Tattva Sūtra

SŪTRA 11

cetanāḥ parānugatās tad-vidhi-vaśyatvāt

(Beings endowed with consciousness follow His injunctions because they are dependent upon Him)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

atha cetnāś caitanya-viśiṣṭā jīvā bahu-vacanopadeśāt te ca bahavaḥ, kintu parasya īśvarasya anugatās tena niyamitās tad-adhīnā ity arthaḥ, tat-kṛta-vidhi-vaśyatvāt. ‘ya ātmani tiṣṭhan ātmānam antar yamayati’ iti śruteḥ | ‘īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe’rjuna tiṣṭhati’ iti smṛteḥ.

Here, cetana refers to the jīvas because they are endowed with consciousness. According to rules of grammar, the plural form (cetanāḥ) has been used because they (the jīvas) are many. However, they are followers of and subordinate to the Supreme Lord, and are controlled by Him. This is the meaning. They are under the control of His regulations. As stated in the śruti, ‘That Supreme Ātmā resides within to regulate the ātmā’ (Bṛhad-Āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.7.22) Similarly, as the smṛti states, ‘The Supreme Lord resides in the hearts of all beings, O Arjuna.’ (Bhagavad-gītā 18.61)

Commentary by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura

Some Vedāntists hold the view that the jīvātma is a single substance, but manifests in various forms through different mediums. To refute this illogical conclusion, the plural form of the word ‘consciousness’ (cetana) has been used to refer to the individual souls. All these jīvas are subservient to the Lord since they are all governed by His rules. In this regard, it is mentioned in the Nārada Pañcarātra, in the first chapter of the Second Ratri, through the words of Sadā-Śiva:

jīvas tat-pratibimbaś ca bhoktā ca sukha-duḥkhayoḥ
kecid vadanti taṁ nityaṁ kāraṇasya guṇena ca
vidyamānāt tirodhānaṁ tirodhānāc ca sambhavaḥ
dehād dehāntaraṁ yāti na mṛtyus tasya kutracit

Some say that the jīvas are reflections of Him and the experiencers of happiness and distress, and that they are eternal due to the qualities of the cause (the Supreme Lord). From existence comes disappearance, and from disappearance comes rebirth. The jīva travels from one body to another; death never befalls him anywhere. (Nārada Pañcarātra 2.1.28-29)

It is also said in the seventh chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā:

apareyam itas tvanyāṁ prakṛtiṁ viddhi me parām
jīva-bhūtāṁ mahā-bāho yayedaṁ dhāryate jagat
etad yonīni bhūtāni sarvāṇīty-upadhāraya
ahaṁ kṛtsnasya jagataḥ prabhavaḥ pralayas tathā

However, you should know that there is another nature, superior to this inferior nature. It is a conscious potency that consists of the living beings and maintains the universe. Try to understand that all beings are manifest from these two sources and that I am the cause of the creation and annihilation of the entire universe. (Bhagavad-gītā 7.5-6)

It is also said in the Upaniṣad:

śvetaketo tat-tvam-asi

O Śvetaketu, you are that. (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.8.7)

The guru tells the disciple, “O Śvetaketu, tat-tvam-asi.’ Some Vedāntists say that this means, “O Śvetaketu, you are that Brahman whom you seek.” However, Gauḍācārya Pūrṇānanda Svāmī has written in the book, Tattva Muktāvalī Māyāvāda Śata Duṣaṇī thus:

sākṣāt tat tvam asīti veda-viṣaye vākyaṁ tu yad vidyate
tasyārthaṁ kurute svakīya-mata-vid bhede’rpayitvā matim
tac-chabdo’vyayam eva bhedaka iti taṁ tatra bhedyo yataḥ
ṣaṣṭhī-lopa-mitā tam eva na hi tad-vākyārtha etādṛśaḥ

The statement, tat-tvam-asi is directly found in the Vedas, but, those who are proponents of their own interpretations have given it a different meaning. However, the word tat refers to the Infallible Lord, which distinguishes Him from tvam (you). Distinction must be there because of the use of the ṣaṣṭhī-tat-puruṣa-samāsa (the sixth possessive compound in Sanskrit grammar), so tat cannot refer to tvam, but means ‘you belong to Him.’ The meaning of the words is like this. (Tattva Muktāvalī 6)

In reality, the guru is telling the disciple, “O Śvetaketu, you belong to that Supreme Lord,” meaning that you have been created and controlled by that Supreme Lord. Alternatively, even if one does not refute the interpretation of the Vivartavādīs*(1), who claim that “You are that Brahman,” then it means that Brahman cannot be realised by acit-padārtha (an unconscious substance). You yourself must be cit-padārtha (a conscious substance), thus you must seek Him out by being established in your own svarūpa.

*(1) Vivartavāda is the Advaitic concept that the Supreme Himself transforms (vivarta) into everything in existence.

Moreover, the view held by the devotees is also expressed in the Caitanya-candrodaya-nāṭaka

vāsudeva-parā devatā vāsudeva-parāt parātmanaḥ saṅkarṣaṇo jīvaḥ ity ādi. jīvayati jīvaṁ karotīti jīvaḥ. na tu svayaṁ jīvaḥ. sa cātmā śabda-brahma para-brahma mamobhe śāśvatī tanū iti tad-ukteḥ. tasmād eva jīva-sṛṣṭir ity arthaḥ.

Vāsudeva is the Supreme Divinity. From Vāsudeva come the Paramātmā, and Saṅkarṣaṇa from whom the jīvas manifest. “He who gives life to the jīvas is also a jīva” – No! He Himself is not a jīva. That Supreme Ātmā has stated, “Śabda-brahma and Parabrahma are both My eternal forms.” Thus, He has created the jīva – that is the meaning. (Caitanya-candrodaya-nāṭaka 6.258)

The next sūtra will determine the eternality or non-eternality of the jīva.

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

nanu ‘ayamātmā brahmetyādi’ śrutiṣu jīvānāṁ brahmābhinnatvā pratipādanena katham atra jīvānām īśvarādhīnatvaṁ sūtrakāreṇa niścitam ity āha 

But, in the statements of śruti such as, ‘The ātmā is Brahman’ (Bṛhad-Āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.5) the non-difference between the jīvas and Brahman is affirmed. How, then, does the author of the sūtras determine the dependence of the jīvas on the Lord?

