Rupa and Sanatana. It is said that he was a very young boy at that time maybe 4 or 5 years old. His father, Anupama was a great devotee of Ramachandra died when Jiva Goswami was very young. Later on when Srila Rupa and Srila Sanatana they came to Vrndavana he also left home and went to Navadvipa where he met Sri Nityananda Prabhu who had already predicted his arrival in Navadvipa. Then Nityananda Prabhu took him around, in parikrama to Navadvipa ( the first Navadvipa Parikrama of our parampara). Then Nityananda Prabhu ordered him "I have blessed you, I've given you enough mercy, but Lord Caitanya has fixed the place of your family in Vrndavana. You go and join your uncles Rupa and Sanatana." He was by that time about 16 years old. While going to Vrndavana he stayed for few years in Benares which was considered by that time as a city of learning like Navadvipa (even now is considered as a city of learning in the field of Sanskrit and Vedic philosophies). Because he was very intelligent, in a very short period of time, he mastered all the six systems ofphilosophy, the sanskrit grammar, astrology, the six Vedangas, the Vedas.... Everything he studied there. It is said that he studied under the great scholar named Madhusudhana Vacaspati who, some people say, was the brother of Sarvabhauma Battacharya. Then he went to Vrndavana to join Srila Rupa and Sanatana. He became initiated by Srila Rupa Goswami. Because he was a great scholar he was helping Rupa and Sanatana. All the editing work was done by him. Srila Rupa Goswami used to give anything he wrote, to Jiva Goswami, to edit. Jiva Goswami wrote commentaries

on "Ujjvala-nilamani' and other works of Srila Rupa Goswami. Besides writing his own books, he wrote many commentaries. Of all the Goswamis he was the most prolific writer. It is said that all his works are equal, in ammount, to the 18 Puranas (without using the help of Ganesa). There a saying about him that when he would write a page he would not wait until the ink get dried to write on the other side. He would go to the next paper and write and then would come to the previous paper. He composed everything in his mind like a computer. And once he wrote no editing was necessary that was the final print. The 'sat-sandarbhas' were composed in Gokula. In the book itself he says that some work was done by Gopala Bhatta Goswami but it was neither complete nor in the proper order nor fully available. Therefore he writes himself for the pleasure of Rupa and Sanatana. The six sandarbhas are known as "Tattva-sandarbha", "Bhagavata-sandarbha" (this Bhagavata refers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead not to the book Bhagavata), "Paramatma-sandarbha", "Krsna-sandarbha", "Bhakti-sandarbha" and "Prtti-sandarbha". Tattva-sandarbha which is the smallest has two sections: - the first can be called pramana or the epistomology; - the second is called prameya or the object of knowledge. Whenever we discuss a philosophy we have to explain what are the valid means of knowledge. Different philosophers they accept different means of knowledge as valid. There is always some arguments and counterarguments about which one is bona-fide or not. In the first section or first half of the book, more or less it discusses these things. Then in the second half it discusses what is the object of knowledge, what is knowable, what is to be known. There are 63 sections or divisions which are called anucheddas. The first 29 are dealing with the epistomologic part; and then the next sections are the premeya or the knowable. In the first section, first he begins with the Invocation or Mangalacaram. And by performing this Invocation, he quotes a verse from SB: "krsna-varnam tvisakrsnam\ sangopangastra-parsadam\ yajnaih sankirtana-prayair\ yajanti hi su-medhasah. By this verse he opens the book, that means he indirectly indicates that our worshipable book is SrimadBhagavatam, we are going to accept its authority and therefore we are beginning our invocation with the

