Kṛṣṇastu Bhagavān Svayam

Śrī Śrī Guru Gaurāṅga Jayataḥ

yasya brahmeti saṁjñāṁ kvacid api nigame yāti cin-mātra-sattāpy

aṁśo yasyāṁśakaiḥ svair vibhavati vaśayann eva māyāṁ pumāṁś ca |

ekaṁ yasyaiva rūpaṁ vilasati parama-vyomni nārāyaṇākhyaṁ

sa śrī-kṛṣṇo vidhattāṁ svayam iha bhagavān prema tat-pāda-bhājām ||8||

In one feature Sri Krishna exists as pure consciousness, without any manifest characteristics, and is referred to as Brahman in some portions of the Vedas. In another feature He expands as the Purusha, who regulates the external potency, Maya, by His many plenary portions. In yet another of His principal forms He is Narayana, resplendent in the spiritual sky, Vaikuntha. May that Sri Krishna, the original complete Absolute Truth [svayam bhagavān], bestow Prema for Himself on those who worship His lotus feet in this world.

Hereby we shall Establish the real meaning the phrase ‘Kṛṣṇastu Bhagavāna Svayam’,  As revealed by Śrīla Jīva gosvāmī and his anugatas for the benefit of the entire world in the footsteps of Ādi Ācārya Śrī Brahma who answered the Ṛṣis who inquired “kaḥ paramo devaḥ” by “kṛṣṇo vai paramaṃ daivatam”. May this work be fruitful by the blessings of the Ācārya who sang “govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi”. May the Name giver and Name holder be merciful upon this servant of Śrī Śrīmad Rādhāgovinda Gosvāmī Mahārāja named Raṅganāth. Though Śrīla Jīva gosvāmī has already established the statement in it’s selfsame glory, still to answer the critics, Gosvāmīpāda’s vāṇi will be specifically quoted in the context.

