karma-grasta iveśvaraḥ

karma-grasta iveśvaraḥ

etan no bhagavan sarvaṁ

yathāvad vaktum arhasi

uttamaśloka-caritaṁ

sarva-loka-sukhāvaham

Why did the Lord accept the seemingly abominable form of a fish in tamoguṇa, condemned by the world, as if controlled by karma? O sage! Kindly explain to me everything about this pastime of the Lord which gives happiness to the world.

The word iva should be added to other phrases describing Matsya so that the meaning becomes “as if in tamaguna and as if intolerable (durmarṣam).” The Lord took the form of a condemned beggar to give mercy to his devotee Bali. If this case is similar, then I want to know to whom the Lord gave mercy by accepting the condemned form of a fish? The activities of the famous Lord give joy to the world because those activities are glorified and heard. To which devotee did the form of Matsya give joy?  

|| 8.24.4 ||

śrī-sūta uvāca

ity ukto viṣṇu-rātena

bhagavān bādarāyaṇiḥ

uvāca caritaṁ viṣṇor

matsya-rūpeṇa yat kṛtam

Sūta Gosvāmī said: When Parīkṣit Mahārāja thus inquired from Śukadeva Gosvāmī, that most powerful saintly person began describing the pastimes performed by Matsya.

|| 8.24.5 ||

śrī-śuka uvāca

go-vipra-sura-sādhūnāṁ

chandasām api ceśvaraḥ

rakṣām icchaṁs tanūr dhatte

dharmasyārthasya caiva hi

Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: For the sake of protecting the cows, brāhmaṇas, devatās, devotees, the Vedic literature, dharma and artha, the Supreme Lord accepts the forms of incarnations.

This verse describes the general purpose of the avatāras.

|| 8.24.6 ||

uccāvaceṣu bhūteṣu

caran vāyur iveśvaraḥ

noccāvacatvaṁ bhajate

nirguṇatvād dhiyo guṇaiḥ

Though moving in species which are higher and lower by intelligence and qualities as Paramātmā, the Lord does not share those qualities of superior or inferior since he is beyond the guṇas, just as the air, though moving everywhere, is untouched by all objects.

 

This verse rejects the idea that the Lord has a condemnable form by making a comparison. Though the Lord moves among species which are higher and lower by their intelligence and qualities, as the antaryāmī, he does not partake of their higher or lower nature since he is beyond the guṇas. What is the question of forms like Matsya being superior or inferior since they are śuddha-sattva? This is Śrīdhara Svāmī’s remark.

|| 8.24.7 ||