3.2: Bhūmādhikaraṇam - Bhūmā, the infinite

“Bhūmā refers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, because the passage mentions that Bhūmā is superior to the jīva, who is dependent on the Lord’s mercy, and also because the qualities mentioned

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

Topic 2: Bhūmādhikaraṇam - Bhūmā, the infinite

The passage from the Chāndogya Upaniṣad also speaks about the Lord.

bhūmā samprasādād adhyupadeśāt, dharmopapatteś ca

“Bhūmā refers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, because the passage mentions that Bhūmā is superior to the jīva, who is dependent on the Lord’s mercy, and also because the qualities mentioned in the passage can only be appropriately attributed to the Lord.”

Sūtra 1.3.8 - Bhūmā in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad refers to the Lord

bhūmā samprasādād adhyupadeśāt

bhūmā: the term Bhūmā (the Infinite); samprasādāt: the jīva, who is the object of the Lord’s mercy; adhi: greater; upadeśāt: because of the teaching.

Bhūmā refers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, because the passage mentions that Bhūmā is superior to the jīva, who is dependent on the Lord’s mercy.

Commentary: This sūtra is connected with a passage from the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, which is part of the conversation between Sanat-kumāra and Nārada Muni. The context of this passage is that Sanat-kumāra describes meditation on a series of objects, one progressively higher than the previous, conducting one to the Supreme Absolute Truth, described as Bhūmā, the Infinite.

The first object of meditation is nāma (names), which refers to the names and forms of material objects, described in many branches of material knowledge included in the scriptures. All of this should be meditated upon as Brahman, just as in the process of meditation in the universal form.

Higher than nāma is vāk (speech), because speech is the means for the transmission of knowledge. The next level of meditation is thus to see speech and knowledge as Brahman. After this is reached, the next stage of meditation is manas (mind), because the mind is the center of all perception for the conditioned soul, and thus, without the mind, both nāma and vāk are meaningless. For a conditioned soul, the mind is thus the sole means of perception for the entire world, and the next stage of meditation is reached when one sees the workings of the mind as Brahman.

The next stage of meditation is sankalpa (will, or resolve), which is the force that allows us to regulate the workings of the mind. Sankalpa is a conscious decision to do or achieve something that can override the unstable nature of the mind. Sanat-kumāra reveals that the whole material creation comes from sankalpa, indicating the existence of a conscious creator behind everything, who creates out of His own will. As in the other stages, sankalpa should be meditated upon as Brahman.

The next stage is citta (deliberation), which is a function of the intelligence, described as higher than sankalpa and the cause of all the previous stages. Without citta, there is no true knowledge, what to say of spiritual realization. When one has citta, he is considered a learned person, and others want to hear from him. One who successfully meditates on citta as Brahman becomes powerful all over the material creation.

Dhyāna (meditation) is even higher than citta, because it can directly elevate our consciousness. Sanat-kumāra describes that all important demigods and other material deities meditate, indicating the existence of a higher level of existence they desire to attain. All great persons have similar qualities to these deities, exhibiting sattvic qualities, such as silence and introspection, while others, who are in an inferior state, are abusive and quarrelsome, being affected by the lower modes.

What is still higher than meditation? Vijñāna (realized knowledge) is still greater. Superficial knowledge of the scriptures (where one just learns words without understanding their real meaning) is in the lowest stage (nāma), a form of mundane knowledge. Vijñāna, on the other hand, is the proper realization of the śāstras. Dhyāna is the process of elevation of one’s consciousness, and vijñāna is when this higher stage is finally reached. When one attains vijñāna, he properly understands the scriptures.

Still higher, however, is bala (strength), or the power to act and serve. A spiritual seeker who is practically engaged in devotional service overpowers a hundred who have knowledge but are not engaged. This attitude of service leads one to approach self-realized souls and obtain transcendental knowledge from them. This spiritual strength is the force that maintains the whole creation. One should meditate on this bala as Brahman.

