Srimad Bhagavatam and the Fall of the Jiva

BY: BAHUSHIRA DAS (ACBSP)

Feb 24, CALIFORNIA, USA (SUN) — In reply to Deenanatha dasa's recent article, "Vedanta Sutra and the Fall of the Jiva", this discussion about the fall/no fall of the jiva is not a lightweight discussion, nor is it meant for new, not well read devotees. Both sides have their quotes from acaryas and quotes from sastra. That is why this discussion has gone on for two years on the Sampradaya Sun. This is a philosophical debating website and specifically for those who want to dig deep into philosophical points. The weak hearted devotee should not come to this website seeking short, sweet answers. If they can't take the words of sastra from both sides of any argument, then they shouldn't expose their tender devotional creepers to this website.

That being said, Srila Prabhupada has commented specifically on some of the ideas presented by Deenanatha dasa. If Prabhupada had said nothing about falling down after going to Vaikuntha, his point would be stronger, but because Prabhupada has commented on this issue we should listen closely to what he says, especially if you believe his words. There are some devotees out there who think that Srila Prabhupada's comments about the fall are just as one feeds pudding to a baby. On the other hand, there are devotees who take Srila Prabhupada's words very seriously. Therefore there is validity to the fallvadi angle in sastra and in the words of the Guru and acaryas.

Upanishads and Vedanta are important and they are basic scriptures to follow. On the other hand, Bhagavatam presents the topmost presentation of Vedic literature. According to Jiva Goswami, in his Tattva Sandarbha, Anunuccheda 29, text 5, he states that the Srimad Bhagavatam is the highest sastra and most perfect of all evidence. Do all devotees still accept that? So one will have to look into one's own heart and decide with prayer whether Srila Prabhupada really means what he says.

The Bhagavatam verses given by Baladeva Vidyabhusana are nice and they state that Krsna will not throw the jiva out of Vaikuntha. Sri Krsna is kindness personified, and would never throw the jiva out of Vaikunthaloka. On the other hand, the jiva does it to himself and Krsna doesn't interfere. One may ask why, doesn't Krsna save the jiva soul from this predicament? From a Gita Lecture in Melbourne, June 27, 1974, a disciple begins:

Disciple: "If Krsna did not want us to come, why are we here?
Prabhupada: Yes. You forced Krsna to allow you to come…This is the position. You have to take sanction. That is a fact. But when you persist God sanctions. And you come and enjoy."

Baladeva Vidyabhusana leaned hard to the Madhva side of philosophy and scholars have noticed this. Ramanujacarya did not place much emphasis on Srimad Bhagavatam. The Gaudiya Vaisnavas do, though. It's our Bible. Pure, exalted devotees and acaryas may also disagree on certain points. Bhagavatam 1.3.15 purport makes that clear. Do devotees remember that? But when Srila Prabhupada speaks, one should listen to all his comments. I am seeing that many devotees don't listen closely enough; or just don't believe what he says, especially on the fall of the jiva.

Vedanta Sutra in and of itself is not enough to cover all the philosophical angles of the fall/no fall issue. It provides a base in philosophy, but it does not cover the finer issues of philosophy. On top of that, Vyasadeva was not satisfied with Vedanta Sutra. So he wrote Srimad Bhagavatam to go deeper. Vyasadeva had to write his own commentary on the Vedanta Sutra, which is Srimad Bhagavatam. This commentary explains the deeper meanings that Vedanta Sutra did not explain about the jiva soul.

Now let us hear some of the commentary of Vedanta Sutra by Vyasadeva and how he further details siddhanta. I will get very basic for the "confused" minds of the "suffering" devotees. In Bhagavatam, 2.15.19 it states:

Nityada muktam mayinam purusa gunam

Nityada-eternally; muktam-transcendental; mayinam-affected by material energy; pupusam-the living entity; gunah-the material modes

"These three modes of material nature…put the eternally transcendental living entity under conditions of cause and effect and make him responsible for such activities."