To be Clear in our stance we believe siddhāntatas tv abhede ’pi śrīśa-Kṛṣṇa-svarūpayoḥ  rasenotkṛṣyate Kṛṣṇa-rūpam eṣā rasa-sthitiḥ; “According to transcendental realization, there is no difference between the forms of Kṛṣṇa and Nārāyaṇa. Yet in Kṛṣṇa there is a special transcendental attraction due to the conjugal mellow, and consequently He surpasses Nārāyaṇa. This is the conclusion of transcendental mellows.”That is the conclusion of the vedic scriptures, We Gauḍiyas consider the mūlarūpi to be Kṛṣṇa, which is backed with scriptural references like this very verse and Upaniṣads like Nārāyaṇa Upaniṣad “brahamaṇyo devaki pūtra” after statements like “eko vai Nārāyaṇa āsit”, “apahatapāpma divyo devaḥ eko Nārāyaṇa” [The resplendent Lord who is free of all sins [Kṛṣṇa] is Nārāyaṇa [Kṛṣṇa’s Vilāsa] ]. Upon close introspection we can deduce that Brahman is Devaki’s Son and Nārāyaṇa is one of his many names as found enlisted in the Kṛṣṇa sahasranāma of Nārada Pāncarātra, Garga saṁhitā’s aśvamedha khaṇḍa and many other texts like the aṣṭottaraśata-nāma- stotra of Brahmāṇḍa purāṇa. For the sake of argument if we consider Kṛṣṇa to be a aṁśa of Nārāyaṇa then If one denies for Nārāyaṇa being a name of Kṛṣṇa then they are indirectly contradicting “sarve sarva-guṇaiḥ pūrṇāḥ sarva-doṣa-vivarjitāḥ [Varāha Purāṇa]” Moreover Śrī Brahmā himself called Śrī Kṛṣṇa as Nārāyaṇa in Śrīmad bhāgavatam 10.14.12 नारायणस्त्वं न हि ? Are you not the Original Nārāyaṇa, from whom comes the secondary Nārāyaṇa. Some Alpaśrūtivids may object the authenticity of the 3 chapters of Bhāgavatam may kindly refer to Siddhānta darpaṇa of Śrī Baladeva. Though Śrī Madhva never commented on the authenticity of those three chapters his later followers followed a incomplete manuscript of the concerned text and started propagating the fake rumour of interpolation in Bhāgavatam there main objection that Brahmā can't be bewildered as been answered by Śrī Madhva himself in one of his works "'भगवत्प्रीतये नित्यं ब्रह्मणो ये भयादयः । न वृथा तस्य भावः स्यात्कश्चित्तेऽपि क्षणार्धगाः ॥ अज्ञानं च चतुर्वारं द्विवारं भयमेव च । शोकोऽपि तावान्नान्यत्र कदाचिद्ब्रह्मणो भवेत् ॥ तत्रापि भगवत्प्रीत्या उन्नत्यैवास्य तद्भवेत्''॥" For the pleaseure of the Lord Brahmā experiences bewilderment four times and two times he experiences fear. In relation to the assertion that Kṛṣṇa holds all the names of Lord Nārāyaṇa It is also said in the fourth canto, chapter 15 of Viṣṇu Purāṇa that the Names of Lord Viṣṇu attain fulfillment in the form as Kṛṣṇa alone tatastamevākrośeṣūccārayaṃstameva hṛdayena dhārayannātmavadhāya yāvadbhagavaddhastacakrāṃśumālojjvalamakṣayatejassvarūpaṃ brahmabhūtam apagatadveṣādidoṣaṃ bhagavantamadrākṣīt, In relation to Śrī Parāśara narrates the story of the 3 births of Jaya Vijaya and the three Avātaras of the Lord, Nṛsiṁha, Rāma, Kṛṣṇa, among them it is only in Kṛṣṇa who exhibits full bhagavatva [bhagavantamadrākṣīt] and names that apparently belong to Viṣṇu find fulfillment in Kṛṣṇa alone as said in the sammohana tantra and other pañcarātras, Some Alpabuddhi may say "You are going out of context dont you know that Jaya Vijaya was cursed to take birth Thrice", To them I reply that the story he is quoting is from Bhāgavata purāṇa which according to his own sampradāya belongs to another kalpa hence by apasiddhānta doṣa his claim falls numb. The names such as Rāma etc belong to Kṛṣṇa alone thus there is no astonishment if those names give liberation, all forms of Śrī Kṛṣṇa are equally potent in giving liberation. Interestingly in the same chapter for Nṛsiṁha form Parāśara says “तनुग्रहणं कुर्वता नृसिंहरूपमाविष्कृतम्” for Śrī Rāma he says “भगवता दाशरथिरूपधारिणा” but for Śrī Kṛṣṇa he says “अयं हि भगवान‍्” someone may object "You say that those forms were not God himself whereares we find the verse ' तत्र च किरण्यकशिपोः विष्णुरयं इति एतत् न मनसि अभूत् ॥', he doesn't realise that the whole point of the interpretation is which form attracts the mind any one and there is no chance of misunderstanding, that form is Kṛṣṇa's who can exhibit any form being the source of all forms and names, as said in the context, Kṛṣṇa had taken all the names in his avatāra 'ततः च तत् काल कृतानां तेषां अशेषाणाम् एव अच्युत नाम्नाम् अनवरतम् अनेक जन्म सुवर्धित विद्वेष अनुबन्धि । चित्तः विनिन्दन संतर्जन आदिषु उच्चारणम् अकरोत् ॥ ' which was not done in other avatāras, As the Ṛg khila substantiates that all names belong to Kṛṣṇa, 'एतान्य् अनन्तनामानि मण्डलान्ते सदा पठेत्' sometimes such shrutis are found under the other primary names of Kṛṣṇa like Viṣṇu, Nārāyaṇa etc. also KṛṢṇa showed the catubhūja rūpa to Sisupala according to his mood 'चतुर्बाहु शंख चक्र गदाधरम् अति प्ररूढ' Kṛṣṇa can assume any form according to the rati of the bhakta, because he is the source of all forms". also in the Kṛṣṇa upaniṣad it is said “ goparūpo hariḥ sākṣānmāyāvigrahadhāraṇaḥ durbodhaṃ kuhakaṃ tasya māyayā mohitaṃ jagat ” “Hari whose original form is that of a Gopāla, took on a form of illusion by which people couldn't recognise him thus he illusoned the whole world". In Rāmatāpanī upaniṣad it's said "yo ha vai śrīrāmacandraḥ sa bhagavānadvaitaparamānanda ātmā ." "That one who is Rāmacandra is Bhagavāna", One may quote "ye matsyakūrmādyavatārāḥ", which is correct because Rāma is manifested from Pradyumna [pādma saṁhitā 1.2.33 'प्रद्युम्ना द्राघवो बली', This is to be understood as explained that Pradyumna is the gateway of all avatāras hence Rāma is called all the avatarās in this Śrūti] who is called 'sarvāvatara nidhanam'. Someone may say "Rāma has been called Svayam Bhagavān 'provāca bhagavānsvayam' also he said he will become Kṛṣṇa 'bhavāntare kṛṣṇāvatāre'" However if we see the Context Rāma hasn't been read speaking but infered 'taṃ hocurno'vadyamavatārānvai gaṇyante āliṅgāmo bhavantamiti. bhavāntare kṛṣṇāvatāre yūyaṃ gopikā bhūtvā māmāliṅgatha' By the rule 'yatrānavasaroʼnyatra padaṃ tatra pratiṣṭhitam,vākyaṃ veti satāṃ nītiḥ sāvakāśe na tadbhavetiti', “In a simple or complex sentence, that word or clause may be supplied as an ellipse, without which (word or clause) the meaning of the sentence would be incomplete, but need not be so supplied where this can be dispensed with, such is the rule of the learned”. If we assert the word "Rāmarūpi Kṛṣṇovāca" then it doesn't disturb the mood of the Upaniṣad because if Rāma was the avatāri of Kṛṣṇa then the later verses like "śeṣanāgo bhavedrāmaḥ kṛṣṇo brahmaiva śāśvatam" would have been replaced by "saumetreya bhavedrāmo kṛṣṇo rāmeva śāśvataṁ" but that's not the case, Kṛṣṇa has been desrcibed as a independent person altogether "kṛṣṇo brahmaiva śāśvatam", Thus by the described insertion of the phrase 'Rāmarūpi Kṛṣṇa uvāca' the śrūti expresses it's correct meaning. Thus the referent of 'Bhagavānsvayam' is Kṛṣṇa and not Rāma. Kṛṣṇa is the deity of puruṣasūkta, as described in the  śrīkṛṣṇapuruṣottamasiddhāntopaniṣat — 'śrīkṛṣṇabhagavān nārāyaṇaḥ paramātmā puruṣottamaḥ triguṇarahitaḥ svayam . katham? puruṣa evedaṃ sarvam ..', Śrī Kṛṣṇa Bhagavān is Nārāyaṇa, Paramātmā, puruṣottama, Trigunarahita Svayam how ? because Puruṣa is all this [Kṛṣṇa is all this].