Srimad-Bhagavatam. It also indicates that our worshipable Deity is Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu, therefore we are quoting the verse about His appearance. He also says "I accept the Srimad-Bhagavatam and even though there are other verses in other scriptures about Lord Caitanya, I just quote Srimad-Bhagavatam." It also shows that sankirtana is the abhidheya, or the means to attain or please Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu. And who will perform this sankirtana? Su-medhasah, the intelligent class of people will take to this process. This is a custom in Vedic system, to begin everything with Mangalacarana, or asking for the blessings of the Lord so then the work can be completed without any disturbances. Then Srila Jiva Goswami writes his own verse to give the meaning to this verse and there he explains "antah krsnam bahir gauram", inside is Krsna and outside is Gaura. Then he explains the meaning. After that in the remaining of the verses he gives the meaning or the reason why he is writing this book. He prays to Rupa and Sanatana Goswami and he says that "they have engaged me to write this book" so people do not think that he is writing as a show of scholarship. He says that he is just expanding whatever Sri Rupa wrote that was not arranged properly or available completely. Then he explains for whom is he writing, because if one is writing a book is has to know who are the people qualified to read it. So he says "yah sri-krsnapadambhoja.... " "I am writing this book only for those people whose only desire is to render service unto the lotus feet of Lord Sri Krsna or Krsna Caitanya. Please don't show my book to anyone else. My book should not be shown to anyone who don't desire to render service to Krsna." After that he prays to his teachers from whom he studied the Srimad-Bhagavatam and his initiating spiritual master, then he begins writing. Finally he composes one verse which is also found in CC where he explains that there is one Personality of Godhead, Lord Sri Krsna who is also called Brahma. That Brahma is not other than Lord Sri Krsna, without variety. And His one potency is glorious and controls Maya - His Paramatma feature. In another form He is existing in Vaikuntha as Narayana. May this Lord Krsna grant His prema to those people who are serving His lotus feet. Then he begins explaining. On section number 9 onwards, he first explains directly what is sambandha, abhideya and prayojana. The question then, is to know what are the means, the process to understand this. Is it based on direct

perception or is it based on the scriptures, or inference or similarity? On what is it based? Then he explains that although there are various means of acquiring knowledge and different philosophers have accepted different means. The Carvakas beleive only in direct perception. They that the only pramana is pratyaksa-pramana and no other processe is valid. They say that there are only four elements: earth, water, fire and air. They don't accept ether or sky. For them consciousness does not exist separately from matter. When the four elements come together to form the body then consciousness come into existence. They say: "don't eat meat or fish, eat food made with ghee. Beg, borrow, buy or steal, somehow or other get ghee." They think that the only happiness is here, so "eat nicely, enjoy, because the only happiness is here, heaven is here". Next is the Buddhist philosophy: they accept direct perception as well as inference (anumana). There are four divisions on their philosophy: 1) Nirvana- as the Carvakas, they that one has to become free from material desires, renounce everything, only then can one be peaceful and happy. But they don't accept the existence of the soul. The other philosophy is the Jainism. They only accept these two process: direct perception and inference. They are a little more advanced then the Buddhists because they accept the existence of the soul, but for them soul is not atomic in size. They say that the soul has the same size as the body. If there is one elephant then the soul is the size of an elephant. If there is an ant, the soul is the size of an ant. They say that is impossible that the soul is localized in one place of the body and feels in another place. Then we have Yoga and Sankhya. They accept sabdapramana as the valid means besides anumana and pratyaksa. They accept the word of the scriptures. This is also what we accept. Most Vaisnavas accept these three pramanas and we, Gaudiya-Vaisnavas, accept that. But we consider sabda-pramana as the topmost. Even though there are other processes, Srila Jiva Goswami only accepts these three on the grounds that Srila Madvacarya only accepted these three as the valid means of knowledge. Then he says that a human being cannot convey proper knowledge because he is endowed with four defects, brahma, pramada, vipraliksa and ?, that is: delusion (taking one thing for another e.g. considering the rope as snake or the human being as a tree), then inadvertence (it means that even when the conditions are alright, still one will not be able to get proper knowledge. One may be sitting in the class, the eyes and ears may be opened, but one may not be

listening), then the desire to cheat (I know something properly but I will convey it as improper so he will not get the proper knowledge), then there is limitation of the senses (all our sense perception is very limited). Some of these defects are innate in us, some depend on the circumstances, some depend on the personality, on the character of the person. So when we see all this, we can understand that some of the defects cannot be removed, because even the great sages, they don't have the desire to cheat but the other defects they also have. Therefore Srila Jiva Goswami says that only sabda-pramana, which is apauruseya, not coming from any human being, will be free from these defects and that will be considered as the valid knowledge. Srila Jiva Goswami says: "therefore we are not going to analize the other processes but we can limit ourselves to sabda-pramana and we will analize sabda with sabda because sabda, or word, is of two types pauruseya and apauruseya. Apauruseya is that which is not composed by any human being and pauruseya is composed by human beings whether is a common person or a saintly person a great sage. We based our knowledge on apauruseya, sabda-brahmana, or transcendental sound." The transcendental sound are the Vedas, they have come directly from Purusa, or the Supreme Personality of Godhead. It is interesting to know that they are coming from Purusa but they are called apauruseya. This can be explained in different ways. We can say that they are not composed by any human being or we can say that they are not composed even by the Lord. They come from Him but even He has not composed them because they are eternal. Just as the Lord is nitya, eternal also the Vedas are nitya. There is not one particular date when the Lord composed them, that is why it is said that the Vedas have come from His breath, because naturally the breath is flowing, we don't consciously say :"now I am going to breath in, now I breath out". When we have to perform a work we have to consciously do it, but breathing we don't do it consciously, even when we sleep it goes on. We don't feel proud "I am breathing!". In the same way the Vedas have come out from the Lord and He has not consciously sat down with the intention of writing the Vedas, because they are eternaly with Him, they just become sometimes manifest and sometimes nonmanifest, in and out. For this reason they are apauruseya. But Srila Jiva Goswami says that the problem still the same. The problem is that the Vedas, at present, are not available in its entirety. Originally they were

