गोविन्द भाष्य (श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण - अचिन्त्यभेदाभेद वेदान्त ब्रह्मसूत्र भाष्य सटीक)

Sūtra 45
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Sūtra 46
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Sūtra 47
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Sūtra 48

Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Sūtra 49
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Sūtra 50
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Sūtra 51

. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka
Upaniṣad (2.3.1) it is said:
dve vāva brahmaṇo rūpe mūrtaṁ caivāmūrtaṁ ca
"The Supreme has two forms: the subtle and the gross."
After dividing the five elements into two categories, the Upaniṣad declares that
all are forms of the Supreme. Then the Upaniṣad (2.3.6) declares:
tasya haitasya puruṣasya rūpaṁ yathā māhārajanaṁ vāso yathā pāṇḍv-āvikam
yathendragopo yathāgny-arcir yathā puṇḍarīkaṁ yathā sakṛd vidyutaṁ sakṛd
vidyutaiva ha vā asya śrīr bhavati ya evaṁ veda.
"That person's form is like gold, like white wool, like an indragopa, like a
burning flame, like a white lotus, like a lightning flash. He who understands this
becomes splendid like a lightning flash."
Then, having described this person splendid like gold, the Upaniṣad (2.3.6)

"This is the teaching: No. No. Not than Him. Nothing is greater than Him.
Nothing is greater than Him. His name is the truth of the true. He is life. He is
truth. He is truth."
The meaning of this passage is this: the Supreme is greater that all the subtle
and gross things in the material world. No person or thing is greater than Him.
That is the meaning of the words, "No. No." in this passage. The words “No. No."
therefore mean "Not than the Supreme Personality of Godhead". The word "no" is
repeated twice to mean, "the material elements and material desires are not greater
than Him" or to mean, "inanimate matter and the conscious living beings are not
greater than Him", or to mean "other groups of two are not greater than Him".
Thus he speaks the teaching (ādeśa): "No" (na). In this way he says, "No person
or thing is greater than the Supreme Personality of Godhead".
Here someone may object: Is it not so that this passage means, "As the material
world does not exist in reality, so the Supreme Personality of Godhead also does
not exist in reality? That is the meaning of the Upaniṣad's assertion “no". The form
of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, which is eternal and spiritual, and which
ends all illusions, is not different from the visible material world. This also means
that the individual spirit soul is also not different from the Supreme Personality of
Godhead. The spirit soul is a reflection of the Supreme. The individual spirit soul,
who is atomic, and the Supreme, who is all-pervading, are not different. They are
like the air in a pot and the air in the great sky. Therefore it is not correct to say
that they are different.
If this objection is raised, then the author of the sūtras gives the following
reply:
Sūtra 22
prakṛtaitāvattvaṁ hi pratiṣedhati tato bravīti ca bhūyaḥ
prakṛtā—the topic under discussion; etāvattvam—being like that; hi—indeed;
pratiṣedhati—denires; tataḥ—then; bravīti—says; ca—and; bhūyaḥ—more.
The previous statement denies that He is like them. It affirms that He is greater.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
This passage of Śruti-śāstra does not teach that the one Supreme has no
qualities. It teaches only that the Supreme is not like other persons. It teaches that

