The Brahma Sutras, or Vedanta Sutra, is a short treatise written by Srila Vyasadeva to transmit the ultimate conclusions of the Vedas. As Srila Prabhupada explains, “The Vedānta-sūtra, which consists of aphorisms revealing the method of understanding Vedic knowledge, is the concise form of all Vedic knowledge.”
The 555 aphorisms of the Vedanta Sutra are usually taken as an incredibly complicated work because Sankaracarya wrote an extremely complex commentary with the goal of covering the real meaning. With the goal of bringing the followers of Buddha back into accepting the Vedas, he developed a philosophy that is very similar to Buddhism, but based on the Vedas. To fit this philosophy into the aphorisms of the Vedanta Sutra, he wrote a commentary that is both complex and contradictory.
However, Srila Prabhupada calls our attention to the direct interpretation of the verses of the Vedanta Sutra, which was used by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to defeat stalwart Mayavadis such as Prakasananda Sarasvati and Sarvabhauma Bhattacharya and bring them to the proper understanding of the sastras. Srila Prabhupada gives us glimpses of these discussions in the Caitanya Caritamrta, as well as the Teachings of Lord Caitanya.
It happens that this direct interpretation of the Vedanta Sutras not only much much easier to understand, but it is something that brings joy to the heart, by descrybing the nature of the Supreme. This direct interpretation of the Vedanta Sutra is explained by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana in his Govinda Bhashya, and it is quite an invaluable tool when explaining Krsna Consciousness since many people who are resistant to accept direct statements from the Bhagavad-Gita and Srimad Bhagavatam become easily attracted by the beautiful logic of the Vedanta Sutra.
How can we be sure that the direct explanation of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu is the correct one, and not the indirect explanation of Sankaracarya? The point is that Srila Vyasadeva himself wrote an explanation of the Vedanta Sutra in the form of the Srimad Bhagavatam. Followers of Sankaracarya usually don’t accept the Srimad Bhagavatam because it doesn’t agree with their philosophy, but when we accept the Srimad Bhagavatam as Vyasadeva’s explanation of the Vedanta Sutra, all the meaning becomes clear.
This is the start of a short explanation I’m writing of the first chapter, based on the explanations left by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana. I will be publishing the meaning of more verses in installments.
The system I’m following here is to first give a short, literal translation of each verse, then some explanations of what it means, and finally the translation given by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana. The reason I decided to follow this system instead of giving directly the translations of Sri Baladeva is because of the nature of the verses of the Vedanta Sutra. Each sutra is an extremely compact block of knowledge (some of them contain a single word!). Each sutra gives a conclusion to a certain philosophical point, and thus they can only be understood in context. In his translation, Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana gives a combination of verse and context, but an inquisitive reader may have difficulty in connecting it with the direct meaning of the verse. I’m thus trying to make a bridge between the two, offering first a direct translation, then explaining the context and what it means, and then giving the translation given by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana, which combines both. With this, I hope to help the reader to understand the flow of the verses.
The English translations of the works of Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana come from the translation published by Bhanu Swami.
- The nature of the absolute
1.1.1
“athāto brahma-jijñāsā”
- Now it’s time to enquire about Brahman.
During our day-to-day struggles, we may not notice it, but the human form of life is very valuable. The Vedas explain that there are 8,400,000 forms of life in this universe, distributed amongst aquatics, plants, insects, lower animals, humans, and also higher beings, all the way up to Brahma, the creator of the universe we live in.
Before attaining the human form, the soul has to pass through an extremely long evolutionary process, going through the millions of different forms of plants and animals. In all these different species there is something to be learned by the soul (insects don’t care for their babies, for example, while mammals do), but only human beings have the higher intelligence necessary to understand philosophical topics. In all the lower species of life, the soul is fully immersed in the assumption that he is the body, and thus works tirelessly just to maintain it. Only in the human form of life, there is the possibility of understanding our real nature as spiritual beings transcendental to the body.
This understanding of our transcendental nature has two components. The first component is to understand our nature as spiritual beings, transcendental to the body. The second is to understand Brahman, which is both our origin and our destination. The nature of this transcendental Brahman is the main topic of the Vedanta Sutra, and this first verse invites us to properly use our human intelligence to try to understand Him, not wasting our precious human existence by just taking care of the body like the animals.
However, even when we come to the point of trying to understand Brahman there are many traps. Many consider Brahman to be just an impersonal force, in which we are supposed to just merge, liquidating our individual existence. This idea may sound attractive to the ones who are frustrated with material life, but this kind of spiritual suicide is not the main message of the Vedas. There is a superior understanding of Brahman, as a source of unlimited spiritual relationships, which is understandable only to the ones who have devotion to Him. In this way, Brahman can be understood only through the association of devotees. This superior meaning is picked up by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana, who translates this first verse in his Govinda Bhashya as: “After attaining association with devotees, one begins the inquiry concerning the Lord.”