Anna (food) is still higher, because food (as prasāda) is the direct mercy of the Lord that nourishes all living beings and creates the conditions for them to be engaged in spiritual activities and gradually progress in spiritual consciousness.

Food is produced from water (in the form of rain), water from fire (rain is produced from sacrifices), and ether is still greater, because ether is the source of all material elements and the whole material creation. We may think of the material creation in a negative light because it entraps us, but this happens due to our own propensity to enjoy it. The material creation serves the purpose of giving an opportunity of deliverance for the conditioned souls, and both the Lord and pure devotees are free to enter and leave it as they please.

Smara (memory) is even greater, because memory allows us to remember the Lord. Still higher is āśā (right aspiration), which is the cause of all beneficial activities. In its highest form, āśā manifests as the desire to serve the Lord. In this sense, āsa is also described as mumukṣutva, the yearning for spiritual realization that starts at the stage of liberation, as described in Bg 18.54. This āśā or high aspiration is in itself a manifestation of the Lord, and when one worships it as such, one attains the fulfillment of this desire for spiritual perfection.

In this way, the verses of the passage from the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, going from 7.1.1 to 7.14.2, describe this succession going from nāma, all the way to āśā. Higher than āśā is the soul (described in the verses as prāna), and higher than the soul is the Lord Himself, described as Bhūmā, the infinite.

Bhūmā is thus the ultimate object of meditation described in the passage, and His identity must be properly understood; otherwise, one misunderstands the whole text.

bhūmā tv eva vijijñāsitavya iti bhūmānam bhagavo vijijñāsa iti
yatra nānyat paśyati nānyac chṛṇoti nānyad vijānāti sa bhūmā
atha yatrānyat paśyaty anyac chṛṇoty anyad vijānāti tad alpam

“Sanat-kumāra said: ‘You should inquire about Bhūmā.’ Nārada answered: ‘Teach me about Bhūmā, O saintly one!’ The great sage then said: “Bhūmā, the Infinite, is where one sees nothing else, hears nothing else, and knows nothing else. Conversely, where one sees something else, hears something else, or knows something else, that you should know to be finite (alpa).” (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7.23.1-24.1)

In ordinary Sanskrit usage, bhūmā can be translated as “much” or “many”, as well as “plentiful”. However, in the verse it is used in the sense of an all-pervasive, or very large form, contrasted with the word “alpa” (”small” or “finite”). Therefore, the passage speaks about an entity that is extraordinarily large and is different in nature from material objects, which are finite. Who is he?

One could argue that bhūmā must refer to the jīva, who is accompanied by prāna, the life air. This appears to be supported by text 7.15.1 of the same passage from the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, where it is mentioned that:

prāṇo vāva āśāyā bhūyān, yathā vā arā nābhau samarpitāḥ, evam asmin prāṇe sarvam samarpitam, prāṇaḥ prāṇena yāti, prāṇaḥ prāṇam dadāti prāṇāya dadāti, prāṇo ha pitā, prāṇo mātā, prāṇo bhrātā, prāṇaḥ svasā, prāṇa ācāryaḥ, prāṇo brāhmaṇaḥ

“Prāna is even greater than āśā (right aspiration). Just as the spokes of a wheel are fixed in the hub, so is everything fixed in this prāṇa. Prāṇa moves by the actions of prāṇa; prāṇa gives to prāṇa, and receives from prāṇa. Prāṇa is the father, prāṇa the mother, prāṇa the brother, prāṇa is the sister, prāṇa the teacher, and prāṇa is the knower of Brahman.”

The word prāna in this verse indicates the jīva, inhabiting the material body, surrounded by prāna. The jīva is defined as prāna in many passages from the Upaniṣads because prāna (being material) is the only visible part. No one can see the soul inside the heart, but one with a refined material vision may be able to see prāna. Similarly, when the soul departs from the body, one can see only prāna leaving the body and moving to another body, just as we may see a plane flying in the sky, but not the passengers inside it. We thus say “Here goes a plane!” even though the important part is not the plane but the people inside. Prāna (the jīva) is defined as higher than āśā (right aspiration), which ultimately awakens the yearning for spiritual realization that brings one to the devotional service of the Lord. Āśā is thus higher than the other factors previously described, such as memory, strength, etc.