The Kṛṣṇa Upaniṣad says — "kṛṣṇo brahmaiva śāśvatam", Kṛṣṇa is himself Brahmana. As it is said in the Padma purāṇa— śrutimṛgyamajaṃ nityaṃ gopījanamanoharam paraṃdhāma paraṃ rūpaṃ dvibhujaṃ gokuleśvaram;  [Śrī Śiva to Sri Pārvati devī] Vedas are searching for the unborn and eternal Lord of Gokula,whose two-handed form is the supreme abode of beauty and delights the gopis of Vṛndāvana [Padma Purana 5.69.86] also in the Gopāla Tāpanī Kṛṣṇa has been addressed as vedānta-vedyāya “who is understood by Vedānta” also it is said in the mahānārāyaṇa upaniṣad 'nārāyaṇāya vidmahe vāsudevāya dhīmahi tanno viṣṇuḥ pracodayāt', “We know Nārāyaṇa to be Son of Vasudeva thus we worship him, May he encompass the whole of my mind due to this contemplation” One may say here the meaning of Vāsudeva is not the Son of Vāsudeva but rather the yaugika meaning should be taken in the context however this claim is set aside by the famous rule even quoted by his acarya in nārāyaṇaśabdanirukti that is  'rudhiryogampaharati' "custom supersedes etymology" [rathakāranyāya of pūrva mimāṁsa], even if by dūrjana tosha we accept his pakṣa then as well this argument holds no water because Kṛṣṇa has explicitly being address with the names Nārāyaṇa, Vāsudeva and Viṣṇu, thus there is no fault in our explanation of the gayatri, And it's not that Bhagavāna hasn't been described in the vedas as Vāsudeva directly in terms of being the son of Vasudeva and devakī like " yo nandaḥ paramānando yaśodā muktigehinī, devakī brahmaputrā sā yā vedairupagīyate nigamo vasudevo yo vedārthaḥ kṛṣṇarāmayoḥ", "devakī brahmaputrā" term for Śrī devaki readily defeats the novice claim of Kṛṣṇa being called the devakiputra in the sense being the saviour from the 'puta' hell, However the juvenile pakṣadhara doesn't understand that the one who saves from puta hell is the Putra, that means the son, even the yaugiki meaning which the anti party wanted put here couldn't serve his purpose but backfired him, if the word would be used in the sense suggested by the opponent then the thought comes why only Devakīputra, does bhagavān only saved devakī from 'puta' hell or he saves all of us from all types of hells. Thus the suggested meaning made by the opponent is fallacious. However without going in much detail these claims are already subsided by the famous rule quoted earlier "rūdḥiryogampaharati". Bhagavāna is always Devaki putra, it's not a time bound name no name of Bhagavan which is time bound, in the gopāl tāpani as well Kṛṣṇa has been called "śrīkṛṣṇāya devakīnandanāya" in literal terms also it substantiates the nityattva of the Lord's associates "nandādivasudevādipārthādinidhyādivītaṃ" as it's found in Skanda purāṇa vaiṣṇava khaṇḍa—  "kāmāstu vāñchitāstasya gāvo gopāśca gopikāḥ | nityāḥ sarve vihārādyā āptakāmastatastvayam ||" "vidhāya svīyanityeṣu samāveśitavāṃstadā | nityāḥ sarve'pyayogyeṣu darśanābhāvatāṃ gatāḥ || ".  Thus the Lord is Eternally the Son of Mother Yaśodā, Mother Devakī, King Nandā and King Vasudeva. Because Kṛṣṇa is described as 'eko devaḥ nityalīlānūrakto', He is Always engaged in his pastimes, Thus he is always the son of the aforesaid pairs. One may ask why to accept Pramāṇas from a Tāmasika Purāṇa, It can be done as there is no harm in doing so as everything contains certain percentage of 'sat' to exist भू सत्तायाम् otherwise there is no existence, Such is also the View of Śrī Madhvācārya.

