Is there no free will?

[tackleberry]

BG 18.61 is rather explicit in this regard. There seems to be no free will at all, according to this verse, where the Lord says the jiva-s are impelled or pushed into action by His mAyA. The word bhraamayan literally means that. Elsewhere, Krishna also tells Arjuna to be an instrument, 'nimitta-mAtram bhava' or something to that effect.

 

Doesn't all this mean Krishna is the only doer, and we're just his instruments. If one argues that we exercise free will even in writing this post, then these actions are similar to the "actions" performed by an instrument in the hands of an able doer. Even if it appears to move and act, the instrument isn't doing anything, it's ever the non-doer.

 

Similarly, are we also non-doers even though we appear to do all kinds of actions? Is this the meaning of BG 18.61?

 

Your thoughts welcome.

[bhaktajan]

Actions are done by us all within the field of Actions.

 

Our sentiments or 'devotions' are aimed at our corner of the universe.

 

The concept expressed in your above posting neglects the idea of "insignificance".

 

The higher up the ladder of the stratum of birth-rights [ie: Deva vs. insect, or, Military dicatorship vs. common soldier, or, school teacher vs student] the higher up you are the more options are availible [but be warned: the bigger they are the harder they fall].

 

Maybe instead of the concept of "Free-will" it should be "Choice of Options" --the outcome at Kurksetra is all about those who had previously sided away from Arjuna and Krishna's side in favor of that which the Kuravas stood for.

[Vigraha]

 

BG 18.61 is rather explicit in this regard. There seems to be no free will at all, according to this verse, where the Lord says the jiva-s are impelled or pushed into action by His mAyA. The word bhraamayan literally means that. Elsewhere, Krishna also tells Arjuna to be an instrument, 'nimitta-mAtram bhava' or something to that effect.

 

Doesn't all this mean Krishna is the only doer, and we're just his instruments. If one argues that we exercise free will even in writing this post, then these actions are similar to the "actions" performed by an instrument in the hands of an able doer. Even if it appears to move and act, the instrument isn't doing anything, it's ever the non-doer.

 

Similarly, are we also non-doers even though we appear to do all kinds of actions? Is this the meaning of BG 18.61?

 

Your thoughts welcome.

 

There is free will but things can appear to be set, for example when Krsna showed Arjuna the Universal form, Arjuna saw everything that would eventually happen, he saw past, present and future all at once.

Regardless of that there is free will, at least we believe we do have free will but that is a paradox because one can also see past, present and future if they become self realized, but if one is a devotee of Krsna, then he is sees things differently again according to ones service.

It depends on what level of consciousness we view things.

Personally I believe the bodies we are in are set on a fixed path according to the dreams of Maha-Vishnu, we as the soul, are just going along for the ride in these vessels that we have earned, desired and deserved over millions of life times.

In other words the mahat-tattva is a paradox where free will and fixed paths are happening simultaneously

We believe we have free will due to ignorance, but everything we do, is actually performed by the material body that is controlled by higher beings or demigods.

 

The REAL meaning of free will is the CHOOSE to serve Krishna Goloka or chase Maya in the mahat-tattva.<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>r chase Maya in the mahat-tattva.

 

[suchandra]

 

BG 18.61 is rather explicit in this regard. There seems to be no free will at all, according to this verse, where the Lord says the jiva-s are impelled or pushed into action by His mAyA. The word bhraamayan literally means that. Elsewhere, Krishna also tells Arjuna to be an instrument, 'nimitta-mAtram bhava' or something to that effect.

 

Doesn't all this mean Krishna is the only doer, and we're just his instruments. If one argues that we exercise free will even in writing this post, then these actions are similar to the "actions" performed by an instrument in the hands of an able doer. Even if it appears to move and act, the instrument isn't doing anything, it's ever the non-doer.

 

Similarly, are we also non-doers even though we appear to do all kinds of actions? Is this the meaning of BG 18.61?

