This passage recalls the passage quoted earlier from the Matsya Purāṇa, which similarly portrays the primordial Purāṇa as eternal śabda that consists of one billion (one hundred crores) ślokas.257 However, whereas in the Matsya Purāṇa’s account the primordial Purāṇa emerges from Brahmā as the first of all the śāstras, prior to the Vedas, in the Skanda Purāṇa’s account the primordial Purāṇa issues forth from Brahmā after the Vedas. Irrespective of whether the primordial Purāṇa emerges before or after the Vedas, Jīva invokes the Skanda Purāṇa passage to establish that it is this undivided primordial totality that is divided up to form the eighteen Purāṇas, beginning with the Brahma Purāṇa: “Listen to the divisions of that [Purāṇa]. The Brahma Purāṇa is first.…” In other words, the eighteen Purāṇas are simply the differentiated expressions of the undivided Purāṇa and are in that sense nondifferent from the primordial totality.
Jīva provides further scriptural evidence to support his argument by invoking the Purāṇic tradition, discussed earlier, that ascribes to Veda-Vyāsa, a partial manifestation of Bhagavān, the role of condensing and dividing the primordial Purāṇa to form the eighteen Puraṇas. He cites the Matsya Purāṇa’s account of this tradition, which represents the Lord as assuming the form of Vyāsa in every Dvāpara Yuga and creating an abridged edition of the primordial Purāṇa in order to compensate for the diminished capacity of human beings to comprehend the original unabridged version. Vyāsa condensed the primordial Purāṇa consisting of one billion ślokas into an abridged edition of 400,000 (four lakhs) ślokas, which he then divided into eighteen Puraṇas. While the original Purāṇa of one billion ślokas continues to manifest in the realm of the gods, the abridged edition manifests in the realm of mortals as a concise version of the original.258 After citing the Matsya Purāṇa’s account, Jīva concludes by asserting that the abridged edition of 400,000 ślokas that is accessible to human beings in the form of the eighteen Purāṇas contains the most significant portions of the primordial Purāṇa and is thus not a distinct composition.259
Having established that the eighteen Purāṇas are nondifferent from the primordial Purāṇa, Jīva seeks to establish that the primordial Purāṇa is nondifferent from the primordial Veda. To attain this objective he invokes the alternative tradition concerning the origins of the Purāṇas, discussed earlier, which relates how Vyāsa divided the primordial Veda by separating out the four types of mantras to form the four Vedic Saṃhitās and the functions of their respective priests, after which he compiled the Purāṇa Saṃhitā from narratives (ākhyānas), episodes (upākhyānas), and verses (gāthās).260 Jīva cites a redacted version of the Vāyu Purāṇa’s account of this tradition—selectively including certain verses while leaving others out—which allows him to shape the passage to support his own distinctive interpretation, in which he identifies the primordial Veda with the Yajur-Veda and argues that the Purāṇa Saṃhitā is the “left-over portion” (śiṣṭa) that remained after the four Vedic Saṃhitās were formed and thus constitutes a part of the original Yajur-Veda.
There was one Yajur-Veda. He [Vyāsa] divided it into four parts. From that [fourfold division] arose the four priestly functions by means of which he organized the sacrifice (yajña). Along with the yajuses came the function of the adhvaryu priest; with the ṛcs, that of the hotṛ priest; with the sāmans, that of the udgātṛ priest; and with the atharvans, that of the brahman priest.… Proficient in the meaning of the Purāṇas, he compiled the Purāṇa Saṃhitā from narratives (ākhyānas), episodes (upākhyānas), and verses (gāthās), O best of brahmins. This left-over portion (śiṣṭa) is also Yajur-Veda.… This is the definitive pronouncement of the śāstras.261
Through his creative appropriation of this Vāyu Purāṇa account, Jīva suggests that after Vyāsa separated out the four types of mantras—ṛcs, yajuses, sāmans, and atharvans—from the primordial Yajur-Veda, certain materials remained—ākhyānas, upākhyānas, and gāthās—from which he compiled the Purāṇa Saṃhitā. The Purāṇa Saṃhitā is thus the “left-over portion” of the original Yajur-Veda.