We can see that the jīva is indicated in text 7.15.1 – in the middle of the passage – as the object of meditation, higher than the other objects of meditation previously mentioned. One could then add that the word “ātmā”, which can be interpreted as another word for jīva, appears in both the beginning and the end of the passage.

In text 7.1.3, it’s mentioned: tarati śokam ātmavit (the knower of ātmā surpasses lamentation), and in text 7.26.1, we find the passage ātmanaḥ evedam sarvam (the ātmā is everything).

If the word ātmā is interpreted as meaning the jīva, then one could conclude that the passage about bhūmā in the middle must also refer to the jīva, who is accompanied by prāna, the life air.

Vyāsadeva presents the right interpretation: While this interpretation of Bhūmā as the jīva has a certain logic, it is rejected by Śrīla Vyāsadeva, who concludes: bhūmā samprasādād adhyupadeśāt. Bhūmā refers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead and not the jīva because this passage mentions that Bhūmā is superior to the jīva, who is dependent on the Lord’s mercy.

As in the previous passages, the incorrect interpretation is based on taking certain aspects of the text while ignoring others. In verse 7.23.1 of the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, the line immediately before the central passage states:

yo vai bhūmā tat sukham, nālpe sukham asti, bhūmā eva sukham

“He who is Bhūmā (the infinite) is bliss. No happiness is found in what is limited. That infinite, that Bhūmā, He alone is bliss.”

In this way, Bhūmā is defined as bliss and as superior to all. A few verses later, on the same Upaniṣad, it is stated (8.3.4):

atha ya eṣa samprasādo ’smāc charīrāt samutthāya param jyotir upasampadya svena rūpeṇābhiniṣpadyate, eṣa ātmeti hovacaitad amṛtam abhayam etad brahmeti, tasya ha vā etasya brahmaṇo nāma satyam iti

“This jīva who has attained the mercy of the Lord rises above the gross material body and attains the effulgent spiritual sky. There, one manifests his original form and meets the Lord, who is immortal and without fear. This is Brahman, who is called Satya, the Absolute Truth.”

In this way, it’s established that not only Bhūmā and the jīva are two different entities, but that Bhūmā has an eternal form full of bliss, and is superior to the jīva, who is dependent on His mercy and has prāna as a companion. The Lord is called Bhūmā (infinite), Brahman, and Satya (the Absolute Truth), while the jīva is called samprasādo, the object of His mercy. In this way, the interpretation that Bhūmā and the jīva are the same can’t be sustained.

Yet another argument: One more way to establish that Bhūmā is not the jīva is to follow the passage of the Chāndogya Upaniṣad starting from the mention of prāna in text 7.15.4:

prāṇo hyevaitāni sarvāṇi bhavati, sa vā eṣa paśyan evam manvāna evam vijānan ativādī bhavati, tam cet brūyuḥ ativādyasīti, ativādy asmīti brūyāt; nāpahnuvīta

“Indeed, all of this is prāna (the jīva). Whoever perceives, understands, and realizes this truth becomes an ativādī, a knower of things. If someone says to him, ‘You are an ativādī.’ He should agree, and not try to hide it.”

When the verse mentions “all of this”, it includes all the other components mentioned previously in the passage, such as right aspiration (āśā), memory, etc., which are parts of the conditioned self. The soul is more important than the material body, material elements, etc. The soul is the topic we should enquire about, and the soul is different from Bhūmā, who is introduced later in the sequence.

An interesting detail is that when the verse speaks about prāna, this includes both the soul proper and the subtle body and vital airs. That’s how the word “jīva” is used in many passages of the Upaniṣads. Knowledge of the jīva starts from knowledge about the vital airs and the subtle body, and is concluded with knowledge about one’s eternal position as an eternal servant of the Lord.