In Rigveda as well the birth of Viṣṇu that is Kṛṣṇa [As described earlier] is mentioned 1.156.4 'yaḥ pūrvyāya vedhase navīyase sumajjānaye viṣṇave dadāśati | yo jātam asya mahato mahi bravat sed u śravobhir yujyaṃ cid abhy asat', Thus the birth of Kṛṣṇa is also eternal in the world, and thus his titles due to those births are also eternal. [Birth pastimes are absent in the spiritual world but present in material world, However Nanda Yaśodā, Vasudeva devakī never cease to be his parents as they are present in the Spiritual world]. One may say if we take the term Vāsudeva as the son of Śrī Vasudeva, limits his vyāpakatva, to that we reply it is not so as the यजुर्वेदीय माध्यन्दिनशाखा says— एषो ह देवः प्रदिशोऽनु सर्वाः पूर्वो ह जातः सऽउ गर्भेऽअन्तः। सऽ एव जातः स जनिष्यमाणः प्रत्यङ् जनास्तिष्ठति सर्वतोमुखः॥,"O Human beings! This Deva, the Supreme soul who permeates this whole world from all directions, He alone earlier [since eternity] manifested inside the womb [Of śrī Devakī /  Yaśodā]; He himself comes, and he is continuosly being born [in nityalīlā], and He, with faces present all directions sitting [present] in everything." Also the Gopāla Tāpanī Śruti says— जन्मजराभ्यां भिन्नः स्थाणुरयमच्छेद्योऽयं योऽसौ सूर्ये तिष्ठति योऽसौ गोषु तिष्ठति । योऽसौ गोपान्पालयति । योऽसौ सर्वेषु देवेषु तिष्ठति । योऽसौ सर्वैर्देवैर्गीयते । योऽसौ सर्वेषु भूतेष्वाविश्य भूतानि विदधाति स वो हि स्वामी भवति।, "Kṛṣṇa, who is free from birth and death, who is unchanging, who cannot be cut, who stays in the Sun, who stays among the Surabhi cows, who protects the Surabhi cows, who stays among the cowherd boys, who stays in all the Vedas, who is glorified by all the Vedas, who has entered all living entities, and who controls all living entities, is your [Śrī Rādhā's] husband."

By the aphorism itihāsapurāṇābhyāṃ vedaṃ samupabṛṃhayet’; “The vedas are expanded by the Itihāsas and Purāṇas” thus establishing the primary meaning of the term Vāsudeva being the son of Vasudeva, we can conclude that the statements of vedas like ‘eko vai nārāyaṇa āsit’ etc in that line are addressing The Lord in his two armed form only as described in the Gopālatāpanī, ‘sat-puṇḍarīka-nayanaṁ meghābhaṁ vaidyutāmbaram, dvi-bhujaṁ jñāna-mudrāḍhyaṁ vana-mālinam īśvaram’, “The Lord whose eyes are like bloomed white lotus petals, his complexion is like dark cloud, He is wearing a yellow dhoti which appears like a streak of lighting amidst the dark cloud, He is two armed, his hands are situated in the Jñāna mūdrā, wearing garlands of forest flowers”.