suposed to be 1130 branches of the Vedas: 21 branches of Rg-veda, 1000 branches of Soma-veda, 900 branches of Yajur-veda and 9 branches of Atharva-veda. But what is available at present is the maximum of 20 branches, that means only 10% or less. So if the case is that how can we understand the Vedas. Suppose that out of the 700 verses of the Bhagavad-gita we just had 20 verses, how could we understand it in all? We would not get any conclusion. So that is one great problem , Srila Jiva Goswami says. Even though we cannot have the entire Vedas we could try to understand whatever is available but a second problem is that the Vedas are very difficult to understand because the language is very difficult and they cannot be understood if there is not the proper sampradaya and that sampradaya has broken down, so the criptic message of the Vedas cannot be understood. Besides that even if we want to understand, in Kali-yuga we endowed of very less memory and to understand Vedas we have to understand first the Vedangas with all its six divisions. If we don't understand these six books we cannot understand the Vedas. Therefore, Srila Jiva Goswami says "why not we study the Puranas?". And on the top of everything, not everybody is allowed to study the Vedas, because the Vedas themselves say that only the twice-born can approach the Vedic knowledge. So why not we study the Puranas? Vyasadeva himself says that he has composed this Mahabharata and Puranas for people who cannot understand Vedas. So Srila Jiva Goswami starts to analize the Puranas. One work that he wants to do is to show that the Puranas have not the defect of pauruseya. Everyone agrees in India that Vedas are apauruseya not composed by any person. Even the Mayavadis agree with that. Even many western scholars agree that they cannot trace the begin of the Vedas. First, Srila Jiva Goswami wants to prove that the Puranas are as good as the Vedas. For this purpose he devotes the first section of the first part of this sandarbha - to prove how the Puranas are as good as Vedas. Then he gives many quotations, from Brhad-anarakya (?) Upanisad to prove that the Puranas and Vedas appeared at the same time, they all came from the breath of the Lord along with the Vedas. Then he explains that the Puranas are basically called like that because the complete the meaning of the Vedas. Purna means to make complete (purna iti purana). He says the vedic meaning are very difficulty to understand and if one does not study the Puranas he will not understand the Vedas. Whatever there is in the Vedas it is also in the Puranas. In fact the Puranas are like commentaries

of the Vedas. The same message of the Vedas have been conveyed in the Puranas in a simple story form so that everyone can read it because anyone likes stories. Then he also propounds that just as Vedas were divided by Sri Vyasa into four divisions, the Puranas were also divided by Vyasa, so he is the same author. And this Vyasa is none else than an incarnation of Lord Narayana Himself. Therefore His words have to be authoritative. Srila Jiva Goswami takes a lot of time on this part, establishing the authority of the Puranas. He also tells a very nice story how Narayana took this incarnation. He says that before Dvapara-yuga there was a great famine, so all the great saintly people and brahmanas they assembled in the place of Gautama Rsi who was having some mystic powers and was feeding everyone. But after some time rain came and from rain came the grains so everybody wanted to go back to their asramas and Gautama Rsi was keeping them because he wanted to be very hospitable and a good host. But they really wanted to go to their places so they try to device some means to leave. They made a calf out of hay and put it on the way to the river where Gautama use to go take is bath early in the morning. In the next morning when Gautama Rsi was walking to the river he kicked the calf and it fell down. Everyone start to say that he had killed a cow so they could not stay anymore in the place of a cowkiller, and they all left. Gautama was very surprised how he could have killed a cow in that way so when the sun came he saw that they had played a trick. He cursed them to loose all their knowledge and thus many of the scriptures were lost. Then the demigods went to pray to the Lord and He decided to appear as Vyasadeva and again compile the Vedas and the Puranas. Therefore Srila Jiva Goswami says that the Puranas are all authoritative as the Vedas. But again the problem in the Puranas remain the same. There are 18 Puranas and they speak about different demigods as being the Supreme Lord. The Siva Purana says that Lord Siva is the Supreme Personality of Godhead; the Skanda-purana says that Skanda is the Supreme Personality of Godhead; the Bhagavat-purana says that Krsna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead; and Devipurana says that Devi is the Supreme Personality of Godhead; and so on. So what to do? How to understand who is right or is wrong, there is so much confusion. Then he says that the Puranas are actually divided in three classes: six in the mode of goodness, six in the mode of passion and six in the mode of ignorance. Then he says, quoting Bhagavad-gita, that from the mode of goodness comes knowledge, from passion comes greed and from ignorance comes sleep. Therefore we should