the Supreme is superior to all others. In this way the Śruti-śāstra affirms that the
Supreme is not like other persons or things. The Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad's
(2.3.1) statement that the subtle and gross elements of the world are forms of the
Supreme does not mean that the Supreme is like the things of this world. The
forms of the Supreme are not material. Therefore it is said that the Supreme is
superior to everything in the material world and therefore He has the name "the
truth of the true". That is the teaching here. He is more than the forms of this
world. Because His form has no limit, therefore the Upaniṣad declares, "No. No."
that is the meaning here. The meaning is that the form of the Lord is not like the
subtle and gross forms of the material world. He is not like them because His form
is eternal and true, and therefore He has the name "the truth of the true". This is
what the Śruti-śāstra teaches. Then the scriptures affirm "No person or thing is
greater than Him". (na hy etasmāt). Because nothing is greater than Him, therefore
He has the name "the truth of the true". That is why the text here says, "no". By
this explanation of a small part of the Lord's nature, the Lord's nature as a whole
may be understood.
Now the word "nāmadheyam" will be explained. The Lord's name here is
"satyasya satyam" (the truth of the true). This name describes the form of the
Supreme. Then the text declares that the Supreme is "prāṇa". Prāṇa" here means,
"the life of all that live". In this way the Lord's forms are superior to all others.
This proves that the Lord's form is better than all other forms, either spiritual or
material. No other form is better than His. In the material world the material forms
are of two kinds: subtle and gross. That the Supreme Lord's forms are not material
is explained in Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (2.3.6). Then the text declares that the
Supreme is the truth of life. Because both the Lord and the individual spirit souls
are not made of the material elements, which begin with ether, therefore they are
both called truth. However, unlike the individual spirit souls, the Supreme is not
subject to the different transformations of the material nature, which grant and
remove true knowledge in different circumstances. Thus the individual spirit soul
is certainly spiritual and conscious. However, the Supreme Personality of Godhead
is superior to the individual souls for the Supreme Lord has limitless auspicious
qualities. When they are understood, then devotion for the Lord naturally
develops. Thus the Śruti-śāstra does not deny the existence of the Lord's form, for
in Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (2.3.6) the Lord's spiritual form was described. Only a
madman would state one thing and then immediately contradict his own words.
Therefore the author of the sūtras says that "the Supreme is not like that". The
author does not say "the Lord has no form at all". Thus the proper explanation is
given.
Adhikaraṇa 12
The Form of the Lord
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa

अथेदानीं भगवद्रूपस्याप्राकृतत्वम् इन्द्रियागोचरत्वं च प्रतिपाद्यते।
यदि हि भगवतः स्वरूपमप्राकृतं न स्यात्, घटादिवत् साधारणं प्राकृतं वस्तु भवेत्,
तर्हि तस्मिन् प्रीतेर्भक्तेश्च सम्भव एव न स्यात्।
श्रुतिशास्त्रमपि तथैवाह—
सच्चिदानन्दरूपाय
"सत्, चित् तथा आनन्द के नित्य स्वरूप श्रीभगवान् को मैं सादर प्रणाम करता हूँ।"
संशयः—किं भगवद्रूपमप्राकृतम् अत एव प्राकृतेन्द्रियाणामगोचरम्, अथवा प्राकृतं सुलभदर्शनं च?
पूर्वपक्षः—भगवतो रूपं प्राकृतमेव भवितुमर्हति, यतो हि बहुभिर्देवैर्दैत्यैर्मनुष्यैश्च तत् साक्षात् दृष्टम्।
सिद्धान्तः—अत्र सूत्रकारः स्वसिद्धान्तं प्रकटयति—
सूत्रम् २३
तदव्यक्तमाह हि ॥ २३ ॥
पदच्छेदः तथा पदार्थः—
तत्—वह (भगवद्रूप); अव्यक्तम्—अप्रकट (प्राकृतेन्द्रियागोचर); आह—श्रुति कहती है; हि—क्योंकि।
सूत्रार्थः—श्रुति कहती है कि वह भगवत्स्वरूप प्राकृत इन्द्रियों के लिए अव्यक्त (अप्रकट) है।
श्रील बलदेवविद्याभूषण-भाष्यम्
भगवान् केवल दिव्य (अप्राकृत) इन्द्रियों के द्वारा ही दर्शनीय हैं। यही बात कठोपनिषद् (६।९) में कही गई है—
न संदृशे तिष्ठति रूपमस्य न चक्षुषा पश्यति कश्चनैनम् ॥

"The Supreme Lord's form is not like that. Material eyes have never seen His
form."
In Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (3.9.26) it is said:
agṛhyo na hi gṛhyate
"The Supreme Personality of Godhead is not perceived by material senses."
In the Bhagavad-gītā (8.21) it is said:
avyakto 'kṣara ity uktas
tam āhuḥ paramāṁ gatim
"They say He is unmanifest and infallible. They say He is the supreme
destination."
Adhikaraṇa 13
The Supreme Personality of Godhead Can Be Seen
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Now will be revealed the truth that although the Supreme Lord is spiritual by
nature, still He can be seen by they who have love, devotion, and spiritual wisdom.
If the Supreme Personality of Godhead were always invisible and never to be seen,
then it would not be possible to have love and devotion for Him. In the Kaivalya
Upaniṣad (2) it is said:
śraddhā-bhakti-dhyāna-yogād avaiti
"One who has faith and devotion, and who meditates on Him, can see the
Supreme Personality of Godhead."
In this way it is explained that a faithful devotee who meditates on Lord Hari,
attains the direct sight of Lord Hari.

