After Śṛṅgī cursed Mahārāja Parīkṣit, the king renounced his kingdom and took a vow to fast until death on the bank of the Ganges. At that time, sages of all classes and orders came from various parts of the universe and assembled there. Parīkṣit Mahārāja inquired from them about the duties of a human being, especially one who is about to die.

Śrīmad Bhāgavata ( 1.19.8–12 ) states:

tatropajagmur bhuvanaṁ punānā mahānubhāvā munayaḥ sa-śiṣyāḥ
prāyeṇa tīrthābhigamāpadeśaiḥ svayaṁ hi tīrthāni punanti santaḥ
atrir vasiṣṭhaś cyavanaḥ śaradvān ariṣṭanemir bhṛgur aṅgirāś ca
parāśaro gādhi-suto’tha rāma utathya indrapramadedhmavāhau
medhātithir devala ārṣṭiṣeṇo bhāradvājo gautamaḥ pippalādaḥ
maitreya aurvaḥ kavaṣaḥ kumbhayonir dvaipāyano bhagavān nāradaś ca
anye ca devarṣi-brahmarṣi-varyā rājarṣi-varyā aruṇādayaś ca
nānārṣeya-pravarān sametān abhyarcya rājā śirasā vavande
sukhopaviṣṭeṣv atha teṣu bhūyaḥ kṛta-praṇāmaḥ sva-cikīrṣitaṁ yat
vijñāpayām āsa vivikta-cetā upasthito’gre’bhigṛhīta-pāṇiḥ

"At that time, the sages endowed with extraordinary spiritual power, who purify the earth, arrived there, accompanied by their disciples. On the plea of making a pilgrim’s journey, such sages verily sanctify the places of pilgrimage simply by their presence. From different parts of the universe, there arrived great sages like Atri, Vasiṣṭha, Cyavana, Śaradvān, Ariṣṭanemi, Bhṛgu, Aṅgirā, Parāśara, Viśvāmitra, Paraśurāma, Utathya, Indrapramada, Idhmabāhu, Medhātithi, Devala, Ārṣṭiṣeṇa,Bhāradvāja, Gautama, Pippalāda, Maitreya, Aurva, Kavaṣa, Kumbhayoni (Agastya), Dvaipāyana, and the great personality Nārada. There were also many other celestial sages, brāhmaṇa sages, royal sages, as well as sages who preside over particular branches of the Vedas, such as Aruṇa. When the emperor [Parīkṣit] beheld all the various orders of great sages assembled there, he received them with due honor and bowed his head to the ground. After all the ṛṣis were comfortably seated, the king, humbly standing before them with palms joined in supplication, offered obeisance to them once again and informed them of his intention to fast until death." (SB 1.19.8–12)

Then the king inquired:

tataś ca vaḥ pṛcchyam imaṁ vipṛcche viśrabhya viprā iti kṛtyatāyām
sarvātmanā mriyamāṇaiś ca kṛtyaṁ śuddhaṁ ca tatrāmṛśatābhiyuktāḥ

"Therefore, O brāhmaṇas, reposing my faith in you, I ask you about that alone which is worthy of inquiry in the matter of ultimate duty. O learned sages, please tell me, after due deliberation, of the unalloyed duty of everyone in all circumstances, and specifically of those who are just about to die." (SB 1.19.24)

The Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad states, “The Supreme Lord is inherently self-endowed with manifold energies” (parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate, ŚU 6.8). Just as the rays of sunlight are neither completely different from nor exactly the same as the sun, so the jīvas are simultaneously one with and different from Bhagavān.

The Vedas’ descriptions of nondifference refer to the qualitative oneness of Bhagavān and the jīvas (i.e., their shared essential identity of consciousness), and the Vedas’ descriptions of difference refer to their quantitative difference.

The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad offers an analogy to help us understand:

"Just as sparks emanate from a fire, so all these vital airs, planets, devas, and living beings issue forth from the Supreme Self. (BAU 2.1.20)"

Sparks are obviously different from the fire that manifests them, but because they possess in minute quantity such fiery qualities as heat and light, they can be said to be “one with” the fire as well. In the same way, the jīvas can be said to be simultaneously different from and one with the Supreme Self, Bhagavān. Any apparent inconsistency in this relationship is resolved by the inconceivable creative energy of Bhagavān, which can render the seemingly impossible possible.

The basis of ahi-kuṇḍala-nyāya is that of presuming a difference where one does not exist.

kuṇḍalātmano’py aher yathā kuṇḍalaṁ viśeṣaṇatvena manyate
- Govinda-bhāṣya 3.2.28

According to this axiom, even though the coil (kuṇḍala) of a snake constitutes the snake (ahi) and is not separate from it, it can nonetheless be considered as an attribute of the snake.

Brahma means the Veda, and one who studies the Vedas under a spiritual teacher while adhering to the foundational training that alone makes possible the reception of his wisdom, as described in the Purāṇas and Smṛtis, is called a brahmacārī.

There are two types of brahmacārīs. Śrī Kūrma describes them as follows:

“A student who properly studies the Vedas, remaining fixed in the Absolute Reality until the end of his life, is called a naiṣṭhika-brahmacārī. A student who enters household life after completing his studies is called upakurvāṇa-brahmacārī” (Kūrma Purāṇa 1.2.77–78)

Vivartavāda is one name for the theory of illusion (Māyāvāda).

