Srimad-bhagavatam 1.1.5 with Many Commentaries

(1.1.5)

ta ekadā tu munayaḥ
prātar huta-hutāgnayaḥ

sat-kṛtaṁ sūtam āsīnaṁ

papracchur idam ādarāt

[About the verse: It has been described in the previous verse that the sages headed by Śaunaka were seated for a sacrifice. This was not an ordinary sacrifice but a brahma-satra — a sacrifice in which discussions about the absolute truth were to take place. How did these discussions begin? This verse answers the question.]

One possible Translation:

(te): Those;

(munayaḥ): sages

(prātar huta-hutāgnayaḥ): who had sufficiently offered oblations to various sacrificial fires at day-break;

(tu): (used here as an emphatic particle. More explanation below.)

(ekadā): on a particular day;

(papracchuḥ): asked;

(ādarāt): respectfully;

(idam): the following questions;

(sūtam): to Sūta Goswami;

(āsīnam): who was well seated;

(sat-kṛtaṁ): [and] had been given his due respects;

(Q.1) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘te’?

Ans) This term ‘te’ becomes ‘ta’ when conjoined with the next term ‘ekadā’. Individually, it appears as ‘te’. When it is in combination with the next term ‘ekadā’, then ‘te’ transforms into ‘ta’ according to the Grammar rule — ‘lopaḥ śākalyasya’ (Pāṇini 8.3.19) This is a pronoun and refers to the sages (munayaḥ). No other comments by any ācāryas.

(Q.2) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘munayaḥ’?

Ans) This term means ‘sages’. It is the plural of the term ‘muniḥ’ (sage). This term is defined in the Bhagavad-gītā (2.56) as follows:

duḥkheṣv anudvigna-manāḥ

sukheṣu vigata-spṛhaḥ

vīta-rāga-bhaya-krodhaḥ

sthita-dhīr munir ucyate

“One who is not disturbed in mind even amidst the threefold miseries or elated when there is happiness, and who is free from attachment, fear and anger, is called a sage (muni) of steady mind.”

Besides this, Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha says that the term ‘munayaḥ’ means ‘omniscient’. He says that even though they were omniscient, they asked Sūta Gosvāmī many questions to hear from him. Śrī Vallabhācārya and Śrī Giridhar-lāla also say that this term indicates their omniscience regarding Sūta Gosvāmī. The sages knew that ‘This is Sūta named Ugraśravā who knows what we desire to hear.’

(Q.3) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘prātar huta-hutāgnayaḥ’?

Ans) The term ‘prātar’ generally means ‘at morning’. It should be noted that the term ‘huta-hutāgnayaḥ’ is an adjective of munayaḥ (sages). Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda describes ‘huta-hutāgnayaḥ’ as follows — ‘hutā eva hutā agnayo yais te’ — ‘[The sages] by whom the sacred-fires were again and again offered oblations into’. So, ‘prātar huta-hutāgnayaḥ’ means ‘by whom the sacrificial fires were again and again offered oblations at morning’. This phrase ‘prātar huta-hutāgnayaḥ’ thus becomes an adjective of the term ‘munayaḥ’. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura and Śrī Śukadeva repeat Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda.

[Grammatical Technicalities: To grammatically derive huta-hutāgnayaḥ, we first need to derive huta-hutāḥ by using the rule ‘saha supā’ (Pāṇini 2.1.4). Thereafter, a bahu-vrīhi-samāsa can be formed by saying ‘huta-hutāḥ agnayaḥ yais te’ to give huta-hutāgnayaḥ.]

Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda goes ahead to say that by repeating the term huta in this phrase, it is indicated that the nitya (sacrifices which need to be performed daily) and naimittika (sacrifices which need to be performed occasionally) sacrifices had been thoroughly performed by these sages on that day. Śrī Vallabhācārya interprets ‘huta-hutāgnayaḥ’ in a slightly different way. He interprets it as, ‘prātar eva hutā eva agnayaḥ punar hutā yeṣāṁ te’, or ‘those [sages] who again offered oblations in the fires which had already been offered oblations once in the morning’.

Śrī Vallabhācārya says that one should not think that offering oblations again in the same fire is against the Vedas. They were vaiṣṇavas and were more interested in hearing the Bhāgavatam and for that reason when they saw that the time is auspicious for such listening, they quickly completed their fire-sacrifice related duties. Later, the same sages will say — ‘karmaṇy asminn anāśvāse’ — ‘We don’t have much faith in the certainty of the success of these fire-sacrifices.’ (Śrīmad-bhāgavatam 1.18.12)

Another meaning of ‘huta-hutāgnayaḥ’ given by Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya and Śrī Giridhar-lāla is as follows — ‘prātaḥ kāle hutena homārheṇa payoghṛtādi-dravyeṇa hutā agnaya āhavanīyādayo yais te’ — ‘those [sages] who offered oblations (huta) using substances fit for offering (huta) viz. milk, ghee etc. in the sacrificial fires (agnayaḥ) named āhavanīya etc.

