6

Shukdeva advises Raja Parikshit in Srimad-Bhagavatam (12/5/11):

aham brahma param dhaam brahma aham paramam padam/evam samikshya cha aatmanam aatmanimaadhaya nishkale

English Translation: Think: I am Brahman, the Absolute Abode, the final destination and attach the Self to the ever-unstinted Brahman.

Interestingly, Sukadeva at the end of Bhagavatam does not advise King Parikshit to pray to God for liberation. He advises to think: I am Brahman.

How does the Sri Madhvacharya interpret the above sloka?

8
  • While I dont know how dvaitins interpret this, it is interesting to note that in the upanishads, it is stated that "aham" is one of the names of brahman. – user16581 Feb 28 '19 at 19:38
  • 1
    You may just write non advaitins... Else, dvaitins only represent Tattva vada followers of Madhvacharya... – user2612 Mar 1 '19 at 1:23
  • If you know Sanskrit, you can search for Madhvacharya's interpretation here: archive.org/details/SriBhagavataTatparyaNirnayaEBook – user9969 Mar 1 '19 at 10:18
  • @SuryaKantaBoseChowdhury yes the link finally worked & i hv dwnlded.Thnx – user17294 Mar 1 '19 at 10:53
  • 2
    @SuryaKantaBoseChowdhury Right, I think Madhvacharya hasn't commented on this verse – Pandya Mar 18 '19 at 15:15
4

The dvaita interpretation of this verse is that it reflects the highest meditative state of a devotee, who is in deep love and knowledge of Brahman as it comes very close and intimate with Brahman. The statement "I am Brahman" is made because the devotee thinks of nothing but Brahman.

vijayadhvajatIrtha was a later dvaita commentator on the bhAgavatam in his padaratnAvalI. It says the following on 12.5.11.

दंशदोषास्पर्शने प्रकारान्तरेणोपायमाह-अहमिति । न हन्यत इत्यहं न हीयत इति वा कदापि न जहाति स्वशक्तिमिति वा एवं विधमीश्वरं विहाय कदापि न तिष्टत्यस्वातन्त्र्यादित्यर्थः उपासनाफलमाह-एवमिति । एवंविधस्त्वं निष्कले आत्मनि परमात्मानं समाधाय संयुज्य समीक्ष्य सम्यक् ध्यायन्

I have kept the Devanagari text above because it is my own transcription, so should be checked. Here is my attempt at translating it:

daMshadoShAsparshane prakArAntareNopAyamAha-ahamiti

daMsha- sting , doShA- night , sparshane- feel, prakArAn- section, tare- boat crossing, pAyam- water, Aha- no, aham- I am, iti- that

The feeling of a sting at night, partly crossing the water, aha, I am that.

I am a little unsure about how to translate this sentence of commentary. The writer compares himself to a sting, signifying the baseness of the self in contrast to the idea that it becomes Brahman, and only having partly crossed the ocean of samsAra: the same word tari is used for crossing samsAra in the ganga sahasranAma #400. For the dvaitin, the self is insignificant compared to Brahman, like a mosquito to a person. This statement contrasts with the view that is contradicted in the next sentence.

na hanyata ityahaM na hIyata iti vA kadApi na jahAti svashaktimiti vA evaM vidhamIshvaraM vihAya kadApi na tiShTatyasvAtantryAdityarthaH upAsanAphalamAha-evamiti

na- no, hanyata- kill, ity- thus, ahaM- I, na- not, hIyata- extinguished, iti- that, vA- or, kadApi- never, na- no, jahAti- leaves, svashaktim- own power, iti- that, vA- or, evaM- such, vidham- kind, IshavaraM- god, vihAya- having left, kadApi- never, na- no, tiShTa- constant, tya- roaming, svA- self, tantry- by tantra, Aditya- deity , arthaH- object of desire, upAsanA- worship, phalam- reward acc, Aha- not, evam- like, iti- this

Thus that self (“I”) is not killed; that is never extinguished or leaves its own power, or never becomes like a kind of god, having left. No, the reward for worship is not like this: [becoming a] constantly roaming self, deity [and] object of desire using tantra.

So the dvaita interpretation of this verse is that the self always remains after liberation, not being deified.

evaMvidhastvaM niShkale Atmani paramAtmAnaM samAdhAya saMyujya samIkShya samyak dhyAyan

evaM- such, vidha- kind, tvam- you, niShkale- undivided, Atmani- in the soul, paramAtmAnaM- who is the supersoul, samAdh- having focused, Aya- thus, saMyujya- intimacy, samIkShya- having investigated, samyak- wholly, dhyAyan- lost in meditation

In such a kind of undivided soul, you having focused [ on the one who is] the supersoul, thus [there is] intimacy, having investigated wholly and [being] lost in meditation.

0

Srimad Bhagavatam 12.5.11 aham brahma param dhaam brahma aham paramam padam/evam samikshya cha aatmanam aatmanimaadhaya nishkale I dont think Sripada Madhvacharya commented on this verse. According to my studies I learnt this verse meant that both atma and paramatma are qualitatively same whereas quantitatively different for example : A drop in the ocean is qualitalively same as the ocean whereas quantitatively not same. Even in the vishnu purana Vishnu purana 5 Ansha 33 Adyaya sloka 47-49 lord krishna says something similar but still atma and paramatma are different.

Hare krishna Jai Sri Radhe

1
0

In brahma Sutra3.3.46 there is a type of devotion known as so'ham bhakti meditating oneself as god. SB(12.5.11): aham brahma param dhaam brahma aham paramam padam/evam samikshya cha aatmanam aatmanimaadhaya nishkale

Gopala Tapini Upanishad states that meditating on god form is devotion. Henceforth even the above quotation is in favour of devotion only. https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/34937/21339v has a very relevant answer regarding this question.

Thank you

Hare Krishna

You must log in to answer this question.