Srimad Bhagavatam 11.11.18 | HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj | ISKCON Chennai | 10 May 2021
Oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya
Oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya
Oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya
nama oṁ viṣṇu-pādāya kṛṣṇa-preṣṭhāya bhū-tale
śrīmate bhaktivedānta-svāmin iti nāmine
namas te sārasvate deve gaura-vāṇī-pracāriṇe
nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi-pāścātya-deśa-tāriṇe
jaya śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya prabhu-nityānanda
śrī-advaita gadādhara śrīvāsādi-gaura-bhakta-vṛnda
Hare Kṛṣṇa Hare Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa Hare Hare
Hare Rāma Hare Rāma Rāma Rāma Hare Hare
Reading from Srimad Bhagavatam Canto 11 Chapter 11 Verse 18.
ŚB 11.11.18
śabda-brahmaṇi niṣṇāto
na niṣṇāyāt pare yadi
śramas tasya śrama-phalo
hy adhenum iva rakṣataḥ
Synonyms
śabda-brahmaṇi — in the Vedic literature; niṣṇātaḥ — expert through complete study; na niṣṇāyāt — does not absorb the mind; pare — in the Supreme; yadi — if; śramaḥ — labor; tasya — his; śrama — of great endeavor; phalaḥ — the fruit; hi — certainly; adhenum — a cow that gives no milk; iva — like; rakṣataḥ — of one who is taking care of.
Translation
If through meticulous study one becomes expert in reading Vedic literature but makes no endeavor to fix one’s mind on the Supreme Personality of Godhead, then one’s endeavor is certainly like that of a man who works very hard to take care of a cow that gives no milk. In other words, the fruit of one’s laborious study of Vedic knowledge will simply be the labor itself. There will be no other tangible result.
Purport
Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura explains that the word pare (“the Supreme”) in this verse indicates the Supreme Personality of Godhead rather than the impersonal Brahman, because Lord Kṛṣṇa, the speaker of these instructions, makes references in later verses to His personality as the Supreme. An impersonal interpretation in this case would be eka-deśānvaya uttara-ślokārtha-tātparya-virodhaḥ, or a contradictory interpretation that creates illogical conflict with other ślokas (verses) spoken in the same context.
It requires great endeavor to take care of a cow. One must either grow food grains to feed the cow or maintain suitable pastures. If the pasture is not properly maintained, poisonous weeds will grow, or snakes will multiply, and there will be danger. Cows are infected by many types of diseases and bugs and must be regularly cleaned and disinfected. Similarly, fences must be maintained around the cow pasture, and there is even more work to be done. If the cow gives no milk, however, then one certainly performs hard labor with no tangible result. Laborious effort is also required to learn the Sanskrit language well enough to discern the subtle and esoteric meaning of the Vedic mantras. If after such great labor one does not understand the spiritual body of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, which is the source of all happiness in life, and if one does not surrender to the Lord as the supreme shelter of all things, then one has certainly labored hard with no tangible result other than his own labor. Even a liberated soul who has given up the bodily concept of life will fall down if he does not take shelter of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The word niṣṇāta, or “expert,” indicates that one must ultimately achieve the goal of life; otherwise one is not expert. As stated by Caitanya Mahāprabhu, premā pum-artho mahān: the actual goal of human life is love of Godhead, and no one can be considered expert without achieving this goal.
HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj:
So here it talks about being fixed in sabda which is [Not audible]. Of course, the sabda brahman can mean many things. Of course, it is Vedas. But of course, the Vedas represent, they represent Brahman. And what is Brahman? So for many, Brahman is impersonal. And that, of course, is how even Srila Prabhupada uses the word, he says Brahman means impersonal. However, then we do have usage of the word indicates, this means Supreme Lord who is Bhagavan.For instance, in the Brahma Sutras, the first verse, athāto brahma jijñāsā inquire about Brahman. So based on this, then Shankaracharya says, yes, we have to inquire about the impersonal Brahman. But then our Acharyas say, no, this Brahman means Narayana, Vishnu, Krishna. So in other words, Brahman can also represent personal aspect of the Lord. Of course, this is clarified in the next sutra, which says that janmādyasya yataḥ [SB 1.1.1] from that Brahman comes creation of the universe. So in other words, that Brahman has some activity. He creates and destroys the material world.