In his discussion of the Vedic status of the Purāṇas, Jīva thus invokes the two alternative Purāṇic traditions regarding their own origins that I discussed earlier: (1) he cites the Matsya Purāṇa’s account of the primordial Purāṇa, variants of which are found in the Śiva, Nārada, Padma, and Liṅga Purāṇas; and (2) he cites the Vāyu Purāṇa’s account of the Purāṇa Saṃhitā, variants of which are found in the Brahmāṇḍa and Viṣṇu Purāṇas.262 As Coburn has noted, while the first tradition emphasizes the divine origin of the Purāṇas and represents Vyāsa as the “editor of a divine Purāṇa,” the second tradition emphasizes the human origin of the Purāṇas and represents Vyāsa as the “mortal arranger of previously existing material.”263 However, in Jīva’s creative appropriation there is no conflict between these two traditions regarding the origins of the Purāṇas. After citing the Vāyu Purāṇa’s account of the Purāṇa Saṃhitā, he cites the Matsya Purāṇa’s account of the primordial Purāṇa, and through this juxtaposition he suggests that the Purāṇa Saṃhitā and the primordial Purāṇa are not different but, on the contrary, are identical. The Purāṇa Saṃhitā that is the left-over portion of the original Yajur-Veda is identical with the primordial Purāṇa of one billion ślokas that Vyāsa condensed into an abridged edition and then divided into eighteen Purāṇas. Jīva thereby establishes that the primordial Purāṇa ( = Purāṇa Saṃhitā) is nondifferent from the primordial Veda ( = original Yajur-Veda) of which it constitutes a portion, from which it follows that the eighteen Purāṇas, which are nondifferent from the primordial Purāṇa, also have a legitimate claim to Vedic status.264
Transcendent Authority of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa
In Tattva Sandarbha 18–26 Jīva Gosvāmin develops the third and final phase of his argument, in which he seeks to establish the transcendent authority of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the preeminent scripture of the entire canon of śāstras and the embodiment of Bhagavān. At the end of Tattva Sandarbha 17, after establishing the authorititative status of the Purāṇas, he raises a problem regarding the Purāṇas as a whole. He notes that the Purāṇas, like the Vedas, are difficult to comprehend by the less intelligent human beings of Kali Yuga because they are not available in their complete forms and they also present divergent views regarding the supremacy of different deities. In Tattva Sandarbha 18 Jīva proposes that this problem could be resolved by locating a single Purāṇa that fulfills the following list of criteria:
This [problem] would be resolved if there were one [scripture] that has the characteristics of a Purāṇa; is uncreated (apauruṣeya); contains the essential meaning (artha-sāra) of all the Vedas, Itihāsas, and Purāṇas; rests on the Brahma-Sūtras; and is available in its complete form on earth.265
Jīva concludes that the one scripture that fulfills all of these criteria is the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, which he declares to be the “sovereign (cakravartin) of all pramāṇas”266 and the “sovereign (cakravartin) of all śāstras.”267
In Tattva Sandarbha 19–26 Jīva marshals a variety of arguments and scriptural evidence to substantiate his claim that the Bhāgavata Purāṇa fulfills each of these criteria—in particular, that it is the consummate apauruṣeya śāstra that contains the essential meaning of both śruti and smṛti texts and that has its basis in the Brahma-Sūtras. The major portion of his analysis takes the form of an extended commentary on the following unidentified passage from the Garuḍa Purāṇa:
This [text] is utterly perfect. It contains the meaning of the Brahma-Sūtras and establishes the meaning of the Mahābhārata. It serves as a commentary (bhāṣya) on the gāyatrī, it supplements the meaning of the Vedas, it is the Sāma-Veda of the Purāṇas, and it was spoken directly by Bhagavān. Consisting of twelve books, hundreds of chapters, and 18,000 verses, this text (grantha) is called Śrīmad Bhāgavata.268
Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the Sovereign of A
ll Śāstras
To support his claim that the Bhāgavata Purāṇa is the sovereign of all śāstras, Jīva parses the Garuḍa Purāṇa passage and his own list of criteria in Tattva Sandarbha 18, elaborating on each of the characteristics that distinguishes the Bhāgavata as the preeminent scripture of the brahmanical canon. He invokes at times the self-representations of the Bhāgavata itself to substantiate his arguments.
