Being the author of Srimad-Bhagavtam why didn’t Srila Vyasadeva speak Srimad-Bhagavatam himself ?

From Mukunda P

Very good, any other question? question from Mukunda Prabhu being the author of Srimad Bhagavatam, why didn’t Sri Vyasadeva speak Srimad Bhagavatam himself? answer it is a part of the Lord’s plan to glorify different devotees according to different time, place, circumstance so just like we see elsewhere that Naradhuni is the spiritual master of Prahlad Maharaj but in the Zila of Narasimhadev even Naradhuni is said to bow down to Hiranyakashipu but Prahlad Maharaj, the disciple, doesn’t bow down to Hiranyakashipu so does that mean that Prahlad Maharaj is greater than Hiranyakashipu? No the idea is that in that specific pastime Prahlad Maharaj’s glory is especially demonstrated and that is done through the inspiration to everyone else to, even if they are exalted devotees, to play roles that enhance the glory of Prahlad Maharaj so even Lakshmi Devi is not able to pacify Lord Narasimhadev but Prahlad Maharaj is able to. So every pastime has a particular rasa by which the specific devotee involved is glorified and that particular aspect of the Lord’s reciprocation with the devotees is highlighted so in the case of the manifestation of the Srimad Bhagavatam in the world we have Vyasadev himself spoke the Srimad Bhagavatam to Shukadev Goswami so the origin is that the Srimad Bhagavatam is eternal like the Shrutis, it is Channa Shruti but it is manifested according to the level of capacity of the people so in demigods, lokas, the Srimad Bhagavatam is more expanded because their capacity is or grasping is higher now at this level of existence whatever Srimad Bhagavatam was the Chitra Shloki is spoken by the Lord to Brahma and in that way the Parampara is passed down and then after that it comes down from Vyasadev to Shukadev Goswami his own son and Shukadev Goswami speaks it to Pariksit Maharaj and then Suta Goswami is among the audience Suta Goswami has a conversation with Naimishar it is used on Naimisharanya and then finally it is written down by Vyasadev so Vyasadev’s role in this particular pastime is he speaks the Bhagavatam first to Shukadev Goswami and then there is also an intermediate incident where Vyasadev that means this is happening prior to that Vyasadev feels despondent and Narada Muni instructs him to glorify the Lord exclusively and then he actually compiles the Srimad Bhagavatam and after that he describes this to Shukadev Goswami and Shukadev Goswami gets attracted from person to person realization so in this way Vyasadev’s role is significant even if he doesn’t speak the Bhagavatam it is he who compiles and integrates the Bhagavatam which is spoken to Shukadev Goswami which is heard by Shukadev Goswami and spoken again and which again is eventually presented in a in the form that we have today in a written form by Vyasadev so even if Vyasadev has not spoken the Bhagavatam still his role is by no means insignificant it is a very significant and important role in the process by which the Bhagavatam is in a way glorifying Shukadev Goswami here and he has his own distinctive qualities he left home he didn’t even want to come out of the mother’s womb and as soon as he came out of the mother’s womb he went to the forest and he did not want to get entangled in material existence and he was not attracted in the very released degree by the best of material pleasures and in this way his glories are broadcast so we could also ask why was Bhagavatam not spoken to Arjuna instead of why was it spoken to the grandson of Arjuna Parikshit Maharaj so we could have had Bhagavatam between Krishna and Arjuna only instead of Parikshit Maharaj and Shukadev Goswami but the point here is different devotees are being glorified and this is Parikshit Maharaj’s glory is being demonstrated by showing how such a great king when he faces undeserving curse then he gracefully accepts it and takes shelter of the sound vibration glorifying the lord similarly Shukadev Goswami at that point is just a 16 year old youth but because he has assimilated the Srimad Bhagavatam both ways by describing how exalted the recipient of the sound vibration is and also by describing how from the material point of view the speaker of the Srimad Bhagavatam seems so unworthy he is young he is unclothed he is it is described that he was not very perfect in recitation of the Vedic hymns and also that he was as we now know samskaras were performed for him but still because he had assimilated the Srimad Bhagavatam all these material qualifications didn’t matter because he had assimilated the Srimad Bhagavatam so he was spiritually qualified and that qualification made him worthy of being the speaker of Srimad Bhagavatam so here we have the contrast of somebody who is so glorious materially that is King Pariksit and then he is considered his life to be worthless unless he gets to hear the Srimad Bhagavatam and on the other hand there is somebody who is considered utterly worthless in the material perspective and not just the material sense but even in the material religious perspective of karma kind but because he has understanding the Srimad Bhagavatam his position becomes even more elevated so both ways through the position of the speaker and the position of the hearer the glory of the Srimad Bhagavatam