3.1: Dyu-bhv-ādy-adhikaraṇam - The abode of heaven, earth, and other things

The passage mentioning the abode of heaven, earth, and other creations refers to the Lord, because the words specifically describe Him, and because He is attained by liberated souls.

« Vedānta-sūtra: The Govinda-bhāṣya of Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa

Topic 1: Dyu-bhv-ādy-adhikaraṇam - The abode of heaven, earth, and other things

The passage from the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad describes the Lord, not pradhāna or the jīva.

dyu-bhv-ādy-āyatanam sva-śabdāt, muktopasṛpya-vyapadeśāt, nānumānam atac-chabdāt, (nātac-chabdāt) prāṇa-bhṛc ca, bheda-vyapadeśāc ca, prakaraṇāt, sthity-adanābhyām ca

“The passage mentioning the abode of heaven, earth, and other material creations refers to the Lord, because the words specifically describe Him, and also because it is described that He is attained by liberated souls. The abode of heaven and earth is also not pradhāna, because there is no word denoting it in the passage. It is also not the jīva, for the same reason. And also because the difference between them is clearly described. It does not refer to the jīva because of the context of the passage, and also because of the later mention that one bird is eating and the other is standing.”

Sūtra 1.3.1 - Where everything that exists rests

dyu-bhv-ādy-āyatanam sva-śabdāt

dyu: of heaven; bhū: earth; ādi: beginning with; āyatanam: the abode; sva: its own; śabdāt: because of the word.

The passage mentioning the abode of heaven, earth, and other material creations refers to the Lord, because the words specifically describe Him.

Commentary: This topic is related to a verse from the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad (2.2.5), where it’s stated:

yasmin dyauḥ pṛthivī cāntarikṣam
otam manaḥ saha prāṇaiś ca sarvaiḥ
tam evaikamjānatha ātmānam
anyā vāco vimuñcathāmrṭasyaiṣa setuḥ

“Know the ātmā in whom the heavens, earth, sky, the mind, and all senses are interwoven. Give up other talks and forms of worship. He is the bridge to immortality.”

This verse describes a divine, eternal person, into whom everything that exists rests, just like threads woven into a piece of cloth, or the single line holding the different patches that form a quilt. Not only is He the sustenance of everything, but He is also the object of meditation and the abode of immortality. Who is this mysterious person?

The analogy of everything that exists being woven into an ultimate cause is also mentioned in the Skanda Purāṇa:

yathā kaṇṭhā-paṭāḥ sūtre otāḥ protāś ca saṃsthitāḥ
evaṃ viṣṇāv idaṃ viśvam otaṃ protaṃ ca saṃsthitam

“Like the two threads, horizontal and vertical, from which a piece of cloth is woven, Lord Viṣṇu is situated as the vertical and horizontal cause of the cosmic manifestation.”

A similar analogy is given by Kṛṣṇa in the Gītā (7.7): “O conqueror of wealth, there is no truth superior to Me. Everything rests upon Me, as pearls are strung on a thread.”

In both references, it is very clear that the Lord is the ultimate foundation of everything mentioned in the verse. However, one could argue that the abode of heaven and everything that exists is not a person, but actually pradhāna, since it is the repository of all material elements. One could thus argue that pradhāna is the cause of all material transformations and that the words āmṛta-setuḥ (the shore of the eternal) and ātma apply to pradhāna since it is eternal and all-pervading. Another may argue that the verse actually describes the jīva, because the jīva is the enjoyer of things in this material world, and because the jīva possesses mind and senses, two of the components described in this passage.

Accepting the pradhāna as the ultimate abode leads to a nihilist conclusion, the idea that we should merge into this unlimited pradhāna and thus annihilate our existence. Accepting the jīva as the ultimate abode is equally damaging, supporting the mistaken theory that we are all God.

