How can we substantiate that the Bhagavatam is the natural commentary on the Vedanta Sutra?

From Ramabhadrapriya P

The Srimad Bhagavatam is the natural commentary of the Vedanta Sutra( Srila Prabhupada states at many places in his bhagavatam purports ) , apart from the references in the Caitanya Caritamrta , are there any other references or verses which state that Srimad bhagavatam is the natural commentary by the same author?

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
and observe ourselves more and more in that.
Because the Srimad Bhagavatam was the last Vedic literature that Vyasadeva wrote. After he had written everything else, this is what he wrote. So, there are some references to the Srimad Bhagavatam, talking about how it contains so much valuable wisdom.
And in the Padma Purana, there is the Bhagavata Mahatmya, where the Srimad Bhagavatam is described in terms of the body of Krishna. And there it is said that how the first two cantos are like the lotus feet, and the tenth canto is like the beautiful face of Krishna, and the Ras Panchadhyaya is like the smile of Krishna on that beautiful face. So, now it is described by Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur in his commentary on the Bhagavatam that actually Vyasadeva had written all 18 Puranas, including the Srimad Bhagavatam.
But he was still dissatisfied, because like the other Puranas, he had written it in a way that was not making pure devotional service extremely lucidly clear. So, what he did was that he edited it thoroughly. And then he wrote the Srimad Bhagavatam, where there was no contamination in terms of a confusion about who is supreme so much, or confusion about which path is supreme.
The Bhagavatam makes clear that Krishna is the supreme manifestation of the Supreme Lord, and shuddha bhakti to him is the supreme goal of life, to achieve that supreme absolute truth. So, this is not so clear in the other Puranas, and it was not similarly clear in the earlier rendition of the Srimad Bhagavatam. So, then what Vyasadeva wrote down after being guided by Narada Muni is what the Amala Puran.
So, in the edition that he has written, which is the last lightening of the day, so it will obviously not, there is no book that he wrote after that. So, we can’t have any references saying that this is the conclusion, because the speaker has concluded, the writer has concluded his writings with this. He has not written anything after this.
And everything that is written before this, that cannot say that this is the conclusion, because that would have to be written after the conclusion to say that this is the conclusion. So, the Padma Purana’s glorification is for the Bhagavatam, even when it was unedited, still it was an exalted book. And the Padma Purana is referring to that pre-edited version that is also glorious.
But, so that Bhagavat Mahatma is one traditional reference which is there, quite important. It’s a Uma Maheshwar Samvat, Shiva-Parvati dialogue. And especially Jiva Goswami in his Tattva Sandarbha, the entire first section of Tattva Sandarbha, almost half of the Tattva Sandarbha is entirely going about establishing the authenticity of the Srimad Bhagavatam.
And he does it using logic, he does it using content. So, he does it in various ways in Tattva Sandarbha. One way he says is that, it is first of all Yasadeva’s self-realization and self-revelation.
Self-realization means not in terms of he realized the soul, but it was his own realization of what is the absolute truth which he understood in 1.7 when he started meditation after a discussion with Yasadeva. Then he also describes, ultimately all of us are going to die. And the Bhagavatam is starting not with some sectarian question, please tell me the glories of Lord Shiva, please tell me the glories of this particular place, Mahatmya.
The Bhagavatam is starting with very objective questions. It is saying, what is the duty of a person who is about to die? What is the duty of a person in general as he is going to prepare for death? So, that is one seed of the Srimad Bhagavatam, the question that Parikshit Maharaja asked Shri Dev Goswami. That comes at the end of the 19th chapter of the 1st Canto.
In the 7th chapter of the 1st Canto, again very universal principles are coming. That Yasadeva in his vision saw that there is a Supreme Lord, there is Maya next to him, under him, and there is a Jeeva under Maya. Although Jeeva is meant to be next to Krishna under the absolute truth, but he has come under Maya.
And he says, by hearing about the absolute truth, connecting with the absolute truth, the Jeeva can go beyond the reach of Maya to the absolute truth. So, again, this is a non-sectarian universal vision of how liberation can be attained. Similarly, if you look at what the sages are asking, the sages are asking, there are so many scriptures which is the essence of the scriptures.
And there are so many dharmas which is the supreme dharma. So, then the Srimad Bhagavatam is spoken by Shri Dev Goswami at that time. Similarly, if you look at the beginning verse, again, janmādy asyetānvade tathaś cārteṣvāṁ So, that also, according to some recensions of the Bhagavatam, om na bhagavate vāsudevā, is not a part of that.
That is the starting invocation. The Bhagavatam starts from janmādy asyetānvade tathaś. So, this does not even name the absolute truth.
It just talks about the principle that there is absolute truth in the source of everything, in the sustainer of everything. Because of whose supreme reality this world seems real. So, if you look at what the Bhagavatam is talking about, this is the absolute truth that is to be discussed in the whole book.
So, it is a non-sectarian description of the absolute truth. So, from these three or four self-references in the Bhagavatam, the question of Parikshit Maharaj, the vision of Vyāsadeva, the question messages to Śruta Goswami and the invocatory verse at the start, we can see the non-sectarian universal nature of the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. So, Jīva Goswami gives some references which talk about the exaltedness of the content of the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam and he also gives us a logical analysis of those contents to show their universality.
And in this way, he establishes for us that this is the culmination of all the Vedic literature. It is now specifically regarding the natural commentary by the same author. The principle we have to see is that the Bhagavatam is talking about the absolute truth.
That’s what it says right in the beginning. And the whole purpose of Vedānta-sūtra is to talk about the absolute truth. In fact, after all the opinions are written, there is confusion about what their actual import is.
And therefore, to resolve this confusion, Vyāsadeva writes the Vedānta-sūtra, Bhādrayāna, he writes it. And similarly, still after writing the Vedānta-sūtra, there is confusion, there is lack of clarity and there is lack of satisfaction. So, now Vyāsadeva writes the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.
So, in this way, if you look at not just the starting verse, both started with Janmādhyasakhyatā, but if you look at the context and the purpose, the purpose was to resolve various misconceptions and to establish the ultimate, absolute truth’s understanding. Both share the common purpose. And therefore, both are talking about the same absolute truth.
Now, Baldevidya Bhushananda Govinda Bhāshya also gives some analysis of this. But primarily, it is Jīva Goswāmī, in his Atpasandharbha, he shows how the Bhāgavatam is explicating the same absolute truth who is being established in the Vedānta-sūtra. Thank you.