[Translator’s Note: One can learn more about the sacrificial fires named āhavanīya, gārhapatya and anvahārya in the Chāndogya Upaniṣat]

Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha however disproves this definition by saying that the term huta has never been used in the standard lexicons for denoting milk, ghee etc.

(Q.3) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘tu’?

Ans) This term is used to add emphasis. The closest that I can think of is the English term ‘however’. So the translation is, “The sages however on a particular day….”

Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha says that this term denotes ‘lokānukampā’, or the compassion of the sages on the people in general. In other words, they were sages but for the benefit of the common people they asked Śrī Sūta Gosvāmī to speak.

According to Śrī Vallabhācārya, this term means ‘pakṣāntara-svīkāra’ or the acceptance of a different opinion. In other words, although the sages were dedicated to the sacrifice, they accepted a vaiṣṇava method of attaining success by engaging in hearing the Bhāgavatam.

(Q.4) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘ekadā’?

Ans) The term literally means ‘once’. Śrī Vallabhācārya says it means ‘once, when the time was suitable for singing the glories of Hari’. Śrī Giridhar-lāla also says the same.

(Q.5) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘papracchuḥ’?

Ans) This is a verbal form derived using the verbal root √pracch. The exact tense used here is ‘liṭ’. Pāṇini says ‘parokṣe liṭ’ (Pāṇini 3.2.115). The meaning of ‘papracchuḥ’ is — “they asked”. Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha says that √pracch is a dvi-karmaka-dhātuḥ (a verbal root which can take two objects) and this justifies why there are two objects — ‘sūtam’ and ‘idam’ in the verse of the verbal form ‘papracchuḥ’.

(Q.6) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘ādarāt’?

Ans) Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya says ‘ādarāt’ means ‘ādara-pūrvakam’ or ‘with due respect’. Śrī Vallabhācārya says that this respect signifies that during any kathā related to the Lord, showing respect is very important. He says that simply speaking high words is not enough. One must also have a proper internal mood.

(Q.7) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘idam’?

Ans) Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda says that ‘idam’ means ‘vakṣyamāṇam’, or ‘the following questions’. These questions will be spoken in the verses which appear after this verse. Śrī Rādhāramaṇa Dāsa Gosvāmī says that the questions were prepared intelligently by the sages, and this is the way in which ācāryas ask questions. In other words, the questions are not asked whimsically but are well thought of.

(Q.8) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘sūtam’?

Ans) Sūtam is an object of the verb ‘papracchuḥ’. It means that they asked the questions “to Sūta Gosvāmī”. At this point, it is important to mention here that Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā goes on a lengthy note about Sūta Gosvāmī’s birth. Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā is a commentator who conforms to the smārta-brāhmaṇa point of view, and hence he feels that it is necessary to clarify some things about Sūta Gosvāmī and his qualification to sit in front of an audience of brāhmaṇas like Śaunaka etc.

Sūta is not only a name but also an indicator of his birth. According to dharma-śāstras, a son born from a brāhmaṇa mother and kṣatriya father is known as a Sūta. Such a marriage is a pratiloma (opposite) marriage and is not recommended in śāstra. Thus, being a Sūta is not an elevated birth. A Sūta is considered the same as a śūdra or sometimes even below that. People with a liberal point of view say that Sūta Gosvāmī being given a higher seat in front of Vedic brāhmaṇas like Śaunaka is an indication that a qualified person, even though born in a lower caste can attain a position higher than the brāhmaṇas.

Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā does not like this and says that quotes a (controversial sounding) smṛti as follows:

śva-carmaṇi yathā kṣīram
apeyaṁ syād dvijātibhiḥ
tathā śūdra-mukhāc chāstraṁ
na śrotavyaṁ kadācana

“Just like pristine milk if presented in a vessel made of dog-skin is undrinkable for the twice-born, similarly elevated knowledge coming from the mouth of a śūdra should never be listened to.”

So Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā raises a doubt, “How is it possible that such intelligent people like Śaunaka etc. listened to the Bhāgavatam from the mouth of Sūta Gosvāmī?”

He replies to the doubt by saying that although Sūta is the name of a śūdra-like caste, this was not the case with Sūta Gosvāmī. He was an exception and not a Sūta by birth. He then quotes a history attributed to the Vāyu-purāṇa (Chapter 62) as follows:

vainyasya tu pṛthor yajñe
vartamāne mahātmanaḥ
sūtyāyām abhavat sūtaḥ
prathamaṁ varṇa-vaikṛtam
aindreṇa haviṣā tatra
haviḥ pṛktaṁ bṛhaspateḥ
juhāvendrāya daivena
tataḥ sūto vyajāyata
śiṣya-havyena saṁpṛktam
abhi-bhūtaṁ guror haviḥ
adharottara-cāreṇa
jajñe tad-varṇa-vaikṛtam
“In the yajña of the great soul Pṛthu Mahārāja, Sūta appeared in his mother Sūtī’s womb as the first pratiloma child. This is because the offerings for Bṛhaspati got accidentally mixed with the offerings for Indra, and these offerings got oblated in the name of Indra by the will of providence. From that sacrifice, a child named Sūta appeared (in Sūtī’s womb). Since the disciple’s (Pṛthu’s) offerings got mixed with the Guru’s (the brāhmaṇas who were guiding Pṛthu) offerings, due to this opposite mixture the first pratiloma child named Sūta was born.”

Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā uses this incident to say that the first Sūta was not born from impure semen but was born from a fire-sacrifice, so he is an exception. He also tries to reinforce his point by saying that in some other purāṇas, the following statement is found:

agni-kuṇḍa-samudbhūta
sūta nirmala-mānasa

“O Sūta! Born from the fire! You are perfectly composed at mind.”

Now, all the while Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā knows that his position can be challenged because Romaharṣaṇa, the father of Sūta Gosvāmī was also known as a Sūta. Romaharṣaṇa was also speaking in front of the brāhmaṇas. How to explain Romaharṣaṇa’s case?

Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that Romaharṣaṇa was also born from the fire. Both Sūta Gosvāmī and Romaharṣaṇa got their qualifications to sit on the vyāsāsana simply by the will of the brāhmaṇas, just like the fire-born Dhṛṣṭadyumna (son of Drupada) got his kṣatriya nature by the will of the brāhmaṇas. Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that another reason for giving the vyāsāsana, which is reserved only for brāhmaṇas to Romaharṣaṇa and Sūta Gosvāmī is that in the Vedas, it is said ‘agnir vai brāhmaṇaḥ’ — ‘the fire-god is a brāhmaṇa’, and hence people born from the fire should be considered as good as brāhmaṇas.

By saying all this, Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā wants to imply that only caste-brāhmaṇas or people born from the fire can occupy the vyāsāsana. If a question is asked as to what will happen if a śūdra-born person occupies this post, Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā warns them by quoting an unknown Vedic text:

vyāsāsanopaveśāc ca
śūdraś cāṇḍālatāṁ vrajet
viprasyaivādhikāro ‘sti
vyāsāsana-samākrame
dharmāṇāṁ śruti-gītānām
upadeśe tathā dvija

“By occupying the vyāsāsana, a śūdra degrades himself to the status of a cāṇḍāla in his next life. Only brāhmaṇas have the right to sit on the vyāsāsana, and to give lectures on dharma, Vedas etc.”

Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that Śaunaka etc. are intelligent brāhmaṇas and they will not give the vyāsāsana to any low-born, otherwise it will go against the Vedic text which was just quoted. The vyāsāsana is reserved for pure brāhmaṇa born souls viz. Vaiśampāyana, Hārīta, Śāntavrata, Mārkaṇḍeya etc. and not for a low-born. Moreover, Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that it does not sound good to hear that great souls such as Śaunaka heard the topmost instructions regarding spiritual life from a low-born. So, Sūta Gosvāmī was not any low-born ordinary Sūta.

If someone objects by quoting the maxim which says that “Knowledge should be taken from any source, just as a jewel can be picked up even from garbage”, then Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā replies to this by saying that this quote is valid only for worldly knowledge.

Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā goes ahead to reinforce his point that Sūta Gosvāmī and Romaharṣaṇa were not low-born by quoting the Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (10.78.32) — ‘yady etad-brahma-hatyāyāḥ’ — ‘The killing of Romaharṣaṇa is brahma-hatyā (killing of a brāhmaṇa)’. Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that this verse proves that Romaharṣaṇa was considered as a brāhmaṇa by the sages and this is the reason why they gave him the vyāsāsana. He goes ahead to say that in some other Purāṇas, it is said ‘varayed brāhmaṇaṁ gurum’ — ‘One should select a brāhmaṇa guru for hearing the Purāṇas’.

If a doubt is raised that in India, there are also caste-based Sūtas who recite the Purāṇas, and for this reason they are also known as Paurāṇikas, then Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that they are called Paurāṇikas not because they have the qualification to recite a Purāṇa. They are called Paurāṇikas because they are able to memorize and recite the history of the lineage of the king who is ruling them.

Finally, if someone quotes the Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (1.4.13) — manye tvāṁ viṣaye vācāṁ snātam anyatra chandasāt — ‘O Sūta! We consider you expert in all subjects except the Vedas’, to say that Sūta Gosvāmī was not a brāhmaṇa because he did not know the Vedas, then Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that the term ‘Sūta’ used for Sūta Gosvāmī is not an indication of his caste. This verse from the Bhāgavatam only means that he did not know “certain” portions. Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā quotes Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (1.3.40) — purāṇaṁ brahma-sammitam — ‘The Bhāgavatam is Vedic-knowledge that leads to the absolute truth.’ Using this, Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that Sūta Gosvāmī was actually a brāhmaṇa who had Vedic knowledge, and had the qualification to sit on the vyāsāsana and deliver lectures to other brāhmaṇas.