So of course, another way of explaining it is to take the root meaning of the word. And the root we analyze by taking it to its most essential meaning, which is usually a verb form. So if we take the word Brahman, then the ultimate meaning is, it means that which is the greatest. And this explanation is often given by our Acharyas to indicate that this greatest entity is the Supreme Lord. Sometimes to make the meaning clear, we add the word para in front of it, we call it Parabrahman. Impersonal aspect of Brahman and Parabrahman would be superior to that, that is Bhagavan.
So if we are fixed in that Brahman, or Parabrahman, then we are not affected by anything in this material world. And of course, if we are not fixed in that Parabrahman, then as this verse explains, everything is useless. We may get some results from other methods than Bhakti, worship of the Lord, but we will not get ultimate results. So we want to have a final result, which is eternal. And anything that does not give that eternal result is useless. Just like the example is given here, to care for and protect a cow, which doesn’t give milk. Which is here mentioned by the word adhenu, a cow which is not a cow. So you care for the cow, expecting milk and you don’t get any milk. It’s a useless endeavor. So we can endeavor in karma yoga, jnana yoga or astanga yoga and get some result, but it’s not giving satisfactory result. Therefore it’s useless. So therefore, though these previous verses can have an inverse implication, ultimately, when we talk about the Brahman, etc, we should understand the ultimate Brahman is the Supreme Lord Bhagavan.
The impersonal Brahman is also called Brahman, because it is also great. It is spread everywhere. The Supreme Lord Bhagavan is also great. He is also spread everywhere. However, the form of Bhagavan has other qualities that do not manifest in the impersonal. And rather Brahman is an incomplete manifestation of the Lord. Sometimes we use the word that represents sat, whereas Bhagavan is Sat-cit-ananda. So some aspect of the Lord is the sat aspect or eternal aspect. But the cit-ananda aspects are not prominent. In one sense, we cannot separate Brahman from Bhagavan. And therefore, in the first canto of Bhagavatam, there it’s called advaya jñānam [ŚB 1.2.11], indivisible or non dual knowledge is Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan. So it is one entity that manifests in different ways. Just as the sun manifests light. And the light is inseparable from the sun. But the light is also dependent on the sun. If the sun does not exist, the rays do not exist. So the rays of the sun and the sun are, they go together. So Brahman and Bhagavan are also one. They go together, they cannot be separated. But at the same time, we cannot say they are exactly the same. So the rays of the sun are not the whole sun. And therefore, the impersonal Brahman is not Bhagavan. So that is one way of explaining the relationship between Brahman and Bhagavan.
Another way is to explain it as Bhagavan is Brahman but with manifestation of many shaktis. And impersonal Brahman is without all that shakti. And for that reason we always emphasize that the Lord has His shaktis. By His cit shakti, internal energy, He manifests His form, qualities, activities in spiritual world. By His tatastha shakti, He manifests jivas. By the bahiranga shakti, external energy He manifests material world. So everything manifested is real and in one sense it’s non-different from the Lord because it’s His own shakti. But at the same time there is some difference. The shakti is not equal to the shaktiman. And the different shaktis are also different from each other. And therefore we see that the internal shakti produces spiritual world, the tatastha shakti produces jivas and the bahiranga shakti produces dull matter. So in this way the Lord is non-different from the material world and the jivas in spiritual world. At the same time He’s different.
If the Lord does not manifest all these shaktis then what happens? We see Brahman. We realize Brahman. But as Brahman has no form, no qualities, no activities of the Lord. No spiritual world. No manifestation of internal energy. No manifestation of jivas from tatastha shakti. No manifestation of material world from the bahiranga shakti. So only Brahman. So we can say that the Brahman is Bhagavan minus His manifestation of His shakti. Another way of looking at it is that from our perception. If we realize the Lord in the most general way that some presence is there that is spiritual, this is Brahman. And if we realize the Lord in detail then this is Bhagavan realization.
So the example is given in one verse that Narada Muni saw the Lord approach. So first he saw a bright spot in the sky. And as the Lord got a little closer that bright spot increased in size. So it was like a mass of light. But nothing else was visible. But as that form of Vishnu became, got closer then gradually within that light he saw a little bit of a form manifesting. And then when He got closer, closer and closer, very close right in front of him then he saw the full form of Vishnu with His crown and His four arms etc. So in this way Narada Muni realized the Lord in His impersonal aspect when he saw the light only and then in His personal aspect when he saw the Lord in detail. But it was the same Lord. It’s not two different.
