In this chapter of the Bhagavatam it is clearly stated that the Atman (jiva) experiences samsara only because it wrongly involves itself in Prakriti and attributes its qualities to itself, and thus it is this bond (with Prakriti) that makes jiva subservient, paratantra:
श्रीमद्भागवतपुराणम्/स्कन्धः ३/अध्यायः २६
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/e6f
Lord Kapila’s sermon to Mother Devahuti, who was an aspirant after liberation, mumukshu:
एवं पराभिध्यानेन कर्तृत्वं प्रकृतेः पुमान् ।
कर्मसु क्रियमाणेषु गुणैरात्मनि मन्यते ॥ ६ ॥
तदस्य संसृतिर्बन्धः पारतन्त्र्यं च तत्कृतम् ।
भवति अकर्तुरीशस्य साक्षिणो निर्वृतात्मनः ॥ ७ ॥
कार्यकारणकर्तृत्वे कारणं प्रकृतिं विदुः ।
भोक्तृत्वे सुखदुःखानां पुरुषं प्रकृतेः परम् ॥ ८ ॥
What is meant here by ‘paraabhidhyana’ is to consider the qualities of Prakriti as one’s own.
So the Atman is subservient, paratantra, owing to its relationship with Prakriti. If this connection with Prakriti is severed owing to self-knowledge, the Atman is freed of both bondage and embodiment.
And it is from this Prakriti-relation alone that Brahman too attains Ishwara-hood. Says the Shruti:
Shvetashvatara Upanishad: 4.10:
मायां तु प्रकृतिं विद्यान्मायिनं च महेश्वरम्।
तस्यावयवभूतैस्तु व्याप्तं सर्वमिदं जगत्॥
Maya itself should be understood as Prakriti. Maheshwara is the one who has this Maya as his power. The pervasion of this Maya/Ishwara can be seen in this whole world.
Thus, Brahman becomes Ishwara only due to the Maya-connection.
The Vishnu Purana states that Nirguna Brahma is unrelated to Prakriti:
विष्णुपुराणम्/द्वितीयांशः/अध्यायः १४
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/1slj
परमार्थस्तु भूपाल संक्षेपाच्छ्रूयतां मम ॥ २,१४.२८ ॥
एको व्यापी समः शुद्धो निर्गुणः प्रकृतेः परः ।
जन्मवृद्ध्यादिरहित आत्मा सर्वगतोव्ययः ॥ २,१४.२९ ॥
परज्ञानमयो सद्भिर्नामजात्यादिभिर्विभुः ।
न योगवान्न युक्तोभून्नैव पार्थिव योक्ष्यते ॥ २,१४.३० ॥
The last two verses above say that Brahman has no name, genus, (jAti), quality (guNa), or relationship (sambandha). Shankaracharya says this in his Gita Bhasya, 13.12:
सर्वो हि शब्दः अर्थप्रकाशनाय प्रयुक्तः, श्रूयमाणश्च श्रोतृभिः, जातिक्रियागुणसम्बन्धद्वारेण सङ्केतग्रहणसव्यपेक्षः अर्थं प्रत्याययति ; न अन्यथा, अदृष्टत्वात् । तत् यथा — ‘गौः’ ‘अश्वः’ इति वा जातितः, ‘पचति’ ‘पठति’ इति वा क्रियातः, ‘शुक्लः’ ‘कृष्णः’ इति वा गुणतः, ‘धनी’ ‘गोमान्’ इति वा सम्बन्धतः । न तु ब्रह्म जातिमत् , अतः न सदादिशब्दवाच्यम् । नापि गुणवत् , येन गुणशब्देन उच्येत, निर्गुणत्वात् । नापि क्रियाशब्दवाच्यं निष्क्रियत्वात् ‘निष्कलं निष्क्रियं शान्तम्’ (श्वे. उ. ६ । १९) इति श्रुतेः । न च सम्बन्धी, एकत्वात् । अद्वयत्वात् अविषयत्वात् आत्मत्वाच्च न केनचित् शब्देन उच्यते इति युक्तम् ; ‘यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते’ (तै. उ. २ । ९ । १) इत्यादिश्रुतिभिश्च ॥ १२
Translation of the above by Swami Gambhirananda:
//For, every word used for expressing an object, when heard by listeners, makes them understand its meaning through the comprehension of its significance with the help of genus, action, quality and relation; not in any other way, because that is not a matter of experience. To illustrate this: a cow, or a horse, etc. (is comprehended) through genus; cooking or reading, through action; white or black, through quality; a rich person or an owner of cows, through relation. But Brahman does not belong to any genus. Hence it is not expressible by words like ‘being’ etc.; neither is It possessed of any quality with the help of which It could be expressed through qualifying words, for It is free from qualities; nor can It be expressed by a word implying action, It being free from actions-which accords with the Upanisadic text, ‘Partless, actionless, calm’ (Shve. 6.19). Nor has It any relation, since It is one, non-dual, not an object of the senses, and It is the Self. Therefore it is logical that It cannot be expressed by any word. And this follows from such Upanisadic texts as, ‘From which, words trun back’ (Tai. 2.4.1), etc.//
That is why Brahman has no transcendental, pAramArthika, name or qualities. There is no proof for the Supreme Being having absolute/inherent a-prAkrita guNas, qualities.