Śrī Vallabhācārya however agrees that Sūta Gosvāmī was born a low-caste. He says that since it would be uncomfortable for Sūta Gosvāmī to stand and deliver a lecture, therefore he was given a seat as an exception.

(Q.9) Is the conclusion given by Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā acceptable to all?

Ans) Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā’s commentary is named ‘bhāvārtha-dīpikā-prakāśa’ (the light illuminating the ‘bhāvārtha-dīpikā’ commentary of Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda). It is supposed to illuminate the commentary of Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda. I personally consider these sections in Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā’s commentary to be his own digressions. Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda was not speaking at all about Sūta Gosvāmī’s caste in this verse but Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā introduces it in order to make the point that only brāhmaṇas can speak from the vyāsāsana.

In actuality, Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā is contradicting Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda because later in the commentary to Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (1.3.40), Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda will say — ‘atrāvarṇikatvāt’ — ‘Sūta Gosvāmī is an avarṇika (outcaste).’ There itself Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā’s position gets disproved.

Moreover the history which Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā quoted from the Vāyu-purāṇa about Sūta Gosvāmī’s birth is not about Sūta Gosvāmī’s birth at all. It is about the birth of the Sūta caste. Sūta Gosvāmī is a  specific person born from Romaharṣaṇa Sūta. In the same section of the Vāyu-purāṇa (Chapter 62), it is given that,

tasmin eva mahā-yajñe
jajñe prājño ‘tha māgadhaḥ

“In that very yajña the Māgadha class of singers were also born.”

So, Sūta and Māgadha here are names of castes, not of individuals. The name ‘Sūta’ in Vāyu-purāṇa does not refer to the son of Romaharṣaṇa.

Vaiṣṇava-ācāryas like Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī have said that each and every one of us have the right to chant the names of the Lord and study the Śrīmad-bhāgavatam. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī says in his Tattva-sandarbha (Anuccheda 15) that — ‘tathāpi sūtādīnām adhikāraḥ. sakala-nigama-vallī-sat-phala-śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmavat’ — ‘In the Purāṇas, lower castes like Sūta etc. also have all rights, just like they have all rights in chanting the names of Lord Krishna, which is the true fruit of all Vedic branches of knowledge.’

Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa says in the commentary to Tattva-sandarbha (Anuccheda 15) that — ‘itihāsāder vedatve’pi tatra śūdrādhikāraḥ strī-śūdra-dvija-bandhūnām ity-ādi-vākya-balād’ — ‘Śūdras have rights on the Purāṇas and Itihāsas, although these literatures are considered Vedic. This is because in the Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (1.4.25) itself it has been given that this literature has been composed for them.’

Śrīla Gopāla-bhaṭṭa-gosvāmī gives an extremely mature and balanced viewpoint in his Hari-bhakti-vilāsa (5.453) as follows:

ato niṣedhakaṁ yad yad

vacanaṁ śrūyate sphuṭam

avaiṣṇava-paraṁ tat tad

vijñeyaṁ tattva-darśibhiḥ

 

“Therefore, wherever restrictive statements are to be found in scriptures [regarding śūdras or women], those statements are understood by the learned souls as applicable to non-vaiṣṇavas only.”

Sāragrāhī vaiṣṇavas consider this verse to be the yardstick for determining what is allowed for a śūdra and what is not. Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī in his commentary on this verse of the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa goes in great detail to explain the rights of śūdras and ladies who are now initiated as vaiṣṇavas. Since it is too exhaustive, I will not get into it right here, but it is sufficient to say here that the Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇava ācāryas do not agree to the conclusions given by Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā.

(Q.10) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘āsīnam’?

Ans) This term is an adjective of the term ‘sūtam’. Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says it means ‘sukhopaviṣṭam’ ([Sūta] who was seated happily). Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha says ‘sukhaṁ pīṭhe upaviṣṭam’ ([Sūta] who was happily seated on the seat). Śrī Śukadeva says it means ‘svastham’ ([Sūta] who was comfortably seated).

(Q.11) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘sat-kṛtam’?

Ans) This term too is an adjective of the term ‘sūtam’. Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says ‘tad-yogya-satkāraiḥ pūjitam’ — ‘[Sūta] who was worshipped according to his position.’

Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya and Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha also says the same. Śrī Vallabhācārya says that they offered him respects despite being a low-born because he had immense respect for the Supreme Lord. Śrī Giridhar-lāla says that giving him the vyāsāsana in itself was the expression of offering respect.