Generally we will realize these different aspects by different sadhanas. So if we practice jnana or yoga, then we will realize the light. This means that we can only approach the Lord from a great distance. Narada Muni seeing the Lord at a great distance, he saw only some light. If we practice Bhakti yoga, then we see the Lord close up. And we do activities and the Lord also does activities. So through the process of Bhakti we can approach the Lord quite close. So depending on our sadhana, we will see the Lord far away in which case we get Brahman realization and we will see the Lord close up in which case we get Bhagavan realization. So in this way by different sadhanas we get different realizations of one Lord but it’s different, quite different.
So we should definitely strive for spiritual rather than material goals. So the material goals are all temporary and they do not give satisfaction to the atma. If we choose the impersonal then it is a step above material things but still there is not complete satisfaction. And therefore both material activities like karma yoga and even spiritual activities like jnana and yoga are like, they get śrama-phala, useless endeavor like the cow without milk. So to choose we have to have a little knowledge. So therefore Bhagavatam gives us this knowledge by which we can understand what is the best process, what is the best goal. So the best method is Bhakti yoga and the best goal is prema. And the other processes like jnana yoga and karma yoga give other result and therefore it is considered to be useless results.
Hare Krishna!
Q & A :
1.) Maharaj, the various aspects of the Lord like the name, form, qualities, pastimes any connections with those things are very, very beneficial spiritually. We also see here the Brahman is an aspect of the Supreme Lord. However such spiritual benefits are not derived from the Brahman. How to properly appreciate that?
So because people see the forms, qualities and activities in the material world, they say these qualities and material activities are useless. They cause bondage. So if we attain spiritual life we should reject all of this. So when they hear the descriptions of formless Brahman or activities they are very attracted to that. Of course from Vaishnava point of view that’s an imperfect. But if one has less knowledge then it will not be a bad choice. So we have to understand that in spiritual life or spiritual realization, we have form, qualities and activities but they are not like material form and qualities. But to accept that is little difficult for people. That’s why we consider that the Vaishnava siddhanta is a little rare for many people. But this is the only way in which the jiva can develop full realization.
2.) Is the term Brahman being interchangeably used to term atma?
Generally Paramatma is distinct from Brahman, and Paramatma and Bhagavan are often used interchangeably. And even the impersonalists when they hear that word Paramatma they think of the form of Vishnu. So we distinguish Paramatma from Brahman but sometimes we use the word Paramatma to mean the Supreme Lord in general so would it include Bhagavan. And in the Sri Sampradaya and Madhva Sampradaya generally they don’t distinguish between Bhagavan and Paramatma. And in the Sri sampradaya and Madhva sampradaya generally they don’t distinguish between Bhagavan and Paramatma.
3.) Maharaj, this is in reference to the slokam vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam [ŚB 1.2.11]. In that Bhagavatam verse, what is the meaning of jñānam advayam?
So sometimes we call Brahman or Bhagavan as vijnana and ananda. The Lord is knowledge and bliss. So therefore jnanam also represents Supreme Lord. He is the number one conscious entity. And this distinguishes the Lord from matter which has no consciousness. So that Lord has these three aspects Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan but we cannot say they are different entities. They are all one with the Lord. So therefore we say advaya not different, not two. So just as the Lord has many forms like Vishnu and Narasimha Deva, Krishna and Rama, they are actually one entity. They are not different. Similarly, Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan are also one entity.
4.) What are the features and shaktis of Paramatma in comparison with Brahman and Bhagavan?