10

concentrate on those Puranas which are in the mode of goodness. But in that there is also some problem, because some of the Puranas are talking about Nrsimhadeva, some speak about Lord Ramacandra, other speak about Visnu, other talk about Narayana. We can all understand that they are all Bhagavan, but who is "svayam-bhagavan"? This is hard to decipher. So he says that if we can come to one book which is giving the meaning of Vedanta-sutra, which explains the meaning of Gayatri, which is apauruseya in nature, and which is completely available and there is a sampradaya existing for that book, then we should analize that book. So we are talking about Srimad-Bhagavatam. He decides then to discuss only on Srimad-Bhagavatam. Of course he proves how the Srimad-Bhagavatam is the natural commentary of Vedanta-sutra, it is beginning with Gayatri-mantra (the first mantra), it is completely available in 18.000 verses, and there is a parampara available (he talks about Ramanujacarya and Madvacarya who accepted SrimadBhagavatam. Even Sankaracarya accepted it.). Then he establishes the Srimad-Bhagavatam as the ultimate book of pramana. Of course there are many details. From here he begins analizing. Now since we have decided that the Srimad-Bhagavatam is the book authority then we will discuss from Srimad-Bhagavatam. Whenever we want to give authority, we will quote from SrimadBhagavatam. He says: "I will not quote the SrimadBhagavatam to give authority to my words but I will quote the Srimad-Bhagavatam to explain what the Bhagavatam says and that is what I want to explain. I will quote other scriptures but the Bhagavatam will be the ultimate authority." Srila Jiva Goswami says that the Srimad-Bhagavatam is the topmost book of authority because Sri Vyasadeva wrote it as a book for himself. Generaly a writer writes something for the benefit of others. That was the case with Sri Vyasa with all the books compiled by him. Himself said that he wrote the Mahabharata for the benefit of people in Kali-yuga since they cannot understand the Vedas. But Srimad-Bhagavatam was compiled by him because he was not satisfied in himself therefore he wrote this book for his own satisfaction on the instruction of his spiritual master. That also tells about the importance of Srimad-Bhagavatam which gave Vyasadeva satisfaction who is considered as an incarnation of the Lord. Then Srila Jiva Goswami showed how the SrimadBhagavatam was accepted by the great acaryas. Even Sankaracarya respect it because he composed one poem called "Govindastaka" in which he mentions about Lord Krsna's pastimes from the 10th canto of SB. In that poem

11

he also prays that he desires to pass his time sitting on the bank of the Yamuna and meditate on Lord Krsna when He was surrounded by His cowherd friends eating the food kept on His hands. He says that this is the perfection of life. Taking hints from these compositions and other words like "bhaja govindam, bhaja govindam", some of his followers were inclined towards bhakti and some others were staunch impersonalist who didn't care anything about bhakti. There were actually two branches among his followers: the bhagavata-sampradaya - these they used to study the Srimad-Bhagavatam. Sridhara Swami composed his famous commentary on the Srimad-Bhagavatam, "Bhagavatdipika" to attract these people to devotional service. His commentary was accepted by Lord Caitanya as bonafide, that is why He criticized Vallabhacarya who said of himself to have writen a better commentary than Sridhara Swami. Srila Jiva Goswami says: "I will quote the commentary of Sridhara Swami to give proof." This is because the six Goswamis have taken the message of Lord Caitanya to their hearts and they didn't want to do anything that did not please Him. But Srila Jiva Goswami continues: " In some places Sridhara Swami had not writen in a very clear sense, then I will write my own commentary." And also in some places Sridhara Swami's commentaries are not according to the bhakti principles because he was using the logic called ?- nyaya. That means when one wants to catch the fish he has to supply meat. The purpose of using meat is not to feed the fish with it what one wants is to catch the fish. In the same way Sridhara Swami's purports are not that he wants to give impersonal comments on Srimad-Bhagavatam but if he does not do that the impersonalists will think that he is a Vaisnava and they will not read his commentaries. So he writes mixed commentaries. Sometimes right from the beginning he explains very clearly that he accepts the Lord and His potencies as eternal, he accepts this material world as part of His potency not just "mitya". But in between, while he is commenting, sometimes he writes impersonal comments. Srila Jiva Goswami says that we will not accept those comments and for this reason some western philosophers have criticized Srila Jiva Goswami thinking that he is just accepting Sridhara Swami for his own purpose not really paying any respect to him. But Srila Jiva Goswami is not hiding this, he clearly comments about it. Then he talks about Ramanujacarya and Madvacarya who accepted also the authority of Srimad- Bhagavatam. Then he starts to analize Srimad-Bhagavatam. The first thing he does is to try to analize the heart of