Srimad-bhagavatam 1.1.4 with Many Commentaries

 

(1.1.4)

naimiṣe ‘nimiṣa-kṣetre

ṛṣayaḥ śaunakādayaḥ

satraṁ svargāya-lokāya

sahasra-samam āsata

One possible Translation:

(naimiṣe): In the forest named Naimiṣa;

(animiṣa-kṣetre): the place belonging to Animiṣa (Lord Viṣṇu);

(ṛṣayaḥ): sages;

(śaunakādayaḥ): viz. Śaunaka etc.;

(āsata): were seated;

(satram): for a fire-sacrifice;

(sahasra-samam): that would continue for a thousand years;

(svargāya-lokāya): for attaining the Supreme Lord, who is known as svargāya-loka;

[About the verse: Now that the first three verses have repeatedly invoked the Supreme Lord as well as described the purpose of the literature as well as the four introductory topics, the narration of the Śrīmad-bhāgavatam begins].

Q.1) What is the meaning of the term “naimiṣe”?
Ans) Naimiṣa or Naimiṣāraṇya is the name of an ancient forest where the narration of the Bhāgavatam took place. The term araṇya means ‘forest’. Therefore naimiṣa-araṇya or naimiṣāraṇya is the Naimiṣa forest. This place is currently known by the Hindi name Nīmasāra and is situated at a distance of about sixty yojanas (~ 500 kms.) from the Vṛndāvana forest in Uttara-pradeśa, India.

This name Nīmasāra appears to be a corruption of the name Naimiśāraṇya. Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī says that this verse has two readings for the name of the forest — naimiśa and naimiṣa. Both names have a slight difference in pronunciation. The ‘ṣ’ in Naimiṣa is retroflex whereas in Naimiśa it is the palatal consonant ‘ś’. Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī describes two different histories for these two different names.

Q.2) What are the histories behind these two names?
Ans) History of naimiśa — Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī quotes a history from a text named vāyavīya. According to this history, Lord Brahmā said that he would create a wheel within his mental frame and then release it. Lord Brahmā declared that the location where the rim (nemi) of this wheel would land (śīryate) would be a place auspicious for performing tapasyā (austerities).

Having said this, Lord Brahma then created the mental wheel, which was as brilliant as the sun. Having paid his obeisance to Lord Shiva, he released the wheel. Śrī Śukadeva in his commentary adds the detail that Lord Brahma created this wheel because he was requested by various twice-born sages to suggest a suitable forest for performing austerities. These sages were delighted on the sight of the wheel and they paid their obeisances to Lord Brahma and went after the wheel released by him. Therefore the place where the rim [nemi] landed [ś]īryate became nemiś or nemiśa. This nemiśa later became known as naimiśa. The term nemi is etymologically formed using the Uṇādi-sūtra (4.43) — ‘niyo miḥ’ and it is used to denote the rim of a wheel.

History of naimiṣa — Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī says that the history of this name can be seen in the Varāha-purāṇa (Chapter 11). In that purāṇa, the Supreme Lord appeared in front of a sage named Gauramukha. The sage Gauramukha requested the Lord to kill the demoniac king named Durjaya, who was attacking his hermitage. On his request, the Lord’s Sudarśana-cakra killed the demoniac king and his armies in the blink of an eye (nimiṣa). The Lord then said — “Since the demoniac forces were killed here in the blink of an eye (nimiṣa), this forest will be known as naimiṣa. In the future, this place will be a bestower of great results on the brāhmaṇas.”

Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha however says that there was a sage named ‘nimiṣa’ and he used to perform his austerities in this place, and due to him the forest became known as ‘naimiṣa’. Alternatively, he also suggests that nimiṣa can refer to a special tree whose fruit is useful in many ways to the sages. He also quotes a statement from an unknown literature which says that this tree is also known by the name nemi. My further research in this direction led me to the Ayurvedic lexicons named Dhanvantarīya-nighaṇṭu and Rāja-nighaṇṭu. In both these lexicons, the term nemi-vṛkṣa (nemi-tree) is used to denote the ‘Senegalia Catechu’ tree, whose fruit has various general and medicinal uses. Therefore, another possibility is that the term nemiṣa refers to this tree whose fruit (catechu) has various uses for the sages. Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha also suggests that another meaning of the term naimiśa could be a place where the rim (nemi) of the sudarśana-cakra of the Lord fell (śīryate). This sudarśana-cakra was requested by the demigods to locate a suitable auspicious place. However, he does not mention the source of this history.

Q.3) Are there any other variant readings of this name?

Ans) Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya says that another alternate reading is ‘naiviśa’. The meaning given by him is as follows — niviśanty atra maharṣayaḥ iti niviśaṁ, tadaiva naiviśam — ‘The great sages enter into this forest (to reside here), and therefore it is called as niviśa and similarly it is also known as naiviśa.’

Q.4) Are there any spiritual implications of these names?