The passage goes further: At this point, hearing that the knower of prāna is considered a knower of things, Nārada Muni, playing the role of the student, assumes that prāna is the highest object of meditation and asks no further questions. However, Sanat-kumāra, playing the role of the guru, continues the explanation, giving the final conclusion of the sequence in the following verse:

eṣa tu vā ativadati, yaḥ satyenātivadati, so ’ham bhagavaḥ satyenātivadānīti, satyam tv eva vijijñāsitavyam iti, satyam bhagavo vijijñāsa iti

“However, He who knows Satya, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is the true knower of things (ativadati).
‘My lord, I will transcend mundane knowledge and become truly wise with knowledge of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.’
‘You should meditate on the Lord; this will bring you direct realization of Him. This is the highest goal.’
‘My dear master, I will meditate on this highest truth’” (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7.16.1)

This verse first concludes the discussion on prāna by the use of the word “tu”, and then proceeds to explain that the greatest object in meditation is, in actuality, not the soul, but Satya, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, stating that the knower of Satya is the greatest ativādī, the true knower of things. To this, Nārada replies: ‘ham bhagavaḥ satyenātivadāni, “My lord, I will become an ativādī wise with knowledge of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.”

The highest object of meditation: In the next verses, from 7.17.1 to 7.22.1, Sanat-kumāra describes, in the inverse order, the sequence that leads to this realization of the Lord, including fixed meditation, firm faith, steadiness, determined effort, control of the mind, and knowledge of the blissful nature of the Lord. In other words, one first obtains knowledge about the Lord, and through this spiritual knowledge, one controls the mind, and with this mental stability, one becomes determined in one’s spiritual practice, attaining steadiness, firm faith, and fixed meditation, culminating in factual realization of the Lord.

This brings us to the passage about Bhūmā, which is the focal point of the discussion: “You should inquire about Bhūmā.”

The two verses about Bhūmā (7.23.1 and 7.24.1), which are being discussed in this sūtra, appear thus in this context of the Supreme Lord being the highest object of meditation. The Lord appears thus on both ends of the sequence, being the object of the knowledge that becomes the foundation of one’s spiritual practice, and also the final goal of the practice itself.

When the verses of this passage of the Chāndogya Upaniṣad are studied in context, it becomes clear that Bhūmā is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He is distinct and superior to the jīva, has a form full of spiritual bliss, and knowledge about Him is the highest teaching.

A last-ditch argument: As a last resort, our defeated opponent could hold to the idea that the word “ātmā” mentioned in verses 7.1.3, 7.26.1, and others refers to the jīva, or individual soul, which would make the translations of these two verses sound like “the knower of the soul surpasses lamentation” and “the soul is everything”. With this, he could try to somehow sustain that the word Bhūmā in the passage refers to the jīva who has prāna as his companion. However, this interpretation is not correct.

The primary meaning of the word ātmā is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, or Brahman. Attributing it to the individual soul in these passages not only contradicts many other passages of the scriptures, but the Chāndogya Upaniṣad itself, which mentions ātmanaḥ prāṇaḥ, “Prāṇa is manifested from the ātmā” (7.26.1) and yatra nānyat paśyati nānyac chṛṇoti nānyad vijānāti sa bhūmā, “When one attains Him one sees nothing else, hears nothing else, and knows nothing else. That is Bhūmā.” (7.24.1)

This understanding is further confirmed later in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (8.3.4), which we also previously discussed: “This jīva who has attained the mercy of the Lord rises above the gross material body and attains the effulgent spiritual sky. There, one manifests his original form and meets the Lord, who is immortal and without fear. This is Brahman, who is called Satya, the Absolute Truth.”

Sūtra 1.3.9 - Qualities that can be applied only to the Lord

dharmopapatteś ca

dharma: qualities; upapatteḥ: because of being appropriate; ca: and.

And also because the qualities mentioned in the passage can only be appropriately attributed to the Lord.