12

Sukadeva Goswami. Then he quotes verses that were spoken by Suta Goswami as prayer to his guru. Then he starts to answer the questions of Saunaka Rsi. In the 2nd chapter he prays to Sukadeva Goswami and in that prayer he mentions "I bow down to the son of Vyasa, the destroyer of all sins whose mind was filled with Brahmananda and thus his mind was free from wordly thoughts; who has his heart drawn to his enchanting beloved 'ajita'; and who has compassionately unfolded this Purana, revolving around Him, Lord Krsna. Salutations to Him." In this verse and in the next specifically he mentions that Sukadeva Goswami was absorbed in brahmananda. The significance of that is that he had no material desires. It means that if he studied SrimadBhagavatam was not for showing his knowledge by delivering 'Bhagavata-sapta' but he was already situated in Brahman, he was 'atmarama', self-satisfied. He was that person behind which his father was calling "putra, putra!" and didn't care for that call. He was that same person who didn't discriminate between male and female. This shows how highly advanced Sukadeva Goswami was. But the same person he came back and studied SrimadBhagavatam. This means that Srimad-Bhagavatam is so important that even an atmarama like Sukadeva was attracted. And we should note that all impersonalists accept Sukadeva Goswami as their authority in Brahman. The impersonalists also give up everything and go away, but they don't follow completely Sukadeva Goswami who came back to study Srimad-Bhagavatam. This was also the question asked by Saunaka Rsi to Suta Goswami, that Sukadeva Goswami was so highly renounced that he would not stay in a house more time that it is needed to milk a cow then were did he find the time to study this Srimad-Bhagavatam? Then he recited the famous "atmarama-sloka", that even the atmaramas, who are called "nirgrantha" (who have gone beyond 'grantha', literatures. This means that they don't have any need to follow any rules and regulations because these are to be followed for a certain purpose and once one have attained it one doesn't need to follow them, they have already bypass them they are considered "avadhutas" ,which means those who have shaken away all rules and regulations). Also 'grantha' means 'knot'. Those who are free from the knots of maya they don't need any scriptures because the scriptures are there to help us to come to the stage of Krsna consciousness and if one is already there then he need not follow it, they follow the Lord directly. So even such a person who is brahman situated performs bhakti because without performing bhakti one cannot attain Brahman realization. One cannot get 'moksa'

13

without bhakti, it is not possible. So impersonalists also take shelter of devotion to get liberation but later on they give up bhakti. But Sukadeva Goswami is not performing bhakti for any cause, it is causeless devotion. Then it must be some reason why he is doing it? Sukadeva Goswami was attracted to hear the SrimadBhagavatam which speaks about Lord Krsna's transcendental qualities. So what he is going to speak to Pariksit Maharaja is not impersonal Brahman. He is not going to propound later on that the goal of life,'brahma-jijnasa', is to become "one" with Brahman because that was where he was at. He explains that although is mind was filled with Brahmananda neverthless he was attracted by the Lila of Ajita. His mind was very attracted by the transcendental pastimes of the beautiful Lord Krsna. He says "whatever my mind is attracted to, I am going to speak. He I really consider somebody as my friend, I will tell him what is in my heart, not something that I already rejected." Therefore whatever Sukadeva Goswami speaks has to be with devotion nothing else, because this he consideres as the need for human beings to purify themselves. He thus spoke the most confidential Purana, the Bhagavat-purana. In the past many acaryas vaisnavas have writen books to defeat Mayavadis, but again the Mayavadis have again writen books to counter the Vaisnavas. But the style that Srila Jiva Goswami uses no one had shown any counter-arguments. No body in the last 500 years have dare to speak against his commentaries, because the logic style which he follows either they have to read and accept it or else they have to close it and go away. This is the main logic and we should understand it very carefully because it will make easier to understand how Srila Jiva Goswami propounds his philosophy in the latter books. Then he says "I have analized the heart of the speaker, Sri Sukadeva Goswami, now let us see what the writer has to say, because sometimes the speaker can give his own ideas and that is not the idea of the writer." Therefore he analizes the samadhi of Srila Vyasa because Narada had told Vyasa to experience in samadhi everything that he had told him. Not that just he would understand and then start writing. He had done a great work but now he needed to meditate upon the words of his guru Sri Narada Muni and experience the most important work that he had to accomplish. So Vyasadeva sat in samadhi (this in the 7th chapter of the 1st Canto of SB). Then he took those verses and analized what he saw in samadhi and from that he concluded all the philosophy that later on was propounde by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Whatever Lord Caitanya said is coming from