We can see that both interpretations are weak, not finding good support in the verse itself and contradicting numerous other passages from the scriptures, as well as general logic. The central point is that many have a general tendency to reject the idea of a supreme authority since accepting the existence of an authority binds us to different sets of rules. This unconscious objection makes one attracted to materialism or impersonalism, which share the idea that there is no personal God in control, and everything appears as a result of transformations started by some mechanical or impersonal energy. Armed with these conclusions, one then proceeds to misinterpret the scriptures, creating interpretations that, even though contradictory and illogical, seduce others who have similar inclinations and are not intelligent enough to see through the faults of the argument. The attempt to establish pradhāna or the jīva as the object of the verse is a good example of this.

To this, Vyāsadeva answers: dyu-bhv-ādy-āyatanam sva-śabdāt. This description refers to the Lord because the words in this passage specifically describe Him.

How can we be so sure that the words “āmṛta-setuḥ” describe the Supreme Lord, and not pradhāna or even the jīva? Both are immortal, so why not? Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa explains that the words “mṛtasyaiṣa setuḥ” in the verse come from the verb “sinoti”, which means “to bind” or to tie together. In this way, the expression means “He who enables one to attain the eternal”, or “like a bridge to immortality”, and can’t be interpreted in any other way.

The analogy is that just as a bridge allows one to cross to the other side of a river, the mṛtasyaiṣa setuḥ described in the verse allows us to attain liberation, crossing over the ocean of repeated birth and death. This is substantiated in the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (6.15), which states:

eko hamso bhuvanasyāsya madhye, sa evāgniḥ salile sanniviṣṭaḥ
tam eva viditvātimṛtyum eti, nānyaḥ panthā vidyate’yanāya

“Within this world’s very core abides a solitary swan. He is the Supreme Self, completely pure, who is like fire submerged in the primordial waters. Knowing Him, one traverses the path of birth and death and attains liberation. For reaching this goal, there is no other path.”

As the verse confirms, one can overcome the path of birth and death only by understanding the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This idea is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (12.6-7), where Kṛṣṇa says: “But those who worship Me, giving up all their activities unto Me and being devoted to Me without deviation, engaged in devotional service and always meditating upon Me, having fixed their minds upon Me, O son of Pṛthā – for them I am the swift deliverer from the ocean of birth and death.”

The Lord is the only one who can save us from the ocean of birth and death, bringing us back to our original position of eternality, bliss, and knowledge. As an inert mass of material elements, pradhāna can’t perform this function, and it is not possible for the jīva to attain liberation by itself. In this way, even without considering other elements from the verse, the words “mṛtasyaiṣa setuḥ” alone prove that the verse speaks about the Supreme Lord, and can’t be used to support any kind of impersonalistic or nihilist philosophy.

Sūtra 1.3.2 - Liberated souls attain the Lord

muktopasṛpya-vyapadeśāt

mukta: liberated; upasṛpya: attaining; vyapadeśāt: because of the statement.

Because it is described that He is attained by liberated souls.

Commentary: Several passages in the scriptures conclude that liberated souls attain the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is another argument reinforcing the conclusions of the previous sūtra, since any explanation must harmonize different passages from the scriptures.

Since the previous sūtra defined the abode of heaven and earth as the one who enables one to attain the eternal, or as the bridge to immortality, the fact that other verses from the scripture define the Supreme Lord as the abode of the liberated souls confirms that the abode of heaven and earth mentioned in the previous passage is indeed the Supreme Lord.

We don’t need to go very far. Later in the same Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad (3.1.3), for example, it is mentioned:

yadā paśyaḥ paśyate rukma-varṇam
kartāram īśam puruṣam brahma-yonim
tadā vidvān puṇya-pāpe vidhūya
nirañjanaḥ paramam sāmyam upaiti

“When the enlightened soul finally sees the golden-hued Lord, the creator, the Supreme Person, who is the source of the impersonal Brahman, he finally becomes free from material duality and attains the Supreme destination, becoming pure like the Lord.”