We accept that the same personality of Godhead is manifested in Vaikuṇṭha and Goloka simultaneously and everywhere else in different forms as per the mood of the devotee, but the original form is that having two arms, and peacock bedecked turban. In the Taittiriya Āraṇyaka— “nārāyaṇa paraṁ brahma [this specifies Original Nārāyaṇa, Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva], tattvam nārāyaṇa paraṁ”; “Nārayaṇa is Param Brahma  [Kṛṣṇa, yo’ sau paraṁ brahma gopālaḥ (Gopāla tāpanī)], ‘”. The Gopāla Tāpanī, after saying eko vaśī sarvagaḥ Kṛṣṇa īḍyaḥ; "Kṛṣṇa is the prime entity, the controller, all pervading and most worshiped" says nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām eko bahūnāṁ yo vidadhāti kāmān: Kṛṣṇa is the chief eternal and chief conscious entity, the chief among many, who accomplishes the desires of his devotees. In this verse yaù refers to Kṛṣṇa. He is the chief eternal, conscious being among all eternal and conscious beings. He fulfills whatever is desired by his devotees. “His devotees” is understood from the later reference gopa-gopī-gavāvītam: he is surrounded by cowherds, gopīs and cows. Kṛṣṇa is none Different than Nārāyaṇa but he exhibits more mellows than Nārāyaṇa does in Vaikuṇṭha it is not that the later can’t exhibit them but he doesn’t do it by will. Just like If Kṛṣṇa wanted he could Kill Hiraṇyakaśipu in his cowherd form only, Still to manifest his eternal unmanifest form of Śrī Nṛsiṁha as per the worship of prahlāda. It is not that some form of the lord was non existing before some time and after that he came into existence, such a view is pure chaos. As in 10.40.7 ŚB Śrīpāda Akrūra calls Kṛṣṇa “bahū mūrti eka mūrtikam”; “Although you have many forms, still you are situated in one form”, also in the Gopāla tāpanī it is said eko’pi san bahudhā yo vibhāti and as in the bṛhadāraṇyaka upaniṣad 3.9.3,  yad gataṁ bhavac ca bhaviṣyac ca; “All forms of the present and future are eternally present in His form” according to the worship of the devotee the Lord manifests his form as said  prajñāntarapṛthaktvavat, dṛṣṭaśca, taduktam [Brahma sūtra 3.3.52], “Because worshippers have difference in knowledge, the perception of the Lord’s form differ accordingly”, There is a popular phrase “upāsanā-bhedād darśana-bhedaḥ” as in the kaṭha upaniṣad. The analogy given for this is of a Vaidurya Gem [Cat eye] as said in the Nārada-pañcarātra, maṇir yathā vibhāgena nīla-pītābhir yutaḥ rūpa-bhedam avāpnoti dhyāna-bhedāt tathā vibhuḥ, “Just as a gem endowed with many colors, such as blue and yellow, appears differently when viewed from different angles, so does the Lord appear in different forms, according to the meditation of the devotee”. 

But we also find references like ‘nāyamātmā pravacanena labhyo na medhayā na bahunā śrutena, yamevaiṣa vṛṇute tena labhyastasyaiṣa ātmā vivṛṇute tanūm̐ svām’, “ This atman[Bhagavān] is not to be attained by a study of the Vedas, nor by intelligence, nor by much hearing, but the atman can be attained, only by him who seeks to know it. To him, Bhagavān reveals his true nature.”. Here ‘tanūm svām’ means his own form or Original form it is also said in the mahābhārata 12.323.18—na śakyaḥ sa tvayā draṣṭum asmābhir vā bṛhaspate yasya prasādaṁ kurute sa vai taṁ draṣṭum arhati , O Bṛhaspati, he cannot be seen by you or us. That person to whom He gives  mercy can see Him. Also in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka 4.4.21 it is said ‘tam eva dhīro vijñāya prajñāṁ kurvīta brāhmaṇaḥ’; “An intelligent equipoised person who has realized Brahman must endeavor to know the Supreme Absolute Truth, the Personality of Godhead, and surrender unto Him with loving devotion.” Also the same is said in Ṛgveda 10.82.7— na taṃ vidātha ya imā jajānānyad yuṣmākam antaram babhūva | nīhāreṇa prāvṛtā jalpyā cāsutṛpa ukthaśāsaś caranti || “You know not him who has genitive rated these (beings); He is another, different from yours (category) ; wrapped in fog, and foolish speech (do they) wander (who are) gluttonous whereareas those engaged in devotion wander satisfied.”   

‘vijñāya prajñāṁ kurvīta’; “After learning about the Personality of Brahman, one should become able to see Him directly.” In this relation we have a mantra from the Ṛgveda 1.164.31, ‘apaśyaṃ gopām anipadyamānam ā ca parā ca pathibhiś carantam sa sadhrīcīḥ sa viṣūcīr vasāna āvarīvarti bhuvaneṣv antaḥ’, “I saw a Gopāla (Gopa). He never falls from his position; sometimes he is near, and sometimes far, wandering on various paths. He is a friend, decorated with a variety of clothes. He comes again and again to the material world [He is the Avatāri]”, Also in Taittiriya Āraṇyaka, Varāha has been mentioned as an instrument [in sense of Avatāra], through whom Kṛṣṇa upheld the earth 'भूमिर्धेनुर्धरणी लो॑कधा॒रिणी । उ॒द्धृता॑ऽसि व॑राहे॒ण॒ कृ॒ष्णे॒न श॑तबा॒हुना' Bhūmi is upheld by Varāha actually by Kṛṣṇa in his Varāha form of 100 arms. [Notice that the word 'ca' hasn't been used, thus the interpretation is correct and authentic].