14

these verses of Srimad-Bhagavatam which explain the trance of Srila Vyasadeva. And that is the heart of Srimad-Bhagavatam because from that only he composed the Srimad-Bhagavatam. bhaktiyogena manasi samyak pranihite 'male / apasyad purusam purnam mayam ca tadapasrayam // He sat down with fixed mind by using the process of bhakti-yoga (not astanga-yoga). By bhakti-yoga when he was completely pure in his mind he saw 'purnapurusa'. This shows that when one's heart is purified by bhaktiyoga, one actually sees the Lord. This bhakti is not simply a armchair philosophy, it is a practical philosophy one will actually realize it. It is not simply word juglery like the Mayavadis, because as soon as he sat in samadhi he saw 'purnapurusa', the complete Personality of Godhead. Purnapurusa means the Lord with the complete sixteen potencies, like the moon has sixteen potencies and from the new it goes on manifesting one by one its sixteen potencies. So he saw 'purnapurusa' like the complete full moon, that means seeing the moon along with its rays. He saw Lord Krsna along with His potencies, which means Radharani, His associates, His abode..., everything. That is 'purnapurusam'. All Vaisnavas say that only Krsna can be 'purnapurusa' because the others are not purna-tattva. Not only he saw Krsna but he also saw Maya. This defeats Mayavadi philosophy, because their philosophy propounds that there is only one truth, Brahman, and that has not potencies. It has no form, no qualities, no characteristics, no potencies. But he saw the Lord with all His potencies, including Maya. This means that Maya is also part of the Lord's potencies which means that it is not mitya, false. It is eternal as Brahman is eternal. He also saw the living entity. In the impersonal philosophy does not have any independent existence. Jiva is nothing but Brahman confused. When Brahman becomes****? that is called Jiva. When Brahman starts thinking "I don't know who am I", when it gets covered by Maya he thinks "I am this, I am that..., I am a living entity." But he says that he saw the living entity but he was bewildered by Maya. He also says that he didn't see 'purnapurusa' bewildered by Maya. It is only the Jiva that was bewildered. Therefore it is not that Brahman was bewildered by Maya and became Jiva, because it was only the Jiva who was bewildered by Maya. And what is that bewilderement? jiva atmanam trigunatmakam, he thinks himself made of the three modes of material nature, that he is the body, subtle or gross. Paro 'pi manute 'nartham, although he is 'para',

15

transcendental, he thinks himself 'tatkrtam cabhipadyate', and then he becomes involved in whatever he performs in this material body. This is what he saw. And then he also saw the solution for it, how can he get rid of this conditioning. And the solution is not "aham brahmasmi, aham brahmasmi" so on, so on.... He says "anarthopasamam saksad bhaktiyogam adhoksaje". This anartha, or this conditioning of the living entity can be removed by performing direct devotional service unto "adhoksaja". And 'lokasyajanato vyasas cakre satvatasamhitam', this was not known to people. People only knew that if one wants to become mukta, or liberated, then he has to say 'aham brahmasmi', so on, so on.... But he says that 'lokasyajanato' that what was not know to people is that if one performs devotional service unto adhoksaja, then he becomes free from anarthas. Previously people thought that devotional service was only a means and ultimately they have to come to the platform of Brahman or the impersonal realization. But here Vyasadeva is not saying that. He says that this is the direct process. Therefore he composed this 'satvatasamhita'. Then he gives a very wonderful meaning to 'Adhoksaja'. He says the adhoksaja is a name of Krsna, because 'aksa' is the axel of the cart. Krsna was hanging under this cart in the house of Nanda Maharaja when He was a baby, then the Saktasura came and He kicked him and the cart broke down. Krsna was lying there so everyone came and said: "adhoksaja!". Adha means below, aksa is the axle of the cart and ja means born. So everyone said :"He has taken another birth!" They thougth He was dead, because they saw the big cart all broken with so many things hanging on it. But nothing had happened to Krsna. So they said His name should be "Adhoksaja". Srila Jiva Goswami says that this is that Adhoksaja to Whom we have to perform bhakti. Then he gives a very wonderful statement: yasyam vai sruyamanayam krsne paramapuruse / bhaktir utpadyate pumsah sokamohabhayapaha //. What is the use of composing this satva-samhita, what is the use? Because simply by hearing it one will attain devotion to Krsna who is parampurusa. This is the same parampurusa that Vyasa has seen, Krsna the son of Nanda and Yasoda. Sruyamanayam means "while listening" it will happen. And after listening one starts preaching. One will become blissful and free from sakamohabhayapaha, the material desease of lamentation, bewilderement and fear. Then, sa samhitam bhagavatim krtvanukramya catmajam / sukam adhyapayam asa nivrttiniratam munim, after