Note that three words sum up this fact of siddhanta. Nityada muktam mayinam - eternally transcendental (nitya muktam, nitya siddha terms are synonymous) affected by material energy. These deeply thought out words by Srila Vyasadeva, who wanted to further explain Vedanta Sutra, says nityada muktam mayinam in the beginning of the Bhagavatam to establish an understanding that one must have before proceeding to read the rest of the Bhagavat. In the purport Srila Prabhupada says:

"Because they are between the internal and external potencies, the eternally transcendental living entities [nitya muktas] are called the marginal potency of the Lord. Factually, the living entities are not meant to be so conditioned by material energy, but due to their being affected by the false sense of lording it over the material energy [free will] they come under the influence of such potency and thus become conditioned by the three modes of material nature. This external energy of the Lord covers up the pure knowledge of the living entities eternally existing with Him, [the established lila is covered over, and forgotten] but the covering is so constant that it appears that the conditioned soul is eternally ignorant [nitya baddha]."

Can the Neo-Gaudiyas deny Vyasadeva's Sanskrit? Nitya muktam mayinam purusam gunah. If they can't refute the Sanskrit, how will they be able to avoid Prabhupada's translation and words as well? I want to hear how they explain these words. Sridhar Swami, the original commentator on Srimad Bhagavatam, accepted by Lord Chaitanya, translates this verse 2.5.19 mentioned in Our Original Position by the GBC Press on page 121. He says, "[The modes] bind the jivas, the purusa, who is mayin, i.e. whose object is maya, although in substance he is always liberated [Nitya Mukta]." These words by Sridhar Swami, "in substance he is always liberated" which is nitya mukta in Sanskrit, along with the words "the modes bind the jivas" indicate that you are in the realm of the nitya muktas (Vaikuntha) and another aspect of the jiva is bound here in this world. Kailasa Chandra Dasa has provided us with good research on acarya commentaries.

Let us consider the pratisthacharya of the Sri Sampradaya, Srila Ramanujacharya:

Atma-svarupa-matrasya prag eva siddhatve'pi karma-bandha-vinirmuktaparicchinna- jnanadi-svarupasya hy atravirbhava ucyate

"Here it's stated that the specific form of the jiva's constitutional body was known, existing in perfection. Upon the manifestation of that form of unlimited knowledge, the jiva is freed from karmic bondage".
(Vedanta-sara commentary on Vedanta sutra 4.4.2)

Especially consider the clause, prag eva siddhatve ‘pi. Siddha means the perfection of existence, especially in the context of this condition being known or manifested. Prag means before that time, i.e. before the time that the perfect condition is manifested - or, more precisely and accurately, re-manifested. The spiritual body has spiritual senses. Theses senses are meant for reciprocation with the Lord of those senses, the Supreme Person.

Their previous existence is perfection could only indicate their previous activity - otherwise, there would be no perfect existence of those transcendental senses in that constitutional body. The other clause adds emphasis to this point: the jiva existed in personal form and personal sensual perfection prior to his (or her) re-manifestation of that perfection at vimukti, complete liberation.

Or as Lord Chaitanya puts it: nitya-siddha krsna-prema. Originally, the soul was (is) perfectly active in a loving, eternal relationship with the Supreme Lord. Sripad Ramanujacarya is in complete agreement with this understanding, as evidenced by his commentary to the above-mentioned Vedanta sutra. Another one of those commentators is Sri Viraraghavacharya on Srimad Bhagavatam 11.11.12:

Evam svasya guna-traya-karma-bandhbhvam uktva jivasyapi
Samsara-banddha aupadhikatvad anitya ity aha soketi.

"There is no karmic bondage of the three modes for God, and, in the verse beginning with lamentation, the jiva's bondage to the cycle of birth and death is said to not be eternal (anitya), because it is based on material designations."

Many of our friends in the no-fall camp are considered advanced scholars in Sanskrit, Vaishnava literature, and the study of siddhanta. The Sanskrit in this commentary is neither cryptic, nor obscure, nor complicated. The meaning is self-evident. Viraraghavacharya states that karmic bondage is anitya. Anitya. Not eternal. Temporary, like everything else concocted in this material world - including the no-fall apasiddhanta. Another commentator to the Bhagavatam is Sri Vijayadhvaja Tirtha:

nija varnam paramatma-gatim ananda-svarupam ca bhajeta
kinca sa jivah punar avyayo'samvrtah avarana-rahito bhavati

"Upon attaining the goal of the Supreme Soul, He serves in his own personal luster and color and in his own personal form of bliss. At that time, the jiva again attains his imperishable form, completely uncovered and free from impediment." Pada-ratnavali, commentary to Srimad Bhagavatam 8.24.48.