 

According vedic view free will is always there. But because we activated with our free will all kind of karmic reactions we sometimes become restricted and don't feel free to act. Just like a mountain climber who feels free by climbing up the biggest mountains and suddenly meets with an accident. The consequential damage of this accident might cause this man to consider that he has no more freedom, is bound to sit in a wheel chair and even thinks of committing suicide. In that state of feeling no more freedom he might say, "I'm no more the doer". But actually it was he himself who brought himself into this condition. And this is basically the situation with all of us being born in this age of kali, we created in our past the karma of having presently very limited material freedom. The good thing is however, we can easily get spiritual perfection by chanting the Holy Name.

 

Devotee: Śrīla Prabhupāda? Why God gave to man free will if He knew the man would fall down in the material world?Prabhupāda: If you have no free will, then you are a stone. The stone has no free will. You want to be stone? Then you must be, must have free will. But don’t misuse your free will. But don’t try to become stone. That is not life.

 

 

 

Bhagavad-gītā 15.15

by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda

August 5, 1976, New Mayapur (French farm)

 

 

Your thoughts welcome.

[suchandra]

 

BG 18.61 is rather explicit in this regard. There seems to be no free will at all, according to this verse, where the Lord says the jiva-s are impelled or pushed into action by His mAyA. The word bhraamayan literally means that. Elsewhere, Krishna also tells Arjuna to be an instrument, 'nimitta-mAtram bhava' or something to that effect.

 

Doesn't all this mean Krishna is the only doer, and we're just his instruments. If one argues that we exercise free will even in writing this post, then these actions are similar to the "actions" performed by an instrument in the hands of an able doer. Even if it appears to move and act, the instrument isn't doing anything, it's ever the non-doer.

 

Similarly, are we also non-doers even though we appear to do all kinds of actions? Is this the meaning of BG 18.61?

 

 

 

According vedic view free will is always there. But because we activated with our free will all kind of karmic reactions we sometimes become restricted and don't feel free to act. Just like a mountain climber who feels free by climbing up the biggest mountains and suddenly meets with an accident. The consequential damage of this accident might cause this man to consider that he has no more freedom, is bound to sit in a wheel chair and even thinks of committing suicide. In that state of feeling no more freedom he might say, "I'm no more the doer". But actually it was he himself who brought himself into this condition. And this is basically the situation with all of us being born in this age of kali, we created in our past the karma of having presently very limited material freedom. The good thing is however, we can easily get spiritual perfection by chanting the Holy Name.

 

Devotee: Śrīla Prabhupāda? Why God gave to man free will if He knew the man would fall down in the material world?Prabhupāda: If you have no free will, then you are a stone. The stone has no free will. You want to be stone? Then you must be, must have free will. But don’t misuse your free will. But don’t try to become stone. That is not life.

 

 

 

Bhagavad-gītā 15.15

by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda

August 5, 1976, New Mayapur (French farm)

[Vigraha]

 

Sorry about the dung-stuff,

 

I sent wrong message to the wrong thread..

 

Thats funny, it made me laugh very loud, a good example of free will on our realm of consciousness

[bhaktajan]

If we are actually without free will then we are being made to suffer like dolts, mudhas & fools par excellence since it would be god himself that is inflicting sorrow etc on to us.

 

The "miseries" and "defects" of the conditioned jiv-atma is due to profund ignorance -- don't ignore it!

 

.............................................................................................................

SB 1.5.32 P: . . . the threefold miseries pertaining to the body and mind, pertaining to the natural disturbances and in relation with other living beings. . . .

SB 7.13.31P: . . . The threefold miseries—adhyätmika, adhidaivika and adhibhautika. No one can escape the threefold miseries of materialistic life, namely miseries pertaining to the body and mind, miseries pertaining to the difficulties imposed by society, community, nation and other living entities, and miseries inflicted upon us by natural disturbances from earthquakes, famines, droughts, floods, epidemics, and so on. . . .