Liberated souls are, by definition, free from all material contamination; therefore, their destination can’t be pradhāna or anything connected with this material world. He who is attained by the liberated souls can only be the Supreme Brahman, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Sūtra 1.3.3 - The material creation is dependent on the Lord

nānumānam atac-chabdāt

na: not; anumānam: that which is inferred; atac-chabdāt: because there is no word denoting it.

The abode of heaven and earth is also not pradhāna, because there is no word denoting it in the passage.

Commentary: “Nānumānam” means to reject the thesis being proposed (na anumāna). With these words, Vyāsadeva rejects the possibility that Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 2.2.5 may refer to pradhāna. Why? Atac-chabdāt: There are simply no words indicating it in the passage.

We can’t just attribute any idea to passages from the scripture. The meaning we try to extract must have support in the words of the text. In this case, however, none of the words in the verse is appropriate to describe the unconscious and inert pradhāna. On the contrary, most of the words used in the verse can only be used to describe a conscious entity.

Apart from that, the abode of heaven, earth, and other things must be something non-material, especially when we consider that the word “ātma” is used. Pradhāna is, on the contrary, the repository of all material energy. It’s more refined than the gross material objects we interact with on this planet, but it is still material. The fact that pradhāna is material and inert proves that it is not what is being referred to in the text.

The center of the whole creation is Goloka Vṛndāvana, the inconceivably vast, lotus-shaped planet where the Lord performs His intimate pastimes surrounded by His perfect devotees. Goloka Vṛndāvana is greater than all other spiritual planets combined; therefore, we can’t even imagine how extensive it may be. Each of the petals of this gigantic Lotus is like a separate planet, where many pastimes happen simultaneously.

Around this gigantic lotus-shaped planet, there are innumerable Vaikuṇṭha planets, where the Lord exhibits His opulence in many Viṣnu forms. Each of these Vaikuṇṭha planets is much larger than a material universe. Therefore, they are also inconceivably vast, with each planet being the abode for an unlimited number of souls.

Around all these spiritual planets is the impersonal Brahmajyoti, the spiritual light that emanates from Kṛṣṇa’s body and from all the spiritual planets. This spiritual light, which is the abode of all kinds of impersonalists, hides the spiritual planets from the view of all the souls who haven’t developed their natural attitude of service to the Lord.

In a corner of this vast spiritual light, the Lord creates an ocean of spiritual water and lies there as Mahā-Viṣnu. This ocean of spiritual waters is called the Causal Ocean, or kāraṇodaka, and because He lies on this ocean, Lord Mahā-Viṣnu is also called Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣnu, or Kāraṇārṇavaśāyī Viṣnu.

On his purport to SB 1.3.2, Prabhupāda describes:

“The Mahā-Viṣṇu lies down in some part of the spiritual sky by His own free will. Thus He lies on the ocean of kāraṇa, from where He glances over His material nature, and the mahat-tattva is at once created. Thus electrified by the power of the Lord, the material nature at once creates innumerable universes, just as in due course a tree decorates itself with innumerable grown fruits. The seed of the tree is sown by the cultivator, and the tree or creeper in due course becomes manifested with so many fruits. Nothing can take place without a cause. The Kāraṇa Ocean is therefore called the Causal Ocean. Kāraṇa means “causal.” We should not foolishly accept the atheistic theory of creation. The description of the atheists is given in the Bhagavad-gītā. The atheist does not believe in the creator, but he cannot give a good theory to explain the creation. Material nature has no power to create without the power of the puruṣa, just as a prakṛti, or woman, cannot produce a child without the connection of a puruṣa, or man.”

The next stage is what is called pradhāna. Lord Kapila describes its nature in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (3.26.10):

yat tat tri-guṇam avyaktam, nityam sad-asad-ātmakam
pradhānam prakṛtim prāhur, aviśeṣam viśeṣavat

“The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: The unmanifested eternal combination of the three modes is the cause of the manifest state and is called pradhāna. It is called prakṛti when in the manifested stage of existence.”