For this we find a upabrahmaṇa in the Bhāgavatam itself—tasmin sva āśrame vyāso badarī-ṣaṇḍa-maṇḍite āsīno ’pa upaspṛśya praṇidadhyau manaḥ svayam "In that place, Śrīla Vyāsadeva, in his own āśrama, which was surrounded by berry trees, sat down to meditate after touching water for purification. [1.7.3]" bhakti-yogena manasi samyak praṇihite ’male apaśyat puruṣaṁ pūrṇaṁ māyāṁ ca tad-apāśrayām "Thus he fixed his mind, perfectly engaging it by linking it in devotional service [bhakti-yoga] without any tinge of materialism, and thus he saw the Absolute Personality of Godhead along with His external energy, which was under full control. [1.7.4]"

Here puruṣaṁ pūrnaṁ, is Kṛṣṇa, This has been cleared in 1.7.7 in the phrase kṛṣṇe parama-pūruṣe; “to Lord Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead”. One may say Kṛṣṇa hear means Viṣṇu only and not the two armed lord. One should refer to Nāma Kaumudī— Kṛṣṇa-śabdasya tamāla-śyāmala-tviṣi śrī-yaśodā-stanandhaye para-brahmaṇi rūḍhiḥ, “The conventional meaning of the word Kṛṣṇa is the dark complexioned parabrahma who is sucking mother yaśodā’s breast milk”, thus it is a proper noun. Kumārila Bhaṭṭa has written— ’labdhātmikā satī rūḍhir bhaved yogāpahāriṇī, kalpanīyā tu labhante nātmānaṁ yoga-bādhataḥ’, “When popular usage [ruḍhi artha] interprets a word in a way very appropriate to the object it describes, that interpretation should be accepted. When scientific etymology [yaugikārtha] interprets a word in a way not appropriate to the object described, that meaning should not be accepted.” Also in the Bhāgavatam 10.8.13 आसन् वर्णास्त्रयो ह्यस्य गृह्णतोऽनुयुगं तनू:, "Your son Kṛṣṇa appears as an incarnation in every millennium. In the past, He assumed three different colors ." Clearly it says that Kṛṣṇa is the one who assumes avataras, गृह्णतोऽनुयुगं तनू:.

