From Teachings of Lord Kapila, Chapter 4: ‘Srimad-Bhagavatam is a commentary on Vedanta-sutra. Vedanta-sutra explains that the Supreme is the source of everything, and the nature of that source is explained in Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.1.1): janmady asya yato 'nvayad itaratas carthesv abhijnah svarat. That source is abhijna, cognizant. Matter is not cognizant; therefore the theory of modern science that life comes from matter is incorrect. The identity from whom everything emanates is abhijna, cognizant, which means He can understand. The Bhagavatam (1.1.1) also states, tene brahma hrdaya adi-kavaye: Krsna instructed Lord Brahma in Vedic knowledge. Unless the ultimate source is a living entity, how can He impart knowledge? Srimad-Bhagavatam was compiled by Vyasadeva, who also compiled the Vedanta-sutra. Generally the Mayavadis emphasize the commentary made on the Vedanta-sutra by Sankaracarya, the Sariraka-bhasya, but that is not the original commentary on Vedanta-sutra. The original commentary is given by the author himself, Vyasadeva, in the form of Srimad-Bhagavatam. To understand the actual meaning of the Vedanta-sutra, we must refer to the commentary made by the author himself. As stated by Sri Krsna Himself in Bhagavad-gita (13.5):
rsibhir bahudha gitam
chandobhir vividhaih prthak
brahma-sutra-padais caiva
hetumadbhir viniscitaih
“The knowledge of the field of activities and of the knower of activities is described by various sages in various Vedic writings—especially in the Vedanta-sutra—and is presented with all reasoning as to cause and effect.”
Transcendental knowledge is therefore very logical. According to the Vedic system, the acarya must understand Vedanta-sutra (also called Brahma-sutra) before he can be accepted as an acarya. Both the Mayavada-sampradaya and the Vaisnava-samprada ya have explained the Vedanta-sutra. Without understanding Vedanta-sutra, one cannot understand Brahman.’
From Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila, Chapter 7, Text 72, purport: 'Knowledge of the unlimited is actual brahmajnana, or knowledge of the Supreme. Those who are addicted to fruitive activities and speculative knowledge cannot understand the value of the holy name of the Lord, Krsna, who is always completely pure, eternally liberated and full of spiritual bliss. One who has taken shelter of the holy name of the Lord, which is identical with the Lord, does not have to study Vedanta philosophy, for he has already completed all such study.
One who is unfit to chant the holy name of Krsna but thinks that the holy name is different from Krsna and thus takes shelter of Vedanta study in order to understand Him must be considered a number one fool, as confirmed by Caitanya Mahaprabhu by His personal behavior, and philosophical speculators who want to make Vedanta philosophy an academic career are also considered to be within the material energy. A person who always chants the holy name of the Lord, however, is already beyond the ocean of nescience, and thus even a person born in a low family who engages in chanting the holy name of the Lord is considered to be beyond the study of Vedanta philosophy. In this connection the Srimad-Bhavatam states:
aho bata svapaco'to gariyn
yajjih vnre vartate nma tubhyam
tepus tapas te juhuvuh sasnur arya
brahman ucur nama grnanti ye te
“If a person born in a family of dog-eaters takes to the chanting of the holy name of Krsna, it is to be understood that in his previous life he must have executed all kinds of austerities and penances and performed all the Vedic yajnas.” (SB. 3.33.7) Another quotation states:
rg-vedo 'tha yajur-vedah sma-vedo 'py atharvanah
adhitas tena yenoktam harir ity aksara-dvayam
“A person who chants the two syllables Ha-ri has already studied the four Vedas—Sama, Rk, Yajuh and Atharva.”