In his purport, Prabhupāda explains:

“The Lord points out material nature in its subtle stage, which is called pradhāna, and He analyzes this pradhāna. The explanation of pradhāna and prakṛti is that pradhāna is the subtle, undifferentiated sum total of all material elements. Although they are undifferentiated, one can understand that the total material elements are contained therein. When the total material elements are manifested by the interaction of the three modes of material nature, the manifestation is called prakṛti.”

Pradhāna is the avyakta-prakṛti of the Lord, material energy in its unmanifested form, where the three modes of material nature reside in equilibrium. Pradhāna is thus different from the causal ocean, which is an expansion of the Lord’s spiritual potency.

As declared by Lord Brahmā on the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.14.14), and also on the Brahma-samhitā (5.47), the causal ocean is the abode of Mahā-Viṣnu, where He lies while performing His pastime of creating the material universes. The causal ocean is the border between the material creation and the spiritual world, like a barrier of water separating the material and spiritual. When Lord Vāmanadeva pierces the shell of the universe with His toe, the crack cuts through all coverings and reaches the spiritual waters of the causal ocean, which flows into the universe, manifesting in the form of the waters of the river Ganges.

Pradhāna, on the other hand, manifests from the Lord’s external potency (bahirāngā śakti); it is compared to a cloud that floats on the causal ocean, remaining inert until activated by the look of Mahā-Viṣnu. This transcendental look contains the creative potency of the Lord, including the time-energy, which puts pradhāna into movement, breaking the equilibrium, and making the three modes distinct. This starts the process of creation, with the three modes being progressively combined with the time energy, generating the material elements, and kick-starting the material creation. From this point, pradhāna is called prakṛti (or mahat-tattva), the manifested material nature, which serves as the foundation for the material creation. This process is mentioned in several of the Purāṇas and also in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. It is also studied in the atheistic Sānkhya, which incorrectly concludes that pradhāna (and not the Lord) is the ultimate cause of the material manifestation.

Although pradhāna and the mahat-tattva (prakṛti) are called material, they are in reality also formed from a spiritual potency of the Lord. It may sound like a contradiction at first, but the fact is that the Lord is spiritual, and all His potencies are spiritual. In this sense, there is nothing factually “material”, since everything comes from the Lord. The energy is just assembled in a certain way. The reason they are considered material, different from the Causal Ocean, which is taken as fully spiritual, is that pradhāna and the mahat-tatvā exist under the realm of Māyā, the illusory potency of the Lord, which allows the conditioned souls to see the energy as matter and play with it.

This is explained by Kṛṣṇa himself on SB 2.9.34: “O Brahmā, whatever appears to be of any value, if it is without relation to Me, has no reality. Know it as My illusory energy, that reflection which appears to be in darkness.”

In other words, all the potencies of the Lord are in truth spiritual. The external potency appears to be material just due to the ignorance of the conditioned souls. When this ignorance is removed, one can see the Lord everywhere, even if still technically living in the material world.

The permutation of pradhāna into prakṛti leads to the appearance of the material universes, the final stage of the material creation, which forms a gigantic structure that floats on the waters of the causal ocean, without, however, mixing with it. This collective of all material universes is sometimes compared to a mass of foam, or a plaque of styrofoam floating on top of it.

Inside each material universe, the Lord manifests Himself as Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣnu, creating a cosmic ocean that fills about half of the universe and lies on top of it on the bed of Śeṣa Nāga, accompanied by Lakṣmī Devī. Comfortably situated, He manifests a lotus flower from his navel, from where Brahmā appears. Simultaneously, He expands Himself as Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣnu, and enters into all material elements and in the hearts of all as Paramātmā, powering the whole creation.

A soul who attains liberation crosses over all these coverings, reaching the eternal abode of the Lord, which is far beyond and fully transcendental.

Sūtra 1.3.4 - The jīva also can’t be the abode

(nātac-chabdāt) prāṇa-bhṛc ca

na: not; atac-chabdāt: because there is no word denoting it; prāṇa-bhṛt: the jīva (conditioned soul), or the consciousness of soul inside the subtle body, covered by the vital airs; ca: and.

It is also not the jīva, for the same reason.