Saṁśaya (doubt): Is the Supreme Lord seen by the mind or by the eyes and
other senses?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): The Supreme Lord is seen by the mind.
This is described in Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.19):
manasaivānudraṣṭavyam
"The Supreme Personality of Godhead is indeed seen by the mind."
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion.
Sūtra 24
api samrādhane pratyakṣānumānābhyām
api—certainly; samrādhane—in worship; pratyakṣa—by the Śruti-śāstra;
anumānābhyām—by the Smṛti-śāstra.
Certainly it is in worship because of the Śruti-śāstra and Smṛti-śāstra.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "api" (certainly) is used here to mock the pūrvapakṣa (opponent).
When one has sincere devotion (samrādhane) with one's eyes and other senses one
can directly see the Lord. Why is that? The sūtra explains: "Because of the Śruti-
śāstra and Smṛti-śāstra." In the Kaṭha Upaniṣad (2.4.1) it is said:
parāñci khāni vyatṛṇat svayambhūs
tasmāt parāṅ paśyati nāntarātman
kaścid dhīraḥ pratyag ātmānam aikṣad
āvṛta-cakṣur amṛtatvam icchan
"The Supreme Personality of Godhead made the conditioned souls gaze at
external things and not at what is within the heart. A rare saint who yearns for
liberation will look inside his heart and see the Supreme Lord staying there."
In the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad (3.1.8) it is said:

jñāna-prasādena viśuddha-sattvas
tatas tu taṁ paśyati niṣkalaṁ dhyāyamānaḥ
"In the course of his meditation a pure-hearted saint will become enlightened.
Then he sees the perfect Supreme Lord directly."
In the Bhagavad-gītā (11.53-54) The Lord Himself declares:
nāhaṁ vedair na tapasā
na dānena na cejyayā
śakya evaṁ-vidho draṣṭuṁ
dṛṣṭavān asi māṁ yathā
"The form you are seeing with your transcendental eyes cannot be understood
simply by studying the Vedas, nor by undergoing serious penances, nor by charity,
nor by worship. It is not by these means that one can see Me as I am.*
bhaktyā tv ananyayā śakya
aham evaṁ-vidho 'rjuna
jñātuṁ draṣṭuṁ ca tattvena
praveṣṭuṁ ca parantapa
"My dear Arjuna, only by undivided devotional service can I be understood as I
am, standing before you, and can thus be seen directly. Only in this way can you
enter into the mysteries of My understanding."*
In this way it is proved that with the aid of devotional service one can see Lord
Hari directly. Thus with the aid of the eyes and other senses one can perceive the
Lord directly. Thus the Lord can be perceived by the senses. Thus the word "eva"
(indeed) in Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.19) does not hint that one cannot see
the Lord with the aid of senses.
Sūtra 25
prakāśādi-vac cāvaiśeṣyāt
prakāśa—fire; ādi—beginning with; vat—like; ca—and; a—not; vaiśeṣyāt—
with differences.

