Śrīmad Bhāgavata 1.17.19

Synonyms

[The philosophical views of the proponents of different paths are now elaborated (vākya-bhedān evāha).¹⁰³]; kecit — some [yogīs (yoginaḥ)]; vasanāḥ — who deny [or obscure (vasate ācchādayanti)]; vikalpa — all distinction [(bhedam); between the individual self and the Supreme Self (jīveśvarādi-bhedam), referring to the Advaitavādīs, who deny the existence of any external agent as the bestower of happiness and distress owing to the falsity of dualism, which perpetuates the self’s ignorance concerning its own happiness and distress (advaitavādinas te hi sukha-duḥkhāder ātmājñāna-vijṛmbhitasya dvaitasya mithyātvāt no ko’pi sukha-duḥkha-prado bhavatīty āhuḥ)¹⁰⁴]; āhuḥ — declare [tad-uktam]; ātmānam [eva] — the self [alone]; ātmanaḥ prabhum¹⁰⁵ — as the cause of its own pleasure and pain [(ātmanaḥ sukha-duḥkha-pradam), those who hold this view deny agency to the devas because the latter are subordinate to the law of karma in the administration of results (na tāvad devatādīnāṁ prabhutvaṁ karmādhīnatvāt), and they also deny agency to karma because of its dependence on the performer of action and due to its being unconscious (na ca karmaṇaḥ svādhīnatvāt acetanatvāc ca)]; anye — others [those schooled in the science of astrology (daivajñāḥ); (jyotir vidaḥ)¹⁰⁶]; [attribute the cause (prabhum āhu)¹⁰⁷]; daivam — to destiny [or providence in the form of the planetary influences (grahādi-rūpāṁ devatām)]; apare — others still [the Mīmāṁsakas]; karma — to conditional action; apare — while others [the adherents of Cārvāka’s materialism (lokāyatikāḥ); or the proponents of atheistic Sāṅkhya¹⁰⁸]; [ascribe the cause (prabhum āhu)¹⁰⁹]; svabhāvam — to a person’s innate disposition.

Some, who deny all distinction [between the jīva and Īśvara], declare the self alone as the cause of its own pleasure and pain. Others attribute the cause to destiny, others still to conditional action, while others ascribe the cause to a person’s innate disposition.

Notes

103Unless otherwise indicated, this and the following bracketed inserts in verse 19 are Śrīdhara Svāmī’s comments.↩

104Viśvanātha Cakravartī.↩

105It is to be noted that Śrīdhara Svāmī takes the word prabhum as meaning “that which occasions happiness and distress” (sukha-duḥkha-pradam), effectively rendering the sense of the word as “the cause” (of these two). He then connects prabhum to the word ātmanaḥ, together meaning, “the cause of one’s own pleasure and pain.” These two words are then to be applied to each of the different agents or items upheld by different theorists as the cause of pleasure and pain. This syntactical arrangement of the verse is explicitly shown in the commentaries of Śukadeva and Giridhara, and applied here in the anvaya. With the exception of Vīrarāghava, all other commentators have followed this line of interpretation. Vīrarāghava takes the word prabhum as meaning Īśvara, which would then amount to an additional view—“and others declare Īśvara as the cause of one’s own pleasure and pain.” To do so, however, he has to add a pronoun (pare) to account for the extra view. This interpretation also leaves the verse as a whole without any word meaning “the cause.” He thus adds the word kāraṇa, “the cause,” which he then applies to each of the propositions in the verse. This interpretation seems less tenable since Īśvara (i.e., Parameśvara) is the implied subject of Dharma’s next proposition in the verse that follows.↩

106Giridhara.↩

107Giridhara.↩

108Jīva Gosvāmī.↩

109Giridhara.↩

SB 1.17.19

Synonyms

Translation

Raise a Query

No questions yet