'Causarum Cognitio:' Parama Karana Narayana

Causarum Cognitio (‘Seek Knowledge of Causes’).

The philosophers sought to know the supreme cause or the cause of all causes (parama karana). What is that entity from which all other entities derived meaning; what is that supreme entity—is it time, is it material nature, is it vital air, is it mind or is it some other entity,  even greater and ontologically even higher? Madhavadeva says in his Nama Ghosa, ‘parama karana narayana;’ the supreme pure personality who is the shelter of all beings and indeed, of all categories of existence, is the cause of all causes.

Now, as Krsna or Narayana is the cause of all causes, if one does not know Him, then, in a certain sense, one cannot be said to really know anything (as all causes emanate from Him). On a similar line, if one knows Krsna, the cause of all causes, then one may be termed as knowing everything.

As Krsna is the ultimate cause, He is represented in each of the material realms—manomaya, pranamaya, etc.—as personally handling and interacting with each of the material entities; although, in reality, He may not do so literally but may do so only from the point of view of ultimate cause—as the highest entity in the ladder of cause and effect.

The Understanding of Krsna in Sankaradeva

The Krsna of Sankaradeva (and Madhavadeva) wandering through Vraja looking for butter is not the Krsna of Gujarat but, rather, Paramatma, the supreme spiritual personality, in the setting of the microcosm, on the lookout, as it were, for the product of the senses. Krsna is God Himself in His capacity as the “cowherd” of the senses. It is this paramatmic understanding of God that allowed the “nirguna” poets like Kabir and even Muslim poets—who were from traditions other than the Vedantic-puranic one—to immerse themselves in the love of Hari and Krsna. This is because Krsna is the transcendent Supreme Spirit (Brahman)—Allah or the Lord Himself— in His role of the ‘Preserver of the Senses’ (Go-pala).

The Microcosmic Vision of Sankaradeva

The 15^th century in Assam is remarkable for the rise of a unique school of devotion to Krsna (Krishna) that came to be known as the eka sarana (sole-refuge) school. And in the writings of its founder as well as foremost exponent Sankaradeva (1449-1568 CE), we obtain a glimpse of a microcosmic reality that is exciting and which promises to alter our understanding of the foundational texts of Hinduism in radical new ways.

The philosophy of Sankaradeva is a very real philosophy. Here, unlike in some other philosophies, the ‘world’ or the creation is not figmental or a product of one’s imagination. The objects of the senses, as also the senses themselves, are real and products of an undifferentiated mass of material substance known as prakrti, a term which may be translated into English as ‘primal matter’ or ‘Ur-matter’. The pure personalities (purusas), due to non-devotion to God, become forgetful of their own spiritual nature, and fall into this prakrti and become dead and extremely matter-like (jada). God,  who is the supreme purusa, out of His own grace (krpa), then has to rescue the fallen purusas by actuating primal matter to evolve out of itself a microcosm—a body, a psycho-physical frame, equipped with all the necessary senses and organs—which will enable the purusa (now known as jiva or organism) to re-train his consciousness. It is this story of the evolution of the microcosm that forms the cornerstone of the Bhagavata Purana, the text that Sankaradeva chooses as his primary source.

Contrary to popular perception, the story of Krsna in the Purana—and in Sankaradeva, as a corollary,—is not one of an ‘epic hero’ or a historical personality of ancient India but, rather, the ‘story’ of the supreme, immanent pure personality (Paramatma) within the microcosm. Krsna is God Himself seen through the prism of the human body. The seer-devotees of the Vedanta have re-visualized the image of the transcendent Brahman as the immanent Lord; as a child, as it were, stealing the product of the senses! Here, one must remark on a very eye-catching feature of the Sankaradeva movement and it is this that there never has been a centrality of an external geographic conception of a Mathura or a Gokula in the lives of its saints and leading personalities. There is thus an intense paramatmic flavor in all of the Sankaradevite literature.

The mind of the Vedantic seer- devotees erupted in joy on seeing this most wondrous microcosm engineered by the Lord and animated by just a tiny part of His infinite spiritual power. And absorbed in the bliss of the Lord's love, they began to translate, or rather, translocate, the topographical entities of the external world into this inner ‘world’. As a result, what we have in the Bhagavata is a microcosmic narrative woven together with the metaphor of the external world. The material evolution of the (theistic) Samkhya philosophy is set within a ontogenic framework. Science—embryology, to be precise,—philosophy and poetics thus come together in one irresistible combination.

As a side-note, Sankaradeva never viewed the texts such as the Puranas and the Mahabharata as historical texts. This is also a tremendous lesson for today’s interpreters. In the Caturbbimsati Avatara section of his Kirttana, Sankaradeva says that as Vyasa saw that the people had become ‘of extremely dull intellect’, he decided to compose the Puranas. This clearly indicates that these are philosophico-scientific texts containing abstruse concepts and scenarios in a ‘storified’ form.

