BY: SUN STAFF
Jan 7, CANADA (SUN) —
Tattva Sandarbha
by Srila Jiva Goswami
SECTION FORTY-ONE
Moreover, if oneness of Brahman with the jiva was the conclusion of Srimad Bhagavatam, then Suta Gosvami would have described: "Sri Vyasadeva experienced in His trance that the one Brahman appears divided because of ignorance, and that the suffering caused by this division can be mitigated by knowledge." And if the pastimes and attributes of the Supreme Lord were not real that would defy the experience of Sri Suka.
Sri Jiva Toshani Commentary
After giving logical refutations of monism, Srila Jiva Gosvami proceeds to disprove it by reference to sabda pramana, or scriptural evidence. This is the Vedic system. So far as understanding the Absolute Truth, the Personality of Godhead, logic has no stance by itself. The final arbiter is always scriptural evidence. Scriptural evidence is so decisive that even if something defies logic, but it is supported by the sabda pramana, it must be accepted as conclusive truth. Any standard lower than this would be inconsistent with the Vedantic epistemology, which establishes the Vedas as emanating from the Absolute Truth and thus infallible.
Earlier, in the pramana portion of Tattva Sandarbha, Srila Jiva Gosvami established the Srimad Bhagavatam as the supreme authority among all types of pramanas. Now he puts monism to the Srimad Bhagavatam test. The core of Srimad Bhagavatam is the verses narrating Srila Vyasa's trance, in which he saw the Supreme Personality of Godhead, complete with His potencies, including Maya, who was far removed from the Lord. Vyasa did not see a non-differentiated Brahman being overpowered by Maya and turned into many jivas. Rather He saw the jiva distinct from the Lord, but captivated by Maya because of thinking himself independent of the Lord. He saw that this false independence is the cause of the jiva's suffering. Simultaneously, He saw that the solution to the jiva's bondage is devotional service to the Supreme Person (bhakti-yogam adhokshaje), not knowledge of oneness with Him.
Suta Gosvami confirms this inferior position of oneness in his prayers to Sukadeva Gosvami, his spiritual master. While speaking the Srimad Bhagavatam to the sages at Naimisharanya, Suta Gosvami specifically mentions that originally Sukadeva was absorbed in the bliss of Brahman. Later, upon hearing some selected Bhagavatam verses describing the pastimes and attributes of Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, his heart was captivated. So much so, Sukadeva studied the Lord's pastimes and excelled in narrating them.
Therefore it is said that the Bhagavatam, which is the ripened fruit of the tree of Vedic literature, became even more relishable when it emanated from the mouth of Sukadeva, who is like a parrot. Suka means parrot, and the allusion here is to the experience that fruit pecked by parrots are sweeter than other fruit from the same tree. When the fruit of the Bhagavatam was first pecked by Sukadeva Gosvami then tasted by Parikshita Maharaja, it was sweeter than ever.
This means that the pastimes and attributes of the Supreme Personality of Godhead are not imaginary, otherwise a liberated soul like Srila Sukadeva Gosvami, who was beyond any mundane desire would never have taken interest in them. Sukadeva was the chief among all the Brahman realized transcendentalists and worshipable by them all. By his example he rejected the state of absolute oneness between the Lord and the jivas. Therefore, the keys to the monistic doctrines--paricchedavada and pratibimbavada--are supported neither by logic nor by the scriptures, especially not the supreme pramana, Srimad Bhagavatam. Rather, the Mayavadis arrive at their conclusions by word jugglery and distorting the scriptural truths, which only serves to confuse the innocent hearer.
Next, Srila Jiva Gosvami explains the reason for the monistic statements found in the scriptures.
Go to Section Forty-two
Return to Section Forty