Notice "again attains." Trying to explain away punah ("again") to not mean what it so self-evidently means is like the mayavadis trying to say that aham does not mean "I." We once were active in a personal, loving relationship with God. When we attain liberation in the original form of our lustrous body and color, we shall again be actively engaged in that original relationship. The process of devotional service is really to learn about Krsna: it is to become educated about Him.

And, last but certainly not least, what about the great scholar Jiva Goswami? He is one of the prominent commentators on the Bhagavatam, and you'll find his purports often in that aforementioned book of commentaries. What does he have to say on this important topic? Here's his commentary on Srimad Bhagavatam 11.11.3:

Vastuto nitya-mukto'pi pratitito'nadi-baddha
Iti yugapad ubhayatvam ghatata ity arthah

"Simultaneously, both are transpiring: the jiva is eternally liberated in substantive form and is bound without beginning."

The Sanskrit words, anadi-baddha, embody the exact same concept as nitya-baddha; they are absolutely non-different in meaning and not much different even in the Sanskrit. So Prabhupada has been previously quoted about the concept of nitya-baddha ("Eternally conditioned means we do not know when we have been conditioned like this. It is not possible to trace out the history.") This is the correct context for understanding Sri Jiva Goswami's use of anadi-baddha in the referenced commentary. This ends the research of Kailasa Chandra dasa.

Srila Prabhupada has commented on this siddhanta of no fall after going to Vaikuntha, which one of such character as Prabhupada can do. Here are some quotes that show how Prabhupada had considered and analyzed the no return from Vaikuntha position of the Neo-Gaudiyas. In a conversation on a morning walk in Cheviot Hills Golf Course on May 13, 1973 in Los Angeles, Srila Prabhupada says:

Paramahamsa: "So we can come down to the spiritual world and return?
Prabhupada: Yes.
Paramahamsa: Fall down?
Prabhupada: Yes…He goes out of his free will; again comes out, again goes. Like that."

So do the Neo-Gaudiyas say these words have no meaning? They are just fabrication? This is just pudding for babies? Of course not, because Prabhupada means what he says.

Srila Prabhupada morning walk in Mayapur, 2-19-76:

Prabhupada: No it is not difficult. It is not difficult.
Acyutananda: It is not difficult. They don't want to understand.
Prabhupada: Because you are part and parcel of God, God has got full independence, but you have got little independence proportionately, because you are part and parcel.
Acyutananda: But in the Gita it says "once going there, he never returns."
Prabhupada: But if he likes, he can return.
Acyutananda: He can return.

Try to grasp what Srila Prabhupada is saying. Acyutananda das was trained up in the Gaudiya Math; Prabhupada had him go to Srila Sridhara's Math because there were no temples then. So Prabhupada knew he was talking to one of the deepest philosophers in ISKCON and Prabhupada answered to him that one can return to this material world even though Gita, Vedanta sutra say you don't return. Do the Neo-Gaudiyas really think that Prabhupada didn't know what he wanted to say? He could have given Acyutananda an answer that would have satisfied him, knowing as Prabhupada did, that Acyutananda thought we never return to the material world and that's why Acyutananda repeated what Prabhupada said, "He can return"." In continuation, Srila Prabhupada explains in a room conversation in Mayapur on February 19, 1976:

Disciple: ...So, if the conditions in the spiritual world are so nice and everything is spiritual, how is it that one can become envious of Krsna in such conditions?
Prabhupada: That is independence…you have got little independence, proportionately, because you are part and parcel.
Disciple: But in the Gita it says "once coming there, he never returns."
Prabhupada: But if he likes, he can return.

In a conversation after lecture on Caitanya-caritamrita in San Francisco on February, 18, 1967, Prabhupada says:

Disciple: When the souls that were never conditioned at all…do they also have the independence?
Prabhupada: Yes, but they have not misused.
Disciple: Could they ever misuse it?
Prabhupada: Yes, they can misuse it, also. That power is there.
Disciple: Well, I believe once you said that once a conditioned soul becomes perfected and gets out of the material world and goes back to Krishnaloka, there's no possibility of falling back.
Prabhupada: No there is a possibility.

