Saṁsāra refers to the experience of birth, death, pleasure, and pain. It is abstract, subtle. Prapañca (the world) is the physical system or infrastructure necessary for these experiences. It is concrete, gross. Therefore, neither can exist independently of the other. Experience is possible only for a conscious being. The world that enables that experience is jada (inert). But what’s strange is that the Bhagavad Gītā teaches that this world and the experiences arising from it is kṣetra – the inert – nature (prakṛti), and the principle that perceives and illuminates this experience and the world that enables it is called kṣetrajña, consciousness:
श्रीभगवानुवाच —
इदं शरीरं कौन्तेय क्षेत्रमित्यभिधीयते ।
एतद्यो वेत्ति तं प्राहुः क्षेत्रज्ञ इति तद्विदः ॥ १ ॥
The principle that knows (or illuminates) the kṣetra is kṣetrajña (Puruṣa).
महाभूतान्यहङ्कारो बुद्धिरव्यक्तमेव च ।
इन्द्रियाणि दशैकं च पञ्च चेन्द्रियगोचराः ॥ ५ ॥
इच्छा द्वेषः सुखं दुःखं सङ्घातश्चेतना धृतिः ।
एतत्क्षेत्रं समासेन सविकारमुदाहृतम् ॥ ६ ॥ (kṣetra = prakṛti)
These two verses describe as kṣetra the world, the sense organs that perceive it, the mind, and also the experiences of desire, aversion, pleasure, and pain.
In the same chapter, though kṣetrajña and kṣetra (Puruṣa and Prakṛti) are fundamentally distinct principles, their impossible mix up is said to be the cause of saṁsāra — the cycle of birth, death, etc., experienced by the puruṣa:
पुरुषः प्रकृतिस्थो हि भुङ्क्ते प्रकृतिजान्गुणान् ।
कारणं गुणसङ्गोऽस्य सदसद्योनिजन्मसु ॥ २१ ॥
The remedy is also given there itself:
To discriminate the kṣetrajña from the kṣetra by means of viveka (discrimination) — this alone releases the puruṣa from bondage.
But is this bondage real or mithyā?
Though the Bhagavad Gītā answers this, the Śrīmad Bhāgavata provides a clear resolution:
Saṁsāra is mithyā:
Bondage and liberation are only conceptual; they are not real — says Vedavyāsa.
In the Bhāgavata, the root cause of saṁsāra is said to be the constructs (imaginations) of the buddhi. These imaginations rest on the three guṇas of prakṛti. Therefore, saṁsāra is dreamlike:
From the words of the Paramātmā to Uddhava in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam (11.11):
श्रीभगवानुवाच
बद्धो मुक्त इति व्याख्या गुणतो मे न वस्तुत: ।
गुणस्य मायामूलत्वान्न मे मोक्षो न बन्धनम् ॥ १ ॥
शोकमोहौ सुखं दु:खं देहापत्तिश्च मायया ।
स्वप्नो यथात्मन: ख्याति: संसृतिर्न तु वास्तवी ॥ २ ॥
Just as a dream appears real to the dreamer, so too is saṁsāra not ultimately real.
Prapañca is mithyā:
Prapañca, the world, is merely an appearance, like mistaking a rope for a snake or a garland for a snake:
आत्मानमेव आत्मतया अविजानतां
तेनैव जातं निखिलं प्रपञ्चितम् ।
ज्ञानेन भूयोऽपि च तत्प्रलीयते
रज्ज्वामहेर्भोगभवाभवौ यथा ।। 10.14.25
Due to ignorance of one’s own true nature, the entire prapañca appears. Upon the arising of knowledge, it vanishes — like the snake seen in a rope disappears.
Another example of the same kind is given in Bhāgavata 4.22.38:
यस्मिन्निदं सदसदात्मतया विभाति
माया विवेकविधुति स्रजि वाहिबुद्धिः ।
तं नित्यमुक्तपरिशुद्धविशुद्धतत्त्वं
प्रत्यूढकर्मकलिलप्रकृतिं प्रपद्ये ॥ ३८ ॥
Here, instead of a rope, the example used is a garland of flowers. One may mistake it for a snake. The prapañca appears as sat (effect) and asat (cause) in that very Brahman due to delusion. With discrimination (viveka), one recognizes the truth — that this world does not exist in Brahman. This aligns with the famous Upaniṣadic statement:
‘मनसैवानुद्रष्टव्यं नेह नानास्ति किञ्चन ।
मृत्योः स मृत्युमाप्नोति य इह नानेव पश्यति’ ॥ १९ ॥ (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.19)
This means, “Here” (iha = in Brahman), there is no multiplicity. The Bhāgavata restates this using a delusional metaphor (bhrama-dṛṣṭānta): yasmin idaṁ… vibhāti.
Thus, Śrīmad Bhāgavata teaches that both saṁsāra and the corresponding prapañca are not ultimately real (pāramārthika).
Why are they not real? The Bhāgavata answers:
The jīva is truly ever-liberated (nitya-mukta):
सुपर्णावेतौ सदृशौ सखायौ
यदृच्छयैतौ कृतनीडौ च वृक्षे ।
एकस्तयोः खादति पिप्पलान्नम्
अन्यो निरन्नोऽपि बलेन भूयान् ॥ ६ ॥
Two birds reside in the same tree. One of them eats the fruit, the other, though not eating, is mighty.
आत्मानमन्यं च स वेद विद्वान्
अपिप्पलादो न तु पिप्पलादः ।
योऽविद्यया युक् स तु नित्यबद्धो
विद्यामयो यः स तु नित्यमुक्तः ॥ ७ ॥
The one who realizes himself as the bird that does not eat — he is the wise one, the one who does not enjoy karma-phala. One with ignorance is always bound (nitya-baddha), the one with knowledge is ever-free (nitya-mukta).
In the same section, Śuka Maharṣi tells Parīkṣit:
त्वं तु राजन् मरिष्येति पशुबुद्धिमिमां जहि ।
न जातः प्रागभूतोऽद्य देहवत्त्वं न नङ्क्ष्यसि ॥ २ ॥
“O king, abandon this animalistic thinking of ‘I will die.’ You were never born before, and though now associated with a body, you will never perish.”
मृत्यवो नोपधक्ष्यन्ति मृत्यूनां मृत्युमीश्वरम् ॥ १० ॥
अहं ब्रह्म परं धाम ब्रह्माहं परमं पदम् ।
एवं समीक्ष्य चात्मानम् आत्मन्याधाय निष्कले ॥ ११ ॥
दशन्तं तक्षकं पादे लेलिहानं विषाननैः ।
न द्रक्ष्यसि शरीरं च विश्वं च पृथगात्मनः ॥ १२ ॥
No death can touch the Lord of Deaths. “I am Brahman, the Supreme Abode; I am the Supreme State called Brahman.” Having thus realized the Self and fixed the mind in the indivisible, you will no longer perceive the body or the world as separate from yourself.
Thus we understand: “The Lord of all deaths” refers to our true Self. Śuka Maharṣhi affirms this as the state of immortality. A similar teaching appears in the Bhagavad Gītā, Chapter 2 in the advice given to Arjuna.
In these various ways, Śrīmad Bhāgavata presents the experience of saṁsāra and the supporting prapañca as mithyā — ultimately unreal.
Om Tat Sat