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

संशयः — क्या स्वर्गलोक-प्राप्ति आदि पुण्य-फल यज्ञादि कर्मों के अनुष्ठान से स्वतः प्राप्त होते हैं, अथवा वे परमेश्वर के विधान (स्वीकृति) द्वारा प्राप्त होते हैं?
पूर्वपक्षः — ये समस्त फल यज्ञादि कर्मों के सम्पादन से ही उत्पन्न होते हैं; इसमें परमेश्वर की कोई भूमिका नहीं है।
सिद्धान्तः — इसके समाधान में सूत्रकार भगवान् बादरायण अपना निश्चित मत (सिद्धान्त) प्रस्तुत करते हैं—

सूत्र ३९

फलमत उपपत्तेः ॥ ३९ ॥
पदच्छेदः एवं शब्दार्थः
फलम् — कर्मफल; अतः — उस परमेश्वर से ही; उपपत्तेः — क्योंकि यही युक्तिसंगत (उपपन्न) है।
सूत्रार्थः कर्मों का फल उस परमेश्वर से ही प्राप्त होता है, क्योंकि यही युक्तियुक्त है।
श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण विरचित गोविन्दभाष्य (तात्पर्य)
स्वर्गलोक की प्राप्ति तथा अन्य पुण्य-फल, जो यज्ञादि सद्धर्मों के अनुष्ठान से साध्य हैं, वस्तुतः स्वयं परमेश्वर द्वारा ही प्रदान किए जाते हैं।
ऐसा क्यों? इस पर सूत्रकार कहते हैं—"उपपत्तेः" (क्योंकि यही तर्कसंगत है)।
नित्य, सर्वज्ञ, सर्वशक्तिमान् एवं परम उदार परमेश्वर की जब यज्ञादि कर्मों द्वारा आराधना की जाती है,
तब वे ही कालान्तर में उन सत्कर्मों का अभीष्ट फल प्रदान करते हैं।
कर्म तो स्वतः अचेतन (जड़) हैं तथा उत्पन्न होकर क्षणमात्र में विनष्ट हो जाते हैं; अतः वे विनष्ट होकर कालान्तरभावी फल देने में असमर्थ हैं। यही इसका तात्पर्य है।
अग्रिम सूत्र में सूत्रकार इसका श्रुति-प्रमाण प्रस्तुत करते हैं—

सूत्र ४०

श्रुतत्वाच्च ॥ ४० ॥
पदच्छेदः एवं शब्दार्थः
श्रुतत्वात् — श्रुति-शास्त्र में ऐसा ही प्रतिपादित होने के कारण; च — तथा / भी।
सूत्रार्थः तथा श्रुति-शास्त्र द्वारा प्रमाणित होने के कारण भी (वही फलदाता सिद्ध होते हैं)।

Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (3.9.28) it is said:
vijñānaṁ ānandaṁ brahma rātir dātuḥ parāyaṇaṁ
"The Supreme Personality of Godhead is full of knowledge and bliss. It is He
who gives the fruits of actions to they who perform yajñas."
In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.24) it is also said:
sa vā eṣa mahān aja ātmā annādo vasu-dānaḥ
"The unborn Supreme Personality of Godhead gives the fruits of work."
These two passages explain that the Supreme Lord gives the fruits of action.
The word "dātuḥ" means "of the performer of yajña", and "rātiḥ" means “the giver
of the results".
Sūtra 41
dharmaṁ jaiminir ata eva
dharmaṁ—piety; jaiminiḥ—Jaimini; ataḥ—from Him; eva—indeed.
Jaimini affirms that piety comes from Him.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Jaimini holds that piety comes from the Supreme Lord. The pious deed that
gives an auspicious result itself comes from the Supreme Lord. In the Kauṣītaki
Upaniṣad (3.8) it is said:
eṣa eva sādhu karma kārayati

