Bhagavatam-daily 202 – 11.11.07 – Enlightenment means to realize not just our oneness with the Absolute but also our difference

Shrimad Bhagavatam 11.7 आत्मानमन्यम् चसवेद विद्वान अपिपलादो नतुपिपलादः यो विद्धया युखसतु नित्यबद्धो विद्यामयोयसतु नित्यमुक्तः आत्मानमन्यम् चसवेद विद्वान आत्मानमन्यम् There is another soul.
It’s a way the Vidhwan, this supreme, this is Atma, this refers to the super soul, it’s a way the Vidhwan, the super soul knows everything, Apipalado Natupipaladaha, Apipalado means that this super soul does not consume the fruits of the tree, Natupipaladaha, as do the other soul or the other bird in the tree, which is consuming the fruits, Avidyayuksatunityapadho, this pipaladaha, that soul which is eating the fruit that is afflicted by avidya, avidyayuksatunityapadho, with avidya this soul is nityapadho, it’s been bound since time immemorial, Vidyamayo Vidyamayo, on the other hand, that supreme being who is Vidyamayo is nityamukta, so essentially this verse continues stressing the difference between the soul and the super soul using the metaphor of the two birds in the tree, so it is said that the super soul is Vidya, is Vidhwan and is nityamukta, whereas the soul is avidya, afflicted by avidya and is nityapadha, the path of impersonalism focuses on dissolving the difference between us and brahman, as is conveyed through the meditation on the vedantic sutra aham brahmasmi, the idea behind such repetition is that I am brahman means, the impersonalist thinks that whatever conception of difference between me and whatever is around me is there, that conception is an illusion and by enlightenment means giving up that sense of differentiation, now this is true as far as our identification with matter is concerned, so aham brahmasmi means that I am spirit, it does not necessarily mean that I am the supreme spiritual being, the word Brahma has multiple meanings and in the Bhagavad Gita as well as in other Upanishadic literature, the differentiation between the minute spirit and the supreme spirit is also made, there is Brahma and there is Parabrahma or as the Upanishads, so there is one who is, one is special eternal among the many eternals, one special conscious among the many special conscious beings and what is the speciality that one is maintaining the others, so this clearly indicates that although we are one with the absolute, everything is not one in the absolute, this means that we are one with the absolute in quality, we are spirit, the absolute is spirit and dissolving the sense of differentiation between us and the absolute truth that comes because of our identification with matter, that is good, but going beyond that, believe or claim absolute oneness between us is not correct, so the other part of that, that means that everything is not one in the absolute, that is stressed in the Upanishadic metaphor of the two birds, the bird is different from the tree, the bird can move from one tree to another, similarly the soul can move from one body to another, the bird tries to enjoy the fruits of the tree, similarly the soul tries to enjoy sense gratification through the body, these are similarities between the body soul, body soul relationship and the tree bird relationship, but just as the tree, just as the soul, just as the birds are qualitatively different from the tree, similarly the soul, the birds belong to a different more active species and the difference between the soul and the body is even more categorical, but the point is comparatively speaking, the eating bird and the observing bird are both birds as contrasted with the tree, which at least in this metaphor is inactive except for providing fruits, so similarly the soul and the super soul are similar in quality and both are spiritual and both are different from matter, at the same time just as there is a difference between the two birds in terms of their actions, one is consuming the fruits, the other is observing the show, the show of this bird consuming the fruits and delighting and fretting over the fruits, similarly there is a difference between the soul and the super soul, the super soul is 30.23 whereas the soul is not observing, the soul is consuming the fruits, the soul is trying to get pleasure through the body and because of the desire to enjoy through the body, the soul is becoming attached and entangled in bodily consciousness of the material world, so although sometimes the Upanishads are thought of as impersonalistic, actually they are clearly through metaphors like this, the Bhagavatam often repeats the Upanishadic Vedantic teachings and reveals their devotional import, so in this case the two bird metaphor is being repeated and actually the original two bird metaphor in the Upanishad itself is conveying the difference between the soul and the super soul and here it is being made clear that actually one is Nityabhadra, the other is Nityamukta, so there is a qualitative difference between the two and realizing that difference is vital for success in the path of Yoga, especially this is all the more so in Bhakti Yoga, because in Bhakti Yoga we want to devote ourselves to the Lord, we want to surrender to Him, we want to make Him our be all and end all and we can’t do that if we think we are Him, so to that end enlightenment means not realizing our oneness with the absolute but realizing also our difference from the absolute and that difference is conveyed through this metaphor.