Ans) Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura gives some spiritual implications of these names. According to him, the term ‘naimiśa/naimiṣa’ is placed in this verse for a very good reason. However, before that it is important to know that in Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura’s edition of the Bhāgavatam, an ‘oṁ’ is placed before this verse. This means that the first three verses of the bhāgavatam were invocations and now the bhāgavatam has begun with the auspicious sound ‘oṁ’. Why is this ‘oṁ’ considered so auspicious? Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura quotes a smṛti which says:
oṁ-kāraś cātha-śabdaś ca

dvāv etau brahmaṇaḥ purā
kaṇṭhaṁ bhittvā viniryātau

tena māṅgalikāv ubhau
“In the beginning of the creation, two sounds came out piercing the throat of Lord Brahma. These two sounds were — ‘oṁ’ and ‘atha’. Therefore these two sounds are considered as auspicious .”

[Translator's Note: Super-commenting on this verse, Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā asks the question “How can piercing of the throat be considered auspicious?” He replies by saying ‘mahatāṁ dūṣaṇaṁ bhūṣaṇam’ — the faults in great personalities become renowned as auspicious qualities.

He gives the example of Lord Shiva, whose throat got a blackish-blue complexion because of drinking poison, but that blackish-blue throat added to his reputation in this world and he became known as Nīlakaṇṭha (the one with the bluish throat).]

Usually therefore, many Sanskrit compositions begin with one of these two sounds. For example, the Vedānta-sūtras begin with the term ‘atha’. The Nārada-bhakti-sūtras also begin with ‘atha’.

Also, Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura says that the term ‘naimiśa’ has been placed in this verse for a special reason. Since the first three verses were invocations, the bhāgavatam is technically beginning from this verse. ‘Naimiśa’ is the first word placed in this verse. The history behind this name (as already explained above in Q.2) is that Lord Brahma’s mentally created wheel landed here. In other words, it attained stability at this place. Thus, this is a place where even Lord Brahma’s mental wheel attained stability.

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura uses this fact to say that this literature Śrīmad-bhāgavatam also has a similar nature. Various devotees have various devotional desires and moods. The bhāgavatam is like a desire-tree that can fulfill all these varieties of devotional desires and moods. Whatever devotional desire one has, one will find that by studying different sections of the bhāgavatam, these various desires will be fulfilled and once these desires are fulfilled, the mind will attain stability in devotion by reading that particular section. For example, someone may desire to serve Krishna as a parent. Their desire will be fulfilled by reading the various narrations in the bhāgavatam in which the Lord’s parents served him. The wheel of their mind will become stabilized (naimiśa) in that location within the bhāgavatam. That is the deep significance of the term namiśa.

If the alternate reading (naimiṣa) is selected, Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura still says that this reading too has a deep significance. The history behind the term ‘naimiṣa’ is that it is ‘a place where demoniac forces were destroyed in a moment’. Similarly, by placing the term ‘naimiṣa’ in the beginning of the bhāgavatam, it is indicated that one’s deep-seated demoniac enemies like lust, anger etc. will be destroyed quickly (naimiṣa) in this literature, and therefore one should reside here in the association of this literature.

Q.5) What is the meaning of the term ‘animiṣa-kṣetre’?

Ans) The term animiṣa-kṣetre is an adjective for the term ‘naimiśe/naimiṣe’ and it means — ‘in the forest of Lord Vishnu.’ According to Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī, the Lord Viṣṇu is animiṣa because his eyes do not blink. According to the Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (Canto 9, Chapter 13) and other purāṇas, king Nimi was cursed by the sage Vasiṣṭha to lose his body. Since king Nimi did not want to take another body, he was granted a place in the eyelids of all conditioned living entities. Due to this, all conditioned living entities have eyes that blink. Due to king Nimi’s presence in the eyelids of all embodied conditioned souls, the time period for which an eye blinks is called as nimeṣa. However, Lord Viṣṇu’s eyes never blink, and hence he is known as a-nimiṣa. His forest is known as animiṣa-kṣetra. Śrī Vallabhācārya also says that animiṣa-kṣetre means ‘forest of Lord Viṣṇu’. He says that Lord Viṣṇu has no faults in him and only spiritual qualities and therefore, he is known as animiṣa.

Q.6) What is the significance of the term ‘ṛṣayaḥ’?

Ans) This term indicates that those who were staying in the forest of naimiśa/naimiṣa were sages. The term ṛṣayaḥ is the plural of the term ‘ṛṣiḥ’. The term ‘ṛṣi’ is derived from the Sanskrit verbal root √ṛṣ. The meaning of this term is popularly understood as follows — ṛṣati prāpnoti jñānena saṁsāra-pāram iti ṛṣiḥ — “A ṛṣi is one who takes us beyond the material world by the dint of his knowledge.”

Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha says that ṛṣi here means a tri-kāla-darśī, or 'a person who can see the past, present and future'. Alternatively Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha and Śrī Vallabhācārya say that it can also mean a mantra-draṣṭā, or ‘a seer of a mantra’.

Q.7) What is the significance of the term ‘śaunaka-ādayaḥ’?