Commentary: Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa explains that the words “na” and “atac-chabdāt” from the previous sūtra should also be applied to this one, which is a continuation of the previous argument. Nānumānam atac-chabdāt refuses the thesis of the abode of heaven and earth being pradhāna, and similarly, the current sūtra refuses the idea that it may be the jīva (referred to in the sūtra as prāṇa, in the sense of the conditioned soul covered by the vital airs).

Let’s go back to the original passage of the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad being discussed in this section:

yasmin dyauḥ pṛthivī cāntarikṣam
otam manaḥ saha prāṇaiś ca sarvaiḥ
tam evaikamjānatha ātmāna
anyā vāco vimuñcathāmrṭasyaiṣa setuḥ

Since the word “ātma” is used, one could argue that the abode of heaven and earth is the jīva, but that’s also not the case. Śrī Baladeva argues that the word “ātma” in the context of the verse comes from the verb “atati” (to go), indicating a person who goes everywhere — in the sense of being all-pervading — different from the jīva who is fixed inside the heart and has no freedom to move about. Used in this sense, ātmā must primarily refer to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Because the Lord goes everywhere, He is consistently addressed by words such as sarva-vit (all-knowing), which also can’t be used in relation to the jīva.

When the other words of the verse are carefully examined, it is found that they are also not appropriate to describe the jīva, and thus the whole idea is dismissed. Just as it can’t be pradhāna, because no words in the verse indicate it, it also can’t be the jīva for the same reason.

The jīva can’t be the abode of heaven and earth described in the verse. The jīva is very small and therefore can’t be the abode of anything. On the contrary, the jīva has to be always under some shelter, be it the internal potency of the Lord that composes the spiritual planets, or the external potency, composed of the different material universes.

In his purport to SB 2.2.14, Śrīla Prabhupāda mentions:

“The Supreme Lord is the seer of all worlds, both material and transcendental. In other words, the Supreme Lord is the ultimate beneficiary and enjoyer of all worlds, as confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (BG 5.29). The spiritual world is the manifestation of His internal potency, and the material world is the manifestation of His external potency. The living entities are also His marginal potency, and they can live in either the transcendental or material worlds, as they choose. The material world is not a fit place for living entities because they are spiritually one with the Lord and in the material world the living entities become conditioned by the laws of the material world. The Lord wants all living entities, who are His parts and parcels, to live with Him in the transcendental world, and for enlightening conditioned souls in the material world, all the Vedas and the revealed scriptures are there—expressly to recall the conditioned souls back home, back to Godhead.”

Sūtra 1.3.5 - The One who maintains many

bheda-vyapadeśāc ca

bheda: difference; vyapadeśāt: because of the description; ca: and.

And also because the difference between them is clearly described.

Commentary: The passage from the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad mentions: tam evaikamjānatha (know this one entity). By the syntax, it is clear that the object of knowledge indicated in the verse is not the jīva, because it speaks of a singular entity, which is to be known by the many jīvas.

This idea of a singular entity, who maintains the innumerable jīvas and is the object of knowledge for them, is offered in many other passages, like in the famous verse of the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (6.13):

nityo nityānām cetanaś cetanānām, eko bahūnām yo vidadhāti kāmān

tam ātma-stham ye ’nupaśyanti dhīrās, teṣām śāntiḥ śāśvatī netareṣām

“He is the Eternal among the many eternals, the Conscious among all who are conscious. He is the One who grants the desires of the many. Those who become sober and wise can perceive Him inside their own hearts. Only they can attain everlasting peace. No one else does.”

The Lord is thus described by many qualities that can’t at all be applied to the jīvas, such as being the maintainer of all, the foundation of all, being everywhere, knowing everything, being completely transcendental, etc. While the jīva is described as being very minute, being dependent on the Lord, having imperfect knowledge, being in illusion, etc. Once we accept that there is a being who is more powerful than all the jīvas, it becomes clear that He is the Supreme abode.