SŪTRA 12

te cānādy-anantaḥ para-śakti-viśeṣatvāt

(They are beginningless and eternal due to their nature of being special manifestations of the Lord’s potency)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

te ca jīvā anādayo’nantāś ca yataḥ parameśvarasya śakti-rūpās tac-chakter ādy-anta-rahitatvāt ‘yathāgner bahavo visphuliṅgā’ iti śruteḥ. ‘mamaivāṁśo jīva-loke jīva-bhūta’ iti smṛteś ca.

And those jīvas are beginningless and eternal because they are forms of the Supreme Lord’s potency. That potency is also without beginning or end, as illustrated by the śruti which states, ‘They are like many sparks from a fire’ (Bṛhad-Āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 2.1.20) and also the smṛti, which says, “The living beings of this world are My eternal particles.” (Bhagavad-gīta 15.7)

Commentary by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura

There is much controversy concerning the jīva’s existence. Some claim that the jīva is eternal, as stated by Śiva in the Nārada Pañcarātra:

kecid vadanti taṁ nityaṁ kāraṇasya guṇena ca

Some say that it is eternal due to the qualities of its cause. (Nārada Pañcarātra 2.1.28)

Again, Śiva says:

kecid vadanty anityaṁ ca mithyaiva kṛtrimaḥ sadā
pralīyate punas tatra pratibimbo yathā raveḥ

Some say that it is temporary, false, and artificial, always dissolving back into that from which it arose, like the reflection of the sun. (Nārada Pañcarātra 2.1.31)

The debate over whether the jīva is eternal or non-eternal is unnecessary because the jīva can be called both nitya (eternal) and anitya (non-eternal). The very cause of the jīva is the potency of the Supreme Lord, and that potency is eternal, without beginning and without end. Therefore, based on the qualities of the cause, the eternality of the jīva can be accepted. The power by which Jagadīśvara, the Lord of the universe, has created the jīvas is called the jiva-śakti, in other words it is Saṅkarṣaṇa.

In the Gītā, Bhagavān says:

apareyam itas tv anyaṁ prakṛtiṁ viddhi me parām
jīva-bhūtāṁ mahā-bāho yayedaṁ dhāryate jagat

However, you should know that there is another nature, superior to this inferior nature. It is a conscious potency that consists of the living beings and maintains the universe. (Bhagavad-gītā 7.5)

The jīva, which is the result of this beginningless and endless potency, is eternal by the quality of its cause. However, the will of the Supreme Lord is the most powerful of all, and if ever the Lord desires to dissolve the jīva, then its dissolution will certainly take place. That is why the jīva is also called anitya (not eternal). When the jīva is accepted as resulting from the jiva-śakti, then the beginninglessness and endlessness of its Cause can also be attributed to it.

The Gītā says:

avyaktādīni bhūtāni vyakta-madhyāni bhārata
avyakta-nidhanāny eva tatra kā parivedanā

O Bhārata, all living beings are unmanifest before birth, manifest between birth and death, and again unmanifest after death. What then is the reason for lamentation? (Bhagavad-gītā 2.28)

The eighteenth mantra of the second part of the first chapter of Kaṭhopaniṣad states:

na jāyate mriyate vā vipaścin
nāyaṁ kutaścin na babhūva kaścit
ajo nityaḥ śāśvato ‘yaṁ purāṇo
na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre

One who is wise never takes birth nor dies at any time. Similarly, the Supreme is not born nor does He die. The living being is unborn, eternal, indestructible and timeless – he is not destroyed when the material body is destroyed.

By the attribute found in this sūtra, the jīva’s brahma-svarūpatva (identity as Brahman, or spirit) is established. Even though the jīva is endowed with  the nature of Brahman, that Parabrahman or Parameśvara, possesses different characteristics from the jīva. This is illustrated in the next sūtra.

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

jīvānāṁ para-śakti-viśeṣa-rūpatve’bheda evāpadyata ity āśaṅkāyāṁ bhedaṁ dṛḍhīkaroti

“Since the jīvas are manifestations of the supreme potency, there is no difference them.” This doubt concerning distinction (between the jīva and the Supreme) will be firmly dealt with.

SŪTRA 13

cid-ānanda-svarūpā api parato bhinnā nitya-satyatvābhāvāt

(Although the jīvas inherently possess the nature of consciousness and bliss, they are different from the Supreme due to the absence of eternal existence)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

te jīvāś cid-ānanda-svarūpā api parataḥ parameśvarāt bhinnāḥ. tatra hetuḥ – nitya-satyatvābhāvād iti. tatreyaṁ prakriyā jīvānāṁ satyatve’pi teṣāṁ sattā-pradaḥ parameśvara eva nitya-satyaḥ, na tu te tathā. ‘nityo nityānām’ iti, ‘satyasya satyam’ iti ‘parāt param’ ityādi-śruteḥ. ‘nirdvandvo nitya-sattva-sthaḥ’ iti smṛteś ca.

Although the jīvas have the nature of consciousness and bliss, they are different from the Supreme Lord. The reason for this difference is the absence of eternal existence. In this context, even though the jīvas possess some form of existence, it is the Supreme Lord alone who is eternally existent who grants existence to them, and not the jīvas themselves. Therefore, the śruti states, ‘He is the Eternal amongst eternals’ (Kaṭhopaniṣad 2.2.13), ‘He is the Reality amongst realities’ (Bṛhad-Āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 2.1.20), ‘He is the Supreme amongst those that are supreme.’ (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 3.2.8). The smṛti also says, ‘Beyond duality and situated in eternal existence’ (Bhagavad-gītā 2.45).

Commentary by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura

The intrinsic nature of the jīva is cid-ānanda (consciousness and bliss), while the intrinsic nature of Brahman is sac-cid-ānanda (existence, consciousness, and bliss). The statement in the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad, dvā suparṇā sayujā sakhāyā (‘two bird-companions sit together’), establishes that the jīva and Brahman, while residing together, share the same nature. The true meaning of ‘sharing the same nature’ is that both are of the intrinsic nature of cid-ānanda. After discussing all these topics, persons with an immature understanding see no difference between Brahman and the jīva. Although the jīva is indeed of the nature of Brahman, he does not attain the full nature of Brahman, since Brahman itself is unchanging and imperishable. However, the jīva, having emanated from the Supreme Lord’s jīva-śakti, does transform. For this reason, in some specific aspect, there is a particular distinction between the jīva and Brahman.

