SECTION THIRTY-TWO         

             The process (abhidheya) and the goal (prayojana), as established previously,  are based on the essential difference between the Lord and the living entity. Çré Vyäsa saw this distinction, as explained in the verse beginning with "yayä"(SB. 1.7.5). The living entity, deluded by Mäyä, although conscious by nature and beyond the inert three modes, considers himself to be this insentient body, composed of the three modes of material nature. Because of this the living entity attains the undesirable end, repeated birth and death.

            Not only is the living being conscious, but yayä-sammohitä, "deluded by Mäyä", and manute, "considers himself", indicate that he has consciousness as his very nature, just as light has the capacity to illuminate itself and other objects. This is confirmed in Bhagavad-gitä, ajïänenävåtaà jïänaà tena muhyanti jantavaù (B.g. 5.15) "Living beings are bewildered because their consciousness is covered by ignorance." Thus the other opinion that "the limiting material designation, upädhi,  constitutes the nature of a jéva" and "being rid of the upädhi is liberation" has been rejected.

            Here the phrase "deluded by Mäyä", implies that Mäyä alone is responsible for deluding the living being and the Lord is indifferent. As seen later in Çrémad Bhägavatam, "The illusory energy of the Lord cannot stand in front of the Lord, being ashamed of her deeds, but foolish people deluded by her, speak proudly of "I" and "mine". (SB. 2.5.13)

            Here the phrase "being ashamed" means that she knows her bewildering the living beings is not pleasing to the Lord, yet she is unable to tolerate that they have turned their backs on the Lord. This is explained in the Çrémad Bhägavatam: "Being attracted to something other than the Lord the living beings become fearful"(SB.11.2.37). Hence she covers their real nature and attracts them to matter since time immemorial..

 

ÇRÉ JÉVA TOÑAËÉ COMMENTARY

             In this section, Çréla Jéva Gosvämé shows the process of self-realization (abhidheya) as service to the Lord and the goal (prayojana) as love of God. Whenever there is service or love, there must be a distinction between the server and the served or the lover and the beloved, and therefore an eternal distinction must exist between the Lord and the living entities.

            According to the impersonalists this distinction exists only at vyävahärika, or the conditioned stage. At pärmärthika,  the liberated stage, all such distinction ceases, because Brahman alone exists on that level. Impersonalists hold that due to absolute oneness between God and the living being there can be no distinction whatsoever on the Brahman level.

            When this Brahman acquires Mäyä as a limiting adjunct (upädhi), He (if we are allowed to use this pronoun) is called jéva. The jéva does not otherwise exist, it is only this proximity to Mäyä (upädhi) that causes Brahman to have the apparent nature of jéva. Hence the featureless Brahman, for no other reason than adulteration by Mäyä, gets deluded and displays a form and a personality only when masquerading as a jéva. Salvation for this deluded Brahman, the mäyävädis say, is simply the giving up of this upädhi--by acquiring knowledge of Brahman.

            But this contradicts what Vyäsa saw in his trance. Çréla Vyäsa saw in His trance that jévas, by their intrinsic nature, are distinct from the Lord. He saw that only the jéva was deluded by Mäyä, and not Brahman or the Personality of Godhead; rather, He saw that Mäyä was not even able to face the Lord. God Himself has no direct involvement in deluding the jéva; He remains indifferent. In conclusion, Vyäsadeva realized that the Lord, the jéva, and Mäyä are all eternal, the Lord  being the support and the other two the supported.

            The phrases "being deluded" and "he thinks" indicate that delusion and its effects, ignorance and misery, are not part of the jéva's nature. These two phrases also indicate that the jéva is both conscious and possesses consciousness. A light bulb does not need an external light to illuminate itself and at the same time its light illuminates the objects around it. Similarly a jéva is self-concious and simultaneously he has the capacity to know objects outside of himself. In other words, to possess knowledge is an intrinsic aspect of his nature and it is not an acquired or borrowed ability, which is what the mäyävädi doctrine implies by positing that the jéva has no intrinsic attributes and has to acquire knowledge so he might get salvation.

             But when a jéva does not desire to serve the Lord, then Mäyä cannot tolerate that. She covers his knowledge and simultaneously casts him into a material body. These are the chief functions of Mäyä, to punish and to rectify the jéva who has turned his back on the Lord. The purpose of the punishment is not to inflict pain on the jéva, but to rectify him. That's why Kåñëa says in the Bhagavad-gétä that transcendental knowledge burns all the bondage of karma, just as fire burns fuel, because once a person has transcendental knowledge punishment has no purpose.

            But this does not mean that the jéva loses his capacity to possess knowledge. That is never possible. The jéva's knowledge is covered, but not lost, like when a light bulb is covered by an opaque object. Light may not show outside, but it still shines within. Similarly, although in the conditioned state the jéva's knowledge faculty is covered, his ability is still present. When his knowledge is covered, however, the conditioned jéva misuses his knowledge faculties and service propensities. Thus he suffers. But as soon as he again puts these faculties to proper use by practicing sädhanä-bhakti, his natural concealed state is revealed, he regains his original svarüpa and becomes situated in unending bliss. A more detailed discussion about this and other aspects of the jéva is given in the Paramätmä Sandarbha.

            But the question then arises, why does the all-powerful Lord not stop Mäyä from bewildering the jéva? Çréla Jéva Gosvämé explains this in the next section.