In the previous article, I discussed how Śrī Jīva Goswami ascertains the paramārtha or supreme object of attainment in the Prīti Sandarbha Anuccheda 5.9. Something is a paramārtha or supreme object of attainment if it has the following qualities:
anāśitva: imperishability
sādhyatva: a valid end
There is a third criterion that is less general. Śrī Jīva Goswami identifies vijñāna or direct experience of the one Absolute Truth as the paramārtha. The paramārtha has a third quality:
sarva-vijñānāntarbhāvavatva: it encompasses the experience of everything else
Śrī Jīva Goswami arrives at this conclusion through an analysis of the dialogue between Jaḍa Bharata and King Rāhugaṇa in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa, which I started discussing in Part I. Jaḍa Bharata makes a distinction between śreya and paramārtha. śreya is an object of attainment of which there are many types- a son, wealth, kingdom, dharma and niṣkāma-karma even. All these are either temporary or an invalid end and therefore violate one or both of the above two criteria for being a paramārtha.
Below, I examine the rest of the section of the Prīti Sandarbha.
Self-realization is not paramārtha
It is common to hear these days in Caitanya Vaiṣṇava circles that ‘self-realization’ is the goal of human existence. Unfortunately, Śrī Jīva Goswami does not agree. He writes:
nanu, śuddha-jīvātma-dhyānasya paramārthatvaṁ bhavet, mukti-daśāyām api sphūrty-aṅgīkāreṇa tad-rūpasya tasyānaśvaratvāt | tad-ācchādanād adhunā saṁsāra iti tasyaiva sādhyatvāc ca | tatroktam ekena—
A further possibility is now entertained: Let us take meditation on the pure jīvātmā to be the ultimate goal (paramārtha), first, because the self in its pure form is imperishable — since its self disclosure (sphūrti) is admitted to be present even in the liberated state — and second, because the immediate intuition of the pure self is a valid end to be attained (sādhya) — since it is due to the covering of its essential nature that the self now finds itself in material bondage (saṁsāra). Jaḍa Bharata responds to this argument in one verse–
Jaḍa Bharata refutes the idea that realizing the ātmā is the paramārtha:
dhyānaṁ ced ātmano bhūpa paramārthārtha-śabditam |
bheda-kāri-parebhyas tat paramārtho na bhedavān || [vi.pu. 2.14.26] iti |
O King, if meditation on the self (ātmā) is designated as the supreme goal, [that too is unjustified, because] meditation on the self exclusive of all else introduces a division or separation (bheda) from whatever is “other” (para) [or from the Absolute Whole (Paramātmā) that encompasses the self], whereas the supreme end is devoid of all division. (vp 2.14.26)
‘Self-realization’ is not the paramārtha because it is a fragmented end. This is because it is divorced from realization of Paramātmā, of which the self is but one aṁśa. It is not a valid end.
Union or oneness of the jīva with Paramātmā is not paramārtha
One may then argue that realizing the union of the the jīva with Paramātmā would solve the problem, as the jīva and Paramātmā would then be non-different (abheda). This is again refuted as follows:
paramātmātmanor yogaḥ paramārtha itīṣyate |
mithyaitad anyad dravyaṁ hi naiti tad-dravyatāṁ yataḥ || [vi.pu. 2.14.27] iti |
If you propose the union (yoga) of the ātmā with Paramātmā as the ultimate goal, then this too is certainly false, because a substance (dravya) that is distinct from another (anyat) is never transformed into that substance. (VP 2.14.27)
Śrī Jīva notes that when a small light is merged within a great light, they do not become non-distinct even in direct conjunction (atyanta-saṁyoga). For this reason, the union (yoga) of the jīva and Paramātmā cannot be the ultimate goal (paramārtha). What, then, of oneness between them (instead of union?). That is also refuted in the verse:
athavātra yoga-śabdenaikatvam evocyate | tataś caitad ekatvam iti vyākhyeyam | śeṣaṁ pūrvavat |
Alternatively, the word yoga in this verse can be understood as “oneness” (ekatvam) [instead of “union”]. In that case, it is the oneness of the jīva and Paramātmā that is proposed and rejected as the supreme goal. [In this interpretation as well,] the rest of the explanation is the same as above.
Experience of Paramātmā is paramārtha
Śrī Jīva Goswami concludes with the following verses spoken by Jaḍa Bharata, which identify the paramārtha:
eko vyāpī samaḥ śuddho nirguṇaḥ prakṛteḥ paraḥ | janma-vṛddhy-ādi-rahita ātmā sarva-gato’vyayaḥ ||
para-jñānamayo’sadbhir nāma-jāty-ādibhir vibhuḥ |na yogavān na yukto’bhūn naiva pārthiva yokṣyati ||
tasyātma-para-deheṣu sato’py ekamayaṁ hi yat | vijñānaṁ paramārtho’sau dvaitino’tathya-darśinaḥ || [vi.pu. 2.14.29-31] iti |
The supreme goal (paramārtha) is the experience (vijñāna=anubhava) of that Reality which is One, all-pervading, equanimous, pure, free from the guṇas, beyond material nature, devoid of birth, growth, and other such transformations, the Self, omnipresent, imperishable, constituted of supreme consciousness (para-jñānamaya), and omnipotent (vibhu) — being bereft and other such designations throughout all past, present, and future states of being. O King, although that Reality [Paramātmā] is present in one’s own body and all other bodies, It is One. The dualists do not perceive Reality as It is in truth. (vp 2.14.29–31)⁶
This experience of Paramātmā has all the three characteristics mentioned at the beginning of this article.
Summary
Self-realization is not paramārtha or the supreme object of attainment
Oneness with Paramātmā is also not the paramārtha
Experience of Paramātmā is the paramārtha
Leave a Reply