Now, in order to appreciate fully this microcosmic vision of Sankaradeva—its full philosophical import as well as its practical implication—we have also to consider the strategy of personification that is adopted in the Puranic universe of discourse. There seems to be, as soon as we enter the puranic realm, a sudden profusion of personalities—kings and warriors, devas, asuras, mythical creatures, apsarases, rsis, etc. An overwhelming majority of these characters are the personified forms of the various evolutes of primal matter.

At the grossest level, we have the internal organs residing in the cavities of the nether region of the body; these are known as the bhutas or daityas. Diametrically opposite to these in point of nature, in the ‘heavenly’ or cerebral regions, are the subtle neural entities known as the devas. They are the controllers of the sense organs such as the eyes, the ears, etc. which are likened to sages (rsis) as they remain engaged in ‘knowing’ or acquiring sense-data. Creatures such as Garuda and Hanumana represent the vital airs (pranas). Further, we have two very special entities that are represented by the figures of Brahma and Siva. Brahma is the personification of the microcosmic mind while Siva is kala (‘time’). Kala is an agent of differentiation of the material substance (sakti). It is specially connected to the bhutas or the internal organs. Finally, primal matter itself is personified as Laksmi.     

Apart from these basic categories, there exist numerous organic classes and sub-classes such as the glands, muscles, ligaments, sensors and nerves which may also be personified. There is also, as mentioned above, a microcosmic geography:  venous rivers, arterial trees, neuronal forests, cartilaginous mountains, etc. As we can see, the bewildering material variety within the human body lends itself excellently to personification.   

There are sufficient hints in the writings of Sankaradeva and his disciple and successor Madhavadeva regarding these mappings. In his rendering of the 3^rd book of the Bhagavata entitled Anadi Patana (Cosmogenesis), Sankaradeva says that all the signs of the universe are ‘within this very body’. He mentions that the location of all the devas is the body. His rendering also clearly brings out the material nature of the mind and the devas. Similarly, in the verses of the Nama Ghosa (Namanvaya section), Madhavadeva explains that as the Lord has entered into the category of the indriyas, He is referred to as ‘Hrsikesa’ by all exemplar-devotees. Further, he says, ‘by the term go (cow) is meant the sensory receptors’ (go pade beda indriyaka buli). And, as the Lord preserves these, He is known as ‘Gopala’.

To conclude, given this microcosmic background, it is not difficult to understand why Sankaradeva should exhort the jivas to take refuge solely in Krsna. This is because, among all the entities, only Krsna is conscious personality, the others being mere personifications of matter. The jivas too are essentially conscious and spiritual and ontologically superior to matter. Therefore, it behoves them to do pure devotion only to Krsna, shunning all forms of worship that are a mere emulation of the microcosmic material processes.

The Bhagavata: The Confluence of Science, Philosophy and Poetics

The Bhagavata is a sophisticated text. Here we have a highly complex microcosmic narrative woven together with the metaphor of the external world. The great ontological discourses of the (theistic) Samkhya are set within a ontogenic framework. And, further, in the midst of such a ontogenic milieu blended with metaphor, there is applied an intelligent dialectical strategy. Science (embryology, to be precise), metaphor, philosophy and dialectics thus come together in one irresistible combination.  To interpret the Bhagavata, therefore, is by no means an easy task. A non-intellectual, literal approach means that the entire plan goes haywire.

The Concept of Pure Personality (Purusa) in the Philosophy of Sankaradeva

puruṣa uttama    parama puruṣa
parama ānanda sbāmī .
tayu pādapadma-    makaranda āśe
śaraṇa paśilo āmi .. (NG, 186)

The concept of a pure personality (purusa) is central to the philosophy of Sankaradeva. It is at the core of the Bhagavata's understanding of the form and nature of God (isvara) and the souls (jivas). In this blog post I attempt to lay down the foundational points for this concept and plan to discuss it in further detail later on.

First, by pure personality (purusa), a transcendental person is meant. A pure personality (purusa) is a pure person. Let us take up the conception of person given in Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person):

A person is a being, such as a human, that has certain capacities or attributes constituting personhood, which in turn is defined differently by different authors in different disciplines, and by different cultures in different times and places. In ancient Rome, the word persona (Latin) or prosopon (πρόσωπον; Greek) originally referred to the masks worn by actors on stage. The various masks represented the various "personae" in the stage play.

(Note how similar is the Greek term prosopon to the Sanskrit term purusa.)

After this definition, we lay down a few basic points relating to the conception of purusa or the transcendental pure person that will form the basis of any treatise that may be developed on this subject.


A pure person (purusa) is a separate ontological category; it is distinct from and superior to the category of matter (prakrti). It is sometimes referred to impersonally (and rather technically) as brahma (spirit). This sort of a substantial definition sometimes deludes us into thinking that it is substance. But, it is not substance. A pure person (purusa) is just that: a pure personality (purusa).

A pure person (purusa) is full of afferential (sense) and efferential (action) capacities or capabilities. Knowing and doing are features essential to its nature. It is the feeler. Memory and even language are native to it.



A pure person (purusa) is genderless: it is neither male nor female nor hermaphrodite. 'He' or 'it,' in whichever case they are used to refer to this entity, is used to indicate a pure transcendental person only.