The idea of the jīva being the abode of heaven and earth can be sustained (and even then with a substantial amount of word jugglery) only if one believes that the jīvas and the Lord are one and the same, as propounded by Māyāvādis. Vyāsadeva, however, counters this with the words bheda-vyapadeśāc ca: The difference between the jīva and the Supreme Lord is clearly described in the scriptures, and thus the abode must be the Supreme Lord, and not the jīva.

Sūtra 1.3.6 - The context of the passage

prakaraṇāt

prakaraṇāt: because of the context.

It does not refer to the jīva because of the context of the passage.

Commentary: As discussed previously, passages of the scriptures must be understood within the context. So, what is the context for verse 2.2.5 of the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad, which is being discussed?

The opening statement of the passage of which this verse is part is found in the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 1.1.3:

śaunako ha vai mahāśālo ’ngirasam vidhivad upasannaḥ papraccha

kasmin nu bhagavo vijñāte sarvam idam vijñātam bhavatīti

“Śaunaka, the respected householder, approached Angirasa following proper etiquette and inquired: “O, great sage who knows everything! What is the one thing, knowing which everything becomes known?”

This passage speaks of an unifying principle that is the foundation of everything. Once this universal principle becomes known, everything else becomes known. This universal principle is the same abode of heaven and earth, which is discussed later, and the main topic of the whole Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad.

This universal principle is described as fully spiritual (ātmānam), the support of everything, the ultimate goal of life (as indicated by the order to give up other talks and forms of worship), and the giver of liberation (the bridge to immortality). Neither the jīva nor pradhāna can be said to have all these characteristics. It must thus be concluded that the unifying principle is the Supreme Lord. Thus, text 2.2.5 that comes after it must be interpreted in the same context. The only logical conclusion is thus that the abode of heaven, earth, and other things is the Supreme Lord, who is the goal of life and giver of liberation described in all scriptures.

Sūtra 1.3.7 - The analogy of the two birds

sthity-adanābhyām ca

sthity-adanābhyām: instrumental dual form, by the two acts of staying/observing and eating/consuming; ca: and.

And also because of the latter mention that one bird is eating and the other is standing.

Commentary: Later, in verse 3.1.1 of the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad, it is mentioned:

dvā suparṇā sayujā sakhāyā, samānam vṛkṣam pariṣasvajāte
tayor anyaḥ pippalam svādvatti, anaśnan anyo abhicākaśīti

“Two birds of beautiful plumage and close friends reside on the same tree. One of them eats the fruits of the tree, thinking they are sweet. The other bird simply observes.”

If taken out of context, this verse would not be clearly understandable. The verse speaks about two birds, but who are the birds? However, when this verse is taken inside the context of verse 2.2.5 and other verses of the passage, it becomes clear that the verse refers to the soul and paramātmā inside the heart. One of the birds is the jīva, who is busy enjoying the fruits of the material world, while the other bird is the Lord, who, although also seated inside the heart, just observes.

Once we understand that the soul is different from and subordinate to the Lord, it becomes clear that the abode described in verse 2.2.5 is the Lord.

As in other topics of the Vedānta-sūtra, we can see that the correct understanding of the verses becomes clear only when they are appropriately examined within the context. One who rushes into using isolated quotes stripped of context to support random ideas will end up with wrong conclusions. In fact, even when one is careful to study the context, he may still be easily misguided if not following the conclusions received through the paramparā.

This analogy of the two birds in the tree is mentioned in several of the Upaniṣads, and also explained by Śrīla Prabhupāda in his purport to Bg 2.22. In this passage, he also further elaborates on the analogy:

“The jīva soul is struggling very hard on the tree of the material body, but as soon as he agrees to accept the other bird as the supreme spiritual master—as Arjuna agreed to do by voluntary surrender unto Kṛṣṇa for instruction—the subordinate bird immediately becomes free from all lamentations. Both the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad (3.1.2) and Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (4.7) confirm this:

samāne vṛkṣe puruṣo nimagno, ‘nīśayā śocati muhyamānaḥ
juṣṭam yadā paśyaty anyam īśam, asya mahimānam iti vīta-śokaḥ

“Although the two birds are in the same tree, the eating bird is fully engrossed with anxiety and moroseness as the enjoyer of the fruits of the tree. But if in some way or other, he turns his face to his friend who is the Lord and knows His glories—at once the suffering bird becomes free from all anxieties.” Arjuna has now turned his face towards his eternal friend, Kṛṣṇa, and is understanding the Bhagavad-gītā from Him. And thus, hearing from Kṛṣṇa, he can understand the supreme glories of the Lord and be free from lamentation.”