Well, as I said, Brahman does not really manifest shaktis. So Paramatma of course, is a form or the Lord with form and He has qualities and He has activities. But we designate Paramatma as that form of Bhagavan that creates the material world and pervades the material world. So it’s that form that’s related to the material world. So that form of Paramatma is a Vishnu form of four arms and we will see exactly the same form in the spiritual world. But we call Him Bhagavan in the spiritual world because He is primarily involved with pastimes with His devotees. As Karanodakasayi Vishnu, Garbhodakasayi Vishnu, Kshirodakasayi Vishnu, He is witnessing the material world. So definitely He has a manifestation of shakti unlike Brahman, but it is limited. So the main difference with Paramatma is the relationship with devotees. So the relationship with devotees gives rise to ananda. So therefore the proportion of ananda in the Paramatma form is less than that of Bhagavan. But the cit aspect is quite prominent. In Brahman, of course, it is conscious, but there is no consciousness of any particular object because there is no other object. But as Paramatma, Vishnu sees the jivas, He sees material world, He creates the material world, so He is conscious of all the things. And of course, He does has some relationship with Lakshmi etc, so the ananda is there but it is minimal manifestation with the jivas etc. But in the spiritual world, that ananda aspect becomes more prominent.
5.) Does advancement in other yoga processes, that is yoga processes other than Bhakti, whether that advancement depends on association with like-minded people or does it depend exclusively on the individual’s effort?
HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj: I mean individual how’s that? What do you mean by that?
Devotee: Yeah, individual’s effort. In other yoga processes whether the success depends upon individual’s effort or association with like-minded people, how it works in other yoga processes? That’s the question.
HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj: Oh, well, of course, the jnani, he develops his knowledge by association with other jnanis and the yogis, similarly they do have to have a teacher, so in that sense they also need some association. But at the same time, they do require their individual effort. So in the Vaishnava siddhanta, both things are there, the effort is also required and the association as well. But we put a slight prominence to the mercy of the devotee.
6.) If a devotee aspires for peace, are they considered to be impersonal or is it santa rasa?
If he is a devotee and he is accepting the form of the Lord and wants to establish a relationship, then we can say santa rasa. In Brahman, there is no rasa because there’s only existence, there’s no other person.
7.) In Bhagavad Gita, Lord says that one who constantly remembers can attain Him easily, but in kali yuga, constantly remembering the Lord is extremely difficult for conditioned souls. So then why the Lord is telling that it is easy? Can you please clarify.
Even if we depend on the mind, if we use jnana or astanga yoga, it is much more difficult. Of course, we find in different yugas, we have different processes. So in satya yuga, we used the mind because the main process was remembering the Lord. As the yugas progress to treta, to dwapara and kali, then the power of the mind becomes less. So therefore, meditation has become quite difficult in kali yuga. However, even then meditation on the form of the Lord is much easier than meditating on impersonal Brahman. However, we don’t recommend meditation as the main process, we recommend Nama Sankirtan. So, people in general can very easily do Nama Sankirtan. And they can get to the highest level.
8.) Generally we see that people who are fixed in impersonal aspect are comparatively advanced than the materialistic people. But when it comes to preaching Krishna consciousness, preaching to an impersonalist is appearing to be more difficult than preaching to a materialist. How to appreciate this fact?
So, of course, some of the impersonalists may oppose Bhakti a lot, particularly those who are attached to Shankaracharya. Others may be impersonal or in a very general way without attachment to any philosophy, those persons can begin to appreciate Krishna. So, it depends mainly on the association. If those people as impersonalists are associated with Shankara followers, then definitely they will not be very receptive. Others may be much more open minded.
9.) Generally we see that the Supreme Lord as Bhagavan feature is always served by His servitors. Paramatma feature is also being considered as a personal form of the Lord. But we see that Paramatma is not accompanied by his servitors. So can you please explain this aspect Maharaj?
Well, if we look at the different forms of Paramatma: Mahavishnu, Garbhodakasayi Vishnu, Kshirodakasayi Vishnu, you will often see in the pictures, there is Vishnu lying on Ananta Sesha and there is Lakshmi massaging His feet. So He does have servitors. Or if you look at the Ananta Padmanabha temple in Trivandrum or the Sri Rangam temple in Trichy, then Ranganatha temple, you will see around that Vishnu there is, the sages are there, Narada Muni is there, Brahma is there chanting the glories of Vishnu. So He does have His servitors. However, those who worship Paramatma are not generally aspiring to be servants. If they do develop that relationship of a servitor, then they develop dasya rasa to Vishnu in Vaikuntha.
Devotees: Grantharaj Srimad Bhagavatam ki jai!!! HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj ki jai!!! His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada ki jai!!! Nitai Gaura premanande Hari Haribol!!!