SECTION THIRTY-FIVE   

            Thus it is highly improper to conclude that the one undivided, conscious Brahman, who is the basis of Mäyä and the embodiment of knowledge, can simultaneously fall under the influence of Mäyä and be covered by ignorance. This explains the difference of class between the jéva and the Lord, and it proves that because of this difference in their natures, the jéva and the Lord are essentially distinct from each other.

 

ÇRÉ JÉVA TOÑAËÉ COMMENTARY

             Çréla Jéva Gosvämé, has analyzed the trance of Çréla Vyäsadeva and drawn the proper conclusions. Now, based on the same analysis, he gives arguments against the Mäyäväda theory of absolute oneness between God and the jéva. This understanding is completely antagonistic to bhakti and is therefore one of the greatest obstacles on the path of devotion. Çréla Raghunätha däsa Gosvämé compares impersonalism to a tigress that devours one's spiritual life. He says, katha mukti-vyäghryä na ñrëu kila sarvätmagilänéù (Manaù çikñä 4), "My dear mind, never listen to talk about liberation, which is like a tigress who swallows everything, including the jéva."

            Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu gave a stern warning to those who aspire for a correct understanding of the the Personality of Godhead. He said, "mäyävadi bhäñya çunile haya sarvanäça" (C.C. Madhya 6.153), "hearing Mäyäväda philosophy can completely destroy one's spiritual life". Ultimately, He says, the Mäyävädis, by describing Absolute Reality as not having any features, are the greatest offenders against the Supreme Lord, Çré Kåñëa.

            In a similar vein, Çré Madhväcärya wrote forceful refutations of the Mäyäväda theory. One of his most impressive is the Mäyävada-Khaëòanam. In this and other works he exposes the Mäyävädis for their jugglery of Sanskåt grammar and faulty logic in their vain attempt to prove absolute non-difference between God and the jéva.

            For these reasons, after refuting the Mäyäväda theory in the upcoming sections, Çréla Jéva Gosvämé concludes by exhorting his readers to further investigate the Mäyävädis "unintelligible imaginations". In other words, those who are followers in the line of Çré Gauräìga Mahäprabhu have a duty to demolish the word jugglery of the impersonalists in as many ways as possible. When they are so thoroughly exposed that not one of the pillars supporting their errant doctrine is left standing, then none but the foolish will fall prey to their misleading conclusions.

            The impersonalists, headed by Çré Çaìkaräcärya, base their tenets on Vedänta Sütra and eleven principle Upaniñads and try to support their conclusions with Bhagavad-gétä, but Jéva Gosvämé contends that their interpretation is not in agreement with the trance of Çréla Vyäsadeva as narrated in the Çrémad Bhägavatam, which is the essence of the Upaniñads, Vedänta, and the Puräëas.

            Mäyävädis claim that ultimate reality is non-dual, pure consciousness, without form or attributes. Hence they define ultimate reality only in negative terms. They say neti neti[i], "Not this, not that". In their support they cite statements of the Vedas such as ekameva dvitéyam (Chhändogya 6.2.1), "One without a second"; vijïänamänandam brahma (Båhad. A. 3.9.28), "Brahman is consciousness and bliss"; neha nanästi kiïcana (Båhad. A. 4.4.19), "No variety exists in this world, in the ultimate sense"; sarva khälvidam brahma (Chhändogya 3.14.1), "Indeed all this is Brahman".

            But then, according to the Mäyävädis, there is something called Mäyä, which is beginningless and indefinable being distinct from both existence (sat) and non-existence or void (asat). This Mäyä has two features--knowledge (vidyä) and ignorance (avidyä). Somehow or other some part of Brahman comes in contact with Mäyä and the result is illusion for that portion of Brahman. Either it contacts the knowledge aspect of Mäyä or the ignorance aspect. When Brahman contacts the vidyä, or the knowledge aspect of Mäyä, it turns into Éçvara, or the Lord. When it contacts the avidyä aspect it turns into jéva.

            According to the Mäyäväda doctrine, the difference between Éçvara and jéva is neither eternal nor because of their intrinsic nature; it is  only due to upädhis, or the apparent limitation of Brahman by either the vidyä or avidyä potency of Mäyä. Once these upädhis, or limiting adjuncts, are removed from the jéva, by acquiring knowledge, he realizes himself to be the unlimited, non-variegated Brahman. This attainment is the perfection of spiritual life. In their support they quote the Vedas, åte jïänät na muktiù, "There is no liberation without acquiring knowledge".

            A favorite analogy the Mäyävädis cite to explain how unlimited Brahman becomes limited as jéva is that of the sky and the pots. Just as there is a vast sky, but it becomes limited in a pot and gets the designation of "the sky in the pot," similarly the unlimited Brahman becomes limited by a subtle and gross material body; but when the pot is broken there is no more distinction between the sky in the pot and the all-pervading sky, because total oneness is achieved. In fact this distinction did not exist even when the pot was intact; it was only imagined to exist. To the monistic mind  Çrémad Bhagvatam (12.5.5) seems to confirm all this, because Çukadeva, the chief of all transcendentalists, in his closing instruction to Parékñit Mahäräja spoke as follows: 

"Just as when a pot is broken, the sky in it again becomes one with the great sky, as it was before. Even so after the death of the body, the jéva again attains Brahman." And later in the same chapter (SB. 12.5.11), Çukadeva says:

            "I am Brahman, the Supreme Shelter, the Supreme Brahman am I. Meditating like this in your mind, merge yourself into that nameless Universal self."

            This of course needs an explanation, but the Mäyävadis take it out of context to explain it.  Only when such verses are taken out of context they may be translated as above. The reason that such verses seem to have an impersonal slant is explained briefly in the fifty-second anuccheda, but Çréla Jéva Gosvämé gives a detailed discussion on this point in Çré Paramätmä Sandarbha, sections 72-84.

            Here, to counter the Mäyäväda philosophy, Çréla Jéva Gosvämé begins establishing the essential distinctions between the jéva and Éçvara. His first point is that it is evident from Vyäsadeva's trance that only the jéva is controlled by Mäyä and not the Lord. Rather Mäyä is dependent upon Him and controlled by Him. The same Brahman cannot be the controller as well as the controlled,  because ignorance and knowledge cannot exist in the one Brahman simultaneously, just as light and darkness cannot occupy the same space.

            The capacities and qualities of the jéva and the Supreme Personality of Godhead are different and the difference is not caused by Mäyä. By constitution the jéva is atomic in size and thus vulnerable to the influence of Mäyä when he is disassociated from the Lord, but he can free himself from the shackles of Mäyä by surrendering to the Lord. This was Çréla Vyäsa's experience.

[i]The real meaning of neti neti is "not this much", implying that the Lord is not limited to this phenomenal world but exist even beyond it. A description of this is given in Çrémad Bhägavatam verse 2.2.18.