The Shiva Purana also says that Brahman is in absolute terms unrelated to Prakriti:
शिवपुराणम्/संहिता २ (रुद्रसंहिता)/खण्डः ३ (पार्वतीखण्डः)/अध्यायः १३
।। महेश्वर उवाच ।।
तपसा परमेणेव प्रकृतिं नाशयाम्यहम् ।।
प्रकृत्या रहितश्शम्भुरहं तिष्ठामि तत्त्वतः ।। ७ ।।
तस्माच्च प्रकृतेस्सद्भिर्न कार्यस्संग्रहः क्वचित् ।।
स्थातव्यं निर्विकारैश्च लोकाचार विवर्जितैः ।।८।।
इदमपि प्रकृत्या (पार्वत्या) शिवं प्रति उक्तम् –
सा चाहं पुरुषोऽसि त्वं सत्यं सत्यं न संशयः ।। १८ ।।
मदनुग्रहतस्त्वं हि सगुणो रूपवान्मतः ।।
मां विना त्वं निरीहोऽसि न किंचित्कर्तुमर्हसि ।। १९ ।।
पराधीनस्सदा त्वं हि नानाकर्म्मकरो वशी ।।
निर्विकारी कथं त्वं हि न लिप्तश्च मया कथम् ।। 2.3.13.२० ।।
प्रकृतेः परमोऽसि त्वं यदि सत्यं वचस्तव ।।
तर्हि त्वया न भेतव्यं समीपे मम शंकर ।।२१ ।।
This is the praise of Dhruva in the Bhagavatam:
श्रीमद्भागवतपुराणम्/स्कन्धः ४/अध्यायः ९
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/acv
ध्रुव उवाच –
योऽन्तः प्रविश्य मम वाचमिमां प्रसुप्तां
संजीवयत्यखिलशक्तिधरः स्वधाम्ना ।
अन्यांश्च हस्तचरणश्रवणत्वगादीन्
प्राणान्नमो भगवते पुरुषाय तुभ्यम् ॥ ६ ॥
एकस्त्वमेव भगवन् इदमात्मशक्त्या
मायाख्ययोरुगुणया महदाद्यशेषम् ।
सृष्ट्वानुविश्य पुरुषस्तदसद्गुणेषु
नानेव दारुषु विभावसुवद्विभासि ॥ ७ ॥
In this, the Prana, Indriya (sense/motor organs), etc., which are under the impelling of Ishwara, all belong to Prakriti. Thus, Ishwara’s impelling of the jiva follows from the jiva being subservient to Prakriti. If there is no relationship with Prakriti for the jiva, there is no ishwara’s rulership over the jiva. That is, only as long as the Atman (jiva) is subservient to nature, it is subservient to the Supreme Lord as well.
The main goal of Vedanta Shastra is to free the Atman from the clutches of Prakriti. When this is achieved, the Atman is neither subject to Prakriti, nor is it subject to Brahman (Ishwara). This seminal doctrine of Vedanta, of the Atman (jiva) being subservient to Prakriti, and the conditionality of the impelling of Ishwara, which is expounded in the Bhagavata, etc. is accepted only in Advaita. In other schools, this premise ofthe Vedanta and the Bhagavatam cannot be appropriately endorsed.
Om Tat Sat
Adbhutam's Blog 