Thus, it is stated in second mantra of the third section of the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad:

samāne vṛkṣe puruṣo nimagno’nīśayā śocati muhyamānaḥ
juṣṭaṁ yadā paśyaty anyam īśam asya mahimānam iti vīta-śokaḥ

On the same tree, the puruṣa (the enjoying jīva) who is immersed in his own desires grieves and is deluded. But when he sees the glories of the other, the Lord, then he becomes free from sorrow.

As long as the jīva continues to experience the results of its own actions, he remains in distress because he is inherently weak, powerless, and incomplete. However, when the jīva takes shelter in the Supreme Lord, he no longer suffers. This śruti establishes that the jīva lacks completeness, whereas the Supreme possesses it. The jīva possesses existence, but not ultimate eternal existence. The jīva’s existence is dependent upon the will of the Supreme Lord. Therefore, although the jīva exists, it is not eternal existence, and although he is eternal, he is not eternally eternal. This is the distinction between the jīva and the Lord. The jīva is finite consciousness, but the Supreme Lord is eternal consciousness. Although the previous sūtra acknowledges the beginninglessness and eternality of the jīva, there is an inherent difference between the jīva and the Supreme Lord. Some followers of Vedānta accept a distinction between the jīva and the Supreme Lord due to the impositions on the jīva, yet they still establish Advaitavāda (non-dualism). Therefore, the next two sūtras are intended to explain and resolve the various opinions of such interpreters.

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

bhedābheda-vicāra-hetukaṁ sampradāya-bhedaṁ nirūpayati

(The following sūtras) address the cause of considering difference and non- difference among other sampradāyas.

SŪTRA 14

teṣāṁ paratvaṁ kecid apare bhedam itare tūbhayam

(Some state that the jīva is the Supreme, others say there is difference, and some accept both)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

teṣāṁ jīvānāṁ paratvaṁ brahma-rūpatvaṁ kecid bādarāyaṇādyāḥ pratipādayanti. apare kaśyapādayas tu bhedaṁ teṣāṁ parameśvara-bhinnatvaṁ vadanti. itare śāṇḍilyādayaḥ kenacid aṁśena bhedaṁ kenacid aṁśena abhedaṁ ca vyācakṣate. tatra yathāyathaṁ pramāṇāny api darśitāni. ‘ayamātmā brahmeti.’ ‘dvā suparṇā sayuje sakhāyā’ iti, ‘ekadhā bahudhā caiva dṛśyate jala-candravat’ ityādi-śrutayaḥ

Some, such as Bādārayana, establish the spiritual status of the jīvas as Brahman. Others, such as Kaśyapa, assert difference, stating that the jīvas are distinct from the Supreme Lord. Others like Śāṇḍilya, explain that some view a partial difference and others view a partial non-difference.  Thus, evidence has been presented as appropriate. The śruti states, ‘The ātmā is Brahman’ (Bṛhad-Āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.5), ‘Two bird-companions sit together’ (Munḍaka Upaniṣad 3.1.1), ‘He is perceived as one and as many, just like the moon reflected in water’ (Amṛta Bindu Upaniṣad 12).

Commentary by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura

In relation to the jīva, there are three kinds of opinions that are seen amongst the Āryans, namely Dvaita (dualism), Advaita (non-dualism) and Dvaitādvaita (the combination of dualism and non-dualism). Dvaitavādīs such as Kaśyapa argue that just as the Lord is an eternal substance, the jīva is also eternal, and both the jīva and Brahman are eternally distinct. The support for their view is found in the third section of the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad, which states:

dvā suparṇā sayujā sakhāyā samānaṁ vṛkṣaṁ praiṣasvajāte
tayor anyaḥ pippalaṁ svādv atty anaśnann anyo’bhicakāśīti

Two bird-companions sit together in the same tree. One of them eats the sweet fruit of the tree, while the other looks on without eating. (Munḍaka Upaniṣad 3.1.1)

Some consider the jīva to be a transformation of Brahman itself and do not recognise any real difference between the jīva and Brahman. The following mantra of the Kaṭhopaniṣad supports their opinion:

asya visraṁśamānasya śarīra-sthasya dehinaḥ
dehād vimucyamānasya kim atra pariśiṣyate
etad vai tat

When the embodied jīva gives up the material body, and is freed from the bodily condition, what is it that remains? (Yama replied:) It is this. (Kaṭhopaniṣad 2.2.4)

Sages like Śāṇḍilya accept that, at present, the jīva and Brahman are indeed distinct, but that it is possible for the jīva to attain Brahman through the process of liberation. Therefore, that substance which is presently dualistic achieves non-dualism. Regarding this, the śruti says:

sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma taj-jalān iti śānta upāsīta

Indeed, everything is Brahman. Everything is created, maintained and dissolved by Him. A peaceful person should worship Him. (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 3.14)

The Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad says:

prāṇo hy eṣa yaḥ sarva-bhūtair vibhāti vijānan vidvān bhavate nātivādī
ātma-krīḍa ātma-ratiḥ kriyāvān eṣa brahma-vidāṁ variṣṭhaḥ

That which pervades all living beings as their vital force, is known by the wise who understand to be the Ultimate Reality. Such a wise person is not given to excessive debate, is immersed in the joy of the self, and is devoted to the self. He is the foremost among those who have knowledge of Brahman. (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 3.1.4)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

nanv evaṁ mata-bheda-darśanena prāṇināṁ buddhi-bhrama eva syād ity āśaṅkāyāṁ sarveṣām aikamatya-rūpaṁ sva-mataṁ prakāśayati

However, in response to the concern that so many different philosophical opinions regarding the living entities creates bewilderment, one conclusion which unites all individual viewpoints will now be revealed.

