What is the theory of reflection Prabhupada refers to in the Gita 2.13 purport?

From Anuj Agarwal

Answer Podcast

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2ZRO9KUsgQ

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
gopichandhan thank you.
Hare krishna question what is the theory of reflection that shloka refers to in bhagavad gita 2.13 per quote answer it is one of the versions of mayavad called as pratipimbavad actually prabhupada largely follows baldevidyabhushan in his gita commentary and he summarizes what baldevidyabhushan is saying and baldevidyabhushan is basically responding and by following the way ramanujacharya has critiqued what shankaracharya has said in his explanation of how the jiva comes under illusion so now we often use the word mayavad in a very general sense or in a very we have a very mayavadi understanding of mayavad that means that we think that all mayavad is just one mayavadi say that everything is one that is true but all people who say that everything is one are not exactly one they have many different understandings of mayavad so now even before shankaracharya was a prominent proponent of mayavad but even before him there were proponents and he talks in his 15.7 mamai vamsho jivaloke parpod he talks about how the infinite brahman becomes finite jiva so there are two theories there is a theory of reflection called as pratipimbavad and there is the theory of limitation which is called avachannavad so the theory of reflection says that just as the sun in the sky can be reflected in the pot of water and then the sun in the reflection of the sun actually the sun is not in the reflection it’s only a reflection that is there and the reflection does not have the potency of the sun but when the reflection when the water is removed and there when the whole reflection is no longer there then the sun will be pursued in its own glory so basically the the nature of the illusion because of which the soul considers oneself to be separated from brahman and considers oneself to be maya that is equated through the idea of a reflection that is conveyed through the idea of a reflection now the other is avachannavad avachanna means limitation that is that just as there is the vast sky which gets vast sky we could say the air in the sky the vedic terminology is different but the point is that we have the space uh that space when it is contained within a pot then actually the air the air or the space or the sky whatever term we want to use here the point is the bhagavad-gita uses the word aakash so that is inside the sky is limited because there is the border that is the box that is the pot but on the so the pot is like the body and when the soul identifies with the body and bodily consciousness the soul gets limited and then the bodily consciousness is destroyed the pot is destroyed then then this aakash which is in the body will merge with the aakash which is outside and so the presently the soul is avachanna is constricted in its notion because of bodily consciousness this is the theory of limitation now both these theories they have been technically analyzed uh by the vaishnava vedantic commentators and exposed thoroughly and the fundamental problem with all such ideas is that if brahman alone is satya where is the other thing which limits brahman come from that’s what the upanishads say that there’s only one brahman and nothing else so now if brahman is the only reality then in either of the ideas if we talk about say there has to be some kind something like a water in which it will reflect and brahman get reflected and then there is some illusion coming up but what is it that in which will reflect in brahman is the only thing that is real where does the object in which it gets reflected come from and how does that also uh trap a part of brahman that’s also a question and similarly even if we say that it’s like a jataka as the prabhupada would talk about using bengali vernacular jatakash patakash so there is akash in the pot with akash in the sky but what forms the pot where does the material that forms the pot come from if brahman is the only reality and how does the uh the part of brahman get trapped in that pot so that is the question which uh which is ultimately fatal for mayavad and that cannot be answered and that’s what ramacharya repeatedly hammers upon in his commentary also in the bhagavad-gita since gita bhakshi now what prabhupada is saying is probably not exactly refuting mayavad over here prabhupada is uh giving us a correct understanding of prathirambhavad so he says that this can be applied the theory of reflection can be applied to the super soul not to the uh not to the soul directly or solve alone he says that that just says if there is a sun in the sky and get reflected in the water and there are stars in the sky and they are also reflected in the water so similarly because there is the there are there is a singular infinite and then the plural infinitesimal souls they are already there in the spiritual realm and they are manifest even in the material realm when the soul falls into illusion and then the super soul accompanies him to guide him ultimately out of illusion so the soul remains trans super soul remains bound whereas super soul remains transcendental unbound so prabhupada gives us the proper understanding of prathirambhavad so what so what is it that according to the vaishnava understanding of vedanta what is it in which the soul and the super soul reflected that is that is the material energy so there is brahman is the only reality but brahman is not a brahman is not a energyless reality brahman is an energetic reality and brahman has material and spiritual energies and the the subordinate spiritual energy that the soul when the soul desires to enjoy matter which is also another material energy of the supreme then purusha prakriti sthohi bhunkte prakriti jan gunam. Krishna talks about in 13.22 the soul desires to enjoy and gets bound because of the desire to enjoy the soul becomes bound in material existence so now krishna also refers to both these examples of the sun and the sky in 13.33 and 34 but those are just explanations of how the soul remains transcendental even while being in material existence and how the transcendence can be realized they in no way support the mayavadi interpretation that that the finite soul and the infinite supreme are one and the same so prabhupada is pointing out the limit the flaws of prathirambhavad and pointing and also giving us the correct understanding of prathirambhavad. Thank you.
What is the traditional meaning