Jīva first establishes the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s unrivaled status among the Purāṇas. He declares the Bhāgavata to be the most sāttvic of the Purāṇas269 and the most profound (guhya) of the Purāṇas, revealing the deepest mysteries of existence.270 The Bhāgavata contains the essential meaning (artha-sāra) of all the Purāṇas,271 and therefore a bhakta who recites daily even a single verse obtains the fruits (phala) of all eighteen Purāṇas.272 Commenting on the Garuḍa Purāṇa’s characterization of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the Sāma-Veda of the Purāṇas,273 Jīva asserts that just as the Sāma-Veda is the most illustrious of the Vedas, so the Bhāgavata is the most illustrious of the Purāṇas. Moreover, he goes so far as to claim that just as the Sāma-Veda reconciles the statements of the various sections (kāṇḍas) of the Vedas by showing that they convey a single message, so the Bhāgavata reconciles the divergent views of the various Purāṇas by showing that they all ultimately glorify Bhagavān.274
Jīva is also concerned to establish the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s paramount status in relation to the second major category of smṛti texts: the Itihāsas, and in particular the Mahābhārata. He suggests that the Bhāgavata contains the essential meaning (artha-sāra) of the Itihāsas275 and provides scriptural evidence to support this assertion by invoking the Bhāgavata’s own claim that it is the concentrated essence (sāra) extracted from the Itihāsas.276 Commenting on the Garuḍa Purāṇa’s statement that the Bhāgavata establishes the meaning of the Mahābhārata,277 Jīva substantiates this claim by showing that the true import of the epic, like that of the Bhāgavata, centers on Hari, the supreme Bhagavān.278 He cites two verses from the Bhāgavata that emphasize that the Mahābhārata’s purpose is to narrate stories (kathā) about Hari that are intended for the general populace, including śūdras, women, and others who are excluded from access to the Vedic Saṃhitās. In this way, Jīva argues, the Mahābhārata is of “equal weight” (tulyatva) to the Vedas in that it provides a path to salvation for those who are excluded from the Vedic path.279
Having established the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s preeminence among smṛti texts, Jīva is also concerned to establish the Bhāgavata’s sovereign status among śruti texts. He asserts that the Bhāgavata contains the essential meaning (artha-sāra) not only of the Itihāsas and Purāṇas but also of the Vedas.280 He invokes in this context the Bhāgavata’s own self-representations, discussed in an earlier section, in which it proclaims itself the “ripe fruit (phala) of the wish-fulfilling tree of Veda” that is full of ambrosial nectar (amṛta or rasa)281 and the concentrated essence (sāra) extracted from all the Vedas.282 Jīva ultimately claims that this śruti pertaining to Kṛṣṇa (sātvatī śruti),283 which is the essence of the entire corpus of śruti texts,284 is the highest form of śruti (parama-śruti-rūpatva), for as the sovereign of all pramāṇas the Bhāgavata possesses its own intrinsic authority independent of the Vedas.285 Commenting on the Garuḍa Purāṇa’s assertion that the Bhāgavata supplements the meaning of the Vedas,286 he suggests, moreover, that the Bhāgavata expands on the Vedas by giving luxuriant expression to that supreme reality which he claims is the central import not only of the Itihāsas and Purāṇas but also of the Vedas: Bhagavān.287
As part of his argument regarding the Bhāgavata Purāṇa’s unique status as the highest form of śruti, Jīva also seeks to clarify the Bhāgavata’s relationship to the gāyatrī mantra, the “seminal text (sūtra) that contains the meaning of all the Vedas.”288 This three-lined Vedic mantra is recited daily by male members of the three twice-born varṇas and is celebrated in brahmanical texts as the seed expression of the four Vedas.289 Jīva invokes passages from the Matsya Purāṇa and the Skanda Purāṇa that characterize the Bhāgavata as based on the gāyatrī,290 and he also comments at length on the Garuḍa Purāṇa’s statement that the Bhāgavata is a commentary (bhāṣya) on the gāyatrī.291 Through his extended analysis he seeks to establish, first, that the opening verse of the Bhāgavata alludes to the gāyatrī mantra292 and, second, that the Bhāgavata as a whole provides an extended commentary on this most important of Vedic mantras.293 He claims in this context that the gāyatrī mantra, like the broader Vedic corpus, is concerned with Bhagavān: “Since the text (grantha) known as the Śrīmad Bhāgavata and characterized as ‘based on the gāyatrī’ is concerned with Bhagavān alone, it serves as a commentary (bhāṣya) on the gāyatrī, which is also concerned with Bhagavān.”294
Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the Uncreated Commentary on the Brahma-Sūtras
To establish the transcendent authority of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the highest form of śruti, Jīva must demonstrate not only that the Bhāgavata is the sovereign of all śāstras but also that it is the sovereign of all pramāṇas.295 He must demonstrate that the Bhāgavata, like the Vedas, is apauruṣeya, uncreated,296 and is therefore a transcendent and infallible source of valid knowledge. To accomplish this objective he argues that the renowned ṛṣi Vyāsa, like the Vedic ṛṣis, was not the author of the Bhāgavata but was simply the vehicle through which the transcendent knowledge manifested. Like the Vedic ṛṣis, Vyāsa is represented as cognizing in meditation through the subtle faculty of “seeing” (root dṛś) certain suprasensible phenomena, which he then recorded in the form of a text (grantha). However, whereas the Vedic ṛṣis cognized the Vedic mantras reverberating forth from the light-filled realms of the gods, Vyāsa is represented as attaining a direct visionary experience of that supreme reality which is the ultimate source of the Vedic mantras and all the gods: Kṛṣṇa, svayaṃ Bhagavān.