SŪTRA 15

sarveṣāṁ sāmañjasyaṁ sātvata-vijñānasya bhramatvābhāvāt pramāṇa-sad-bhāvāc ca

(There is harmony amongst all opinions, due to divine knowledge being valid evidence which is free from error)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

sarveṣām ṛṣīṇāṁ sāmañjasyam aika-matyam eva vicāreṇādhigamyate, teṣāṁ sātvatānāṁ bhagavat-tattva-jñānīnāṁ jñānasya bhramatvābhāvāt ayathārthābhāvāt, tan-mateṣu pūrvokta-śruty-ādi-pramāṇa-sad-bhāvād-apītyarthaḥ. ‘māyāṁ madīyām udgṛhya vadatāṁ kiṁ nu durghaṭaṁ’ iti śrī-bhagavad-ukteḥ

Through careful analysis, harmony and unity among all the ṛṣis can be achieved. Amongst those who are noble, it is understood that knowledge concerning bhagavat-tattva is free from error and misinterpretation. This understanding is even supported by previously quoted evidence from the śruti and other authentic sources. But as Śrī Bhāgavata states, ‘Is it so difficult for those quibblers who have taken refuge in My māyā potency to argue?’(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 11.22.4)

Commentary by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura

Evidence from the śruti has been shown for all three aforementioned opinions, therefore all must be considered true. In particular, Kaśyapa, Bādarāyaṇa, and Śāṇḍilya are all devotees of Bhagavān, that is, they are capable of realising the presence of Divinity (bhagavad-bhāva) through direct experience. Therefore, conclusions based on their self-evident convictions can never be erroneous. The differences that appear in their views on this topic are not real. They are all in agreement; only those who have established sampadāyas based on their teachings quarrel over a few statements. The Supreme Lord is the sole advaya-tattva, that Reality who is one without a second, and His potency is infinite. Among these potencies, the jīva-śakti and the māyā-śakti are familiar to the jīvas. By a transformation of that jīva-śakti, all the jīvas have been created and are existing at present. Later, according to the will of the Supreme Lord, they may also cease to exist. This is only established by two evidences – pratyakṣa (direct perception) and anumāna (inference). The Taittirīya Upaniṣad states:

yato vā imāni bhūtāni jāyante yena jatāni jīvanti yat prayanty abhisamviśanti

From Him all beings are born, they live according to Him, and again they enter into Him. (Taittirīya Upaniṣad 3.1.1)

Through this conclusion, the standpoint of Advaita is established since no other reality apart from Brahman is perceived. The concept of Dvaita is also established since the jīva and inert matter are not presently perceived to be false like a dream. This can also be said to support the view of Dvaitadvaita since both Advaita is seen at the beginning and the end, and Dvaita is perceived in the intermediate stages. Actually, there is no disagreement among the ṛṣis who wrote their sūtras. Conflicts only arise amongst those who have authored fictitious  commentaries and their argumentative disciples.

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

evaṁ jīva-svarūpaṁ nirūpya idānīṁ sarvānartha-nivṛtti-pūrvakaṁ paramārtha-phala-prāptaye upāyaṁ vaktum upakramate.

Having now established the jīva’s svarūpa, we now proceed to discuss the means for attaining the ultimate goal, which involves the removal of all anarthas (unnecessary impediments) beforehand.

SŪTRA 16

vicāra-rāgau cetana-dharmau svarūpa-pravṛtti-bhāvāt

(Analysis and attraction are the nature of the conscious jīva, because they are the tendencies of his svarūpa)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

vicāro hi jñāna-janyaḥ, ata eva cetana-niṣṭhaḥ jñānasya tat svarūpatvāt rāgasyāpy ānanda-janyatvāt, ānandasya nija-rūpatvāt, cetana-niṣṭhatvaṁ tat-pravṛtti-rūpatvāc ca. ‘satyaṁ jñānam ānandam’ iti śruteḥ

Analysis arises from knowledge; therefore, it is rooted in consciousness, since knowledge is the very nature of consciousness. Similarly, attachment (rāga) arises from bliss (ānanda), as bliss is inherent to one’s true nature. Hence, attachment is also rooted in consciousness, and it manifests as its dynamic expression. The śruti states, ‘The Supreme is eternality, knowledge and bliss’ (Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.1.2)

Commentary by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura

Analysis and attachment are the inherent qualities of a conscious substance. Here, knowledge can be said to be analysis. The ātmā is of the nature of knowledge, as stated in the Brahma Sūtra:

ātmeti tūpagacchanti grāhayanti ca

One should worship the Supreme Ātma with complete attachment as the inner self, because those who are knowledgeable in the truth perceive Him as the very essence of the ātmā, and they explain this to their disciples in that manner. (Brahma Sūtra 4.1.3)

Prahlāda says in the Bhāgavata:

ātmā nityo’vyayaḥ śuddha ekaḥ kṣetra-jña āśrayaḥ
avikriyaḥ sva-dṛg hetur vyāpako ‘saṅgy anāvṛtaḥ

The Supreme Ātmā is eternal, indestructible, pure, singular, the knower of the individual jīvas, the supreme shelter, immutable, self-effulgent, the cause of all causes, all-pervading, uninfluenced by matter, and not covered by māyā. (Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 7.7.19)

Every object has two aspects – its inherent nature (svarūpa) and its tendency (pravṛtti). Therefore, knowledge is the ātmā’s inherent nature, and attachment is its tendency. The only true object of this attachment is the Supreme Lord. However, in the bound state of the jīva, this attachment is directed toward inferior objects. Regarding this, Śrī Viṣṇu Purāṇa contains the statement of Prahlāda as follows:

yā prītir avivekānāṁ viṣayeṣv anapāyinī
tvām anusmarataḥ sa me hṛdayān nāpasarpatu

The same constant love that those who are indiscriminate feel for the sense objects – may such constant love never leave my heart as I always remember You. (Viṣṇu Purāṇa 1.20.19)

In the bound state of the jīva, that knowledge does not fully manifest. In the liberated state, the jñāna-ātmā–svarūpa (the ātmā possessing inherent knowledge) exists, as mentioned in the second chapter of the Gītā:

acchedyo’yam adāhyo’yam akledyo’śoṣya eva ca
nityaḥ sarva-gataḥ sthāṇur acalo’yaṁ sanātanaḥ

It is indestructible, incombustible, insoluble and cannot be withered. It is eternal, all-pervading, unchanging, immovable and primeval. (Bhagavad-gītā 2.24)

However, when the jīvātmā is bound, he becomes perverted by upādhis (conditional designations) and acquires his present state as a human being. In this state, the mind takes control, and his inherent knowledge becomes hidden, while sense perceptions is mistakenly taken to be knowledge. In reality, there is a significant difference between the knowledge of a liberated jīva and that of a bound jīva. Knowledge is a pure substance; therefore, it is not bound by space or time. This is why Bhagavān has referred to it as sarva-gataḥ (all-pervading). What is called knowledge in this present state is merely a transformational state of knowledge. In reality, it is not actual knowledge. When analysing current knowledge, it is observed that apart from some understanding in relation to the Supreme Truth, everything else that is presently considered to be knowledge is completely based on the senses.

