FolioCorpusŚrīmad-Bhāgavatam

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 7.15.63

कार्यकारणवस्त्वैक्यदर्शनं पटतन्तुवत् । अवस्तुत्वाद्विकल्पस्य भावाद्वैतं तदुच्यते ॥ ६३ ॥
kārya-kāraṇa-vastv-aikya-
[kaarya-kaarana-vastv-aikya-]
darśanaṁ paṭa-tantuvat
[darshanam pata-tantuvat]
avastutvād vikalpasya
[avastutvaad vikalpasya]
bhāvādvaitaṁ tad ucyate
[bhaavaadvaitam tad uchyate]
kārya — the result or effect kāraṇa — the cause vastu — substance aikya — oneness darśanam — observation paṭa — the cloth tantu — the thread vat — like avastutvāt — because of being ultimately unreality vikalpasya — of differentiation bhāva-advaitam — the conception of oneness tat ucyate — that is called.
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
kārya-kāraṇa-vastv-aikya-
kārya
the result or effect
kāraṇa
the cause
vastu
substance
aikya
oneness
darśanaṁ paṭa-tantuvat
darśanam
observation
paṭa
the cloth
tantu
the thread
vat
like
avastutvād vikalpasya
avastutvāt
because of being ultimately unreality
vikalpasya
of differentiation
bhāvādvaitaṁ tad ucyate
bhāva-advaitam
the conception of oneness
tat ucyate
that is called.
When one understands that result and cause are one and that duality is ultimately unreal, like the idea that the threads of a cloth are different from the cloth itself, one reaches the conception of oneness called bhāvādvaita.
Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura Gauḍīya
Translation
Non-difference of conception means seeing the effect and the cause as one, like threads related to a cloth, since all these are unreal, arising from misconception. One considers effect and cause to be one. The thread (cause) is not the cloth (effect), but can be seen as one with it. There is oneness of the effect and cause of prakṛti.
When cause and effect are seen as one, and duality recognized as ultimately unreal — like threads and cloth — this is bhāvādvaita, oneness of being. Cloth and threads are not really two; neither are the Lord and His expressions.
Reflection Questions
  • Where in your daily perception do you see only the cloth, missing the threads of Kṛṣṇa's energy?
  • How does seeing source and expression as one shape devotion rather than impersonalism?
📝 My note

← Read full Chapter 15