 | In their book, In Vaikuņṭha Not Even the Leaves Fall, Satya Nārāyaņa dāsa and Kuņḍalī dāsa (hereafter, the authors) maintain that although Śrīla Prabhupāda often taught that conditioned souls have fallen from the personal association and service of the Lord, he also wrote in his books that no one falls down from Vaikuņṭha. The authors argue that this apparent conflict can only be resolved by recourse to Śāstra and the previous ācāryas. These sources, they claim, show unambiguously that the conditioned state of the jīvas is literally beginningless, or anādi, and that souls do not fall down from Vaikuņṭha. The authors further insist that Śrīla Prabhupāda’s teaching that some souls do fall from Vaikuņṭha was merely a preaching strategy. They assert that Śrīla Prabhupāda generally spoke this false doctrine in his private communications, such as letters and conversations, but in his books he speaks the siddhānta: that no one falls from Vaikuņṭha.
|
| We propose to show in this book:
|
| 1. The Sanskrit word anādi, ”beginningless,”(2) like many Sanskrit words, displays a richness of meaning when applied in different ways. When anādi is applied to the material bondage of the soul, its meaning is different than when, for instance, it is applied to the soul itself.
|
| 2. Previous ācāryas and such Śāstras as Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam provide ample evidence that the jīvas fall into the conditioned state, which thus begins at a certain time.
|
| The Word “Anādi” in the Authors’ Book
|
| On page 75 of their book, the authors offer a chart of four key Sanskrit terms with definitions:
|
| - nitya—no beginning, no end
- anitya—beginning, end
- no beginning, end
- ananta—beginning, no end
|
| The authors insist that such learned ācāryas as Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī use these terms in a precise and literal sense. Therefore, since the ācāryas refer to the anādi bondage of the soul, we must conclude that there is no beginning to the soul’s material existence. Hence it is impossible that the soul was once with Lord Kŗṣņa, fell down and thus began material life.
|
| And yet, whenever the śāstras state that the soul’s bondage is anādi, Śrīla Prabhupāda almost invariably declared that the term anādi indicates that the soul is bound or conditioned”since time immemorial,” literally”since a time no longer in memory.”
|
| We shall now review the use of the word anādi in Vedic scriptures, starting with śruti, proceeding to smŗti and the commentaries of ācāryas.
|
| It is clear to all parties that a follower of Śrīla Prabhupāda is not inclined to reject the literal meaning of his teachings. The authors note,”In his Bhaktivedanta purports, he answered the question about falldown from the spiritual sky in clear, unambiguous language.” (Leaves, p. 129) But a follower of Śrīla Prabhupāda likewise is not inclined to accept a theory that Śrīla Prabhupāda consciously misinformed his followers about an important aspect of Vaiṣņava philosophy. The authors acknowledge that sentiment (“We assume that Prabhupāda gave us the ultimate answer to all our direct questions,” p. 129). But their conclusion is,”When you compare his answer to us on the jīva bondage issue with the answer of the śāstra, his statements in his purports and those of our previous ācāryas, it is obvious that he did not give us the ultimate answer even to the direct question.” (p. 129) This is a bold assertation. To test it, we shall review the word anādi in the Vedic scriptures.
|
| Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad
|
| The authors first attempt to give evidence from śruti, for they argue at length that in the Vedic tradition, all interpretations of the ācāryas or of smŗti must conform to śruti.
|
| They state:
|
| | The śruti confirms that the jīva’s bondage is caused by beginningless māyā.
anādi-mayayā supto yadā jīvaḥ prabudhyate
ajam anidram asvapnam advaitam budhyate tadā
(Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad 1.16)(3)
“When the jīva, sleeping by (the influence of) beginningless māyā, awakens, then he realizes the unborn, sleepless, dreamless nonduality.”(4).
Someone may argue that it is māyā—used here in the sense of the external energy—that is anādi, and not the bondage of the jīva. But that is not the intention of this verse. The verse is not describing māyā-Śakti; it is explaining the conditioning of the jīva and its characteristics at the liberated stage.(5) | |
|
| There are three problems with the authors’ interpretation of this text:
|
| 1. The authors have invented a stopgap rule of interpretation for this verse.
|
| It is:”In a verse describing the jīva’s conditioned state, a reference to māyā shall be understood as indicating the individual illusion of the soul and not the Lord’s personified external energy.” No such rule is given by the ācāryas or the śāstra.
|
| A prominent example from the Bhāgavatam (among dozen of such examples) demonstrates that this new rule of scriptural interpretation cannot pass the test of Śāstric reference. After hearing from his guru, Nārada, Vyāsadeva saw the Lord and His illusory energy, as described in these verses.(Bhāg. 1.7.4-5)(6)
|
| "Thus he [Vyāsadeva] fixed his mind, perfectly engaging it in devotional service [bhakti-yoga] without any tinge of materialism, and thus he saw the Absolute Personality of Godhead along with His external energy, which was under full control. Due to this external energy, the living entity, although transcendental to the three modes of material nature, thinks of himself as a material product and thus undergoes the reactions of material miseries."
|
| Verse 1.7.5 of the Bhāgavatam speaks clearly and directly about the conditioned jīva, yet the word yayā,”by which [illusory energy],” refers to the Lord’s external potency, māyā.
|
| 2. The authors commit a logical mistake in their interpretation of the so-called śruti text under discussion:
|
| Moreover, by logic, the effect of anādi objects is also anādi. So if māyā is anādi, as the verse says, then its effect,”the sleep of the jīva,” is also anādi.(7)
|
| Although logic does dictate that an anādi cause has an anādi effect, logic does not tell us that all these effects must be experienced by the same subject. For example, the sun has been shining on India for millions of years, but this does not mean that a particular Indian has enjoyed that sunshine for millions of years.
|
| 3. The third mistake is perhaps the most serious: the above quote is not actually from the Māņḍūkya Upaniṣad, which has only twelve verses. The so-called verse 1.16 is actually from a famous commentary on the Māņḍūkya Upaniṣad by Gauḍapāda, the parama-guru of Śaṅkarācārya. Indeed, one may note the impersonal flavor of the text:
|
| "When the jīva, sleeping by [the influence of] beginningless māyā, awakens, then he realizes the unborn, sleepless, dreamless nonduality."
|
English
Español
Pусский
Português