Verse 2.2.186

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of verse 2.2.186:

अतस् तस्माद् अभिन्नास् ते भिन्ना अपि सतां मताः ।
मुक्तौ सत्यम् अपि प्रायो भेदस् तिष्ठेद् अतो हि सः ॥ १८६ ॥

atas tasmād abhinnās te bhinnā api satāṃ matāḥ |
muktau satyam api prāyo bhedas tiṣṭhed ato hi saḥ || 186 ||

ataḥ–then; tasmāt–from Him; abhinnāḥ–nondifferent; te–they; bhinnāḥ–different; api–also; satām–of the devotees; matāḥ–consideration; muktau–in a liberated state; satyām–actually; api–also; prāyaḥ–generally; bhedaḥ–difference; tiṣṭhet–may remain; ataḥ–then; hi–certainly; saḥ–that.

Therefore, great personalities are of the opinion that because the jīvas and Parabrahman both have characteristics of sac-cidānanda, they are nondifferent from one another, but because the jīvas are a portion of Parabrahman, they are also different. Even when the jīvas are liberated, as a rule, this difference remains.

Commentary: Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā with Bhāvānuvāda

(By Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī himself including a deep purport of that commentary)

The bhakti-śāstras say, “The living being, or the jīva, and Parabrahman, or the Supreme Brahman, are nondifferent from one another because they share the same nature–that of eternality, knowledge, and bliss. But as the jīva is a part, or aṃśa, of Parabrahman, they are different also. This concept is illustrated in the three examples [from verse 184] of the sun and its rays, the fire and its sparks, and the ocean and its waves. The sun and its parts–its rays–are nondifferent in that they share radiance and other similar attributes. But unlike the sun, the rays are multifarious and diffusive. Therefore, the sun and its rays are different.

“This difference between the parts and the whole exists eternally. The significance of this example is that just as the sun has an inherent relationship with its rays, so the living beings have an integral relationship with the Lord. However, one cannot equate a ray of the sun with the sun itself. Rather, the sun is of a superior nature, and it is from the sun that rays emanate. Similarly, the Lord’s nature is superior to that of the living being.

“Śrī Bhagavān possesses an innate, inconceivable potency named Yoga-māyā, who makes the impossible possible. By the effect of this potency, the simultaneous oneness and difference between Bhagavān and the living beings manifests. As rays emanate from the sun, all jīvas manifest from the Lord. The Lord and the jīvas are nondifferent from one another in that they are both conscious by nature, but since the jīvas are also parts (aṃśa) of Bhagavān, they are simultaneously different as well. It follows that this difference is eternal and continues even when the jīvas are liberated.”

Śrī Śaṅkarācārya-pāda has stated, “muktā api līlayā vigrahaṃ kṛtvā bhagavantaṃ bhajanti–For the sake of performing pastimes, even liberated souls accept a body and worship Śrī Bhagavān.” According to this statement, salvationists first attain the stage of jīvana-mukta, in which they remain in a material body but are free from identification with it. Later, at the stage of mukti, in which they no longer have bodies, some liberated jīvas, out of their own free will, accept bodies that are suitable for serving Bhagavān and thus worship Him.

The bhakti-śāstras continue, “In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (6.14.5), Śrī Parīkṣit says to Śrī Śukadeva:

मुक्तानाम् अपि सिद्धानां नारायण-परायणः
सु-दुर्लभः प्रशान्तात्मा कोटिष्व् अपि महा-मुने

muktānām api siddhānāṃ nārāyaṇa-parāyaṇaḥ
su-durlabhaḥ praśāntātmā koṭiṣv api mahā-mune

O great sage, among millions of perfected and liberated souls, one may be devoted to Lord Nārāyaṇa. Such a devotee, who is completely peaceful, is rarely found.

“These words of the Mahā-Purāṇa also establish the separate existence of Śrī Bhagavān and the jīva who is His servant. Otherwise, if one merges into Brahman at the time of liberation, who is there to accept a body as a pastime? Who is there to become devoted to Nārāyaṇa on the strength of bhakti? If the soul’s existence merges into Brahman forever, how can the separate identity of the liberated jīva be explained?

“One might object that both the examples cited above apply to jīvana-mukta souls who are liberated even within their material bodies. However, this assumption is not correct because the salvationists, even in the jīvan-mukta stage, have bodies. Going back to the verse above, it can be asked, why did Śrī Śaṅkarācārya-pāda use the words ‘vigrahaṃ kṛtvā–upon accepting a body [they will perform worship of Bhagavān]’? These words make no sense in relation to those jīvanmukta souls, who are liberated while still present in their bodies. Neither can one say that the stanza of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, muktānām api siddhānām, refers to the position of being jīvan-mukta.

“It is stated in the Kārtika-māhātmya of the Padma Purāṇa: ‘There was a great sage in human form who merged into Bhagavān. Then he again became manifest in a form similar to that of Lord Nārāyaṇa.’ The Bṛhan-nārasiṃha Purāṇa, describing the vow of Nṛsiṃhacaturdaśī, tells of how a prostitute and a brāhmaṇa merged into Bhagavān. They then manifested again, the brāhmaṇa as Prahlāda and the woman as his wife. There are many similar narrations of how liberated souls have again accepted bodies.”

In the original verse above, the significance of prāyaḥ, meaning ‘for the most part’ or ‘as a general rule,’ is that, occasionally, by the desire of the Lord, some living beings attain nirvāṇa, the extinction of the self, which is known as sāyujya liberation. Therefore, prāyaḥ has been used to indirectly indicate nirvāṇa.