॥ ब्रह्मसूत्रम् ॥
(स न वह्न्यादिवत्, तद्विधविशेषाभावात्)
सूत्रार्थः—वह (परमेश्वर) अग्नि आदि की भाँति नहीं है, क्योंकि उसमें वैसे (स्थूल-सूक्ष्म आदि) भेद-विशेष नहीं हैं।
॥ श्रील बलदेवविद्याभूषणविरचितं गोविन्दभाष्यम् ॥
पूर्वसूत्रात् (३।२।१९) 'न' इति पदमत्राप्यनुवर्तते।
अत्र कश्चिदाशङ्केत—यथा वन्हेः सूक्ष्मं स्थूलं चेति द्वे रूपे भवतः;
यत्र सूक्ष्मं रूपमदृश्यमव्यक्तं च भवति, स्थूलं च रूपं दृश्यं व्यक्तं च भवति;
तथैव परेशस्यापि द्वे रूपे भवितुमर्हत इति चेत्।
अत्रोच्यते—'नैतदेवम्'। कुतः?
सूत्रं व्याचष्टे—अग्न्यादिवत् तस्मिन् स्थूलसूक्ष्मभेदाभावात्।
तथाहि बृहदारण्यकोपनिषदि पठ्यते—
"अस्थूलमनण्वह्रस्वम्" (बृ० उप० ३।८।८)
श्रुत्यर्थः—वह परब्रह्म परमेश्वर न स्थूल है, न सूक्ष्म (अणु), न ह्रस्व है और न ही दीर्घ।
तथा च गरुडपुराणेऽप्युक्तम्—
स्थूलसूक्ष्मविशेषोऽत्र न कश्चित्परमेश्वरे ।
सर्वत्रैव प्रकाशोऽसौ सर्वरूपेष्वजो यतः ॥
श्लोकार्थः—चूँकि वह अजन्मा परमेश्वर सर्वत्र और सभी रूपों में समान रूप से प्रकाशमान है,
अतः उस परमेश्वर में स्थूल अथवा सूक्ष्म का कोई भेद विद्यमान नहीं है।
अत्र पुनः कश्चिदाशङ्केत—यदा भक्ताः भक्त्या तं भजन्ति, तदापि परमेश्वरः सर्वदा तेषां समक्षं
प्रादुर्भवन्नोपलभ्यते, अतः प्रेम्णा भजनेऽपि भगवान् सर्वदा प्रकट नहीं होते, यह सिद्ध होता है।
इत्याशङ्कां परिजिहीर्षुः सूत्रकारोऽग्रिमं समाधानमाह—

Sūtra 26
prakāśaś ca karmaṇy abhyāsāt
prakāśaḥ—appearance; ca—and; karmaṇi—in activity; abhyāsāt—by repetition.
And when the activity is repeated, then He appears.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "ca" (and) is used here to dispel doubt. When activities like
meditation and worship are repeated, then the Lord appears. In the Dhyāna-bindu
Upaniṣad (18) it is said:
dhyāna-nirmathanābhyāsād
devaṁ paśyen nigūḍhavat
"By repeated meditation one is able to see the Supersoul hidden in the heart."
By repeated meditation one develops love for the Lord, and at that time one is
able to see the Lord. However, in the Brahma-vaivarta Purāṇa it is said:
na tam ārādhayitvāpi
kaścid vyaktī-kariṣyati
nityāvyakto yato devaḥ
paramātmā sanātanaḥ
"No one, simply by engaging in worship, can force the Lord to become visible.
To a person who tries to force Him in this way, the eternal Lord is always
invisible."
The worship described here is worship performed without sincere love for the
Supreme Lord.
Here someone may object: Is it not true that the Supreme Lord is present within
everything? If He is present within, then it is a contradiction to say that He can
come out. He remains within and He does not come out. Therefore the statement
that the Supreme Lord comes out and becomes directly visible is a collection of
meaningless words, words that contradict the truth that the Lord is always present

within everything.
If this objection is raised, then the author of the sūtras gives the following
reply.
Sūtra 27
ato 'nantena tathā hi liṅgam
ataḥ—therefore; anantena—by the infinite; tathā—so; hi—indeed; liṅgam—
evidence.
It is so by the infinite. There is evidence.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
There is evidence to support both ideas: that the Supreme Lord is present
within everything, and that the Supreme Lord becomes visible to they who
meditate on Him. The unlimited Supreme Lord, pleased by His devotees' worship
of Him, shows to them His own form. He does this by His inconceivable mercy.
That should be accepted. How is this known? The sūtra explains: “There is
evidence.” In the Atharva Veda it is said:
vijñāna-ghanānanda-ghana-sac-cid-ānandaika-raso bhakti-yoge tiṣṭhati
"The Supreme Personality of Godhead, whose sweet form is eternal and full of
bliss and knowledge, becomes visible when He is worshiped with devotion."
This means that by His mercy the Lord appears before they who worship Him
with devotion. In the Nārāyaṇādhyātma it is said:
nityāvyakto 'pi bhagavān
īkṣate nija-śaktitaḥ
tāṁ ṛte paramātmānaṁ
kaḥ paśyetām itaṁ prabhum
"Although He is always invisible, the Supreme Personality of Godhead becomes
visible by His own power. Without first obtaining His mercy, who can see Him?"

