CC daily 108 – M 6.140-141 – Harmonize the contradictory-seeming scriptural statements by proper comprehension

That will eventually lead to in our future talks thank you so Jaitan Mahaprabhu is now Jaitan Mahaprabhu by expressing the Mukhya Artha or the Abhidha Vritti is now explaining what is the essential import of scripture and he says Sarvaishwarya Paripurna Swayam Bhagwan he says this Bhagwan the all-opening the transcendental supreme person is Sarvaishwarya Purna he is he is endowed with all opulences in fact the word Bhagwan means one who possesses Bhagwa means opulences so so it’s a Sarvaishwarya Purna Ananta Guna Sampanna Narayana as Ramayana Acharya says that far from being Nirguna Narayana is Ananta Guna Sampanna that he is endowed not with no qualities but with unlimited auspicious qualities so his qualities are all auspicious transcendental and they’re supremely auspicious so being attracted to him and his qualities brings the supreme auspiciousness in the life of the conditioned soul it attracts the soul to move from bondage towards liberation now that so that absolute truth in scripture declares as Aishwarya Purna Sarvaishwarya Purna not just opulent but filled with all opulence to complete degree so now Vyakhyana is interpretation Tandra Nirakarakari so some people Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is talking about the wrong strategy used by some interpreters his interpreters Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is not throughout here making a direct attack on Sarvabhauma he is not saying that you know your interpretation yes he’s the beginning he said that yes your interpretation i’m not able to understand your interpretation is covering the meaning instead of limiting it but now when he’s going to technicality not again harping on that point your interpretation your interpretation he says no some concocted interpretation so although Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is not avoiding an attack he is not necessarily aggravating or antagonizing his intellectual opulent we see how Chaitanya Mahaprabhu although he is uncompromising with respect to the philosophical philosophical import with respect to dhant but still with respect to sadhacharya also he is he is sensitive so this will we’ll see how things move forward so sir the absolute truth is all-endowed person so now he’s now the question may come up that in the previous was asserted that he’s Sarvaishwarya Purna but then the question may come oh but the scripture don’t just say that he’s Sarvaishwarya Purna scriptures also say that he’s Nirbhuna or he’s Nirvisesha so now what does it mean when it says that he’s Nirvisesha it means Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is explaining that prakruta nishyati kare aprakruta sthapa so that actually this explains that how he is not prakruta prakruta sthapa so they are not mundane they are transcendental and because they are transcendental so because we should not because we coming from our material background will have a tendency to confuse the transcendental with the mundane so when we see a form often we think of that the forms that we have experience of our material and they are temporary they are limited so similarly the qualities that we see different people have in this world they emerge from the modes they are material so we may extrapolate from our experience and presume that even the qualities of the lord are material and to protect us from presumption the such presumptions coming from unwarranted extrapolations the scriptures talk about a categorical difference between our qualities and our attributes and the lord’s attributes and that’s why they use the word nirvisesha so the nirvisesha is used to establish how the lord’s qualities are aprakruta not they’re not used to establish that he does not have any qualities at all because scripture itself often says the lord has that the absolute truth has many qualities so now a reconciliation needs to be done for how that which is how these two seemingly contradictory statements are to be reconciled the one statement that actually the absolute truth is is having opulences in fact is having unlimited and complete opulences is all opulences in full sarvaishwaryapurna and on the other hand the absolute is nirvisesha so how are these to be reconciled now the impersonalists try to say that actually the sarvaishwaryapurna description in scripture is is lower level reality is vyavaharika and the nirvisesha description is paramarthic but then ramanacharya argues that such a strategy where is the basis for relegating one set of descriptions inferior and other as superior and for and if truly that were the intent that should also be represented in the stress that scripture gives on such a description but we will see that most of the scripture in fact an overwhelming majority of the scripture gives a personalist description of the absolute truth now there are devotees offering prayers there is a lot of performing pastimes and intervening in supernatural and in transcendental ways in the devotee’s lives to protect them to redeem them to liberate them so if you see overall the scriptures do describe an absolute the absolute truth much more in personal terms than in impersonal terms and if if scripture is self-evident then we should be able to we should be able to see the both the explanation of scripture of the absolute truth being sarvaishwaryapurna and of the absolute truth being nirvisesha in a harmonious way so we should see both these descriptions in a harmonious way and then what way can these two descriptions be reconciled that is described over here now actually speaking the advaitic way of reconciling these two essentially doesn’t reconcile it just says that actually one is a illusion and the other is the actual reality so it’s not actually a reconciliation it is a it is an imposition of one as higher over the other whereas the understanding which is the actual import of the scripture which is given by vashnavacharya is that both of these are true because nirvisesha refers not to the absolute absence of all qualities but to the absence of material qualities and the presence of so that we don’t do an unwarranted extrapolation of material conceptions on the transcendental absolute truth so it is for that specific purpose that the nirvisesha description is used chaitanya mahaprabhu in this way gives a explanation that reconciles both the both the contradictory seeming descriptions of the

Disclaimer: This transcript was generated using AI and may contain occasional errors or inaccuracies.