Now let us look at other Bhagavatam verses. In Bhagavad-gita 6.47, Srila Prabhupada states in the purport:

"Every living entity is of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and thus every living entity is intended to serve the Supreme Lord by his own constitution. Failing to do this, he falls down..The Bhagavatam 11.5.3 confirms this as follows:


Ya esaam purusam saaksaad aatma prabhavam ishvaram
Nabhajaty avajaananti stbaanaad bhrastaah patanty adhah

Anyone who does not render service and neglects his duty unto the primeval Lord who is the source of all living entities will certainly fall down from his constitutional position."

In a Bhagavad-gita lecture that was given on February 21, 1969 in Los Angeles (Collected Lectures on Bhagavad-gita As It Is, VoI.5, pp. 6-7), Srila Prabhupada quotes the same Bhagavatam verse 11.5.3. He then gives this commentary, which throws even more light on it making it clearer:

"His is also a very nice example. The Bhagavat says that we are all parts and parcels of the Supreme. If we do not serve the Supreme, then we fall down from our specified place. What is that?..If the part and parcel cannot render service regularly, that means it is painful. So any person who is not rendering service to the Supreme Lord, he's simply giving pain to the Supreme Lord. He's simply giving trouble. Therefore he has to suffer....The same example. Stbanad bhrastah patanty adhah. And as soon as one thing is very painful, just like the government keeps all these painful citizens into a prison house. Collect together. ‘You live here, you are nonsense, you criminals live here. Don't live in the open state.' Similarly, all these criminals who have violated the laws of God, who have simply given pain to the Lord, they are put in this material world. And, sthanad bbrastah, he falls down from the specified place....So we have fallen down. Being against the principles of God consciousness, we are fallen down. So if we want to revive our original position, we must be placed again in that service attitude....The best thing is to revive our original Krsna consciousness and be engaged in the service of the Lord. That is the natural life and that is possible in the spiritual sky or the Goloka Vrndavana."

At the end of the lecture a question was asked: "Why are you teaching about Krsna Consciousness? Prabhupada answered: "Because you have forgotten the service of Radha and Krsna, therefore you have become the servant of Maya."

In Bhagavatam 6.11.24, it states:

Aham hare tava padaika-mula-dasanudaso bhavitasmi bhuyah

"O my Lord, O Supreme Personality of Godhead, will I again be able to be a servant of Your eternal servants who find shelter only at Your lotus feet?"

This verse indicates that the word "again" (bhuyah) in the above verse refers to the original state of the jiva. This is a reoccurring word throughout the Bhagavatam. So it has importance.

In Srimad Bhagavatam 8.24.48, King Satyavrata says:

Bhajeta varnam nijam esa so ‘vyayo
Bhuyat sa isah paramo guror gurah

"Thus one regains his original identity, just as a block of gold or silver sheds all dirt and becomes purified when treated with fire."

Srila Prabhupada says in his purport:

"The word varnam refers to the luster of one's original identity. The original luster of gold or silver is brilliant. Similarly, the original luster of the living being, who is part of the sac-cid-ananda-vigraha, is the luster of ananda, or pleasure…The living being should become purified and regain his svarupa, his original identity."

In a July, 1976 lecture Srila Prabhupada emphasized:

"Mukti means as it is defined in Srimad Bhagavatam, Muktir hitvanyatha rupam sva-rupena vyavasthitih. That is mukti. Sva-rupena, legally, constitutionally, I am a servant of God, or Krsna. Now I have become a servant of dog and maya. So if I give up this service and again become servant of God, that is mukti."

In addition, Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.53 states:

"The brahmana continued: My dear friend, even though you cannot immediately recognize Me, can't you remember that in the past you had a very intimate friend? Unfortunately, you gave up My company and accepted a position as enjoyer of this material world."