BG 16.24P: . . . Çästra is without the four principal defects that are visible in the conditioned soul: imperfect senses, the propensity for cheating, certainty of committing mistakes, and certainty of being illusioned. These four principal defects in conditioned life disqualify one from putting forth rules and regulations. Therefore, the rules and regulations as described in the çästra—being above these defects—are accepted without alteration by all great saints, äcäryas and great souls. . . .

[Vigraha]

 

If we are actually without free will then we are being made to suffer like dolts, mudhas & fools par excellence since it would be god himself that is inflicting sorrow etc on to us.

 

There is free will otherwise how can there be love without it.

In the material world though, unlike Krsnaloka, it is restricted, think about it, think about it, an animal is controlled by instinct of eating, sleeping, mating and defending. An animal is simply dragged around by the urges of the senses.

Sometimes we may think we have freewill but really, it is the urges of the material body.

 

[OzE Hindu]

This has been previously mentioned, but according to Srila Prabhupada's books, we do have free will. We possess free will to decide either to serve Maya or to serve Krishna. To me at least, this is very easy to understand and accept straightaway. Another scripture, Sri Guru Granth Sahib, is far more fatalistic.

 

Still, for many others, whether or not we have free will can remain a matter of endless speculation. However, we should all realize that we are dependent on the Lord in any case.

 

"All living beings in all the planets of this universe, including the presiding deities of all the planets, are fully under the control of the Lord. They work like birds caught in a net, who cannot move independently."

- Srimad Bhagavatam (Canto 6, Chapter 12, Text 8)

[theist]

Krishna explained Bhagavad-gita to Arjuna and then told him to do what he likes. Make your choice Arjuna means there is free will. Arjuna's nature was a warrior yet he wanted to leave the battlefield. Krishna told him that due to his nature as a warrior he would be engaged anyway. So where is the free will? Free will is in the consciousness with which Arjuna engaed in the battle. "Not considering loss or gain victory or defeat do your duty for My satisfaction" is the teaching of the Bhagavad-gita. Free will is in the nature of our consciousness. Act for Krishna or be compelled to act anyway under the dictates of the three gunas.

 

It is about what motivates us.

[Dark Warrior]

I am not too knowledgeable on this issue, but I will comment.

 

It is true that these verses exist in the Gita, but there are some verses which state the gunas as doer as well. "prakrteh kriyamanani gunaih karmani sarvasah ahamkara vimudatma karta aham iti manyate" indicates that gunas are the doer not atma. Gita (chapter 13, I believe) says: "prakrityaiva hi karmani kriyamani sarvashah yah pasyatitathatmanam akartaram sa pasyati", ie, Only prakriti does all the work, who sees that Atman is not the doer, is right.

 

Arjuna was a surrendered soul, and hence he had the jnana to become the instrument of the Lord. Actually, the Lord was persuading Arjuna to fight. If He wished to exercise absolute control, He could have hypnotised Arjuna into fighting instead of convincing him with 18 chapters!!

 

My understanding is that Karma is anadi (not started by even Vishnu), and that according to Karma, the Jiva's knowledge contracts or expands while in samsara. Hence, Karma and Prakrti become the doer, and the Jiva does good or bad things according to them.

 

But this doesn't mean that the Lord is powerless. His function is defined in Gita, that He is the antaryamin, the eternal controller, etc. He is fully aware of our actions, and can exercise control over them. But, the Lord is also a neutral arbitrator. He controls the Gunas that control us, but He does not violate the laws of Karma, which are anadi (though He can, He doesn't). He gives merits or punishment to Jivas depending on their actions, which in turn depend on their karmas. That is why we are all not in Vaikuntha now, despite His mercy!!

 

We are totally dependant on Him, but we forget that we are dependant on Him due to Karma. He goes out of His way to remind us of our dependency.