"The Lord engages the living entity in pious activities."*
According to Jaimini, the Supreme Lord does not give the results of actions,
either directly or indirectly. The Lord creates only the actions themselves and the
results are given by the actions.
Here someone may object: Is it not so that actions are over in a moment,
whereas there is often a great lapse of time before actions bear their karmic result?
If the actions quickly cease to exist they cannot create the karmic results, for
something that has ceased to exist cannot create something new.
To this objection Jaimini may reply: No. It is not so. Even though the action
itself comes to an end, it leaves behind a potential result. Only when this result is
fulfilled is the action actually completed. Even if there is a considerable lapse of
time, the action itself gives the result to the person, a result appropriate to that
particular action. Thus actions are the givers of results.
In the following words Śrīla Vyāsadeva, the author of the sūtras, gives His
opinion.
Sūtra 42
pūrvaṁ tu bādarāyaṇo hetu-vyapadeśāt
pūrvaṁ—previous; tu—but; bādarāyaṇaḥ—Vyāsadeva; hetu—of the cause;
vyapadeśāt—from the description.
But Vyāsadeva holds the previous view, for the Lord is described as the cause.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Here the word "tu" (but) is employed to dispel doubt. Vyāsadeva holds the
previous view, that the Supreme Personality of Godhead awards the fruits of
action. Why so? The sūtra explains: "for the Lord is described as the cause". In the
Praśna Upaniṣad (3.7) it is said:
puṇyena puṇyaṁ lokaṁ nayati pāpena pāpam
"The Supreme Lord takes the pious to the world of the pious and the sinful to
the world of the sinful."

In this way the scriptures teach that the Supreme Lord awards the results of
action. That is the meaning. Because they already have ceased to exist, the actions
themselves cannot be the cause of the karmic results. Also, it is the Supreme Lord
Himself who is the creator of karma, for the scriptures say:
dravyaṁ karma ca kālaś ca
"The Supreme Personality of Godhead is creator of matter, karma, and time.
In this way it is proved that the Lord is the creator of karma. The idea that
actions leave behind a potential result is a lame and foolish idea. Actions are
inanimate and unconscious. They are like a block of wood or a stone, and
therefore they have no power to award the results of actions. Also, the Śruti-śāstra
never describes them as awarding the results of actions.
Here someone may object: Is it not so that the demigods are worshiped in the
performance of yajñas and it is the demigods themselves who give the results of
these yajñas.
If this is said, then I reply: It is by the sanction of the Supreme Lord that the
demigods are able to give these results. This is clearly described in the Antaryāmī
Brāhmaṇa. Therefore the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself awards the
results of actions. The lotus-eyed Supreme Lord Himself affirms this in the
following words (Bhagavad-gītā 7.21-22):
yo yo yāṁ yāṁ tanuṁ bhaktaḥ
śraddhayārcitum icchati
tasya tasyācalāṁ śraddhāṁ
tām eva vidadhāmy aham
"I am in everyone's heart as the Supersoul. As soon as one desires to worship
some demigod, I make his faith steady so he can devote himself to that particular
deity.*
sa tayā śraddhayā yuktas
tasyārādhanam īhate
labhate ca tataḥ kāmān
mayaiva vihitān hi tān
"Endowed with such a faith, he endeavors to worship a particular demigod and
obtain his desires. But in actuality these benefits are bestowed by Me alone."*

In this way worshiped by the performance of yajña, the Supreme Lord Himself
gives the auspicious results to the worshiper. When He is thus pleased by
devotion, the Supreme Lord will give everything, even Himself to His devotee. This
will be described later on with quotes from the Śruti-śāstra.
Thus, in these two padas has been seen: 1. the fault of the material world,
which is an abode of many sufferings, beginning with repeated birth and death, 2.
the faultless glories of the Lord, 3. the Lord's being the controller of all, 4. the
Lord's form of pure spirit, and 5. the Lord's being not different from His attributes.
By hearing of these things one develops a great thirst to attain the Lord's
association and a great disgust for all that is far from the Lord. In this way one
comes to attain the Lord. That is what was revealed in these two padas.
Pada 3
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
parayā nirasya māyāṁ guṇa-
karmādīni yo bhajati nityam
devaś caitanya-tanur manasi
mamāsau parisphuratu kṛṣṇaḥ
May Lord Kṛṣṇa, who with the aid of His transcendental potency pushes aside
the influence of māyā, who has a host of transcendental virtues eternally, who
enjoys eternal transcendental pastimes, and who has now appeared as Śrī Caitanya
Mahāprabhu, appear in my heart.
In this pada will be revealed the way of worshiping the Lord's transcendental
attributes. As in a vaidūrya jewel many splendid colors are always manifest, so in
the Supreme Personality of Godhead many different transcendental forms, all
perfect and without beginning, are also manifest eternally. Understanding that the
Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is supremely perfect, complete, and pure,
has many different forms, a devotee becomes attracted to one of the Lord's forms
and directs his worship to that form. If the various scriptures describe
transcendental virtues present in that form of the Lord, all those virtues may also
be ascribed to that single chosen form. Thus a person who worships the Supreme
Personality of Godhead as present in His powers and opulences, such as the mind
and the other powers of the world, should review the scriptures' descriptions of
the various qualities of these forms, but not of other forms of the Lord.