Commentary: To reinforce the evidence that Bhūmā is the Lord, Śrīla Vyāsadeva argues that the qualities described in the text can be appropriately attributed only to the Lord, and not to anyone else. For example, text 7.24.1 in the passage mentions:

yo vai bhūmā tad amṛtam

“Indeed, Bhūmā is the eternal.”

sa bhagavaḥ kasmin pratiṣṭhita iti, sve mahimni

“Narada asked: In what is this Supreme Lord established? In His own greatness, answered the sage.”

This is the complete verse:

yatra nānyat paśyati, nānyacchṛṇoti, nānyat vijānāti, sa bhūmā, atha yatrānyat paśyati, anyacchṛṇoti, anyat vijānāti, tad alpam, yo vai bhūmā, tad amṛtam, atha yad alpam, tan martyam, sa bhagavaḥ kasmin pratiṣṭhita iti, sve mahimni, yadi vā na mahimnīti

“The great sage then said: “Bhūmā, the Infinite, is where one sees nothing else, hears nothing else, and knows nothing else. Conversely, where one sees something else, hears something else, or knows something else, that you should know to be finite (alpa). Indeed, Bhūmā is the eternal (amṛta), but what is limited (alpa) is perishable.

Nārada asked: ‘O revered one, in what is this Supreme Lord established?’

‘He is established in His own greatness, but at the same time not in His greatness, for He is inconceivable and Supremely independent.’” (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7.24.1)

In this way, Bhūmā is described as being eternal, not depending on anyone (in other words, being the cause of all causes), being the shelter of everyone, and being supremely glorious. These are qualities that can’t be attributed to anyone else apart from the Supreme Personality of Godhead, since prāna is not eternal, the soul is not independent, and even the greatest demigods are not the shelter of everyone.

This is confirmed in the following verses in the passage:

sa evādhastāt, sa upariṣṭāt, sa paścāt, sa purastāt, sa dakṣiṇataḥ, sa uttarataḥ, sa evedam sarvam iti, athāto ’hankārādeśa eva aham evādhastāt, aham upariṣṭāt, aham paścāt, aham purastāt, aham dakṣiṇataḥ, aham uttarataḥ, aham evedam sarvam iti

“Bhūmā, the Supreme Lord, the infinite, is above, below, behind, and in front. He is in the south. He is in the north. He is everything.

Understanding that the Lord is his very self, one should meditate on the Lord in the heart: ‘I am below. I am above. I am behind. I am in front. I am in the south. I am in the north. I am everything.’” (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7.25.1)

tasya ha vā etasyaivam paśyata evam manvānasyaivam vijānata ātmataḥ prāṇa ātmata āśātmataḥ smara ātmata ākaśa ātmatas teja ātmata āpa ātmata āvirbhāva-tirobhāvāv ātmato ’nnam ātmato balam ātmato vijñānam ātmato dhyānam ātmataś cittam ātmataḥ sankalpa ātmato mana ātmato vāg ātmato nāmātmato mantra ātmataḥ karmāṇy ātmata evedam sarvam iti

“One who sees, contemplates, and realizes this truth can see that from the Supreme Self comes prāna, āśā, smara, ether, fire, water, manifestation and dissolution, anna, bala, vijñāna, dhyāna, citta, sankalpa, mana, vāk, nāma, as well as mantras and activities. He can see that all of this comes from the Lord.” (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7.26.1)

If we go to the Purāṇas, additional evidence can be found. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.89.57, for example, which is part of the description of the pastime of Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna meeting Lord Mahā-Viṣnu in the causal ocean, it’s mentioned:

vavanda ātmānam anantam acyuto
jiṣṇuś ca tad-darśana-jāta-sādhvasaḥ
tāv āha bhūmā parameṣṭhinām prabhur
beddhāñjalī sa-smitam ūrjayā girā

“Lord Kṛṣṇa offered homage to Himself in this boundless form, and Arjuna, astonished at the sight of Lord Mahā-Viṣṇu, bowed down as well. Then, as the two of them stood before Him with joined palms, the almighty Mahā-Viṣṇu, supreme master of all rulers of the universe, smiled and spoke to them in a voice full of solemn authority.”

In this verse, the word “bhūmā” is indisputably used to refer to the Lord in His form as Mahā-Vishnu.