This means that the Lord becomes visible by His own wish. The Supreme Lord
Himself declares (Bhagavad-gītā 7.24):
avyaktaṁ vyaktim āpannaṁ
manyante mām abuddhayaḥ
paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto
mamāvyayam anuttamam
"Unintelligent men, who do not know Me perfectly, think that I, the Supreme
Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, was impersonal before and have now assumed this
personality. Due to their small knowledge, they do not know My higher nature,
which is imperishable and supreme."*
Because the Lord becomes visible in response to His devotees' love, that does
not mean that He is not also all-pervading, present within everything. He does
both these actions by the power of His own internal potency. However, to they
who do not love Him, He presents only a reflection or a shadow of Himself. The
Lord Himself affirms (Bhagavad-gītā 7.25):
nāhaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya
yogamāyā-samāvṛtaḥ
"I am never manifest to the foolish and unintelligent. For them I am covered by
My internal potency."*
Therefore, even though He is full of transcendental bliss and other auspicious
qualities, He appears terrible and ferocious to they who have no love for Him.
Therefore to they who do not love Him He remains invisible.
Adhikaraṇa 14
The Lord's Qualities Are Not Different From His Self
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Now will be proved the truth that the Lord's qualities are not different from His
self. If the Lord's qualities were different from His self, then His qualities would be
secondary and unimportant, and thus love for the Lord, love inspired by those

गुण भी गौण तथा महत्त्वहीन हो जाएँगे। किन्तु, भगवान् के प्रति प्रेम
गौण और महत्त्वहीन नहीं है। यह स्पष्ट रूप से देखा जाता है कि भगवान् के प्रति प्रेम
परम महत्त्वपूर्ण है। भगवान् के गुणों का वर्णन श्रुति-शास्त्र में इस प्रकार है:
विज्ञानमानन्दं ब्रह्म ॥
"परम पुरुष भगवान् ज्ञान और आनन्द-स्वरूप हैं।"
यः सर्वज्ञः सर्वविद् ॥
"परम पुरुष भगवान् सर्वज्ञ एवं सर्ववित् (सब कुछ जानने वाले) हैं।"
आनन्दं ब्रह्मणो विद्वान् ॥
"विद्वान् पुरुष ब्रह्म के आनन्द को भली-भाँति जानता है।"
संशय: क्या उपास्य परमतत्त्व स्वयं ज्ञान और आनन्द रूप गुण ही है,
और इस प्रकार निर्विशेष (निराकार) है, अथवा परमतत्त्व वह परम पुरुष है
जो आनन्द और ज्ञान आदि गुणों से सम्पन्न है?
पूर्वपक्ष: क्योंकि शास्त्रों में दोनों ही पक्षों का प्रतिपादन मिलता है,
अतः किसी एक निश्चित निष्कर्ष पर पहुँचना सम्भव नहीं है।
सिद्धान्त: निम्नलिखित शब्दों में सूत्रकार (महर्षि बादरायण) अपना
निर्णय प्रस्तुत करते हैं।
सूत्र २८
उभयव्यपदेशात्त्वहिकुण्डलवत् ॥ २८ ॥
उभय — दोनों का; व्यपदेशात् — कथन होने से; तु — किन्तु/निश्चय ही; अहि — सर्प;
कुण्डल — और उसकी कुण्डली (वलयाकार स्थिति); वत् — के समान।
अन्वय-अर्थ: दोनों ही प्रकार के (अभेद और भेद के) श्रुति-वचनों का व्यपदेश होने से, ब्रह्म और उसके गुणों का सम्बन्ध सर्प और उसकी कुण्डली के समान है।
श्रीमद्बलदेवविद्याभूषण-विरचित गोविन्दभाष्य तात्पर्य