Others, however, speak in the following way: The one Supreme Personality of
Godhead assumes different forms as an actor assumes different roles on the stage.
In this way the Lord has many different names and abodes. For this reason all the
qualities and pastimes of the different forms of the Lord, as described in the
scriptures, may be ascribed to any one of the Lord's forms.
Here someone may object: Is it not so that many of the qualities of many of the
Lord's forms, qualities described in the scriptures, cannot be properly ascribed to
all of the Lord's forms? Is it not so that sweetness, opulence, peacefulness,
austerity, ferociousness, and other qualities may be mutually contradictory, and it
may also be contradictory to ascribe the features of having a horn, tail, mane, tusk,
or other features appropriate to the Lord's forms like Varāha and others to the
Lord's humanlike forms, which carry a flute, conchshell, bow, arrows, and other
paraphernalia? Therefore in the Mahābhārata it is said:
yo 'nyathā santam ātmānam
anyathā pratipadyate
kiṁ tena na kṛtaṁ pāpaṁ
caureṇātmāpahāriṇā
"A person who ascribes to the Supreme Lord qualities that the Lord does not
actually possess is a thief who robs himself. Does he not sin with his words?"
Therefore, because of both the injunction of Smṛti-śāstra and the experience of
the wise sages, one should not ascribe the qualities of one of Lord's forms to
another of the Lord's forms.
If this is said, then the following reply may be given: The qualities of one of
Lord's forms may be ascribed to another of the Lord's forms only when the
qualities are appropriate to that particular form. Ascribing the qualities of one of
Lord's forms to another of the Lord's forms is of two kinds: 1. cintana, and 2. dhī-
mātra. They who perform this first kind of meditation are called sva-niṣṭha, and
they who perform the second kind of meditation are called ekāntī. In the next
pada three kinds of wise devotees, headed by the sva-niṣṭha devotees, will be
described. The sva-niṣṭha devotees have equal love for all the Lord's forms. They
see all the qualities of all the Lord's forms present equally in each of the Lord's
forms. They do not see anything improper in ascribing many contradictory
qualities to each of the Lord's forms. They consider that the Lord by His great
potency may possess many mutually contradictory qualities, just as a vaidūrya
jewel may display many different colors.
The ekāntī devotees, who are divided into two groups: pariniṣṭhita and
nirapekṣa, do not have equal love for all the Lord's forms. They meditate only on
the qualities of one form the Lord, the form they have chosen. They see the
qualities of this form alone. Even though they are well aware of the Lord's other
forms, they do not meditate or gaze upon them. On His part, the Lord generally
does not reveal His other forms to these devotees. This will be reveled in another
adhikaraṇa. As for the passage quoted from the Mahābhārata, its true meaning is