Ans) The term śaunaka-ādayaḥ means ‘śaunaka etc.’ It can also mean ‘headed by śaunaka’. Mentioning only śaunaka and including all other sages in the term ‘ādayaḥ’ implies that the sage śaunaka was the leader of all the other sages in the forest. This term ‘śaunakādayaḥ’ is an adjective of the term ṛṣayaḥ. The leader of all the ṛṣis was Sri Shaunaka. Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that according to the literature named ‘Līlāvatī’, śaunaḥ sarva-vivekaḥ syāt — “A person who possesses all wisdom is known as śaunaka”. He further says that only a devotee of the Lord can have all wisdom because such a devotee understands the all-pervading Lord as he is.

Another meaning of śaunaka given by Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā is śunasya apatya — a descendant of śuna. He quotes the Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (9.17.3) — śunakaḥ śaunako yasya bahvṛca pravaro muniḥ — ‘Gritsamada’s son was śunaka and śunaka’s son was śaunaka who was a leader expert on the Ṛg-veda.’

Q.8) What is the meaning and significance of the term ‘satram’?

Ans) Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā gives a definition of the term ‘satra’ in his commentary. He says — ‘yatra bahu-kartṛka-yāgas tatra satra-śabdaḥ prayujyate’ — ‘Wherever many priests are involved in performing a sacrifice, it becomes denoted as satra.’

He also gives a definition as follows:

bahubhyo dīyate yatra

tṛpyanti prāṇino bahu
kartāro bahavo yatra

tat-satram abhidhīyate

“Wherever charity is given to numerous people; wherever numerous living entities are satisfied by offering food, water etc; wherever many people are involved in performing the sacrifice, it is known as a satra.”

He also says ye ṛtvijas ta eva yaja-mānāḥ — a satra is a sacrifice in which the hosts themselves are the performers. Usually, a sacrifice is hosted by a king or a householder and the priests are invited to perform it. In this sacrifice however, the hosts were the performers. Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya says that alternatively, the term ‘satra’ here refers to a brahma-satra. He says that the characteristics of a brahma-satra are given in the Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (10.87.11):

tulya-śruta-tapaḥ-śīlās

tulya-svīyāri-madhyamāḥ

api cakruḥ pravacanam

ekaṁ śuśrūṣavo 'pare

“All the sages present were equal in learning, austerity and good behavior; all of them were equal to friends, enemies and neutral parties. Yet they organized a brahma-satra where one of them was the speaker and the others were eager listeners.”

[Note: There are two types of satras — karma-satra and brahma-satra. When various sages of equal qualifications gather and appoint one among them as a host (yaja-māna) and the remaining become priests (ṛtvijas) in a Vedic sacrifice, then such a sacrifice becomes known as karma-satra; and when various sages of equal qualifications gather and appoint one among them as a speaker (vaktā) and the remaining become listeners (śrotā) in a discussion on the absolute truth, then that too is a sacrifice known as brahma-satra.]

Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya also says that the words — āsīnā dīrgha-satreṇa kathāyām in Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (1.1.21) indicate that the satra was actually a brahma-satra, which is nothing but a discussion on the absolute truth among great sages. Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya indicates that this particular satra was special because it was bhagavad-guṇānubhavātmaka — replete with topics regarding the divine qualities and experience of the Lord.

Q.9) What is the meaning and significance of the terms ‘svargāya lokāya’?

Ans) Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī says that the term ‘svargāya’ means ‘Hari’. He derives it as follows — ‘svaḥ svarge gīyata iti svargāyo hariḥ sa eva loko bhaktānāṁ nivāsa-sthānaṁ tasmai tat-prāptaya ity arthaḥ’ — “The term svaḥ means heaven and he who is glorified (gīyate) in svaḥ (heaven) is svargāya (= Hari). The term ‘loka’ means ‘abode’, so ‘svargāya-loka’ means ‘Hari who himself is the abode of all the devotees’. Thus, svargāya-lokāya means ‘to attain Hari, who is the abode of all devotees’. In this way, Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī says that svargāya-lokāya are not two different terms but a single samāsa (compound term).

Somebody may question this unique interpretation of svargāya, since the literal meaning of ‘svargāya lokāya’ would be “to attain heaven”. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura defends Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī’s stance by saying that the term ‘svargāya’ is grammatically similar to the term ‘urugāya’ found in the Vedas and in the Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (2.3.20). Since urugāya in that verse is also an adjective of Lord Krishna, similarly svargāya in this verse can also be considered as an adjective of Lord Krishna. The exact grammatical derivation of svargāya is (svaḥ + √gai + ghañ).