1.1.2
“janmādy asya yataḥ”
- From Him, everything emanates.
The first verse speaks about the importance of using our human intelligence to inquire about Brahman, but who or what is Brahman? Would Brahman be some kind of impersonal object? Would Brahman be some kind of conscious being? Would Brahman be a person like us?
The second verse gives us the first clue to understanding the transcendental nature of Brahman, explaining that He is the source of everything, including us (as spirit souls) and the material Universe (including our bodies and everything else that exists). This has two very profound implications:
The first is that if Brahman is the source of the material nature, including all the material universes, this means Brahman is transcendental to the material nature. If an artist makes a painting, this proves that his nature is different from the painting. If the artist would also be a painting, he would not have hands to paint it. Therefore, the fact that Brahman is the source of the material nature and of the material universes proves that He is different from it. In other words, Brahman is transcendental.
The second implication is that Brahman must be a conscious being. If I say that “Sergey created this car” this implies that Sergey is a person (or at least some kind of conscious being), since a rock or a lamp would not be capable of creating a car. I may not know who Sergey is, but just from the fact he created a car, I can understand that He is a person.
Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana translates this verse as: “From that Brahman arise creation, maintenance and destruction of this universe.”
1.1.3
“śāstra-yonitvāt”
- He can be known through the sastras.
After understanding that Brahman is a person, where can we find more about Him? This is answered in the third sutra, “śāstra-yonitvāt”, meaning that Brahman can be understood through the Sastras, or in other words, through the Vedas.
The fact that the Vedas exist implies that Brahman created the Vedas (since the first verse explains that Brahman is the creator of everything that exists). This further contradicts the idea that Brahman is some kind of impersonal light since lamps can’t write books. The most important meaning however is that although transcendental, Brahman can be understood by us, not through our limited imagination, but by studying the guidebooks He himself left in the form of the sastras, which include books such as the Bhagavad-Gita and the Srimad Bhagavatam.
This ultimate meaning is picked up by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana, who translated this verse as: “The Lord cannot be known by reasoning because the source of understanding the Lord is the Upaniṣads.”
1.1.4
“tat tu samanvayāt”
- (He is understood) by the harmony of different statements (from the sastras)”.
The Vedas are a very extensive body of literature, which includes books that speak about different topics and give different conclusions that appear contradictory to the layman. This verse however emphasizes that the scriptures led to a logical conclusion and that such conclusion is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
In his Tattva Sandarbha, Srila Jiva Goswami carefully analyzes the different books that compose the Vedic literature and concludes that most of the books that compose the Vedas are too extensive and indirect to be understood by common men. He points to the Puranas as the way to understand the Vedas and concludes that the Srimad Bhagavatam is the ultimate conclusion of the Vedas. The Vedanta Sutra is a small treatise directed to inquisitive persons, which is more thoroughly explained through the 18,000 verses of the Srimad Bhagavatam.
The Srimad Bhagavatam, in turn, can only be properly understood through the process of disciplic succession, an unbroken chain that brings us the proper conclusions of the verses, going all the way up to Srila Vyasadeva, the author himself.
In this way, this 4th sutra indicates that the sastras lead to a logical conclusion and that such a conclusion is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. However, to reach such a conclusion one has to study the sastras through the proper process, receiving the proper conclusions from a spiritual teacher who is part of the proper disciplic succession since Brahman can’t be understood through our limited imagination.
This idea that the sastras ultimately lead to the Supreme Personality of Godhead (Lord Vishnu) is emphasized by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana, who translates this verse as: “But Viṣṇu is the conclusion because of the agreement of other scriptures as well.”
1.1.5
“īkṣater nāśabdam”
- Brahman is not inexpressible (in words).
Two negatives make a positive. “Brahman is not inexpressive” indicates that Brahmana can indeed be explained by words. This contradicts the idea that Brahman can’t be understood. This sutra makes it clear that it is possible to understand the transcendental nature of Brahman, but that there is a process for it.
The nature of Brahman is explained in detail in the scriptures, especially in the Upaniṣads. The Bhagavad-Gita, for example, is considered one of the 108 Upanisads, and it contains a great deal of information about the Supreme Personality of Godhead, explained by Lord Krsna Himself.
Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana translates this verse as: “Brahman is not inexpressible because scriptural statements to the contrary are seen in the Upaniṣads.”
