Early History of the Vaishnava Faith and Movement in Bengal, from Sanskrit and Bengali Sources c9.s4.t4.35

c9.s4.t4.35

Jiva Gosvāmin thus admits that, notwithstanding this single authoritative statement, there are many texts in the *Bhāgavata* and elsewhere, in which Kṛṣṇa appears to be spoken of as a partial aspect or Amśa-Avatāra of the Bhagavat. These texts fall into two groups, namely, those occurring respectively in the *Bhāgavata* itself and those in other Purāṇas and Itihāsas. Jiva Gosvāmin contends that with reference to both these classes of texts, the Mahāvākya considered above prevails, and they must, therefore, all be interpreted accordingly. Some of these texts are discussed in detail by him; for instance, *Bhāgavata* iv. 1. 58 (*harer amśau ihāgatau*); x. 1. 1 (*amśenāvatīrṇasya viṣṇoḥ*); x. 2. 13 (*jagan-maṅgalam* acyutāṃśam); x. 2. 35 (diṣṭyāmba te kukṣi-gataḥ paraḥ pumān amśena) ; x. 8. 19 (nārāyaṇa-samo guṇaiḥ) ; x. 20. 40 (babhau bhūḥ.........kalābhyāṃ nitarāṃ hareḥ ; x. 43. 20 (avatīrṇa-vihāṃśena), etc. In all these and such other verses, the presence of words like amśa or kalā appears to indicate a contrary idea of Kṛṣṇa as a partial aspect of Hari, Nārāyaṇa, etc; but the texts are reconciled by the ingenious explanation that the terms amśa or kalā do not refer to Kṛṣṇa-Bhagavat himself directly but to those partial aspects or incarnations who remain absorbed in him and manifest themselves to the phenomenal world simultaneously with the Lord's appearance, in accordance with the well known fact that parts can never exist without the whole. Commentatorial ingenuity is also shown sometimes by adopting particular ways of grammatical or syntactical analysis of words or phrases—a device which is not unknown in Indian philosophical literature in general. The interpretation, for instance, of the phrase nārāyaṇa-samo guṇaiḥ, employed with reference to Kṛṣṇa in one of the above passages (x. 8. 19), is made favourable to Kṛṣṇa's case by rejecting the sense "equal to Nārāyaṇa in his attributes" (nārāyaṇasya samo guṇaiḥ) obtained by Tatpuruṣa Samāsa, and by accepting, by means of the Bahuvrīhi Samāsa, the sense "to whom Nārāyaṇa bears a resemblance by his attributes" (nārāyaṇaḥ samo yasya guṇaiḥ).