Jīva emphasizes that the Bhāgavata Purāṇa manifested (root bhū + āvir) in Vyāsa’s mind when he was immersed in the depths of meditation in samādhi, and therefore it is apauruṣeya in that it was not composed by Vyāsa or by any other agent.297 He provides an extended analysis of Vyāsa’s experience in samādhi as depicted in Bhāgavata Purāṇa 1.7.4, quoted earlier: “In his mind, freed of impurity by bhakti-yoga and completely collected, he saw (root dṛś) the primordial (pūrva) Puruṣa.” Jīva gives precedence to an alternative reading of this verse found in some manuscripts in which pūrṇa Puruṣa is given in place of pūrva Puruṣa, and he interprets “he saw the pūrṇa Puruṣa” to mean that Vyāsa saw Bhagavān. He maintains that Vyāsa obtained a direct visionary experience of Kṛṣṇa, svayaṃ Bhagavān, in his complete fullness (pūrṇa) and in his essential nature together with his svarūpa-śakti, beyond the material realm of prakṛti. Moreover, he suggests that Vyāsa’s cognitions of Kṛṣṇa also included Paramātman and Brahman, which are subsumed within Bhagavān as partial aspects of his totality. Vyāsa subsequently recorded his cognitions of Kṛṣṇa and his līlā in the form of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the śruti pertaining to Kṛṣṇa.298
In discussing the mechanisms of Vyāsa’s cognitions, Jīva claims that the Bhāgavata manifested in stages. It first manifested (root bhū + āvir) in a subtle (sūkṣma) form in Vyāsa’s mind. It then appeared in a condensed form as the Brahma-Sūtras. Finally, it manifested (prakaṭita) in its fully expanded form as the Śrīmad Bhāgavata. In this way, Jīva argues, the Bhāgavata serves as a natural (akṛtrima) and self-revealed (svataḥ-siddha) commentary (bhāṣya) on the Brahma-Sūtras and establishes the authoritative standard against which all other commentaries must be judged.299 Moreover, he claims that all the great exponents of Vedānta, including even Śaṃkara himself, recognize the unrivaled authority of the Bhāgavata as the apauruṣeya exposition of Vedānta.300
Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the Embodiment of Bhagavān
In support of his claim that the Bhāgavata Pu
rāṇa is the sovereign of all śāstras, as we have seen, Jīva returns repeatedly to his fundamental premise: the central import of both śruti and smṛti texts is Bhagavān, and since the Bhāgavata’s principal aim is to expound the glories of Bhagavān, it can thereby serve to illumine the “interconnections (samanvaya) among all the śāstras.”301 “In the Vedas, Rāmāyaṇa, Purāṇas, and Mahābhārata Hari is extolled everywhere—in the beginning, the middle, and the end.”302 Therefore, Jīva argues, rather than attempting to master this voluminous collection of śāstras, those who seek to know the supreme reality in the present age of Kali Yuga should focus their studies on the śruti pertaining to Kṛṣṇa, the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, which encapsulates the teachings of the entire canon of śruti and smṛti texts in a single volume.303 Among the many śāstras of this vast canon, the Bhāgavata is the only scripture that adequately illuminates the nature of the supreme reality.304
Throughout the course of his analysis Jīva thus repeatedly suggests that the transcendent authority of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa derives first and foremost from its special relationship to Kṛṣṇa, svayaṃ Bhagavān. He ultimately claims that this śruti that pertains to Kṛṣṇa, illuminating the nature of the supreme reality, is in the final analysis nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa in its unique status as Bhagavān’s self-revelation. The Bhāgavata is “spoken directly by Bhagavān” as his self-revelation to the creator Brahmā at the beginning of each cycle of creation,305 and it is again manifested by Bhagavān to himself in the form of his partial manifestation Vyāsa in Dvāpara Yuga.306 Finally, at the onset of Kali Yuga, when Kṛṣṇa returns to his transcendent abode after completing his sojourn on earth, he leaves behind the Bhāgavata as his “representative embodiment” (pratinidhi-rūpa) on earth in Kali Yuga.
Bhakti and Embodiment Page 26