1.1.6
“gauṇaś cen nātma-śabdāt”
- (Even if described in words,) Brahman doesn’t become covered by the material modes, because Brahman is “atma” (he is non-material and existed before the material modes were created).
One of the main characteristics of the Vedanta Sutra is that it explains very intricate philosophical concepts in an extremely condensed way. This 6th sutra is a good example of it. Although composed of just four words, the meaning of this sutra requires a whole sentence to be expressed in the English language.
First of all, like any passage of a conversation, this sutra needs to the understood in the context of the previous verses. Sutra 1.1.5 speaks about Brahman being described in words. One could argue that since words are material, Brahman described through words becomes material or contaminated by the three material modes.
First of all, what are the three modes? The three gunas, or the three modes of material nature are a subject extensively explained in the Bhagavad-Gita. If one is tied by the hands and feet to strong ropes, he can be made to dance in different ways against his will by some strong person who pulls these ropes. Similarly, although transcendental, the soul is made to behave like a dog, a horse, or a human being by a strong force, the three modes of material modes.
When influenced by the mode of ignorance, the soul completely forgets his transcendental nature and fully identifies with the needs of the body, becoming absorbed in finding food, shelter, and satisfaction to his base instincts as a lower animal. When one is influenced by passion one gains the impetus to manipulate matter, trying to satisfy unsatiable ambitions as a human being. Finally, when one becomes influenced by the mode of goodness one becomes peaceful in the understanding that he is not the body, and gradually attains a state of satisfaction and freedom from anxiety. We can see that these three modes of material nature are three different sets of ropes that pull us in different ways.
Of the three modes, the mode of goodness is considered the best, because it leads one to gradually understand his nature as a soul, transcendental to the body. However, even the mode of goodness is still considered material. Although more refined than the modes of passion and ignorance, it is still part of this material world.
Bhahman, however, represents a completely different paradigm Brahman is completely spiritual in nature, transcendental to these three modes. Even when explained in words, Brahman remains transcendental. In other words, such words that describe the Supreme Brahman do not bring Him down to our level; on the opposite, such words gradually elevate our consciousness, elevating it to the spiritual level.
When we come to the original words in Sanskrit, this sutra has two parts, “gauṇaś cen nā” means that even if described in words, Brahman doesn’t become covered by the material modes, because “ātma-śabdāt”, Brahman is “atma”, he is non-material and existed before the material modes were created. This contradicts the impersonalist idea that Brahaman becomes covered by Maya when coming to this material world as an avatara. Brahman is always transcendental. He is a person, he has spiritual qualities and activities and He never becomes covered by Maya, even if described in words.
In his Govinda Bhashya, Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana translates this verse as: “If you argue that Brahman described by words is Brahman covered by material guṇas, the answer is no, because the text mentions the word ātmā in relation to Brahman.”
1.1.7
“tan-niṣṭhasya mokṣopadeśāt”
- One who is devoted to Him attains liberation.
A very important concept described in the Vedas is the idea of moksa, or becoming free from the influence of material nature. Since we are originally spirit souls, we are transcendental to this material world, and to the influence of the material modes. However, somehow or other we became entrapped here, away from our true spiritual nature, and our mission now is to again break free. However, it’s very difficult for a soul to become free by himself. Constitutionally we are small particles of consciousness, and due to our diminutive size, this material nature seems extremely vast, as a huge ocean. However, Brahman is very big and powerful, and He can easily free us.
This verse again emphasizes that Brahman is transcendental to the three modes of nature because if Brahman would be under their influence, He would be part of the material world and thus would not be able to free us from it.
The word “devotion” may bring the idea of some ritualistic process or some blind religious sentiment, but the real meaning here is “connection”. Everyone nowadays hears about Yoga, but that’s a process that is largely misunderstood. The Vedas describe different processes of Yoga, and they all have the ultimate goal of connecting one to the Absolute Truth, or the Supreme Brahman. Yoga means to connect the soul back to his original transcendental nature in association with the Supreme Brahman.
When we speak about devotion, we are speaking about this spirtual connection between the source and His part. One who attains this connection, or this devotion to Brahman attains liberation, finally becoming free from material nature.
Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana translates this verse as: “The Lord is not a manifestation of sattva-guṇa because the scriptures teach that the person who worships the Lord attains liberation from the guṇas.”
1.1.8
“heyatva-vacanāc ca”
- This is proved by the absence of contrary statements (in the sastras)
Although Brahman creates the Universe, He remains pure. Because He is pure and transcendent to the modes of material nature, He can give liberation from the modes. If Brahman was also under the control of the material nature, He would just be some kind of material object, and would not be able to give release to the soul.