When the senses come into direct contact with an object, the impression of that object, as perceived through the senses, enters the inner chamber of the mental system. Then one of the inner senses carefully retains and preserves that impression. This process can be termed as dhāraṇā (mental retention). Subsequently, through anukalpa and vikalpa,* which are the two functions of the internal senses, those mental impressions that have been retained, provide substance for all imaginary experiences. The internal senses, while expanding their dominion over all things, continuously analyses them as good, bad, etc. That analysis can be termed as logic, or rationalism. By specifically analysing this entire process, it can be said to be sensory-based. Being bound by matter, the pure jñāna-svarūpa of the ātmā becomes transformed and attains an adverse condition.

*Translator’s Note: Anukalpa is the process by which the mind creates mental representations of objects or ideas that are not immediately present or directly perceived. Anukalpa is used to describe the creation of conceptual or hypothetical scenarios. For example, if one is designing a house, one has a mental vision of how the layout should be, what colour it should be painted etc. It is not a physical reality, but a mental conceptualisation. This is anukalpa. Vikalpa involves the cognitive function of generating different options or hypotheses. It is a form of mental activity that deals with assessing multiple potential realities or interpretations. For example, if one is taking a road trip, one may consider various possibilities – taking a scenic route, a faster route. Each of these options is a potential route you could take based on different criteria. This is vikalpa.

Thus, in the first chapter of the Tenth Canto, Vasudeva says:

svapne yathā paśyati deham īdṛśaṁ
manorathenābhiniviṣṭa-cetanaḥ
dṛṣṭa-śrutābhyāṁ manasānucintayan
prapadyate tat kim api hy apasmṛtiḥ
yato yato dhāvati daiva-coditaṁ
 mano-vikārātmakam āpa pañcasu
guṇeṣu māyā-raciteṣu dehy asau
 prapadyamānaḥ saha tena jāyate

A person, absorbed in a dream, sees himself with a particular form and contemplates what he is seeing and hearing, accepting that and forgetting his circumstances in the waking state. Wherever the restless mind, impelled by providence, moves, it is shaped by its own transformations and attaches itself to the five elements created by māyā. The embodied ātmā, identifying with the body fashioned from these elements, is born along with it. (Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.1.41-42)

The characteristics of pure knowledge are perceived in this way in the Kaṭhopaniṣad:

yadā pañcāvatiṣṭhante jñānāni manasā saha
buddhiś ca na viceṣṭati tām āhuḥ paramāṁ gatīm

When the five knowledge-acquiring senses remain peaceful, and the mind and intelligence do not overexert themselves, that state is said to be the highest attainment. (Kaṭhopaniṣad 2.3.10)

Although that knowledge transforms into the mind, it does not get destroyed.

indriyāṇāṁ pṛthag-bhāvaṁ udayāstamayau ca yat
pṛthag utpadyamānānāṁ matvā dhīro na śocati

The urges of the various senses come and go. Understanding that the self is different to the sensual body, a sober person does not grieve. (Kaṭhopaniṣad 2.3.6)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

tatra rāgasya arthānarthobhaya-mūlaṁ pratipādayati

Attachment is the root-cause of both artha (that which is necessary) and anartha (that which is unnecessary).

SŪTRA 17

pare’nuraktiḥ svabhāvikī śreyas-karī ca itareṣv aupādhikī duḥkha-pradā ca

(Attraction to the Supreme is inherent and beneficial, and the opposite is conditional and only gives misery)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

jīvanām ity anuvartate. pare īśvare anuraktiḥ svabhāva-siddhā utkarṣādi-śreyaḥ-sampādayitrī ca bhavati. itareṣu vittāpatya-kalatrādiṣu sā anuraktir aupādhikī saṁsāra-duḥkha-pradā ca bhavatīty arthaḥ. ‘tam eva viditvāti mṛtyum’ eti, ‘ajāhy eko juṣamāno’nuśete’ ityādi-śruteḥ.

Thus, the jīvas follow the Supreme. Attachment to the Supreme Lord is inherent by nature and leads to progress and the attainment of auspiciousness. In contrast, attachment to wealth, family, spouse etc. is conditional and awards one suffering in worldly existence. The śruti says, ‘By knowing Him, one overcomes death’ (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 3.8) and  ‘Renouncing everything, the one who is absorbed in the Supreme remains engaged (in contemplation.’ (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 4.5)

Commentary by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura

Attraction for the Supreme Lord is the inherent tendency of the jīva. Just as the attraction of iron is the nature of a magnet, melting is the quality of heat, burning is the potency of fire, saṅkalpa and vikalpa (accepting and rejecting) are the functions of the mind, and the capability to fulfil their respective purposes is the nature of material objects, similarly, attraction to the Supreme Lord is the ātmā’s inherent tendency. In the liberated state, this is the tendency of the jīva. It remains pure and fully manifest, but in the bound state, it becomes mutated. The attachment of embodied beings to material objects is a mutation of superior attachment. When that tendency is without material designations, it becomes supreme attachment, but when it acquires such designations, it becomes distorted. Attachment is a singular tendency, yet it acquires different names according to different designations. When there is attachment for money, it is called greed. When attachment arises towards the beauty of a woman, it can be called lechery. When attachment is directed towards the suffering of others, it is termed as compassion. When attachment is directed towards a brother or sister, it is known as affection. When attachment is towards a benefactor, it becomes gratitude. When attachment is directed towards someone who is favourable or supportive, it becomes love. When attachment is designated as hostile, it becomes hatred. In this way, the same inclination manifests in various forms. Its multiplicity is its designation. With a liberated jīva, it remains in a state free from designations. It does not simply remain in the same state, but that pure attachment can also infinitely expand – this is its excellence. All these designations have been termed as dharma (nature). Therefore, Bhagavān states:

sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja
ahaṁ tvāṁ sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi mā śucaḥ

Abandon all types of dharma – come and surrender unto Me alone! Do not fear, for I will surely deliver you from all reactions. (Bhagavad-gītā 18.66)

After renouncing all designations, surrender to Bhagavān alone is supreme attachment. This supreme attachment is not entirely possible for embodied beings to attain in its purest form. However, it is the duty of those who are embodied to gradually practice abandoning material designations through pure analysis. Any resulting pāpa, in other words, any difficulties that arise from this, will be removed by Bhagavān’s grace. This is the conclusion.