that it is a rebuke hurled at the impersonalists, who claim that the Supreme is
consciousness and nothing else. The truth that the Supreme certainly does have
qualities, and therefore the Lord's qualities should be sought out by they who seek
liberation, is described in Chāndogya Upaniṣad (8.1.1-6). It is also said, in thw
Taittirīya Upaniṣad (2.4.1):
ānandaṁ brahmaṇo vidvān
na bibheti kutaścana
"He who knows that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is full of bliss never
fears anything."
This means that they who understand the qualities of the Supreme become free
of fear. In this way the scriptures affirm that the Supreme certainly does have
qualities. The impersonalists claim that the Lord's qualities are either falsely
ascribed to Him or else are accepted only because of the material traditions of this
world. However, because many of these qualities are present in the Lord alone and
no one else, it cannot be said that these qualities are falsely ascribed to the Lord,
and because the revelation of scripture does not describe them as such, it also
cannot be said that the qualities of the Lord are accepted only because of the
material traditions of this world. They who claim that the qualities of the Lord are
imagined to facilitate worship of the Lord, as in the statement, "Imagining the
goddess of speech to be a cow, one should worship her", are all fools. Their idea is
destroyed by the simple statement of the scriptures:
satyam etyopāsīta
"Approaching the Supreme Reality, one should worship Him."
Even the impersonalists, in their commentaries on sūtras 3.3.12 and 3.3.38,
affirm that the Supreme is bliss and there is no difference between the individual
souls and the Supreme. In this way they accept the idea that the qualities of the
worshipable Supreme are real and not metaphors. When the scriptures say that the
Supreme has no qualities (nirguṇa), the intention is that He has no material
qualities. Because it is clearly stated that the Lord is not different from His
qualities, this objection of the impersonalists should not be taken seriously. For
the purpose of meditation the Lord's qualities should be understood to be of two
kinds: aṅgi-niṣṭha (general qualities) and aṅga-niṣṭha (features of the Lord's form).
It is said that one may collect from all the different parts of the Vedas descriptions
of the Lord's qualities.

Adhikaraṇa 1
The Lord Should Be Sought
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Viṣaya (the subject to be discussed): To understand the Lord's qualities one
should search all the texts of the Vedas.
Saṁśaya (doubt): Should one learn about the Supreme by studying the branch
(śākha) of Vedic texts in one's own community, or should one study all the
branches of the Vedas?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): Because all the branches of the Vedas are
different, one should study only one's own branch of the Vedas.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion:
Sūtra 1
sarva-vedānta-pratyayaṁ codanādy-aviśeṣāt
sarva—all; veda—Vedas; anta—end; pratyayam—meaning; codana—
injunctions; ādi—beginning with; aviśeṣāt—because of not being different.
Because the Vedic injunctions and all other sources of real knowledge are not
genuinely different, therefore knowledge of Him is the conclusion of all the Vedas.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "anta" (end) here means "conclusion". The word "anta" is also used
in this way in Bhagavad-gītā (2.16):
ubhayor api dṛṣṭo 'ntaḥ
"This they have concluded by studying the nature of both."*

Thus knowledge of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the final conclusion
taught by all the Vedas. Why is that? The sūtra explains: "because the Vedic
injunctions and all other sources of real knowledge are not genuinely different."
The "other sources of real knowledge" here refers to logic. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka
Upaniṣad (1.4.7) it is said:
ātmety evopāsīta
"One should worship the Supreme."
These words, as well as the promptings of logic, confirm the truth that these
statements and many others like them in passages of all the Vedas, all describe the
same Supreme Lord. The same Supreme Lord is described in the same way in the
Kaṇva, Mādhyandina, and other recensions of the Vedas.
Here someone may object: In one part of the Vedas (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad
3.9.28) it is said:
vijñānam ānandam brahma
"The Supreme is knowledge and bliss."
However, in another part of the Vedas (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 1.1.9) it is said:
yaḥ sarva-jñaḥ sarva-vit
"The Supreme knows everything."
Because in this way each branch of the Vedas speaks differently of the Supreme,
they do not all describe the same object as the Supreme.
If this is said, the author of the sūtras gives the following reply.
Sūtra 2
bhedād iti cen naikasyām api
bhedāt—because of difference; iti—thus; cet—if; na—not; ekasyām—in one;
api—also.

If it is said, "because they are different," then I reply, "It is not so, for it is also
in one".
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
It is not so. That is so because these differences are seen even within the same
branch of the Vedas. An example of this is the Taittirīya Upaniṣad, which gives the
following two statements.
satyaṁ jñānam anantaṁ brahma
"The limitless Supreme is both knowledge and truth."
ānando brahma
"The Supreme is bliss."
In this way the many different branches of the Vedas describe the same form
of the Supreme Lord. They do not contradict each other at all.
Sūtra 3
svādhyāyasya tathātvena hi samācāre 'dhikārāc ca
svādhyāyasya—of Vedic study; tathātvena—by being so; hi—indeed;
samācāre—in Vedic rituals; adhikārāt—because of being qualified; ca—also.
Because of being qualified to study the Vedas and to perform rituals.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
In the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka (2.15) it is said:

svādhyāyo 'dhyetavyaḥ
"One should study the Vedas."
In this way one is ordered to study all the Vedas. In the Smṛti-śāstra it is said:
vedaḥ kṛtsno 'dhigantavyaḥ sa-rahasyo dvijanmanā
"A brāhmaṇa should study the entire Veda, including even its confidential
portions."
The word "samācāre" in this sūtra means "because all are qualified to perform
all pious rituals". The Smṛti-śāstra confirms this in the following words:
sarva-vedokta-mārgeṇa
karma kurvīta nityaśaḥ
ānando hi phalaṁ yasmāc
chākhā-bhedo hy aśakti-jaḥ
sarva-karma-kṛtau yasmād
aśaktāḥ sarva-jantavaḥ
śākhā-bhedaṁ karma-bhedaṁ
vyāsas tasmād aciklpad
"Following the path of all the Vedas, one should regularly perform pious
rituals. Bliss is the result attained by this. The Veda was divided into different
branches because the people were not able to perform all the pious deeds described
in the Veda. That is why Vyāsa divided the Veda into many branches and the one
collection of pious rituals into many collections."
Therefore, if a person is able to do so, he may understand the Supreme by
performing all the spiritual practices described in all the branches of the Vedas. In
the next sūtra the author gives an example of indirect reasoning leading to the
same conclusion.
Sūtra 4
sava-vac ca tan niyamaḥ
sava—yajñas; vat—like; ca—and; tat—that; niyamaḥ—rule.

That rule is like the yajñas.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The "savas" here are the seven yajñas beginning with the saurya-yajña and
ending with the śataudana-yajña which, because they are performed with only one
fire, may be performed only by the followers of the Atharva Veda. The worship of
the Supreme Lord, however, can performed by the followers of all the Vedas.
The word "salila-vat" (like water) is an alternate reading of the first word in this
sūtra. If this reading is accepted, then the sūtra means, "As all waters flow, without
restriction, into the sea, so all the statements of the Vedas describe, as much as
they have the power, the Supreme Personality of Godhead." In the Agni Purāṇa it
is said:
yathā nadīnāṁ salilaṁ
śaktyā sāgaratāṁ vrajet
evaṁ sarvāṇi vākyāni
puṁ-śaktyā brahma-vittaye
"As the water of rivers, as far as it has the power, always enters the sea, so all
words, as far as their speaker has the power, should be employed to understand
the Supreme Lord."
Sūtra 5
darśayati ca
darśayati—reveals; ca—also.
It also reveals it.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
In the Kaṭha Upaniṣad (1.2.15) it is said:

sarve vedā yat-padam āmananti
"All the Vedas describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead."
This means that the Supreme Lord is known by all the Vedas, or, in other
words, the Vedas reveal the truth of Lord Hari. The word "ca" (and) in this sūtra
hints, "as far as one has the power". They who have the power may worship the
Supreme Lord by performing the pious rituals described in all the branches of the
Vedas. They who do not have the power must worship the Supreme Lord by
performing the pious rituals described in their own community's branch of the
Vedas. The conclusion is that the Supreme Lord is the final object of knowledge
sought by all the branches of the Vedas. This truth was also described in the very
beginning of Vedānta-sūtra (1.1.4):
tat tu samanvayāt
"But that (Lord Viṣṇu is the sole topic of discussion in the Vedas) is confirmed
by all scriptures."
This truth is thus repeated here in the discussion of the properness of studying
the different qualities of the Supreme Lord. Because this repetition strengthens the
argument here, there is no fault in it.
Adhikaraṇa 2
The Lord's Qualities Are Described in Many Scriptures
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Now the author of the sūtras will show that the many qualities of the Lord may
be understood by studying all the Vedas. For example, in the Atharva Veda's
Gopāla-tāpanī Upaniṣad (1.8), the Supreme Lord is described as a cowherd boy
dark like a tamāla tree, dressed in yellow garments, decorated with a Kaustubha
jewel, wearing a peacock-feather, playing graceful melodies on a flute, and
surrounded by gopas, gopīs, and surabhi cows. There He is the Deity of Gokula. In
the Rāma-tāpanī Upaniṣad, however, He is described as the Lord whose left side is
decorated by Jānakī-devī, holding a bow, the killer of Rāvaṇa and a host of
demons, and the king of Ayodhyā. In the Rāma-tāpanī Upaniṣad it is said:

prakṛtyā sahitaḥ śyāmaḥ
pīta-vāsā jaṭā-dharaḥ
dvi-bhujaḥ kuṇḍalī ratna-
mālī dhīro dhanur-dharaḥ
"Decorated with earrings and a jewel necklace, His complexion dark, His
garments yellow, and the hair on His head matted, saintly, two-armed Lord Rāma
is accompanied by Goddess Sītā."
In the scriptures the Lord's form as Nṛsiṁha is described as having a
frightening face and filling His enemies with fear. The word "bhīṣaṇa"
(frightening), which occurs in Lord Nṛsiṁha's mantra, is explained in the
following words of the Nṛsiṁha-tāpanī Upaniṣad:
atha kasmād ucyate bhīṣaṇam iti. yasmād yasya rūpaṁ dṛṣṭvā sarve lokāḥ sarve
devāḥ sarvāṇi bhūtāni bhītyā palāyante svayaṁ yataḥ kutaścin na bibheti.
bhīṣāsmād vātaḥ pavate bhīṣodeti sūryaḥ. bhīṣāsmād agniś cendraś ca mṛtyur
dhāvati pañcamaḥ.
"Why is the Lord called frightening? Because when all the demigods, all the
worlds, and all living entities see His form, they all flee in fear. He fears no one.
Out of fear of Him the wind blows and the sun rises. Out of fear of Him fire, the
moon, and death all flee."
The Lord's form as Trivikrama is described in the Ṛg Veda (1.154.1):
viṣṇor nu kaṁ vīryāṇi pravocaṁ
yaḥ pārthivāni vimame rajāṁsi
yo askambhayad uttaraṁ sadhasthaṁ
vicakramāṇas tredhorugāya
"How can I describe all the glories and powers of Lord Viṣṇu, who created the
heaven and earth, established the worlds above and below, and with three steps
passed over all the worlds?"
Therefore, like the yajñas, which are different because they are offered to
different demigods, so the method of worship to be offered to the different forms
of the Supreme Lord are all different because the qualities of the Lord's different
forms are different.
Saṁśaya (doubt): Should the Śruti-śāstra's description of the Lord's qualities in
one kind of worship be added in another kind of worship, or not?

Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): The Śruti-śāstra's description of the Lord's
qualities in one passage should be heard. One should not mix that description
with other descriptions of the Lord in other passages.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion.
Sūtra 6
upasaṁhāro 'rthābhedād vidhi-śeṣa-vat samāne ca
upasaṁhāraḥ—combination; artha—of meaning; abhedāt—because of non-
difference; vidhi—of duties; śeṣa—remainder; vat-like; samāne—in being the
same; ca—also.
In what is common there may be combination, for the meaning is not different.
This is like what is appropriate for the rules and regulations.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "ca" (and) is used here for limitation. When the method of worship
is the same, when the pure Supreme Personality of Godhead is the object of
worship, and

गोपालतापनी उपनिषद् में कहा गया है:
एकोऽपि सन् बहुधा योऽवभाति ।
"यद्यपि वे एक हैं, तथापि अनेक रूपों में प्रकाशित होते हैं।"
इस प्रसंग में भगवान् रामचन्द्र तथा अन्य अवतारों के रूपों को
भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण के ध्यान में समाहित किया गया है।
श्रीमद्भागवत में भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण के प्रति कहा गया है:
नमस्ते रघुवर्याय
रावणान्तकराय च ॥
"रघुश्रेष्ठ तथा रावण का वध करने वाले आपको नमस्कार है।"
ऐसे अनेक अन्य वचन उद्धृत किये जा सकते हैं जो उन ध्यानों को दर्शाते हैं जहाँ
भगवान् के विभिन्न रूपों के वर्णनों को एक साथ लाया गया है।
यहाँ पूर्वपक्ष (आपत्ति): बृहदारण्यक उपनिषद् (१.४.७) में कहा गया है:
आत्मेत्येवोपासीत ।
"परमात्मा के रूप में ही उपासना करनी चाहिए।"
अतः केवल एक ही रूप की उपासना करनी चाहिए और उपासना की अपनी पद्धति में
अन्य रूपों का समावेश नहीं करना चाहिए।
यदि ऐसा कहा जाए, तो सूत्रकार (सिद्धान्त रूप में) निम्नलिखित उत्तर देते हैं:
॥ सूत्रम् ७ ॥
अन्यथात्वं शब्दादिति चेन्नाविशेषात् ॥
अन्यथात्वम् — अन्यथा (भेद), शब्दात् — श्रुतिशास्त्र के कारण, इति चेत् — यदि ऐसा कहें,
न — तो ऐसा नहीं है, अविशेषात् — (भगवद्रूपों में) विशेष भेद न होने के कारण।
यदि कोई कहे कि "श्रुति-शास्त्र के कारण ऐसा अन्यथात्व (भेद) है", तो उत्तर है "ऐसा नहीं है..."