Taking advantage of these verses, there are some sahajiys who, taking everything very cheaply, consider themselves elevated Vaisnavas but do not care even to touch the Vednta-sutras or Vedanta philosophy. A real Vaisnava should, however, study Vedanta philosophy, but if after studying Vedanta one does not adopt the chanting of the holy name of the Lord, he is no better than a Mayavadi. Therefore, one should not be a Mayavadi, yet one should not be unaware of the subject matter of Vedanta philosophy. Indeed, Caitanya Mahaprabhu exhibited His knowledge of Vedanta in His discourses with Prakasananda Sarasvati. Thus it is to be understood that a Vaisnava should be completely conversant with Vedanta philosophy, yet he should not think that studying Vedanta is all in all and therefore be unattached to the chanting of the holy name. A devotee must know the importance of simultaneously understanding Vedanta philosophy and chanting the holy names. If by studying Vedanta one becomes an impersonalist, he has not been able to understand Vedanta. This is confirmed in Bhagavad-gita (Bg. 15.15). Vedanta means “the end of knowledge.” The ultimate end of knowledge is knowledge of Krsna, who is identical with His holy name. Cheap Vaisnavas (sahajiyas) do not care to study the Vedanta philosophy as commented upon by the four acaryas. In the Gaudiya-sampradaya there is a Vedanta commentary called the Govinda-bhasya, but the sahajiyas consider such commentaries to be untouchable philosophical speculation, and they consider the acaryas to be mixed devotees. Thus they clear their way to hell.’
From Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila, Chapter 7, Text 102, Purport: 'The Mayavadi sannyasis, appreciating Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu, inquired from Him why He did not discuss Vedanta philosophy. Actually, however, the entire system of Vaisnava activities is based on Vedanta philosophy. Vaisnavas do not neglect Vedanta, but they do not care to understand Vedanta on the basis of the Sariraka-bhasya commentary. Therefore, to clarify the situation, Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, with the permission of the Mayavadi sannyasis, wanted to speak regarding Vedanta philosophy. The Vaisnavas are by far the greatest philosophers in the world, and the greatest among them was Srila Jiva Gosvami Prabhu, whose philosophy was again presented less than four hundred years later by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura Maharaja. Therefore one must know very well that Vaisnava philosophers are not sentimentalists or cheap devotees like the sahajiyas. All the Vaisnava acaryas were vastly learned scholars who understood Vedanta philosophy fully, for unless one knows Vedanta philosophy he cannot be an acarya. To be accepted as an acarya among Indian transcendentalists who follow the Vedic principles, one must become a vastly learned scholar in Vedanta philosophy, either by studying it or hearing it.
Bhakti develops in pursuance of Vedanta philosophy. This is stated in Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.2.12):
tac chraddadhana munayo
jnana-vairagya-yuktaya
pasyanty atmani catmanam
bhaktya sruta-grhitaya
The words bhaktyasruta-grhitaya in this verse are very important, for they indicate that bhakti must be based upon the philosophy of the Upanisads and Vedanta-sutra. Srila Rupa Gosvami said:
sruti-smrti-puranadi-
pancaratra-vidhim vina
aikantikiharer bhaktir
utpatayaiva kalpate
“Devotional service performed without reference to the Vedas, puranas, pancaratras, etc., must be considered sentimentalism, and it causes nothing but disturbance to society.” There are different grades of
Vaisnavas (kanistha-adhikari madhyama- adhi kari uttama-adhikari), but to be a madhyama-adhikari preacher one must be a learned scholar in Vedanta-sutra and other Vedic literature because when bhakti-yoga develops on the basis of Vedanta philosophy it is factual and steady. In this connection we may quote the translation and purport of the verse mentioned above (SB. 1.2.12):
TRANSLATION
That Absolute Truth is realized by the seriously inquisitive student or sage who is well equipped with knowledge and who has become detached by rendering devotional service and hearing the Vedanta-sruti.’
From a lecture by Srila Prabhupada, given on January 11, 1967: 'So far Vedanta-sutra is concerned, Bhagavata is Vedanta-sutra itself. Bhagavata is the natural commentary on the Vedanta-sutra. Therefore one who has sufficient knowledge in Bhagavata, he has automatically sufficient knowledge in Vedanta-sutra.’
Comments