16

composing this Srimad-Bhagavatam which is known as bhagavati-samhita, Vyasadeva taught this book to Sukadeva Goswami. And why did he teach it to Sukadeva Goswami since he had so many disciples like Jaimini, Vyasampanu, Romaharsana and others, all so great personalities, so why he taught it to Sukadeva who did even knew how to tight his kopins? He says nivrttiniratam munim, because Sukadeva Goswami was nivrtta, he was not in the path of pravrtti-marga, he was completely renounced, that means he had no scope of misusing the book. He had no scope of misunderstanding the book, because when one has material desires in the heart one has the tendency to misunderstand or misinterpret the message for our means. Sukadeva was a muni, a thougthful person even though he wander like a crazy person. There are crazy people who don't care for anything, who could be called also nivrttaniratam, but they are not muni, thougthful. Then Vyasadeva explained the atmarama ca munayo. All these points ultimately explain the importance of Srimad-Bhagavatam and its philosophy. This is actually the heart of Srila Vyasadeva. This is the theme which he takes and compiles later on. This is where all the Vainava philosophies, specially the Gaudiya Vaisnava philosophy, come from, because the name of Krsna is directly mentioned, bhakti is mentioned and also the energies of the Lord are mentioned. Therefore this is what Srila Jiva Goswami expands. He just expands the original message, that is why he calls his work bhagavat-sandharbhas, or the books which reveal the hidden meanings of Srimad-Bhagavatam, the heart of Srila Vyasadeva. He actually goes to the hidden heart and takes all the meaning. After that he also analizes the heart of Suta Goswami and he quotes verses where Suta Goswami himself is speaking. To the six questions put by the sages of Naimisaranya, Suta Goswami first answered himself in the second and third chapters. And if we read those, again we find all the philosophy is there. And Suta Goswami himself has given the same solution. He himself talks about studying the Srimad-Bhagavatam. He begins by saying narayana namaskrtyam\ naro caiva narottama, and then he goes on to say nityam bhagavatam sevaya, just by performing service to this bhagavatam one's heart can become purified. In this way Srila Jiva Goswami analizes the hearts of these three great personalities, the writter, the first speaker and the second speaker. Then he says that if one wants to analize further, he can also analize the heart of Maitreya Muni, who is also a great speaker of the Bhagavatam, analize the heart of Pariksit Maharaja, what he actually wanted to hear

17

(because Pariksit Maharaja himself said: "I am not worried whether the tataksa serpent can come and bite me, please continue to chant the glories of Lord Visnu, because I am not interested in anything else."). So if we analize in this way we will see that the SrimadBhagavatam explains these three things: sambandha, abhideya and prayojana. These are the six books that Srila Jiva Goswami wrote. In the first four books he analizes the sambandha, because this sambandha is the theme about which are so many confusions and so many theories and philosophies. So he wrote these four books to analize this in great detail, because unless one understands sambandha clearly, he will not attain the goal. He writes Bhagavat-sandharbha and Krsna-samdharbha. In Krsna-sandarbha he explains that there is bhagavan but there is svayam-bhagavan and that is Lord Krsna. There is establishes Lord Krsna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. If Srila Jiva Goswami had not writen the Krsna-sandarbha it would be very difficult to prove that Krsna is svayam-bhagavan. Here he does the most authoritatively work, the topmost research work of this kali-yuga, to explain that Krsna is actually the Supreme Personality of Godhead, because even in other vaisnava-sampradayas they don't accept it. They all think that Krsna is some incarnation of Visnu, Narayana, Rama, Pradyumna or Sankarsana, etc. So many philosophies. In Krsna-sandarbha he takes all these arguments, defeats everything and establishes Krsna as bhagavan-svayam. He says that this is his cakravarti statement, or the emperor statement from Bhagavatam: krsnas tu bhagavan svayam. He says that this is enough for him to defeat everything. He takes all the counterarguments from the Bhagavatam and all other Puranas stating that Krsna is not the Supreme and he chops everything one by one, and finally he establishes Lord Krsna as Supreme. Then in Bhakti-sandarbha he explains abhidheyatattva, or the process - what is the means to acquire the goal. There he analyzes bhakti in great detail because there are so many types of bhakti. There is saguna-bhakti, nirguna-bhakti, sadhana-bhakti, raganugabhakti, bhava-bhakti, prema-bhakti... He analizes everything. Even though bhakti has been analized by Srila Rupa Goswami in his Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu, in his Bhakti-sandarbha Srila Jiva Goswami reveals so many new things and a wonderful analizes of devotion. Finally he wrote Prti-sandarbha to explain the prayojana-tattva, or the purpose, the goal. That is prema or love of Godhead, because in our Gaudiyavaisnava sampradaya we don't consider only bhakti as the