The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the qualities of knowledge and bliss
themselves, and He is also a person who possesses the qualities of knowledge and
bliss. He is like a snake and its coils. As a snake both is and possesses its coils, so
the Supreme Personality of Godhead both is and possesses His qualities. How is
this known? The sūtra explains: “Because there is description of both.” The Śruti-
śāstra describes both. That is the meaning. The word "tu" (indeed) here hints that
the passages of the Śruti-śāstra have a single meaning. The meaning here is that the
Lord is inconceivable. The Lord is not divided. It is not that these two kinds of
explanations of the scriptures mean that one part of the Lord has one nature and
another part of Him has a different nature. He is not divided into parts in that way.
Sūtra 29
prakāśāśrayavad vā tejastvāt
prakāśa—of light; āśraya—the shelter; vat—like; vā—or; tejastvāt—because of
being splendid.
Or, because He is effulgent He is like an abode of light.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Because the Supreme Personality of Godhead is effulgent, that is to say because
He is full of consciousness, therefore He is the abode of light. That is the
conclusion. As the effulgent sun is the abode of light, so the all-knowing Supreme
Personality of Godhead is the abode of knowledge. That is the meaning. The word
"tejaḥ" is defined to mean either “the destroyer of ignorance” or “the destroyer of
darkness".
Sūtra 30
pūrvavad vā
pūrva—past; vat—as; vā—or.
Or, as the past.

Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
As it is said that time both possesses the past and also is the past itself, so the
Supreme both possesses knowledge and bliss and also is knowledge and bliss.
Thus the Supreme is both the quality and the possessor of the quality. In the
Brahma Purāṇa it is said:
ānandena tv abhinnena
vyavahāraḥ prakāśavat
pūrvavad vā yathā kālaḥ
svāvecchedakatāṁ vrajet
"As the sun is not different from its light or time is not different from its quality
of the past, so the Supreme is not different from His bliss."
In this series of analogies (sūtras 28-30) each analogy is more subtle than the
one before it.
Sūtra 31
pratiṣedhāc ca
pratiṣedhāt—because of denial; ca—also.
Also because it is denied.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "ca" (also) is used here for emphasis. In the Kaṭha Upaniṣad (2.4.11
and 14) it is said:
manasaivedam āptavyaṁ
neha nānāsti kiñcana
mṛtyoḥ sa mṛtyum āpnoti
ya iha nāneva paśyati

"A pure heart can understand that the Lord and His attributes are not different.
He who sees them as different travels from death to death."
yathodakaṁ durge vṛṣṭaṁ
parvateṣu vidhāvati
evaṁ dharmān pṛthak paśyaṁs
tān evānuvidhāvati
"One who thinks the Lord and His attributes are different falls into hell as
rainwater glides down a mountain peak."
In the Nārada-pañcarātra it is said:
nirdoṣa-pūrṇa-guṇa-vigraha ātma-tantro
niścetanātmaka-śarīra-guṇaiś ca hīnaḥ
ānanda-mātra-kara-pāda-mukhodarādiḥ
sarvatra ca svagata-bheda-vivarjitātmā
"The Supreme Personality of Godhead is independent, faultless, filled with
virtues, not residing in a material body, untouched by the modes of nature or a
material body fashioned of inanimate matter, but still possessing a face, belly,
hands, feet and other features of a spiritual body filled with bliss. He is not
different from His various limbs, features, and qualities."
Because in this way the scriptures deny that the Lord is different from His
attributes, therefore the Lord is not different from His attributes. Therefore the
word “bhagavān” (the all-opulent Supreme Lord) is defined in terms of the Lord's
knowledge and other attributes. In the Viṣṇu Purāṇa it is said:
jñāna-śakti-balaiśvarya-
vīrya-tejāṁsy aśeṣataḥ
bhagavac-chabda-vācyāni
vinā heyair guṇādibhiḥ
"The word bhagavān' means He who has all knowledge, strength, wealth,
power, heroism, and splendor, but no faults'."
Although the Lord and His attributes are actually one, they are spoken of as
being two in the same way that a body of water and its waves are spoken of as
being two. The Lord is blissful. He is also bliss itself. Therefore His form is full of
bliss. Because the Lord's activities are eternal, therefore the Lord's form is also
eternal. However, for the sake of ordinary dealings a pretended distinction is made