 

He dwells in us and accompanies us on our journey through samsara. He loves even the worst of sinners, so if they even do one good deed in His favor, He reduces their Karmas greatly.

 

If someone states that Vishnu makes us do bad things, and yet He is unaffected by anything bad because He is Brahman, it isn't a satisfactory explanation because then He wouldn't have to take the trouble to come down as an avatar and provide an exhaustive explanation on spirituality!!

 

His very act of taking descent shows that although He is capable of anything and is ever neutral to the Karma of the Jivas, He is also extremely biased in the sense that He loves all these trapped souls, and hence wishes for them to be liberated.

 

So, statements like the Jiva being completely deluded by Maya, can be understood as the duties of the Lord. *Some* freewill is essential. A soul (as in the case of Arjuna) is provided with sastras and knowledge. If this soul has less Karma, he will come to know this knowledge. Then, depending again on Karma, the Soul makes the right or wrong decision. The right decision - you realise that you are an instrument of the Lord. Even if you make a wrong decision, eventually, everything works to His favor.

 

Of course, the ISKCON view of a 'fall' from Vaikuntha is wrong, as no muktatma can ever make a 'wrong' decision.

 

However, I think this sort of topic cannot be solved by us. We need to consult learned Vedantins for this purpose. One thing we should all agree on is this - His causeless mercy will liberate us, and we may do whatever we can to get to Him.

[Amlesh]

Very tough subject matter.

[kimfelix]

Yes, I agree, it is a very complex matter. There is a useful passage in the Mahabharata on this at the start of the Anushasana Parvan. At the start of Chapter 6 (BORI Critical Ed, I am afraid), Yudhishthira asks directly about this:

 

daive purusha-kare cha kimsvich cheshthataram bhavet.

 

In reply Bhishma cites a conversation on the subject between Brahma and Vasishtha. This chapter appears in Volume X of the Ganguli translation beginning from page 16 on the Anushasana. It is quite a lengthy discourse but the gist of it is that destiny and personal endeavour are like a field and a seed planted in it. A field may be ploughed and fertile (in the sense that one's destinty may be propitious) but without sowing the seed no crop will grow (so if we don't make endeavours destiny alone will not suffice). The idea is that destiny is certainly a major factor in our lives but that does not mean that it is useless to make endeavours. Just the opposite, without endeavour destiny alone will not bring the result we seek.

 

And 18.13-14 of the Gita, Krishna offers an enumeration of five causes for a result: 1. The situation (adhishthana) 2. The performer of the action (karta) 3. The instruments employed 4. The different endeavours made 5. Destiny (daiva). So in Krishna's analysis again destiny is one factor in the outcome we experience, but it is only one of five.

[theist]

Vaisnava's must believe in eternal free will. Without free will what are we? We are 100% Krishna with no independent free will. Free will marks our line of separation from the Supreme Being.

 

Mayavadis think free will to be an illusion. Vaisnava's accept free will as an eternal principle.

[RadheyRadhey108]

 

BG 18.61 is rather explicit in this regard. There seems to be no free will at all, according to this verse, where the Lord says the jiva-s are impelled or pushed into action by His mAyA. The word bhraamayan literally means that. Elsewhere, Krishna also tells Arjuna to be an instrument, 'nimitta-mAtram bhava' or something to that effect.

 

Doesn't all this mean Krishna is the only doer, and we're just his instruments. If one argues that we exercise free will even in writing this post, then these actions are similar to the "actions" performed by an instrument in the hands of an able doer. Even if it appears to move and act, the instrument isn't doing anything, it's ever the non-doer.

 

Similarly, are we also non-doers even though we appear to do all kinds of actions? Is this the meaning of BG 18.61?

 

Your thoughts welcome.

I think that when Lord Sri Krishna says that we're impelled to act by His Maya potency, that He's saying that w/o His Maya potency, there would be no reason to act. Not that we don't have the right to do as we choose, or that everything we do is in accordance with His wishes and desires.