18

goal but prema. For us prema is beyond bhakti. These are the six sandarbhas. After analizing these things, then he starts speaking about jivatattva and also speaks about Mayavada. There are some nice logic statements in Tattva-sandarbha to defeat impersonal philosophy although he does not go into very much detail because in Tattva-sandarbha he just wants to give like a gist. In one way Tattva-sandarbha is just a gist of the sat-sandarbhas and then he expands this more in detail. That is why it is called Tattva-sandarbha because it gives the tattva of this philosophy. And also he establishes the philosophy of acintya- bhedabeda in brief and he will explain it in more detail in the Paramatma-sandarbha. Srila Jiva Goswami himself also wrote a commentary on the sat-sandarbhas. After writing the sat-sandarbhas he was not satisfied so then he wrote a commentary which is called 'sarva-samohadhi(?)'. This is even more philosophical then the sat-sandarbhas. The language of the sat-sandarbhas is highly philosophical but this sarva-samohadhi (?) is even more difficult. There he takes all the philosophies from Carvaka up to the philosophy of Madvacarya and Ramanujacarya and he finds defects in all of them and then he establishes that the only philosophy which is the highest, which is the heart of Srimad-Bhagavatam, is "acintya beda-beda". Even though in Paramatma-sandarbha he mentiones this acintya beda-beda concept, only in sarva-samohadhi he makes it very clear that it is our main philosophical concept. In the sandarbhas he defeats the mayavada philosophy but his style is more mellow and from the point of SrimadBhagavatam. In sarva-samohandi he speaks more like a scholar quoting many verses from the Upanishads, he takes the statements of Sankaracarya and defeats all of them. Then he speaks about the function of Maya. She creates illusion but she herself exists. Srila Jiva Goswami explains why the Lord do not stop her from troubling the living entities and he says because she is also a devotee and just as a criminal he may be beaten in front of the King and the King has the power to stop the person who is beating but he will not do it because the punishment is good for the criminal. Maya does something good for the living entity and the Lord doesn't interfere with this. But Maya herself does not like this job very much and thus she feels ashamed to come in front of the Lord. Then he explains a little more about abhidheya and prayojana and he analyzes the Gayatri-mantra because it is said that the Srimad-Bhagavatam is beginning with the Gayatri-mantra. He takes the first verse of the Srimad-

19

Bhagavatam and he takes the first line which is called the gayatri and he shows how this gayatri is composed in the sloka form. And the reason he gives is that the gayatri is generaly meant to be read by those who are twice initiated, but this Srimad-Bhagavatam is meant to be read by everyone, be he a sudra, a woman or lowest than that. He doesn't write the gayatri in that explicit form but he puts the same meaning, but to convey the idea that this is gayatri, he has kept one word 'dhimahi'. This 'dhimahi' is the word which is always chanted in gayatri, it cannot be dropped. This is like the symbol to show that this is gayatri. Then he explains the meaning of this gayatri which is not to worship the sun-god, Lord Siva or Sakti but to worship Radha and Krsna. This also he propounds in the Tattvasandarbha and later on he expands it in Paramatmassandarbha in more detail. Finally he concludes the sandarbhas by explaining the 10 subjects which are explained in Bhagavatam. In those 10 subjects the 10th one is the most important: it is the 'asraya'. He says that all of the nine topics which are described in Srimad-Bhagavatam are meant only to explain the 10th one. And this 10th one is that which is explained in the 10th Canto.

20