between the Lord and His attributes, even though there is in truth no distinction at
all. If this is not done then it would not be possible to speak sentences like,
"Existence exists," "Time is always," and "Space is everywhere," statements that
are useful in ordinary discourse. Nor are statements like “Existence exists" foolish
illusions. They are meaningful statements, as the sentence "The jar exists" is a
meaningful statement. These statements are not metaphors like the sentence
"Devadatta is a lion", for the statement “Existence does not exist" can never be
truthfully said. Nor do these statements hint that attributes do not exist, for in the
previously stated example of water flowing from a mountain peak there are
certainly attributes. However, the idea that the Supreme Lord is different from His
attributes is certainly denied here. In this way the Supreme Personality of Godhead
is not different from the attributes He possesses.
Adhikaraṇa 15
The Supreme Personality of Godhead Experiences the Highest Bliss
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Now will be described the truth that the bliss and other attributes of the Lord
are all of the highest nature. If the bliss and other attributes of the individual spirit
souls were equal to the bliss and attributes of the Lord, love and devotion for the
Lord would not be possible.
Viṣaya (the subject to be discussed): Now will be discussed the texts that
describe these attributes of the Lord.
Saṁśaya (doubt): Are the bliss and other attributes of the Supreme Lord greater
than the bliss and other attributes of the individual spirit souls, or are they not
greater than them?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): Because the bliss of the Supreme
Personality of Godhead is described in the same terms used to describe the
ordinary blisses of the material world, therefore the Lord's bliss is not greater.
After all, when one speaks the word "jar" one doesn't mean something greater than
a jar.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion.

Sūtra 32
param ataḥ setūnmāna-sambandha-bheda-vyapadeśebhyaḥ
param—greater; ataḥ—than this; setu—of a bridge; unmāna—immeasurable;
sambandha—relationship; bheda—difference; vyapadeśebhyaḥ—from the
descriptions.
It is greater because of the statements about a bridge, immeasurability, a
relationship, and a difference.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The bliss and other attributes of the Supreme Personality of Godhead are
greater than the bliss and attributes of the individual spirit souls. Why is that? The
sūtra declares: "because of the statements about a bridge, immeasurability, a
relationship, and a difference." The statement about a bridge is given in the
Chāndogya Upaniṣad (8.4.1), where the bliss of the Supreme Lord is described in
these words:
eṣa setur vidhṛtiḥ
"It is the highest bridge."
The statement about immeasurability is given in the Taittirīya Upaniṣad (2.4.1):
yato vāco nivartante
"Unable to describe the immeasurable bliss of the Supreme Personality of
Godhead, words return and become silent."
The statement about a relationship is given in the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad
(4.3.32):
etasyaivānandasyānyāni bhūtāni mātram upajīvanti
"The bliss of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the highest. All others
experience only a small portion of that bliss."

The statement about a difference is given in the following words:
anyaj jñānaṁ tu jīvānāṁ
anyaj jñānaṁ parasya ca
nityānandāvyayaṁ pūrṇaṁ
paraṁ jñānaṁ vidhīyate
"The knowledge possessed by the individual spirit souls is one thing and the
knowledge possessed by the Supreme Personality of Godhead is another. The
perfect, complete, blissful, and immutable knowledge possessed by the Supreme
Personality of Godhead is higher."
The bliss and other attributes described in these statements are not at all like
the ordinary bliss and other attributes found in this world.
Here someone may object: Still, what is described with the word "jar" cannot
really be different from a jar.
To answer this objection the author of the sūtras speaks the following words.
Sūtra 33
sāmānyāt tu
sāmānyāt—because of resamblance; tu—but.
But because of a common quality.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "tu" (but) is used here to dispel doubt. As the word "jar" is used to
describe many different kinds of jars, which all have a single quality of "jarness" in
common, so the word "bliss" describes many different kinds of ordinary and
extraordinary blisses, which all have a single quality of "blissness" in common.
However the different kinds of bliss and other attributes are not alike in all
respects. Therefore it is said:
para-jñānamayo 'sadbhir