not so, for there is nothing specific".
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
If someone claims that Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (1.4.7) refutes the idea of thus
bringing together the Lord's qualities, then I reply: No. It is not so. Why not? The
sūtra explains: "for there is nothing specific". This means that no scriptural
passage declares, "the Lord's qualities should not be worshiped together." The
word "eva" (indeed) in Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (1.4.7) means that one should
not worship what is not the Supreme Lord. It does not mean that the Lord's
qualities can not be worshiped together. If it is said, "The king alone is seen", that
does not mean that the king's royal parasol and other royal paraphernalia were
absent. It is said:
tasmād yathā-śakti-guṇāś cintyāḥ
"Therefore, as far as one is able, one should meditate on the Lord's various
transcendental qualities."
In this way it is proved that one may bring together the various qualities of the
Lord.
As a vaidūrya jewel manifests many different colors, so the Supreme Lord
manifests many different forms. Each of these forms is the same perfect, complete,
and pure Supreme Lord. In some forms the Lord displays all His qualities, and
other forms the Lord does not display all His qualities. Therefore a wise devotee
may meditate on all the Lord qualities, as described in the scriptures, as being
present in the particular form of the Lord that is chosen for worship.
Adhikaraṇa 3
The Ekāntī Devotees Do Not Meditate On All the Lord's Qualities
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Although they are learned in the many branches of the Vedas, still the ekāntī
devotees meditate only the Lord's qualities as revealed in their own Upaniṣads,
which they have carefully studied. Even though they are aware of other qualities,
they do not meditate on them. In this way there is an exception to what was
previously described.

Viṣaya (the subject matter): The subject matter here is a passage of Gopāla-
tāpanī Upaniṣad.
Saṁśaya (doubt): In the worship performed by the ekāntī devotees, should all
the qualities of the Supreme Lord be brought together or not?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): Because the Lord's qualities are to be
praised, the ekāntī devotees should meditate in this way, if they are able.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion.
Sūtra 8
na vā prakaraṇa-bhedāt parovarīyastvādi-vat
na—not; vā—or; prakaraṇa—of devotion; bhedāt—because of differences;
parovarīyastva—greater than the greatest; ādi—beginning with; vat—like.
Certainly not. Because of the differences in devotion. Like the Parovarīya and
others.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "vā" (or) is used in the sense of “certainly". The ekāntī devotees do
not bring the qualities of the Lord's other forms into the specific form they have
selected to worship. In this way the ekāntī devotees who are exclusively devoted to
Lord Kṛṣṇa do not think of Lord Nṛsiṁha's mane, teeth, fearsomeness, and other
qualities as present in Lord Kṛṣṇa. In the same way the ekāntī devotees who are
exclusively devoted to Lord Nṛsiṁha do not think of Lord Kṛṣṇa's flute, stick,
peacock-feather, and other qualities as present in Lord Nṛsiṁha. Why is that? The
sūtra explains: “prakaraṇa-bhedāt" (because of the differences in devotion). The
word "prakaraṇa" here means "the most exalted (pra) activity (karaṇa)."
Therefore the word “prakaraṇa" here refers to devotional service. The word
“bhedāt" here means "because of the differences".
Because it is more intense and deep, the devotion of the ekaṇtī devotees is more
exalted than the devotion of the svaniṣṭha devotees. Here the author of the sūtras
gives and example. He says: "Like the Parovarīya and others." This means that the
ekāntī devotees who are exclusively devoted to the Lord's form as the Hiraṇya
Puruṣa in the sun planet do not ascribe to their object of worship the qualities of
the Lord's form as Parovarīya, a form worshiped by the worshipers of Udgītha. The