Just my own thoughts, though.

[shvu]

 

Mayavadis think free will to be an illusion.

 

No, they don't.

 

I see you still haven't given up offering your expert opinions on Mayavada.

 

Cheers

[shvu]

 

BG 18.61 is rather explicit in this regard. There seems to be no free will at all, according to this verse, where the Lord says the jiva-s are impelled or pushed into action by His mAyA. The word bhraamayan literally means that. Elsewhere, Krishna also tells Arjuna to be an instrument, 'nimitta-mAtram bhava' or something to that effect.

 

Doesn't all this mean Krishna is the only doer, and we're just his instruments. If one argues that we exercise free will even in writing this post, then these actions are similar to the "actions" performed by an instrument in the hands of an able doer. Even if it appears to move and act, the instrument isn't doing anything, it's ever the non-doer.

 

Similarly, are we also non-doers even though we appear to do all kinds of actions? Is this the meaning of BG 18.61?

 

Your thoughts welcome.

 

I like the Tattavada interpretation detailed here.

http://www.dvaita.org/shaastra/gita/bg514.html

 

Cheers

[Dark Warrior]

I think, one needs to consider the concept of Antaryami, ie, the indweller here. It is a fact that the Lord is the soul of our soul, ie, we are sentient atman, who have within us, the sentient Lord.

 

The BG Sloka only says that a Jiva acts as a result of the interaction of the 3 Gunas of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. The BG Sloka 18.14 'Adhishtaana' clearly says the body, the soul, the mind in association with senses, the vital air and Bhagavan are the five agents that act together. Brahadaranyaka Upanishad 4.1.18 describes how Jiva is the prime mover like a king moving with his subjects. According to Sastras, oneself experiences the fruits of one's actions. "Prakriti" does not enjoy the fruits of actions since it has no action on its own. It is, therefore, clear that Atman is the doer. And it is also clear that atman is NOT the doer. Confused? Well, here is the explanation.

 

In certain statements in the Gita, Lord says, 'Practice Bhakti-Yoga. If you cannot do that, remain Self-Situated. If you cannot do that, renounce fruits of your actions'. And so on. Since the Lord gives us options, does this not imply that there may be something that the Jiva can do by his own volition?

 

In an attempt to reconcile these statements, it can be said that this freedom granted to the jiva is to be seen in the concept of antaryami, Vishnu's presence as the 'inner most' being in the Jiva. The antaryami presence is related to embodiment of the self as a consequence of creation. Even in this embodied state, the jiva continues to depend on the divine for its sustenance (as verified by the Dvaitins in the link that Shvu provided), and the divine in the form of antaryami thus becomes a power source without which no action is possible on the part of the embodied jiva. Even in the samsaric state where the jiva acts with relative freedom constructing its own separate world, it is the antaryami that provides the needed energy and sustenance for the jiva to do so, making it possible to drift away from the playful world of the original creation and thus get trapped in the cycle of birth-death-rebirth!!

 

Thus, I believe that no action is possible without permission of the Lord. But this does not imply lack of freedom, rather, the Lord simply gives assent for a Jiva's decisions in Samsara. Hence, the Jiva is free, but is also the non-doer, because the actions owe their 'power source' to the antaryami. And statements like 'Jiva is mover' , etc. can be said to pertian to the indweller.

 

It is by the will of Vishnu that an individual is either in the state of bondage or release. But this immanence in the souls is not to be construed as to leave no freedom of action on their part. The souls resting in and furnished by it with bodies and sense organs as well as powers to use them, apply themselves of their own accord and in accordance with their wishes, to works either good or evil. No action is indeed possible without the assent of the inner Soul; but in all volitional actions there is the volitional effort (prayartana) made by the individual soul; the Supreme Soul, by giving it assent carries out the action.

 

Sorry about the long post.

