Srimad Bhagavatham:Commentaries-2

[Guest guest]

Now,as an addition to my previous posting on this subject

I would like to share with other Sahrdayas some of the

beauties of the Commentaries mentioned therein.

 

One name which is basic to the list of commentators

and which keeps recurring is SrIdharaSwAmI's(S).He also

wrote commentaries on Sri VishnuPurANam and GItA.But

the BhAgavatam commentary is his magnum opus.On even

a cursory study of the work one gets a clear knowledge

in respect of three qualities of S - his abundant sense

of humor,his analytical ability and his obvious devotion

to the Lord.

 

Just before the birth of Krishna,the devas led by Brahma

and Siva come to DevakI's cell to hail the advent of the

Lord.After the famous stOtra beginning with,<Satya-vratam

satya-param>,they greet DEvakI also and depart.Describing

their exit the text says-

<..yathA/ BrahmESAnau purOdhAya dEvAh prati-yayur divam>

-in the proper manner(or, as before),keeping Brahma and Siva

in front,the devAs returned to heaven.

 

S,taking the meaning of <yatha> as "as before", comments

as an aside,

<asmAn vanchayitvA EtAviha sThAsyEta iti manyamAnA

brahmESAnau puratah krtva yayuh>

- the devas,suspecting that their leaders may fool them

and linger on for a glimpse of Krishna,made sure

by keeping them in front during their retreat also (as

during their arrival)!

 

Earlier,we're told that VasudEva,keeping his promise

made to Kamsa,brought the first baby of DEvakI

called KIrtimAn to Kamsa to be killed.The text

here has a SlOka made up of four general statements

(arthAntara-nyAsAs)-

<Kim dussaham nu sAdhUnAm ? VidushAm kim apEkshitam?

Kim-akAryam kadaryANAm? Dustyajam kim DhrutAtmanAm?>

 

-What indeed is there that the good will not suffer

patiently? or the wise can long for?What the base

will blench from? or the resolute cannot renounce?

(Tr.by N.Raghunathan)

 

S. connects up the four statements with reference to

the context thus in his commentary:

" If one were to ask-How could Vasudeva have presented his own

son to Death?-the reply is- What indeed will not the Good that is those

who believe in keeping their word suffer in patence? But how

could he relinquish his natural longing to fondle his child?

For the Wise,that is,for those who know that the

Lord is the only worthwhile Being,is there anything

else to long for? But-Why can't it be that VasudEva

thought in his heart that Kamsa will be touched by

his sacrifice and hence may spare the child's

life? No. What will the base like Kamsa blench from?It may

be so for VasudEva,but how could DEvakI give away

her newborn? What is it that the resolute cannot

renounce?"

 

You come across the following stanza which clearly

needs an interpretation:

<KAlEna snAna-SauchAbhyAm samskArair-tapasEjyayA

Sudhyanti dAnaih santushTyA dravyAN-yAtmAtmavidyayA>

 

-Things get purified through Time,bathing,

cleansing,purificatory rites,austerities,offering

of sacrifices,charity,contentment;but AtmA through

AtmavidyA .

 

S states clearly- "land etc through lapse of time;body

thro bathing;impurities and harmful things thro cleansing;

womb thro purificatory rites;senses thro austerities;

brahmins etc thro offering of sacrifices;objects and

gifts thro charity;mind thro contentment gets purified.

AtmA thro knowledge of AtmA only."

 

SrI Veera RAghava (VR) the ViSishTAdvaita commentator of

SrImad BhAgavatam was an equally great scholar who however

like Sri VishNuchitta(EngaLAzhwAn) the commentator of SrI

VishNuPurANam,preferred to retain S's commentary wherever

possible and added and modified only where he felt the

need.

 

There is a beautiful description of the homelife of Nanda

wherein it is stated that YaSOdA and ROhiNI,what with the

multifarious daily chores cutting into their time,and the

equally distracting responsibility of keeping a constantly

vigilant eye on the two toddlers who were determined to get

into all sorts of dangers,constantly wore a harried look

and most of the time did not know whether they were coming

or going!At this,S,who was a SanyAsI,comments( with a line

uncannily similar to SrI KulaSEkhara AzhwAr's-"ASOdai

tollai inbattiRudi kanDALE!")-

<grha saukhyasya parA kAshThA darSitA!>

-thus is shown the ultimate joy of a householder's

existence!

And VR in his commentary retains this line intact.

 

Let us end with a passage where the two commentators differ.

In the StOtra of Brahma referred to earlier,occurs the

following SlOka-

<Tvam Eka Eva asya satah prasUtih

tvam sannidhAnam tvam-anugrahaScha

Tvan-mAyayA samvrta-chEtasas tvAm

paSyanti nAnA na vipaSchito yE>

 

About the first line there is no dispute,Both

commentators say,"You alone are the creator,

protector and destroyer of this universe."

Then S says regarding the second half-

"KrishNa asks:how can you say this when

Brahma,VishNu and Rudra are famous for

the above activities? Brahma replies:Only

those persons whose knowledge is covered by

your MAyA believe in multiple deities.Those

who are really learned do not think on those

lines"

VR gives two meanings for the second half:

"Krishna asks-how can you ascribe all these great

activities to me when people think me to be no

different from other human beings?and Brahma

replies:because they are befuddled by your

MAyA.-as KrishNa himself says in GItA-

<mOhitam nAbhijanati mAm-Ebhyah param

avyayam>'

"or alternatively another meaning could be:

Thus in the first half having stated that

Krishna is the cause for everything in creation,

in the second half he says that there is no

difference between cause and effect.That is,

those who believe that created things have a

distinct existence apart from Him are merely

befuddled by His MAyA."

 

EmberumAnAr TiruvaDigaLE SaraNam!