Śrīpāda Madhvācārya quotes a lost part of the Brahma Saṁhitā in his brahma-sūtra bhāṣya on 1.1.1 sūtra—yatrānavasaroʼnyatra padaṃ tatra pratiṣṭhitam,vākyaṃ veti satāṃ nītiḥ sāvakāśe na tadbhavetiti, “In a simple or complex sentence, that word or clause may be supplied as an ellipse, without which (word or clause) the meaning of the sentence would be incomplete, but need not be so supplied where this can be dispensed with, such is the rule of the learned” There are multiple statements in this regard from the Vedic Corpus. In the Udyoga Parva of Mahābhārata— kṛṣir bhū-vācakaḥ śabdo ṇaś ca nirvṛti-vācakaḥ tayor aikyaṁ paraṁ brahma kṛṣṇa ity abhidhīyate, “ ‘The word “kṛṣ” is the attractive feature of the Lord’s existence, and “ṇa” means spiritual pleasure. When the verb “kṛṣ” is added to the affix “ṇa,” it becomes “Kṛṣṇa,” which indicates the Absolute Truth.” Certain neo Pāṭhāntara are found in regard of this Śloka viz. udyoga 70.5 कृषिर्भूवाचकः शब्दो णश्च निर्वृतिवाचकः । विष्णुस्तद्भावयोगाच्च कृष्णो भवति सात्वतः, However Such is not available in supposed edition [Kumbhakonam] similar verse is found in 69.5 for the same parva in the concerned text — "कृषिर्भूवाचकः शब्दो गश्च निर्वृतिवाचकः। विष्णुस्तद्भावयोगाच्च कृष्णो भवति सात्वतः ।।", however this verse says "विष्णुस्तद्भावयोगाच्च, Viṣṇu being situated in that state became Kṛṣṇa, sātvata Kṛṣṇa [Yadu sambhuta kṛṣṇa] [in some other kalpa]". However the half verse 'कृषिर्भूवाचकः शब्दो णश्च निर्वृतिवाचकः' is quoted multiple times by Śrī Vedānta deśika in Bhagavagītā bhāṣya, however the Whole verse 'कृषिर्भूवाचकः शब्दो णश्च निर्वृतिवाचकः तयोरैक्यं परं ब्रह्म कृष्ण इत्यभिधीयते' is Quoted by Śrī Baldeva vidyābhuṣana, Śrī Jiva gosvāmī in their works, even Advaitin Nārāyaṇa bhaṭṭa in his Nārāyaṇīyam and Unbiased dictionary like Vācaspatyam [कृष्ण पु० कृष--नक् । भगवतोऽवतारभेदे वासुदेवे १ देवकी- नन्दने । “कृषिर्भूवाचकः शब्दः णश्च निर्वृतिवाचकः । तयोरैक्यं परं ब्रह्म कृष्णैत्यभिधीयते”] quote the śloka in the correct pāṭha "कृषिर्भूवाचकः शब्दः णश्च निर्वृतिवाचकः । तयोरैक्यं परं ब्रह्म कृष्णैत्यभिधीयते"  Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha Sūri celebrated 17 century author of the Mahābhāratabhāvadīpa bhāṣya on Mahābhārata quotes the śloka in the correct pāṭha in another of his work called the Mantra Bhāgavata's Gokul Khaṇḍa, as in the Gautamīya tantra— kṛṣi-śabdaś ca sattārtho ṇaś cānanda-svarūpakaḥ sattā-svānandayor yogāc cit paraṁ brahma cocyate, “The word ‘kṛṣ’ means ‘eternal transcendental existence’ and ‘ṇa’ means ‘spiritual pleasure’. These two syllables, meaning eternal existence and spiritual pleasure, are joined to become the word ‘Kṛṣṇa’, the name of the param brahma.”, thus said in the chāndogya upaniṣad 'sad eva saumyedam agra āsīd', “Oh Gentle student, Before everything only sat existed” In the Ṛg veda 1.164.31, Gopāla Kṛṣṇa has been called the Avatāri ‘ āvarīvarti bhuvaneṣv antaḥ’, also we find in Yajur veda taittirīya āraṇyaka  bhūmirdhenurdharaṇī lokadhāriṇī, uddhṛtāsi varāheṇa kṛṣṇena śatabāhunā, “The earth is the giver of happiness like the milk cow, the sustainer of life and support for all living beings. Thou wert raised up by Kṛṣṇa [varāheṇa kṛṣṇena, by Kṛṣṇa through Varāha] in His incarnation of the  boar having hundred hands.” and also Ṛgveda 1.22.18, trīṇi padā vi cakrame viṣṇur gopā adābhyaḥ ato dharmāṇi dhārayan; says Viṣṇu who is essentially the Gopāla took three steps and established religion. Also in ŚB 10.14.32, Kṛṣṇa is addressed as pūrṇa brahma sanātanam, in the same granth 7.15.58 gūḍhaṁ paraṁ brahma manuṣya-liṅgam,  in the viṣṇupurāṇa 4.11.2, yatrāvatīrṇaṁ Kṛṣṇakhyaṁ paraṁ brahma narākṛti,