[Amlesh]

The concept of free is like planting a flower in the sky. It does exist in conception but in reality it is not.

 

We take for example, the Jiva who is defined as an eternal servant of God, whether Direct or Indirectly. When talking about servant, automatically the issue of Master crops up, and when there is a master, then how come there can be a free will.

 

The depth of this issue can be sensed more and more depending on the level of self-realisation. When a person, be it a Hard Core atheist commits a well chosen free actions, the resultant effects be it +ve or -ve is subsquently imposed on him. The latter might think, I'm free to do this and that, but still hapiness and miseries of life will be waiting to cross his way.

 

Now, if someone is not agreeing with me, then tell me, who has ever been spared from the four miseries of life(birth, death, old age and disease).

 

Those who has transcended the dualities of life perfectly understand that no one is independent of God.

 

Govindam Adi Purusham...

.....Sarva Karana Karanam.

[cbrahma]

 

Human life is meant for one thing, athato brahma-jijnasa, to inquire about the Supreme Absolute Truth. But instead of doing that, they have created so many "isms." That is their misfortune.

 

 

 

[750325CC.MAY Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila 1.1 Mayapur, March 25, 1975] His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

 

 

 

Since the human form of life is to question who we are, the Vedanta sutra

"athato brahma-jijnasa" would make no sense without free will.

 

Granted even those in the human form act like animals - only eating, sleeping mating and defending. But the little bit of independence is there because we are sat-cit-ananda vigraha , Krsna's marginal potency.

[Amlesh]

Choice is given, but outcome is already decided by providence. Arhuna was asked to choose but was said by Krishna, whether you choose or not to do the Job, the outcome has already been decided.

 

In the long run even that free will, will dissapear, the only thing that exist is the thing that is eternal, our dependence to God.

[theist]

TRANSLATION BG 2.16

Those who are seers of the truth have concluded that of the nonexistent [the material body] there is no endurance and of the eternal [the soul] there is no change. This they have concluded by studying the nature of both.

 

PURPORT

There is no endurance of the changing body. That the body is changing every moment by the actions and reactions of the different cells is admitted by modern medical science; and thus growth and old age are taking place in the body. But the spirit soul exists permanently, remaining the same despite all changes of the body and the mind. That is the difference between matter and spirit. By nature, the body is ever changing, and the soul is eternal. This conclusion is established by all classes of seers of the truth, both impersonalist and personalist. In the Vishnu Purana (2.12.38) it is stated that Vishnu and His abodes all have self-illuminated spiritual existence (jyotimshi vishnur bhuvanani vishnuh). The words existent and nonexistent refer only to spirit and matter. That is the version of all seers of truth.

This is the beginning of the instruction by the Lord to the living entities who are bewildered by the influence of ignorance. Removal of ignorance involves the reestablishment of the eternal relationship between the worshiper and the worshipable and the consequent understanding of the difference between the part-and-parcel living entities and the Supreme Personality of Godhead. One can understand the nature of the Supreme by thorough study of oneself, the difference between oneself and the Supreme being understood as the relationship between the part and the whole. In the Vedanta-sutras, as well as in the Srimad-Bhagavatam, the Supreme has been accepted as the origin of all emanations. Such emanations are experienced by superior and inferior natural sequences. The living entities belong to the superior nature, as it will be revealed in the Seventh Chapter. Although there is no difference between the energy and the energetic, the energetic is accepted as the Supreme, and energy or nature is accepted as the subordinate. The living entities, therefore, are always subordinate to the Supreme Lord, as in the case of the master and the servant, or the teacher and the taught. Such clear knowledge is impossible to understand under the spell of ignorance, and to drive away such ignorance the Lord teaches the Bhagavad-gita for the enlightenment of all living entities for all time.

----------

 

Only the personalist accepts the existence of the individual self after liberation and as such only the personalist accepts the factual eternal existence of free will.