Śrī Vallabhācārya is known for speaking out against some portions of Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī’s commentary. While interpreting ‘svargāya lokāya’ too, he disproves Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī’s definition of svargāya-lokāya as a single compound term and sticks to the traditional meaning of svargāya lokāya i.e. ‘heavenly abode’, and says that Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī’s definition is incorrect because the Vedas already have passage saying, ‘svargāya vā etāni lokāya hūyante’ — ‘The sages perform sacrifices to attain the heavenly abode.’ In this Vedic passage, the terms ‘svargāya’ and ‘lokāya’ are separated and not joint together in a compound term. Thus, according to Śrī Vallabhācārya, Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī’s interpretation is incorrect. The aim here seems to be disproving Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī’s explanation and establishing his own opinion as superior. It is also interesting to note that although Śrī Giridhara-lāla is a follower of Śrī Vallabhācārya, he ends up accepting Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī’s definition. He also gives another proof that the term ‘svar loka’ means Vaikuṇṭha. He says that in Śrīmad-bhāgavatam (11.7.1), a similar term ‘svar-vāsam’ has been used to refer to Vaikuṇṭha.

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura says that the sacrifice of the sages was initially for attaining heaven. However, they heard the various other Purāṇas from Romaharṣaṇa and became more inquisitive about the Lord. Thereafter, they got the association of Śrīla Sūta Gosvāmī and became interested in bhakti-rasa, or the mellows of devotion. Thus, they said:

karmaṇy asminn anāśvāse
dhūma-dhūmrātmanāṁ bhavān
āpāyayati govinda-
pāda-padmāsavaṁ madhu

We have just begun the performance of this fruitive activity, a sacrificial fire, without certainty of its result due to the many imperfections in our action. Our bodies have become black from the smoke, but we are factually pleased by the nectar of the lotus feet of the Personality of Godhead, Govinda, which you are distributing. (Śrīmad-bhāgavatam 1.18.12)

Thus, Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura says that although the sages began performing a sacrifice to attain heaven, the purpose of the sacrifice was lost in due course of time and they all began to focus on Hari alone.

Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that ‘svargāya-lokāya’ can also mean ‘to attain Hari’s abode, Vaikuṇṭha’.

Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya also says that ‘svarga’ means a place of unsurpassed joy and it indicates the parama-pada or Vaikuṇṭha. Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya also adds that the sages cannot be aiming for the heavenly planets found in this world, because their leader Śaunaka is a topmost devotee (parama-bhāgavata).

Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha also gives an interpretation on similar lines.

Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya and Śrī Śukadeva also quote a passage from the Kaṭha-upaniṣat (1.13) which proves that those who stay in ‘svarga’ are those who have attained true immortality. The passage is as follows — ‘svarge loke ‘mṛtatvaṁ bhajante’ — “Those who reside in that abode named svarga experience true immortality’. Thus, even from this quote, it can be established that svarga means ‘the place of true immortality’, or Vaikuṇṭha and ‘svargāya lokāya’ can mean ‘to attain that Vaikuṇṭha’

Q.10) What is the meaning and significance of the terms ‘sahasra-samam’?

Ans) Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī says it means ‘a thousand years’. Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā accepts this but raises a question that in the Mahābhārata (9.36.40), there is a phrase which says ‘satre dvādaśa-vārṣike’ i.e. a satra is of dvādaśa (twelve) years. How can these two be reconciled?

Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says by defending Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī that in this case, the term dvādaśa in the Mahābhārata should be interpreted as ‘dvābhyāṁ bindubhyāṁ adhikā daśa’ i.e. two zeroes after 10 (=1000). Thus by this novel definition, the contradiction is resolved.

Or Śrī Vaṁśīdhara Śarmā says that the Mahābhārata must be speaking about some other day of Lord Brahmā, where the definition of a satra was different. Or he says that sahasra-samam can mean ‘thousand months’. This is because in the Vedas as well as in the commentaries of the Mahābhārata, there is a statement that sometimes, a month can be considered as long as an year.

Śrī Vīrarāghavācārya, Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha, Śrī Vallabhācārya and other commentators agree with the interpretation of Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī.

Q.11) What is the meaning and significance of the terms ‘āsata’?

Ans) According to the commentators, this is a prefix + verb. ‘ā’ is the prefix and ‘asata’ is the verb. The intention of this verb is to say that “they performed”. It is interesting to note that ‘asata’ a form not to be found or derived according to Pāṇini’s rules easily, and thus this verb gets interpreted in various ways by various commentators. Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī says that it means “they performed”. Śrī Vijaya-dhvaja-tīrtha says that it means “they were seated”, or “they were initiated in”.

Most commentators say that the meaning of some verbal forms is determined mainly by looking at their prefixes. They give examples of verbal forms in the Vedas such as ‘ā-labhante’, ‘nir-vapanti’, ‘upa-yanti’, all of which mean “they performed”. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī says that in many such verbal forms, a suitable prefix is used to give the same meaning i.e. “they performed”.

In Sanskrit Grammar too, there is a rule “bahvarthāḥ api dhātavaḥ bhavanti” — “Sometimes, verbal roots can take many meanings.” (Mahā-bhāṣya on Pāṇini 1.3.1). This seems to be the case here with this verbal form. It has taken various meanings according to the mood of various commentators.

---