word Parovarīya means "greater than the greatest". The example here is of the
worshipers of Ugītha in relation to Parovarīya.
Here someone may object: Is it not so that the ekāntīs and svaniṣṭhas are both
called devotees of the Lord and therefore they must both meditate on all the Lord's
qualities just as they who call themselves brāhmaṇas must all meditate on the
Gāyatrī-mantra?
If this is said, then the author of the sūtras gives the following reply.
Sūtra 9
saṁjñātaś cet tad uktam asti tu tad api
saṁjñātaḥ—by the name; cet—if; tat—that; uktam—spoken; asti—is; tu—but;
tat—that; api—also.
If it is because of the name, then I reply, "But it was already said. That also."
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "tu" (but) is employed here to dispel doubt. If it is said that all who
worship the Supreme must meditate on all His qualities, then the answer was
already given in the previous sūtra. The answer is, "Certainly not. Because of the
differences in devotion." Although they are certainly included in the general
category of the Lord's devotees, the ekāntīs are the best of the devotees, and
therefore they do not meditate on all the qualities of the Lord. If it were otherwise
then they would not be the best of the devotees. Because the ekāntī devotees are
passionately devoted to one particular form of the Lord, they are superior to the
svaniṣṭha devotees who are in a general way devoted to all the forms of the Lord.
Also, even the svaniṣṭha devotees are not able to meditate on every single one of
the Lord's qualities. In the Ṛg Veda (1.154.1) it is said:
viṣṇor nu kaṁ vīryāṇi pravocaṁ
"How can I describe all the glories and powers of Lord Viṣṇu?"
In the Smṛti-śāstra it is said:

नान्तं गुणानामगुणस्य जग्मुर्
योगेश्वरा ये भवपाद्ममुख्याः।
"ब्रह्मा, शिव, देवगण तथा योगेश्वर भी प्राकृत गुणों से अतीत
भगवान् के दिव्य गुणों का अन्त नहीं पा सके।"
सूत्र व्याख्या करता है, "अस्ति" (है), जिसका यहाँ अर्थ है, "सभी भक्त
केवल 'भक्त' नाम धारण करने के कारण सर्वथा एकसमान हैं—यह विचार
'हेतोरन्वयव्यभिचार' नामक हेत्वाभास (तार्किक दोष) है।" जिस प्रकार भगवान् के परोवरीय
स्वरूप के उपासक तथा हिरण्मय स्वरूप के उपासक दोनों ही उद्गीथ के
उपासक माने जाने पर भी भगवान् के विषय में भिन्न धारणाएँ रखते हैं,
उसी प्रकार स्वनिष्ठ और एकान्ती भक्तों की भी भगवान् के विषय में
भिन्न धारणाएँ होती हैं; स्वनिष्ठ भक्त भगवान् के समस्त गुणों का
ध्यान करते हैं तथा एकान्ती भक्त केवल अपने अभीष्ट-उपास्य रूप के
गुणों का ही ध्यान करते हैं। यही इन दोनों अधिकरणों का सिद्धान्त-निष्कर्ष है।
अधिकरण ४
भगवान् का बाल्य एवं यौवन
श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण द्वारा अवतरणिका
अब सूत्रकार भगवान् की बाल्यावस्था आदि के गुणों के ध्यान में
उपसंहार (संग्रह) के विषय में विचार आरम्भ करते हैं। गोपालतापनी उपनिषद् में
कहा गया है:
कृष्णाय देवकीनन्दनाय ॐ तत् सत्। भूर्भुवः स्वस्तस्मै वै नमो नमः।
"ॐ तत् सत्। भूर्भुवः स्वः। देवकीनन्दन भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण को नमस्कार है।"
नाम-कौमुदीकार 'कृष्ण' शब्द का लक्षण इस प्रकार करते हैं:
कृष्णशब्दस्तु तमालनीलत्विषि यशोदास्तनन्धये रूढिः।
"कृष्ण शब्द का अर्थ है: यशोदा के स्तनन्धय (शिशु) पुत्र, जो तमाल वृक्ष के समान श्यामवर्ण हैं।"