Just like a lamp can’t create universes or write books, a lamp can’t release one from the grip of material nature. Only someone who is out of the ocean can pull us out of it. Therefore, the statement that Brahman can free us from the material ocean reinforces the idea that He is both transcendental and conscious.
It makes sense, but how can we understand that this logic is correct? The answer is again the scriptures. If Brahman, the creator of the Universe would have material qualities and be under the control of the three modes of material nature, the scriptures would mention it. Therefore, the absence of statements in this direction is another proof that this idea is not correct.
This verse is translated by Sri Baladeva as “The Lord does not have material qualities because statements to that effect would make the Lord an inferior object.”
1.1.9
“svāpyayāt”
- He merges into Himself.
Again illustrating the succinctness of the Vedanta Sutra, the sutra contains a single word. Svāpyayāt is the combination of two words: “sva” (the Self) and “apyayat” (on account of entering). This verse explains the nature of different avataras such as Varaha, Nrshinha, Kurma, and so on.
Although transcendental, Brahman frequently comes to this material world. When He does so, he appears in a visible form, which which He performs activities. As Varaha, He lifted the Earth from the depths of the causal ocean, as Nrshinhadeva he fought with the powerful demon Hiranyakashipu, who was terrorizing the Universe, and so on. One could argue that since Brahman assumes different forms and performs different activities, such forms must be material, but this verse indicates that this is not the case.
If Brahman would be a product of the material nature, He would merge back into the material nature, but as this verse explains, this is not the case. Brahman merges back into Himself, and this again proves that Brahman, including all avataras, is transcendental.
Some philosophers try to point that Pradhana (the unmanifested total of material energy from where all the material universes appear) as the ultimate source, but this idea is contradicted here (as well as in the previous sutras). Pradana is not the source of the Supreme Brahman, rather Brahman is the source of Pradhana as well as of everything that exists.
We can see that in this way the Vedanta Sutra deconstructs different mistaken ideas that one may have about transcendence. One who is especially determined may still misunderstand, but when we accept the direct and logical flow of ideas in the verses, the meaning is clear.
Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana translates this verse as: “The Lord is not covered with material qualities because he merges into himself, not into something else.”
1.1.10
“gati-sāmānyāt”
- (This can be understood) by the uniformity of the teachings (of the scriptures).
As the previous sutra explains, Brahman assumes forms and performs activities when He appears in this material world as different avataras. This means He also has qualities. Normally, when we think about qualities we think about material qualities like “strong”, “beautiful”, “intelligent” and so on. All these qualities are material, and find their opposites in defects such as “weak”, “ugly” and “dumb”. However, the scriptures explain that Brahman has qualities, but at the same time, they say that He is transcendental to the material nature.
When we are faced with apparent contradictions like this one, we tend to take one side of the question as the correct and disregard the other. However, this 10th sutra emphasizes that the way to understand this question is to harmonize the two sides of the argument. This is the general rule to understand the sastras. Different instructions must be taken together as part of a single explanation, and not treated separately. This is something that is explained in detail by Srila Jiva Goswami in his Sat Sandarbha.
In this case, the fact that Brahman performs activities and has qualities, but at the same time is transcendental to material nature indicates that such qualities are transcendental. This opens a whole new paradigm, indicating that apart from the material nature where we currently live, there is a transcendental nature that is transcendental to it. This transcendental nature includes forms, qualities, and relationships. In fact, in the Bhagavad Gita Krsna explains that this material universe is like an inverted tree that is a reflection of the original tree, that is on the spiritual side. Brahman is thus not just some impersonal concept, but a whole new world full of variety.
This verse is translated in the Govinda Bhashya as: “The Lord is not covered by the guṇas because all the scriptures describe the Lord as having qualities beyond the material guṇas.”
1.1.11
“śrutatvāc ca”
- This is stated in the sruti (the scriptures)
Reinforcing the previous statements (that Brahman is the source of everything, and that He has qualities, but these are spiritual and not material qualities), Srila Vyasadeva concludes that this is stated in the sastras.
In many passages of the sastras, negative words like “nirguna” are used to describe Brahman. Nirguna means “without quality”. In other passages, however, positive words are used such as “omniscient” (that he is aware of everything). When both are taken in context, the logical conclusion is that words such as “nirguna” describe that Brahman has no material qualities, while words like “omniscient” describe his spiritual qualities. No mundane person can be everywhere at the same time, since our material bodies are limited by time and space, but being endowed with a perfect spiritual form, Brahman can be everywhere simultaneously in his feature of Paramatma and see everything.