Exercise

Now it’s your turn. Can you answer the following arguments using the ideas from this section?

Opponent: “As seekers of philosophical truth, we must examine the verses of the Upaniṣads with careful attention. The Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad (2.2.5) mentions, yasmin dyauḥ pṛthivī cāntarikṣam, otam manaḥ saha prāṇaiś ca sarvaiḥ, tam evaikamjānatha ātmānam, anyā vāco vimuñcathāmrṭasyaiṣa setuḥ: “Know that one in whom heaven, earth, sky, the mind, and the vital breaths are all woven. Know him alone as the Self. Abandon all other speech. This is the bridge to immortality.”

Hearing such a beautiful verse, the question naturally arises: Who is this Self, or ātmā, who is the support of all? Vaiṣnavas jump into the assumption that it is the Personality of Godhead, but a more careful examination of the passage reveals that it is not the case. A more sound conclusion would be that the abode of heaven and earth is the jīva, who is the knower and the enjoyer of the world. The jīva is the possessor of both prāna and manas (mind), which are explicitly mentioned in the verse. The jīva is also sarva-gata (all-pervading) in the sense that it moves from one body to another and gradually experiences everything that exists. Attributing the “bridge to immortality” to the jīva is also philosophically sound, since ātma-jñāna (self-realization) means to know oneself, and this knowledge of the self as transcendental makes liberation possible.

However, this interpretation is also ultimately flawed. After careful deliberation, we must conclude that the abode described in the passage is neither Viṣnu nor the jīva, but pradhāna. The word “ātmā” in the Upaniṣads is well-known to carry multiple meanings, such as body, mind, Self, or prakṛti. In this particular passage, the term points to pradhāna, the unmanifest. Let’s examine the arguments that support this conclusion.

The verse declares that all things, heaven, earth, sky, mind, and breath are woven into this reality, which is the cause and support of them all. This clearly points to pradhāna, which is precisely such a cause. Pradhāna is the undifferentiated source from which all matter and its subsequent transformations sprout. This fits perfectly with the description of the foundation and support for everything that exists. The phrase amṛtasya eṣa setuḥ (this is the bridge to immortality) also perfectly fits pradhāna, who serves as karma-kṣetra (the field of action) for the jīvas, allowing them to gradually attain transcendence, just like a mother nourishing a child. In this way, pradhāna sustains the world and provides, by enjoyment and later detachment, the means for the attainment of liberation.

Vaiṣnavas insist on interpreting each and every passage from the Upaniṣads as referring to their personal God, but they do so not out of grammatical or contextual necessity, but from sentimentality, without a clear philosophical basis. We, however, prefer to remain grounded in contextual study and philosophical consistency.”

Description: The opponent is a proponent of the atheistic Sānkiya, trying to impose the conclusion of pradhāna being the ultimate cause. In their philosophy, there is no God; pradhāna itself is the cause of the universe, and the jīvas enjoy it. The argumentation may appear logical at first, but it doesn’t properly follow the conclusions of the scriptures, and can thus be contracted in many different ways once the proper meaning of the verses is revealed.

Do you agree with the points made by the opponent? If not, give your arguments.

You can also donate using Buy Me a Coffee, PayPal, Wise, Revolut, or bank transfers. There is a separate page with all the links. This helps me enormously to have time to write instead of doing other things to make a living. Thanks!

« Vedānta-sūtra: The Govinda-bhāṣya of Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa