The final conclusion on the “fall” of the Jīva
“Forgot” or “lost” is a temporary, solvable status. If something is lost, it just needs to be found. To become free, we need to remember what we once forgot.
« The ‘Fall’ of the Jīva, as Explained by Śrīla Prabhupāda
The final conclusion on the “fall” of the Jīva
We come then to the conclusion of the passage, described by the Supersoul in the next five verses:
“Actually, you are not the daughter of Vidarbha, nor is this man, Malayadhvaja, your well-wishing husband. Nor were you the actual husband of Purañjanī. You were simply captivated in this body of nine gates.” (SB 4.28.60)
Just as our relationship with the body is illusory and temporary, our relationships with friends, relatives, and well-wishers are also illusory and impermanent. As Prabhupāda explains: “As water passes down a river, many straws and grasses are carried from the shore. These straws and grasses come together in the river’s current, but when the waves toss this way and that, they are separated and carried somewhere else. Similarly, the innumerable living entities within this material world are being carried by the waves of material nature. Sometimes the waves bring them together, and they form friendships and relate to one another on a bodily basis of family, community or nationality. Eventually they are thrown out of association by the waves of material nature. This process has been going on since the creation of material nature.”
If these relationships are centered in Kṛṣṇa, they can help us to remember our original spiritual nature, but if the relationships are purely material, the friends and relatives become an obstacle to our spiritual development, because they will always try to drag us down to the material illusion they are so attached to. It is in this sense that Prabhupāda declares: “One’s so-called husband, relative, son, father or whatever cannot actually be a well-wisher. The only actual well-wisher is Kṛṣṇa Himself.”
Accepting that we are not the body, and that all relationships connected with the body are temporary and ultimately illusory, the next question is: what am I, factually? Could it be that I’m not the body, but still, somehow, a product of this material world? Some imply this by concluding that the soul was never outside the material creation. However, the Lord removes this doubt in the next two verses:
“Sometimes you think yourself a man, sometimes a chaste woman and sometimes a neutral eunuch. This is all because of the body, which is created by the illusory energy. This illusory energy is My potency, and actually both of us — you and I — are pure spiritual identities. Now just try to understand this. I am trying to explain our factual position.
My dear friend, I, the Supersoul, and you, the individual soul, are not different in quality, for we are both spiritual. In fact, My dear friend, you are qualitatively not different from Me in your constitutional position. Just try to consider this subject. Those who are actually advanced scholars, who are in knowledge, do not find any qualitative difference between you and Me.” (SB 4.28.61-62)
Māyāvādis misunderstand the relationship of the Lord and the soul, concluding that they are one in all aspects. However, all Vaiṣnava ācāryas agree that although we share the same spiritual nature of the Lord, we are separate individuals. Because we are very small, we can be easily captured by the material energy, which is so expansive, but the unlimited Lord remains always in His transcendental position and can thus save us. This is explained in the Upaniṣads with the example of the two birds on the tree.
This difference is explained by Prabhupāda in his purport to text 61:
“The factual position of both the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the living entity is qualitatively one. The Supreme Lord is the Supreme Spirit, the Supersoul, and the living entity is the individual spiritual soul. Even though both of them are original spiritual identities, the living entity forgets his identity when he comes in contact with material nature and becomes conditioned. At such a time he identifies himself as a product of the material nature. Because of the material body, he forgets that he is the eternal (sanātana) part and parcel of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.”
Again, we see the word “forgets” is used. This is a very important point to understand this complicated topic. “Forgot” or “lost” is a temporary, solvable status. When we forget something, we just need to remember. If something is lost, it just needs to be found. It is very different from the idea of something never existing or having to be established, which contradicts the idea of eternity, and the conclusion of Mahāprabhu quoted previously.
This is very didactically explained by Prabhupāda in the rest of his purport:
“This is confirmed in this way: mamaivāmśo jīva-loke jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ. The word sanātana is found in several places in Bhagavad-gītā. Both the Lord and the living entity are sanātana (eternal), and there is also a place known as sanātana, beyond this material nature. The real residence of both the living entity and God is the domain of sanātana, not this material world. The material world is the temporary, external energy of the Lord, and the living entity is placed in this material world because he wanted to imitate the position of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In this material world he tries to enjoy his senses to his best capacity. All the activities of the conditioned soul within this material world are perpetually taking place in different types of bodies, but when the living entity acquires developed consciousness, he should try to rectify his situation and again become a member of the spiritual world. The process by which one can return home, back to Godhead, is bhakti-yoga, sometimes called sanātana-dharma. Instead of accepting a temporary occupational duty based on the material body, one should take to the process of sanātana-dharma, or bhakti-yoga, so that he can put an end to this perpetual bondage in material bodies and return home, back to Godhead. As long as human society works on the basis of false material identification, all the so-called advancements of science and philosophy are simply useless. They only serve to mislead human society. Andhā yathāndhair upanīyamānāḥ: in the material world, the blind simply lead the blind.”
With this, we go to the next verse:
“As a person sees the reflection of his body in a mirror to be one with himself and not different, whereas others actually see two bodies, so in our material condition, in which the living being is affected and yet not affected, there is a difference between God and the living entity.” (SB 4.28.63)
This verse describes the simultaneous oneness and difference of the soul and the Lord. The Lord is very big, and the soul is very small, and the soul has a tendency to fall into illusion, while the Lord is always transcendental. Māyāvādis, however, fail to understand this point.
