If the Abheda-vada (the doctrine of non-differentiation) corresponded to reality, the realized sages would have testified to it. Instead, in the teachings and experiences of Vyasa, Sukadeva and Suta Gosvami we find the opposite description. In fact, Vyasa clearly saw that Purna-purusa, the illusory energy (Maya) and the jiva victim of illusion were three different entities. Otherwise, Sukadeva would never have been attracted to Krishna’s lilas and Suta Gosvami would not have uttered the 18,000 verses attesting to the superiority of devotional service over any other degree of realization. Caitanya Mahaprabhu says:
krishna name ye ananda-sindhu-asvadana
brahmananda tara age khatodaka-sama
“Compared to the ocean of transcendental bliss enjoyed by chanting the Hare Krishna mantra, the pleasure derived from the realization of Brahman (brahmananda) is like a small amount of water contained in a channel.” (Caitanya Caritamrta Adilila 7,97).
The Lord goes on to quote a verse from Hari-bhakti-sudhodaya (14.36). And in his Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu (1.1.38), Rupa Gosvami says:
“Even if brahmananda were multiplied by a million, it could not compare even with an atomic portion of the pleasure that can be enjoyed in pure devotional service.”
Therefore, both the scriptures and the great saints and scholars agree that Isvara (Sri Krishna) and the jivas are essentially different in identity.
The Brahma Sutra of Krishna Dvaipayana Vyasa also agrees in questioning the doctrines just discussed. The two Mayavada theories we have just discussed can only be used positively in a secondary sense.
Jiva Gosvami clarifies what is meant by “… they can only be used positively in a secondary sense.”
Those scriptures proposing non-difference can be used to arrive at the same conclusion that Vyasa reaches during samadhi by avoiding the contradiction present in the statement that Isvara and jiva are identical and separate, because of the inconceivable power that is proper to Isvara, they are at the same time identical and separate, like the sun and its innumerable rays.
The concept seems more difficult than it really is. Baladeva Vidyabhusana explains this with an analogy:
“There are two brahmanas, one dark-skinned and the other light-skinned; Both are brahmanas, but they are also two distinct persons. So, Isvara and jiva are both spiritual in nature, but Krishna is Isvara and the individual soul (us) is infinitesimal, each with its own eternal individuality.”
The Gosvami Maharaja thus shows his total adherence to the teachings of Mahaprabhu, proposing and explaining in simple words the famous acintya-bhedabheda-tattva, simultaneous equality and difference.
Thus, we have proven that Isvara and jiva are different. The first is the basis of Maya’s existence) and the second is Maya’s victim. Ultimately, only the worship of Isvara (by the jiva) can be the correct abhideya.
Sri Jiva Gosvami comes to the following conclusions:
(a) Having established that Isvara and jiva are distinct,
- b) and that the former is supreme and the latter is subordinate to it,
- c) it follows that the supreme means of realization is the worship and veneration of Isvara.
This conclusion brings us to the next topic, the subject of virtuous discussion.
This is a section of the book “Tattva Sandarbha”, in English.
To buy the complete book, click here
Leave a Reply