A pure person (purusa) is endowed with a beauteous form. It (or he) is certainly not absolutely formless. But this form is not a prakrti-made one.

A pure person (purusa) exists forever. It is eternal (sanatana). It just is. And just was and will be. At no point of time did the purusas ever come into existence. They are never created, not even in Vaikuntha--their native, transcendental abode--; not even by Isvara.

A pure person (purusa) is not connected to any material mind-link (manas) or any physical frame or material body. When it is so connected, then, at that time, it is referred to as jiva. The pure person (purusa) has its own transcendental mind, its own faculty of consciousness (cit). This cit is different from the material manas by which term we might mean (material) entities like subtle mind, brain, cerebral cortex, etc.

The supreme pure person is the Lord (isvara) and the souls (jivas) are also, in their native forms, pure personalities (purusas) .

Self-Counsel (ātma-upadeśa): A Translation of a Passage from the Nama Ghosa

ātma-upadeśa

he jihbā sadā tora, madhurese mātra priẏa

jāna tañi rasara sāraka .

āna teji nirantare, kariẏoka mātra pāna

nārāẏaṇa nāma amṛtaka .. 89

he jihbā tañi sadā, āhmāta nirddaẏa bhaili

kene nobolasa rāma bāṇī .

saṃsāra sāgare iṭo, harise sudṛḍha nāwa

jāni hari buliẏo kalyāṇī .. 90

he karṇa sadā tora, śabada mātrase priẏa

tañi śabda madhura jānasa .

koṭi amṛtatodhika, parama madhura śabda

śuna sadā kṛṣṇa nāma yaśa .. 91

he mana tora kāma, saṅkalpa bikalpa dharmma

teji michā kāmanā [byāpāra] sakala .

sadāẏe saṅkalpa mātra, kariẏo suhṛda mana

kṛṣṇanāma parama maṅgala .. 92

śunio hṛdaẏa hera, brahmāṇḍa bhitare yata

bastu āche toka nojoḍaẏa .

tāka teji kṛṣṇanāma, akṣaẏa amṛta piẏā

santoṣaka labhiẏo hṛdaẏa .. 93

śuniẏoka buddhi tora, kewale niścaẏa dharmma

teji sawe bināśī biṣaẏa .

sadā śuddha sumaṅgala, akṣaẏa kṛṣṇara nāma

tāke mātra kariẏo niścaẏa .. 94

śuna hera ahaṅkāra, nicinta āpuna māra

michā ahammamaka tejiẏo .

parama īśbara kṛṣṇa, huẏoka tāhāna dāsa

sādhusaṅge kṛṣṇaka bhajiẏo .. 95

śuniẏoka citta hera, parama rahasya bāṇī

tumi śuddha jñānara ālaẏa .

kṛṣṇa nitya śuddha buddha, parama īśbara dewa

nachāḍibā tāhāna āśraẏa .. 96

kṛṣṇa nija iṣṭadewa, ātmā priẏatama guru

suhṛda sodara bandhujana .

kṛṣṇe mora mati gati, kṛṣṇata bhakati rati

kṛṣṇapāwe nimajoka mana .. 97

Self-Counsel (ātma-upadeśa)

O tongue! Only the sweet is dear to you always;
you are the connoisseur of taste (rasa).
Forsaking other things, please do only the drinking
of the nectar of the ‘Narayana’ name. 89

O tongue! Always you have become cruel to me;
for what reason do you not utter the word ‘Rama?’
In this samsara-ocean, only ‘Hari’ is the well-secured boat.
Knowing, utter ‘Hari,’ beneficial lady! 90

O ear! Always, only sound is dear to you;

you are the discerner of sweet sound.

A billion times sweeter then nectar, the supremely sweet sound;

listen always to Krsna’s name and glory. 91

O mind! Yours is the duty of thinking and considering alternatives.

Forsaking all other false affairs,

you always think only on, beloved mind,
the supremely beneficial name, ‘Krsna.’ 92

Hey heart, listen! All things that are within the perimeter of this universe;
all these are not enough for you.

Forsaking those, drinking the inexhaustible nectar of Krsna’s names,

you obtain satisfaction, heart! 93

Please listen, intellect! Yours is solely the duty of resolving.

Forsaking all destructible sense-objects;

the pure, very auspicious, indestructible name of ‘Krsna’—
on that, only, you resolve always. 94

Hey ego, listen! Do not plot your own downfall;

you forsake all your false egotism.

Supreme Lord is Krsna—you become His servant;
do pure devotion to Krsna in pure devotees’ company. 95

Please listen, O conscience! I say this supremely secret word.

You are the abode of unstained knowledge.

Only Krsna is forever-existing (nitya), pure (suddha) and wise (buddha). He is the Supreme Lord and controlling entity.

Do not ever leave His shelter. 96

Krsna is my own deity, my most beloved self, my teacher.

He is my kinsman, my brother and bosom friend.
Let, towards only Krsna, my intellect move; let, in Krsna, fond attachment develop in my mind;
let, into Krsna’s feet, my mind sink. 97