There are many names mentioned in the scriptures that describe the Lord indirectly, such as Ātmā (the Supreme Self), Caitanya (the living force), Jagadīśa (the controller of everyone), Vibhu (full of opulence), Brahman (the supreme spirit), and so on. Bhūmā is also one of these names. Māyāvādis are usually more attracted to these names because they don’t directly contradict their monistic philosophy. With a certain amount of word jugglery, they can even be interpreted as referring to the individual soul, as we can observe in many of the arguments raised in this section. However, when the direct meaning of the verses of the Vedānta-sūtra is revealed, it becomes clear that Vyāsadeva himself goes against this doctrine by showing how even these indirect names actually refer to the Lord in His personal form. This understanding is actually very essential for understanding the scriptures, since if the verses of the Upaniṣads are interpreted following these wrong definitions, the true meaning is lost.

Exercise

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

Opponent: In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (7.15.1), it is said: prāṇo vā āśāyā bhūyān, “prāṇa is superior to hope.” From this statement onward, prāṇa (life-breath) is the subject under discussion. Since immediately after this the word Bhūmā (the fullness) is introduced (bhūmaiva vijijñāsitavyaḥ), without any question and answer in between, the conclusion is that bhūmā is identical with prāṇa. Furthermore, this prāṇa is not merely the life-breath, but the jīva soul accompanied by prāṇa. The section begins with a reference to the jīva, tarati śokam ātmavit: “he who knows the self surpasses lamentation” (7.1.3), and it ends with a reference to the jīva in the passage ātmanā evedam sarvam, “all this is the self” (7.26.1). In this way, the bhūmā mentioned in the middle must also refer to the jīva.

When the Upaniṣad says (7.24.1): yatra nānyat paśyati, nānyac chṛṇoti, nānyad vijānāti, sa bhūmā, “When one sees nothing else, hears nothing else, knows nothing else, that is Bhūmā”; the meaning is that when the jīva, in the state of deep sleep, has his senses withdrawn into prāṇa, then he perceives nothing outside or inside. That state is called bhūmā.

Similarly, when the Upaniṣad says (7.23.1): yo vai bhūmā tat sukham, “The bhūmā is bliss”; this need not refer to the Supreme Lord, but may refer to the jīva, for the śruti itself says: tasyām sukham aham asvapsam, “In that state I slept happily.” Thus, the happiness of deep sleep belongs to the jīva.

Therefore, we conclude that in this passage, the word bhūmā does not refer to Viṣṇu, but to the jīva. The soul, as Brahman, should be inquired about, just as declared in the first sūtra of the Vedānta-sūtra (athāto brahma-jijñāsā). There is no basis for trying to sustain that it refers to Lord Viṣnu.

Description: A follower of Śankarācārya (Advaita Vedānta) would agree with our basic proposition that Bhūma is Brahman, and just reject the personal aspects, while a Sānkhya-vādin would try to interpret it as being pradhāna, the unmanifest material cause. This particular view of Bhūma as the jīva accompanied by prāna is characteristic of the Pūrva-Mīmāṃsā school.

Originally, the Mīmāṃsakas were primarily focused on karma-kāṇḍa, the ritual portion of the Vedas, establishing the eternality of Vedic injunctions and believing in Vedic ritual as the highest duty. Jaimini established this philosophy for common men, who are incapable of understanding anything higher than mere fruitive activity. By following this path, they would at least follow the rules and regulations.

Later, however, as other philosophical schools raised challenges, some branches of Mīmāṃsā extended into the philosophical study of the Upaniṣads. Because they don’t accept a supreme personal Lord, they tend to read terms like ātmā and bhūmā as referring to the jīva or to prāna, rather than to the Lord. We can see that in this exercise, the pūrvapakṣa identifies Bhūma with the jīva and then tries to explain the bliss attributed to Bhūma as the happiness one feels while in deep sleep (a rather creative interpretation).

Do you agree with this interpretation? Is Bhūma the Lord or the jīva? 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