In the purport of 4.28.53, it affirms:

"This is an explanation of how the living entity falls down into this material world. In the spiritual world there is no duality, nor is there hate…The vibhinnamsa expansions, the marginal potencies of the Lord, are the living entities. When the living entities desire to enjoy themselves, they develop a consciousness of duality and come to hate the service of the Lord. In this way the living entities fall into the material world,…His affection for the living entity is eternal…In this way the living entity may someday return home, back to Godhead…By misusing his independence the living entity falls down from the service of the Lord and takes a position in this material world as an enjoyer."

Continuing in the next verse 4.28.54 it says:

"Although we have been living together for many thousands of years, we are still far away from our original homes.

Purport:
The original home of the living entity and the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the spiritual world. In the spiritual world both the Lord and the living entities live together very peacefully. (note: in 8.24.51 purport Prabhupada says "Vaikunthaloka, or the spiritual world" next to each other in the sentence which means these terms refer to the same thing.) Since the living entity remains engaged in the service of the Lord, they both share a blissful life in the spiritual world. However, when the living entity wants to enjoy himself, he falls down into the material world."

Some say these verses only refer to the Supersoul assisting the jiva soul in the material world. But in this verse it says, "We are still far away from our original home." This is in plural form, meaning both are far away from the original home, which is in the spiritual world, Vaikunthaloka mentioned in 8.24.51 purport. The verse, 4.28.53 is referring to Krsna as a friend. Supersoul is always residing with the jiva as long as the jiva is in the material realm so they are not separated. Supersoul separates from the individual jiva when the jiva goes back to Vaikunthaloka. So the Supersoul cannot be the intimate friend who is mentioned here in the verse.

In these two verses it is obvious what Prabhupada is explaining. This is a personal exchange with the Lord. In the Brahmajyoti there is no personal exchange and this exchange between the Lord and the living entity was intimate before the jiva soul comes here, as stated in the verse. But it was forgotten. Please see the article Srila Prabhupada spoke exactly in the Archives. These exchanges were in the spiritual world Vaikunthaloka, not the Brahmajyoti, or the Causal Ocean.

Continuing in 4.28.55 Krsna states:

"My dear friend, you are now My very dear friend. Since you left Me, you have become more and more materialistic…

Purport:
When the living entity falls down, he goes into the material world…Actually, it is Krsna who personally advises all living entities to return home, back to Godhead."

Krsna is the friend of the jiva soul being mentioned here, as Srila Prabhupada says in the purport. Back to Godhead does not mean back to the Brahmajyoti. And it is obvious by the flavor of the texts in Bhagavatam that it is the topmost scripture. It is not terse, like the verses in Vedanta Sutra. It is obvious why Vyasadeva became satisfied by writing the Bhagavatam. In 11.14.25 Bhagavatam, it asserts:

yathagnina hema malam jahati
dhmatam punah svam bhogate ca rupam
atma ca karmanusayam vidhuya
mad-bhakti-yogena bhajaty atho mam

"Just as gold, when smelted in fire, gives up its impurities and returns to its pure brilliant state, similarly, the spirit soul, absorbed in the fire of bhakti yoga, is purified of all contamination caused by previous fruitive activities and returns to its original position of serving Me in the spiritual world."

Note: the Sanskrit, punah svam bhajate ca rupam atma - which means again enters its own spirit soul form. Punah-again; svam-its own; bhajate-enters; ca-also; rupam-form; atma-the spirit soul or consciousness. This shows that the soul expanded here returns or enters its own form there in Vaikunthaloka. The Satchitananda vigraha, which already existed prior to coming to this world.

After reading Bhagavatam and comparing it to Vedanta Sutra, does the devotee really think that the Vedanta Sutra is the end of all knowledge as it is defined? I think not. Bhagavatam is so much sweeter, deeper and more detailed.

One with deep intelligence can see that this issue does have a one sided answer. This issue of fall/no fall of the jiva soul is a definite case of acaryas disagreeing, just as Srila Prabhupada has stated occurs in our line. Vyasadeva who wrote the Vedanta Sutra and Srimad Bhagavatam has presented both fall/no fall of the jiva soul. That is why Srila Prabhupada and other acaryas have mentioned both fall/no fall as well.

| The Sun | News | Editorials | Features | Sun Blogs | Classifieds | Events | Recipes | PodCasts |

| About | Submit an Article | Contact Us | Advertise | HareKrsna.com |

Copyright 2005,2010, HareKrsna.com. All rights reserved.