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is now by expressing the Mukhya Artha or the Abhidhavrtti is now explaining what is the essential import of scripture and he says Sarvaishwarya Paripurna svayam Bhagavan. He says this Bhagavan, the all opulence supreme, the transcendental supreme person is Sarvaishwarya Purna. He is endowed with all opulences.

In fact the word Bhagavan means one who posses bhaga, bhaga means opulences. So it is Sarvaishwarya Purna, Anantagunasampanna Narayana as Ramacharya says that far from being nirguna, Narayana is Anantagunasampanna that he is endowed not with no qualities but with unlimited auspicious qualities. So his qualities are all auspicious, they are transcendental and they are supremely auspicious.

So being attracted to him and his qualities brings the supreme auspiciousness in the life of the conditioned soul. It attracts the soul to move from bondage towards liberation. Now that absolute truth whom scripture declares as Sarvaishwarya Purna, not just opulent but filled with all opulences to complete degree.

So now vyakhyana is interpretation. So some people, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is talking about the wrong strategy used by some interpreters. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is not throughout here making a direct attack on Sarvabhauma.

He is not saying that your interpretation. Yes, in the beginning he said that yes your interpretation I am not able to understand. Your interpretation is covering the meaning instead of eliminating it.

But now when he is going to technicality he is not again harping on that point. Your interpretation, your interpretation he says. No, some concocted interpretation.

So although Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is not avoiding an attack, he is not necessarily aggravating or antagonizing his intellectual opponent. We see how Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, although he is uncompromising with respect to the philosophical import, with respect to siddhanta, but still with respect to sadhacharya also he is sensitive. We will see how things move forward.

So the absolute truth is all-endowed person. Nirvishesha tandra kahe yehi shruti gaan. Prakruta nishedha kare aprakruta sthapan.

Nirvishesha tandra kahe yehi shruti gaan. So now the question may come up that in the previous Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has asserted that he is sarvaishwara purna but then the question may come, oh but the scriptures don't just say that he is sarvaishwara purna. Scriptures also say that he is nirguna or he is nirvishesha.

So now what does it mean when it says that he is nirvishesha? It means Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is explaining that prakruta nishedhi kare aprakruta sthapan. It says that actually this explains that how he is not prakruta. Prakruta sthapan.

So they are not mundane, they are transcendental. And because they are transcendental, so because we should not, because we coming from our material background will have a tendency to confuse the transcendental with the mundane. So when we see a form, often we think of the forms that we have experience of our material and they are temporary, they are limited.

So similarly the qualities that we see different people have in this world, they emerge from the modes. They are material. So we may extrapolate from our experience and presume that even the qualities of the Lord are material.

And to protect us from presumption, such presumptions coming from unwarranted extrapolations, the scriptures talk about a categorical difference between our qualities, our attributes and the Lord's attributes. And that's why they use the word nirvishesha. So the nirvishesha is used to establish how the Lord's qualities are aprakruta.

They are not used to establish that he does not have any qualities at all. Because scripture itself often says the Lord has the absolute truth, has many qualities. So now a reconciliation, an arthapatti needs to be done for how that which is nirvishesha.

How these two seemingly contradictory statements are to be reconciled. The one statement that actually the absolute truth is having opulences, in fact is having unlimited and complete opulences, is all opulences in full, sarvaishwarya purna. And on the other hand the absolute truth is nirvishesha.

So how are these to be reconciled? Now the impersonalists try to say that actually the sarvaishwarya purna description in scripture is lower level reality, is vyavaharik. And the nirvishesha description is paramarthik. But then Ramanacharya argues that such a strategy where is the basis for relegating one set of descriptions as inferior and other as superior.

And if truly that were the intent that should also be represented in the stress that scripture gives on such a description. But we will see that most of the scripture, in fact an overwhelming majority of the scripture, gives a personalist description of the absolute truth. Now there are devotees offering prayers, there is the Lord performing pastimes and intervening in transcendental ways in the devotees lives to protect them, to redeem them, to liberate them.

So if we see overall, the scriptures do describe the absolute truth much more in personal terms than in impersonal terms. And if scripture is self-evident, then we should be able to see both the explanation of scripture of the absolute truth being sarvaishwarya purna and of the absolute truth being nirvishesha in a harmonious way. So we should see both these descriptions in a harmonious way.

And what way can these two descriptions be reconciled? That is described over here. Now, actually speaking the Advaitic way of reconciling these two essentially doesn't reconcile, it just says that actually one is an illusion and the other is the actual reality. So it's not actually a reconciliation.

It is an imposition of one as higher over the other. Whereas the understanding which is actually important scripture which is given by Vaishnavacharyas is that both of these are true because nirvishesha refers not to the absolute absence of all qualities, but to the absence of material qualities and the presence of so that we don't do an unwarranted extrapolation of material conceptions on the transcendental absolute truth. So it is for that specific purpose that the nirvishesha description is used.

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in this way gives an explanation that reconciles both the contradictory seeming descriptions of the absolute truth. We will continue this analysis in our next talk. Thank you.