 

We are told above that only if something is eternal is it truly considered to exist. Since the impersonalist refuses to accept the individual self after liberation how can they accept the existence of free will after liberation? They can't. This makes whatever definiton of free will they may come up with a by product of maya and as we have seen above this is the definiton of something that has no real existence.

 

Without the individual self free will is an impossibility. Only the personalist Vaisnava's can understand and accept the existence of free will.

[bhaktajan]

 

. . . we're impelled to act by His Maya potency, . . .

 

Very well said. I have to think about this: "impelled to act by His Maya potency"

[RadheyRadhey108]

Thanks Bhaktajan

[Malati dasi]

Radhe Radhe

 

The ideas of Shuvu, Tackleberry, and Dark Warrior are in line with the "traditional" Gaudiya Vaishnavas position on this. Other Vedic based school of thoughts are in the same bandwith.

 

It's only the ISKCON/GM who hold to these views, consistent with their fall vada theory.

 

Of course as you can see on this thread, that the explanations given by the posters here that to GM/ISKCOn are very simplistic.

 

But the truth can be very abstract indeed!

 

I've pasted some ideas, from my gurubhai's blog.

 

Our free will is very minute as to be negligible.

 

Mandukya Upanisad (1.9):

bhogartham srstir ity anye kridartham iti capare devasyaisa svabhavo'yam aptakamasya ka sprha

"Some say that Lord creates the material world for His enjoyment and some say He creates for His play. Indeed it is His mere nature. After all, He is fully satisfied, so what desires does He have to fulfill?"

Purport by Satyanarayan Dasji of the Jiva Institute: "The idea is that just as the Lord is causeless so are His activities such as the creation. It is not possible to attribute any ultimate cause for them except that it is His very nature. Any one who has energy will act. People act to attain something, but the Lord is aptakama, one whose desires are fully satisfied. Therefore His activities are just part of His nature."

Visvanatha Chakravarti ‘s tika of SB 3.7.10: tatra bhagavatah prstha sthitaya anadyavidyaya tamah svarupaya anadi vaimukhya rupa bhagavat prstha-sthanam jivanam jnanam yallupyate tasya na vastutvam karanam napi prayojanam kim apy asti "Ignorance, which is beginningless, is situated on the Lord's back. She covers the knowledge of the jivas who are situated on the Lord's back and are non devotees. Their non devotion is anadi. There is no real reason or purpose for their knowledge being covered."

 

Commenting on this verse Bhagavad Gita 13.20 Visvanatha Cakravartipad declares that the conditioning of the conditioned souls is beginningless—mAyA jIvayor api macchaktitvena anAditvAt tayoH saMzleSo'py anAdir iti bhAvaH "Illusion and the conditioned souls are both My energies. They are both beginningless and they have been interconnected since beginningless time as well."

To Paramatma Sandarbha 47 quotation, Satyanarayan das of the Jiva of the Jiva Institute replies:

"The meaning of the words tat-parAGmukhatva doSeNa labdha-chidrayA mAyayA paribhUtaH (ParamAtma Sandarbha, Text 47, ) is that the jiva is covered by mAyA and who sees the defect of non devotion in the jiva. It is important to understand that there is no sequence intended here. Just as it is said that jIvas spring from the Lord, but the jIva and Lord both are aja, unborn, nitya, eternal. How can the jIva spring from the Lord, because that would imply that jivas did not exist once upon a time? The point is that they co-exist as energy and the energetic. Similarly the non devotion of the jiva and MayA's covering him is all simultaneous.

When expressed in words it appears there is a sequence of events. That is the limitation of language in trying to express a reality that in fact has no relation of cause and effect. Sequence is a limitation of language, because words must be spoken or written in some sequence. Thus language has the influence of material time, which has the divisions of past, present and future. As a result language causes concurrent events to appear linear."

(SB 10.51.54) "When the end of this seemingly endless cycle comes in sight, one attains the association of a devotee...."