Once again, Bhagavān says in the Gītā:

samo’haṁ sarva-bhūteṣu na me dveṣyo na me priyaḥ
ye bhajanti tu māṁ bhaktyā mayi te teṣu cāpy aham

I am equal to all living beings. I neither hate nor favour anyone. Yet whoever worships Me with devotion is with Me and I am certainly with them. (Bhagavad-gītā 9.29)

All types of pāpa are considered afflictions; these afflictions are attributed to material designations. Therefore, the following sūtra is there.

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

nanu cid-ānanda-rūpasya katham anartha-sambandha ity āśaṅkāyām āha

“How can there be any connection with anarthas for one who is of the nature of pure consciousness and bliss?” In response to such a doubt, the following has been stated.

SŪTRA 18

upādhi-kṛtā hi kleśāḥ

(Afflictions are created by material designations)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

jīvānāṁ saṁsāropādhi-hetukāḥ kleśa-rūpā anarthā bhavanti, ‘kapūyācaraṇāḥ kapūyān yonim āpadyanta’ ityādi-śruteḥ, ‘buddhi-nāśāt praṇaśyati’ ityādi-smṛteś ca.

For the jīvas, anarthas in the form of afflictions arise due to designations within the material world. The śruti says, ‘Those who engage in deceitful practices fall into a deceitful womb.’(Chāndogya Upaniṣad 5.10.7), and smṛti states, ‘From loss of intelligence, one descends.’ (Bhagavad-gītā 2.63)

Commentary by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura

The unconditioned state of the jīva is pure. In that state, the jīva remains in his true nature as consciousness and bliss – in other words, he is situated in his own svarūpa, engaged in his tendency towards superior attachment to the Lord. The Kaṭhopaniṣad states:

yadā sarve pramucyante kāmā ye’sya hṛdi śritāḥ
atha martyo’mṛto bhavat yatra brahma samaśnute

When all material desires lurking in the heart are removed, one exchanges death for immortality and attains the bliss found within the Absolute Truth. (Kaṭhopaniṣad 2.3.14)

When the jīva turns away from supreme attachment, then his attachment to inferior substances arises. This is the material designation of the jīva. Through this, the jīva’s mind becomes perverted and the results of the mind’s misconceptions lead to his repeatedly accepting a physical body and the suffering associated with the state of material subjugation. All these sufferings are due to mundane designations. However, as stated in the third mantra of the Vājaseneya Upaniṣad:

asuryā nāma te lokā andhena tamasāvṛtāḥ
tāṁs te pretyābhigacchanti ye ke cātma-hano janāḥ

Those who enjoy the world without establishing a relationship with the Paramātmā are suicidal. When they leave the body, they go to that place which is attained by all those with evil tendencies that are covered in darkness. (Īśopaniṣad 3)

The meaning of the word asūrya is this – individuals who are attached to inferior things go to a state where the light of knowledge cannot manifest clearly. In other words, all those persons who harbour such desires achieve all those mundane things. The attainment of a material body by the jīva should be considered as going to the asūrya-loka (the realm devoid of spiritual illumination), because in that condition, the light of knowledge does not manifest clearly. Worldly afflictions are themselves the afflictions of the jīva. In the book Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, Śrī Rūpa Gosvāmī has classified afflictions into three types:

kleśas tu pāpaṁ tad-bījam avidyā ceti tat tridhā

Afflictions are threefold – pāpa, the seed of pāpa, and ignorance. (Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.1.18)

The attachment of the jīva to material objects is called avidyā (ignorance), as stated in the Vājaseneya Upaniṣad:

andhaṁ tamaḥ praviśanti ye ‘vidyām upāsate

One situated in ignorance enters into a realm of complete darkness. (Īśopaniṣad 9)

Vāsanās (mental impressions) are called the seed of pāpa, and those activities that are immoral are themselves pāpa. Afflictions are present in these three conditions.

These very designations are what constitute anarthas. Anartha-nivṛtti (the elimination of anarthas) is considered the cessation of material designations for the bound jīvas. Anartha-nivṛtti is liberation because without the designation of anarthas, the jīva attains a state of eternal bliss and knowledge. Thus, it has been established in the following sūtra.

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

evaṁ jīvānām upādhi-kṛta-kleśa-sambandha-rūpaṁ bandhaṁ vyavacchidya idānīṁ mukti-svarūpaṁ viśadayituṁ sūtram ārabhate

Thus, having distinguished the bondage of the jīvas, which is characterised by afflictions related to their conditional designations, the sūtra will now begin to clarify the nature of liberation.

SŪTRA 19

anartha-nivṛttir muktiḥ sva-pada-prāpakatvāt

(The elimination of anarthas is liberation, because one achieves his inherent position.)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

upādhi-kṛta-duravasthā-janitānartha-nivṛttir eṣa jīvānāṁ saṁsāra-muktiḥ svasya padaṁ cid-ānanda-svarūpaṁ tat-prāpti-hetutvāt tasyā ity arthaḥ. ‘satā saumya tadā sampanno bhavati’, ‘ānandaṁ brahmaṇo vidvān na bibheti kutaścana’ ityādi-śruteḥ.

The elimination of anarthas born from an erroneous state created by conditional designations is the liberation of the jīvas from the cycle of birth and death. The attainment of their own state, their natural proclivity of consciousness and bliss (cid-ānanda-svarūpa), is the cause for this liberation. This is the meaning of that. The śruti says, ‘One attains Him during sleep, in the realm of external unconciousness.’ (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.8.1) and ‘One who knows the bliss of Brahman has no fear of anything.’ (Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.9.1)