According to this theory, the material creation has no factual existence but is only an illusory appearance, just as in semi-darkness one may see a snake where there is only a rope. The rope has phenomenal existence, but may look like a snake in poor light. But as soon as proper lighting is thrown on it, the illusion of a snake disappears and one sees the rope as it is.

The snake is the vivarta of the rope, or in other words, an illusory appearance produced from ignorance. It is not real because one has not seen it in the proper light. Yet, it is not unreal, like a rabbit horn, because one sees an existing object (i.e., the rope), and the fear too is genuinely felt. Nevertheless, it is mithyā (untrue) or vivarta. Similarly, out of ignorance one mistakes Brahman to be the world. However, as soon as one acquires proper knowledge from Śruti statements, such as ahaṁ brahmāsmi, one realizes everything to be Brahman. This is Vivartavāda.

There are various types of pramāṇas, or valid means of knowing. These are outlined in the commentary to Section 9 of Tattva Sandarbha.

Therein, it was explained that Bhagavān’s form can be understood only through śabda-pramāṇa, or revealed sound. Thus,His body is called Śabdabrahman. The Lord’s body is self-luminous, which means that it reveals itself and, hence, cannot be perceived by material senses.

Moreover, because śabda reveals the form of the Lord, śabda or Śabdabrahman is nondifferent from Him. This was confirmed by the Lord Himself to King Citraketu: “Śabdabrahman and Parabrahman are my two eternal bodies” (SB 6.16.51)

Also, Maitrāyaṇi Upaniṣad states: "The Absolute Truth is to be understood as Śabdabrahman and Parabrahman. After comprehending Śabdabrahman, one attains Parabrahman, or the Supreme Lord. (Maitrāyaṇi Upaniṣad 6.22)

When Bhīṣma fought with Arjuna on the battlefield of Kurukṣetra, his sharp arrows wounded Śrī Kṛṣṇa, who was driving Arjuna’s chariot. Bhīṣmadeva remembered this while lying on his bed of arrows awaiting death. One may conclude from this that the Lord’s body is material.

Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī says that this description is of māyika-līlā, pastimes of an apparent nature only. This means that Bhagavān’s māyā projects an apparent scene so as to be viewed in a particular way to particular onlookers, yet the appearance contradicts the inherent truth of His being. This is similar to seeing a hero shot in a film or a play; in reality nothing happens to the actor.

This is also the definitive opinion of Śrī Śukadeva, the prime speaker of Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. He says that those who think that Kṛṣṇa can fall into illusion, or that His body is material, forget that He is the Unlimited Lord. Bhīṣma was overwhelmed by a demoniac warrior spirit, and the Lord, being a Player of unlimited skill, took on the appearance of being wounded to reciprocate with him in appropriate manner.

Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s body appears wounded to demons who fight with Him as well. The Lord thus nurtures their envious and ignorant nature, because He says that He reveals Himself exactly in accordance with the essential attitude with which He is approached. (Gītā 4.11)

According to Viṣṇu Purāṇa 6.7.47 Absolute Reality manifests in four ways:

1. Para-mūrta, the transcendental Absolute, replete with transcendental form, such as Śrī Kṛṣṇa and His plenary expansions.
2. Apara-mūrta, the phenomenal Absolute, or in other words, the Absolute appearing as the cosmos, having a conceptualized form, such as the universal form (viśva-rūpa).
3. Para-amūrta, the transcendental Absolute, devoid of form, which is Brahman.
4. Apara-amūrta, the immanent Absolute, who is without visible form, i.e., whose form is imperceptible due to immanence. This refers to the form of the Lord as Īśvara, the indwelling Supreme Self, who is the ground and source of creation.

According to Śrīdhara Svāmī, the fourth category is apara-amūrta, and this manifestation refers to Paramātmā. Truly speaking, Paramātmā, or Īśvara, is not amūrta, or formless. Rather, His form as the indwelling Self remains unseen due to His quality of immanence. Here apara does not mean inferior, phenomenal or conceptualized, as in the case of apara-mūrta, i.e., the viśva-rūpa. Rather, it implies a form other than the form of Bhagavān (na para iti aparaḥ). This latter phrase could also be rendered, “Immanence is that which is other than transcendence.” Moreover, the word amūrta (formless) does not mean formless, as in the case of para-amūrta, but a form which is similar to and leads to the supreme form, i.e., Bhagavān.

To those who have true loving devotion unto the Complete Person, Bhagavān, the Absolute manifests in His para-mūrti, His transcendental form. For beginners on the path of upāsanā, the Absolute manifests as apara-mūrti, in His universal form. For the adherents of jñāna-mārga, the Absolute manifests as para-amūrta, transcendental Brahman without form. For those who worship the Lord in devotion, but with excessive attention to jñāna, the Absolute manifests as apara-amūrta, as the immanent, imperceptible Supreme Self, the internal regulator of material nature.

Although there are statements such as, “The Lord accepted a form” (PP 6.227.7), these do not indicate that prior to the acceptance of form, the Lord was formless.

Such statements indicate the actions that He manifests to His devotees. For Him, the acceptance of form is without beginning — it is eternal. Otherwise, nothing else could have form.

Bhāṣya is a commentary, especially a commentary that explains the meaning of a sūtra (aphorism) word by word.