This verse also invokes the same idea of reflection that is offered by Lord Kapila in the Third Canto to explain the presence of the transcendental soul inside the material world, explaining the simultaneous sameness and difference of the Supreme Lord and the conditioned soul.
As Prabhupāda explains: “Although he and the Supreme Personality of Godhead are one in quality, the living entity is prone to forget his spiritual identity, whereas the Supreme Personality never forgets. This is the difference between lipta and alipta. The Supreme Personality of Godhead is eternally alipta, uncontaminated by the external energy. The conditioned soul, however, being in contact with material nature, forgets his real identity; therefore when he sees himself in the conditioned state, he identifies himself with the body.”
The previous verse already defined that the soul and the Lord are non-different in terms of quality. Both share the same spiritual nature. However, when we consider our current state, it doesn’t look at all like we may be qualitatively one with the Lord. The Lord is pure and transcendental, while we live under the influence of the three material modes. The Lord is perfect, while we struggle with the four material imperfections, and so on. How can this be explained?
In the Third Canto, Lord Kapila used the example of the light of the sun entering a dark room through a small orifice on the wall, being reflected in the water on a pot, and from there being reflected again on the walls, thus illuminating the whole room.
This example explains how both the Lord and the soul manifest in the material world. In the case of the Lord, the original sun is Mahā-Viṣṇu, who simultaneously enters each and every material universe as Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu (who is compared to the reflection on the water), and then as Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, who permeates the whole universe, just as the light reflected on the walls. Lord Kapila explains that the Lord manifests as Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu and Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣṇu as a form of reflection, since He doesn’t directly enter into contact with the material energy.
In the case of the soul, the water in the pot is the false ego, and the walls are the senses and other parts of the body. The consciousness of the soul is thus reflected first in the false ego, and from there illuminates all parts of the body with consciousness. In this verse, this same example is invoked to explain the conditioned status of the soul.
When we see ourselves reflected in a mirror, the reflection will include any imperfections present in the mirror. If the mirror is blue, our reflection will appear blue; if the mirror is cracked, our reflection will appear deformed, and so on. Our conditioned identity is thus just like the reflection on the cracked mirror, containing many imperfections. However, under the spell of illusion, we identify with this imperfect reflection, forgetting who we truly are.
This point of the soul identifying with the imperfect material identity, the reflection on matter, corresponds to the first part of the verse, “As a person sees the reflection of his body in a mirror to be one with himself and not different”.
In this way, the person in front of the mirror (the conditioned soul) may identify with the reflection and forget his real self, but another person seeing from the outside will see two distinct entities: the real person and the reflection, and will have no problem in distinguishing between the two. Similarly, a self-realized soul can clearly see that the pure soul is different from the imperfect material identity, and he thus tries to bring one back to sanity. That’s what the verse explains by “whereas others actually see two bodies”.
The verse then continues, explaining that “in our material condition, in which the living being is affected and yet not affected, there is a difference between God and the living entity.”
Although in one sense we are affected by the imperfections in the mirror, these effects are limited to the reflection; they don’t affect our real self. Similarly, although the conditioned identity may exhibit so many imperfections, they don’t affect the soul, which remains transcendental.
When we compare two persons, we see that although separate individuals, they share the same nature. However, if we put the first person in front of a mirror, and we compare the reflection in the mirror with the second person, certainly, the reflection is of a very different nature. Now we are not comparing two persons, but a real person and a two-dimensional reflection. Similarly, the current conditioned nature of the soul is very different from the real, pure, transcendental soul. When we compare this conditioned reflection with the Lord, they indeed appear to be very different. However, when we compare the Lord and the original soul, who continues to exist simultaneously with the reflection, we suddenly realize they share the same nature.
As Prabhupāda explains, our original spiritual nature continues to exist even now. The problem is that now we are identifying with our conditioned nature, and not with our eternal, Kṛṣṇa-conscious self. We are just like a person in front of the mirror, thinking we are the reflection, instead of our real self. The point is thus to bring our consciousness out of the conditioned reflection, understanding we are not the body, mind, intelligence, or even the material ego, but an eternal servant of the Lord.
How can we return to our transcendental position?
“In this way both swans live together in the heart. When the one swan is instructed by the other, he is situated in his constitutional position. This means he regains his original Kṛṣṇa Consciousness, which was lost because of his material attraction.” (SB 4.28.64)
We need to abandon our arrogant attitude and accept the guidance of the Lord, who speaks to us from within as Paramātmā, and from without as the spiritual master. The verse describes the soul returning to his transcendental position by the words “naṣṭām āpa punaḥ smṛtim” (again gaining one’s real understanding, which was lost), which Prabhupāda translates as “he regains his original Kṛṣṇa Consciousness, which was lost because of his material attraction.”
Nārada thus concludes his teachings to Prācīnabarhi. Although spoken as an allegory, all the points in the narration are truthful, and are spoken for the elevation of both the king and us, students of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:
“My dear King Prācīnabarhi, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the cause of all causes, is celebrated to be known indirectly. Thus I have described the story of Purañjana to you. Actually it is an instruction for self-realization.” (SB 4.28.65)
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!