Commentary by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura

There is much debate and discussion about the topic of liberation. Liberation is classified into five types – sārṣṭi, sālokya, sāmīpya, sārūpya, and sāyujya. These are the types of liberation. The name for attaining equal opulence with Bhagavān is sārṣṭi. The name for residing in the divine realm of Bhagavān is sālokya. The name for becoming close to Bhagavān is sāmīpya. The name for attaining a form similar to Bhagavān is sārūpya. The name for merging into Bhagavān is sāyujya. These classifications are seen in the śāstra. Upon deep analysis, a common characteristic amongst all types of liberation is observed. Sārṣṭi, sālokya, sāmīpya, sārūpya, and sāyujya all reveal some proximity to Bhagavān. The jīva’s disregard for Bhagavān is the cause of all suffering, because rejecting the spiritually blissful Bhagavān results in material suffering. This is the jīva’s state of subjugation. Although there are many specific kinds of attributes concerning the state of subjugation, it’s common feature is nothing more than disregard for the Lord. Therefore, in all kinds of liberation, what other characteristic can be seen except for closeness to the Lord – that is called sayujya. In many Vaiṣṇava sampradāyas, there is a particular hatred towards the term mukti (liberation). This aversion has arisen solely from a lack of discussion about mukti. This must be acknowledged. In the conversation between Sārvabhauma and Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya in Śrī Puruṣottama Kṣetra, Sārvabhauma states:

sālokyādi cāri yadi haya sevā-dvāra
tabu kadācit bhakta kare aṅgīkāra
sāyujya śunite bhaktera haya ghṛṇā-bhaya
naraka vāñchaye tabu sāyujya nā laya

If the four kinds of liberation such as sālokya etc. are accepted as a way of service, then a devotee may accept them. Yet when a devotee hears about sāyujya, he feels aversion sna fear. He would desire hell before accepting sāyujya. (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya-līlā 6.267-268)

Then, Śrī Caitanyadeva tells the following to Sārvabhauma:

prabhu kahe mukti-padera āra artha haya
mukti-pada-śabde sākṣāt īśvara kahaya
mukti pade yāṅra sei mukti-pada haya
kimvā navama padārtha muktira samāśraya
dui-arthe kṛṣṇa kahi kene pāṭha phiri

The Lord said: There is another meaning to the word mukti-pada. It also directly refers to the Lord. One at whose feet mukti resides is known as mukti-pada. Mukti is the ninth subject of the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, and the Lord is the shelter of mukti. I accept these two meanings What is the necessity of changing the text? (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya-līlā 6.271-273)

Then Sārvabhauma said:

sārvabhauma kahe o-pāṭha kahite nā pāri

Sārvabhauma replied: I cannot give such an explanation. (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya-līlā 6.273)

mukti-śabda kahite mane haya ghṛṇā-trāsa
bhakti-śabda kahite mane haya ta’ ullāsa

When the term mukti is mentioned, it evokes aversion and fear in the mind, and when the word bhakti is spoken, it brings delight. (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya-līlā 6.276)

And then it is said, śuniyā hāseba prabhu (‘hearing this, the Lord smiled’).

In this regard, those followers of Śrī Caitanyadeva who are sāragrāhīs (those who seek that which is essential) will not differentiate between the terms mukti and bhakti as having separate meanings. Rather, those who hate the concept of liberation should be doubted regarding their depth of analysis and seriousness. In reality, there is no difference between mukti and parā-bhakti; rather, those who perceive a difference between them have not realised either of these states. This is obvious. When the sole characteristic of both bhakti and mukti is the supreme bliss of proximity with the Lord, then to hate the word mukti while favouring the term bhakti simply becomes leads to a dispute over semantics. It is seen that the primary reason why Vaiṣṇavas have an aversion for the word mukti is that it is often understood to imply the complete annihilation of the jīva, in other words, absolute dissolution. However, despite this, the term is still used in a universal sense, according to the meaning one attributes to it.

Nevertheless, Sārvabhauma states:

yadyapi tomāra artha ei śabde kaya
tathāpi āśliṣya-doṣe kahana nā yāya
yadyapi mukti-śabdera haya pañca vṛtti
rūḍhi-vṛttye kahe tabu sāyujye pratīti

Although You have given this meaning to the word, it is not possible to discuss it without addressing the defect of misinterpretation. Although the term mukti denotes five different categories, by its direct meaning, it refers specifically to sāyujya. (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya-līlā 6.274-275)

In this case, the word sāyujya means merging into Brahman. In reality, the meaning of the word sāyujya is a connection with Brahman. The practice of all those Vaiṣṇavas who are engaged in gopī-bhāva sādhana must also be called the sādhana of brahma-sāyujya. There is no real difference in the meaning, only a dispute over the terminology. Regarding this, the Śāṇḍilya Sūtra states as follows:

tad-aikyaṁ nānātvaikatvam upādhi-yoga-hānād āditya-vat

The jīva is one with Him and also diverse. When the connection with material designations is eliminated, the jīva becomes effulgent like the sun. (Śāṇḍilya Sūtra 2.93)

The result that comes from taking shelter of the Supreme Brahman is called liberation. The nature of that liberation is described in this way in the Kaṭhopaniṣad.

etad ālambanaṁ śreṣṭham etad ālambanaṁ param
etad ālambanaṁ jñātvā brahma-loke mahīyate

 This is the best support. This is the supreme foundation. When one knows this foundation, one is welcomed into the abode of the Absolute. (Kaṭhopaniṣad 1.2.17)

This liberation leads the jīva to attain his own position, and that position is described immediately after the previous mantra in the Kaṭhopaniṣad in this way:

na jāyate mriyate vā vipaścin
nāyaṁ kutaścin na babhūva kaścit
ajo nityaḥ śāśvato ‘yaṁ purāṇo
na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre

One who is wise never takes birth nor dies at any time. Similarly, the Supreme is not born nor does He die. The living being is unborn, eternal, indestructible and timeless – he is not destroyed when the material body is destroyed. (Kaṭhopaniṣad 1.2.18)

Indeed, through these revelations of śruti and by analysis, it is understood that liberation, or the jīva’s attainment of his intrinsic position, is an indescribable phenomenon. This phenomenon cannot be expressed by words or the mind, because in this subjugated state, all jīvas (from Brahmā down to the inanimate beings) are bound by space and time. Therefore, no one can conceive of a state that transcends both these elements. However, that the transcendental state is far superior to this conditioned state. This is our self-evident belief. In regards to those who ignore this self-evident belief, Death himself has spoken about them in the Kaṭhopaniṣad as follows:

na sāmparāyaḥ pratibhāti bālaṁ
pramādyantaṁ vitta-mohena mūḍham
ayaṁ loko nāsti para iti mānī
punaḥ punar vaśam āsādyate me

The Lord who grants liberation does not reveal Himself to one who is childish, careless, bewildered by wealth and deluded. One who thinks that there is no other world than this falls under my sway again and again. (Kaṭhopaniṣad 1.2.6)

Those who seek to determine the nature of liberation or the afterlife through logical analysis are foolish. The Kaṭhopaniṣad states:

naiṣā tarkeṇa matir āpaneyā
proktānyenaiva su-jñānāya preṣṭha
yāntv amāpaḥ satya-dhṛtir batāsi
tvādṛṅ no bhūyān naciketaḥ preṣṭha

O dear one, this knowledge cannot be understood nor destroyed by logic when one who has full understanding describes it. O Naciketā, you are most sincere. There are very few questioners like you. (Kaṭhopaniṣad 1.2.9)

Further inquiry into the subject of liberation is not possible. Therefore, those who wish to determine the nature of topics related to this inconceivable state through argument and verbal expression find their efforts fruitless. Instead, they remain engaged in disputes about conditions such as nirvāṇa, salokya, and sāṣṭi, which can never be resolved. Hence, the following statement of the sādhus is our guiding principle:

acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṁś tarkeṇa yojayet
prakṛtibhyaḥ paraṁ yat tu tad acintyasya lakṣaṇam

One should not try to understand by logic that which is inconceivable. That which is beyond material nature is called inconceivable. (Mahābhārata, Bhīṣma-parva 5.22)

Vyāsa’s sūtra states:

tarkāpratiṣṭhānāt

That which is beyond matter cannot be established by mundane logic. (Vedānta-sūtra 2.1.11)

A specific description of this will be given in the commentary on the 36th sūtra. Liberation is the elimination of anarthas, and through it, the jīva attains his true condition. In the First Canto of the Śrīmad Bhāgavata, Sūta says:

bhidyate hṛdaya-granthiś chidyante sarva-saṁśayaḥ
kṣiyante cāsya karmāṇi dṛṣṭa evātmanīśvare

Upon perceiving the Lord within the mind, the knot within the heart is severed and all doubts are removed along with all karma. (Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 1.2.21)

In the Second Canto of the Bhāgavata, there is a discussion on liberation:

muktir hitvānyatha-rūpam svarūpeṇa vyavasthitiḥ

Mukti is being situated in one’s svarūpa and rejecting all other forms. (Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 2.10.6)

Here a doubt may arises – Since the Supreme Lord is supremely compassionate, why does the jīva experience anarthas? The following sūtra resolves this issue.

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

cit-padārthas tu svabhāvataḥ svatantraḥ īśvara-pradānāt. kintu jīvānāṁ svātantryaṁ hi teṣāṁ kleśa-hetur iti prasiddhaṁ tarhi tad-dānena kuta īśvara-prasādo bhavatīty āśaṅkāyām āha.

Inherent independence, which has been awarded by the Lord, is the intrinsic nature of conscious entities. However, the inherent independence of the jīvas is well known to be the cause of their suffering. Therefore, where does the grace of the Lord come from? Thus, this doubt will be addressed.

SŪTRA 20

jīvānām itarānurakti-hetur īśvara-kāruṇyaṁ tata eva teṣāṁ svātantrya-siddheḥ

(The independence of the jīvas, which is bestowed by the mercy of the Lord, is also the cause of their attraction to other things)

Sanskrit Commentary by Śrī Gopīnātha Paṇḍita

teṣāṁ svātantryaṁ tad-utkarṣāya īśvareṇa karuṇayā dattam. tataḥ parameśvaraṁ vismṛtya svatantratayā jīvā itara-viṣayāsaktā bhavantītyarthaḥ,’ anena jīvenātmanānupraviśya nāma-rūpe vyākaravāṇi, ‘na taṁ vidāthaya imā yad yuṣmākam antaraṁ babhūva’ ityādi-śruteḥ.

Out of compassion, the Lord gives the jīvas independence for their benefit. This means that due to their independence, the jīvas forget the Supreme Lord and become attached to material objects. The śruti states, ‘I shall enter the primordial elements along with the jīva and manifest the divisions of names and forms.’ (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.3.2) and, ‘You are not aware of He who has produced these living beings. He dwells within you.’ (Bṛhad-Āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.3.15)

Commentary by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura

The suffering of the jīvas due to their attachment to inferior things has already been observed. But if the Supreme Lord is supremely compassionate, then why did He not protect the jīvas from such inferior attachments? There is a possibility of such an objection being raised.

If the Supreme Lord were to control the jīvas like inanimate objects, how would the jīvas achieve any advancement? Progress or decline is only the result of one’s own actions. In order to facilitate their development, the Supreme Lord made the inherent nature of the jīvas independent. All those jīvas who misuse their own independence by abandoning their inherent attachment to the Lord, and instead indulge in material desires through their attachment to mundane things, are subjugated by material nature due to the influence of their own desires. This means that by being engaged in material enjoyment, they are deprived of the supreme bliss of premāmṛta (the nectar of divine love).

Thus, the Munḍaka Upaniṣad states:

yaṁ yaṁ lokaṁ manasā samvibhāti
viśuddha-sattvaḥ kāmayate yāṁś ca kāmān
taṁ taṁ lokaṁ jāyate tāṁś ca kāmāms
tasmād ātma-jñaṁ hy arcayed bhūti-kāmaḥ

Whatever world a pure-minded man mentally desires, and what desires he has, he gains that world and those desires. Thus, whosoever wishes for success should offer respects unto such a knower of the ātmā. (Munḍaka Upaniṣad 3.1.10)

The suffering that the jīvas experience due to the misuse of this kind of independence cannot be said to be given by the Lord, nor can the Lord be blamed for it in any way. The Creator is never to be blamed for the suffering that one experiences due to a violation of the law. If the Creator forced the jīvas to accept suffering, then He would be guilty of partiality. If, through his own free will, a jīva strengthens his own superior attachment, it will lead to his advancement, but without free will, he has no qualification to advance. It must be said that by granting such exceptional free will to the jīvas, the Supreme Lord has shown His compassion towards them. It must also be said that the fall down which is seen due to the misuse of free will only occurs to reform the jīva in order to deliver them. The fact that the Lord’s punishment is a result of His compassion has been stated by the Nāga-patnīs in the sixteenth chapter of the Tenth Canto of the Śrīmad Bhāgavata:

anugraho’yaṁ bhavataḥ kṛto hi no
daṇḍo’satāṁ te khalu kalmaṣāpahaḥ
yad dandaśūkatvam amuṣya dehinaḥ
krodho’pi te’nugraha eva sammataḥ

What has been done here by You is indeed mercy to us, because Your punishment of the wicked removes their contamination. Since our husband acquired the form of a serpent, Your anger towards him is actually Your mercy. (Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.16.34)