[someone may say this says nothing but describes the descent of the Lord in Humanlike form, to clear their doubt we shall drive their attention to the word "narākṛti" which is ekavacana prathamā vibhakti, if the sense of the word was 'in human form' then the term used would have been "narākṛteḥ" ekavacana pañcami vibhakti, if the sense was 'by humanform' then it would have been 'ākṛtinā' ekavacana trītiyā] Gopāla tāpani 2.90  yo’ sau paraṁ brahma gopālaḥ also in Kṛṣṇa upaniṣad 'kṛṣṇo brahmaiva śāśvatam' also śrī devakī is called “brahmaputrā”, ‘One whose son is Brahman’. As in the Vāsudevopaniṣad devakī-nandano nikhilam ānandayad, also in the vedānta sūtra it is said “anandamayo’bhyasāt” in this relation it is said in taittiriya upaniṣad 'raso vai saḥ, rasa hyevāyaṃ labdhvānandībhavati', some on may come running with the self proclaimed śrūti "श्रीरामएवरसोवैसः" and attribute it to the atharva veda's paippalāda śākhā only to look knowledgable however they inturn prove their naiveness and non exposure in the vedas as the quoted reference is found no where, not being satisfied by this he may scream out a śloka from a secterian text which is not a part of any bonafide śāstra and only quoted by Rāma centric sects called the bhuṣunḍi rāmāyaṇa or the ādi rāmāyaṇa, "रसो वै स इति प्राहु सर्वार्थ लोकिनी श्रुतिः", however this verse is not tracable because the work is divided in 3 khandas and the concerned person quotes from 6th khanda which is nothing but foolish blabering, after personal research we came accross this statement in the 3rd khanda however that khanda is oriented for "Sahaja" sādhanā, This is highly condemned by Vaiṣṇavas and are having śākta tantras at its centre as writes Dr. BP Singh in the preface of the copy which i reffered to that is why Closely observing this work called Bhusundi Rāmāyaṇa even a naive person can conclude that it doesn't match the description of Lord Rāma in Kṛṣṇopaniṣad and Rāma-tāpanī, rahasya etc upaniṣads hence it's not acceptable as an authorative work far away from being a pramāṇa, Bhusundi Ramayana became famous only after being promoted by Rāma parakha sects. Thus the Description of Brahman is addressed towards Kṛṣṇa in his cowherd form only. Here the use of words like ‘nara’ or ‘manuṣya’ are used to say that param brahma has a corporeal form this is also agreed in the Yajurveda 7.39 mahāṁ’indro nṛvadā (nṛvata), “The Great Lord who is the master of the senses has a form like that of a human[nṛvat]”, in the Ṛg veda 10.31.17 manuṣyavadagne. “The purifying Lord having a corporeal form” means that with two hands and other human features [rather the other way round nonetheless we are using conventional terminology here]. That however doesn't mean that forms with multiple hands and other forms are not Param Brahma though sometimes statements are found like sthūlam aṣṭa-bhujam proktaṁ sūkṣmam caiva caturbhujam parantu dvibhujaṁ proktaṃ tasmād etat trayam yajet, “The gross eight-armed form has been described. The subtle four-armed form has been described, and the supreme two-armed form has been described. Therefore  one should worship all three” [Ānanda-saṁhitā] Also said in the Jayākhyā saṁhitā 4.23-26a sthūlasūkṣmaparātmanā tredhā'vasthitasya bhagavato rūpasya nirūpaṇam | śrībhagavān | sraṣṭā pālayitā cāhaṃ saṃhartā punareva ca | svakīyayogayuktyā tu sthūlarūpeṇa nārada || sūkṣmeṇa sarvabhūtānāṃ nivasāmi hṛdantare | karomyanugrahaṃ cāpi bhaktānāṃ bhāvitātmanām ||  pareṇānandarūpeṇa vyāpakenāmalena ca |vyāsayāmyakhilaṃ vipra raseneva tarūttamam || mūle siktaṃ śikhāśākhāpatrapuṣpaphalānvitam | "There are three forms of Bhagavāna, namely gross, sublte and transcendental. Creation, maintenance and dissolution are done with the gross form. The subtle form is used for staying in the heart of the living beings. The tripāda vibhuti is classified by the transcendental form all pure, all pervasive and of the form of entire bliss.". Also said in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad "द्वे वाव ब्रह्मणो रूपेमूर्तं चैवामूर्तं च, मर्त्यं चामृतं च, स्थितं च यच्च, सच्च, त्यच्च ॥" "Brahman has but two forms—gross and Transcendental, situated in mortal world [ekapāda] and situated in immortal world [tripāda], limited [Mūlarūpa in Paravyoma] and unlimited [pervading everything], Exists and will keep existing.",All of them indeed are Parama brahma and are full of all guṇas of Śrī Kṛṣṇa as said in the Mahāvarāha Purāṇa—

sarve nityāḥ śāśvatāś ca dehās tasya parātmanaḥ |

hānopādāna-rahitā naiva prakṛtijāḥ kvacit ||

paramānanda-sandohā jñāna-mātrāś ca sarvataḥ |

sarve sarva-guṇaiḥ pūrṇāḥ sarva-doṣa-vivarjitāḥ ||

All of the bodies of the Lord are eternal, and appear repeatedly in the material world. They are devoid of increase and decrease. They are never born of matter. All His bodies have the very nature of the highest bliss, are pure knowledge, are full of good qualities, and are devoid of all faults. 

One may object The Jayākhya saṁhitā which you quoted itself says that the para rupa has four hands and four faces अनादिनिधनं देवं जगत्स्रष्टारमीश्वरम्। ध्यायेच्चतुर्भुज विप्र शङ्खचक्रगदाधरम् ।। 73 ।। ( Jayakhya Samhita 6.73 ), However the Ignorant Fellow doesn't know that no where in the entire chapter is this form mentioned as the "Para rupa", it is just mentioned as the Dhyāna murti for a certain mantra it doesnt say anything about this form being the para form the actual avatarana of the form is "देवताध्यानम् अनादिनिधनं देवं..". The description of Parā form is found in Śrī Saṁkarṣaṇa saṁhitā 1.2.37— 'परात्परस्वरूपं तु द्विहस्तं सुमनोहरम्।

अगम्यं लौकिकैर्बाह्यैः करणैः साभिमानिकैः॥' and Bṛhad Brahma Samhitā 1.13.96 — "न मुक्तो नापि नित्यस्तु जीवाद्न्यः परः पुमान् । द्विहस्तं ह्येकवक्त्रं च शुद्धस्फटिकसंनिमम्॥", Lakṣmī Tantra 10.12-16 — "अनौपम्यमनिर्दश्यं वपुः स भजते परम्। विश्वाप्यायनकं कान्त्या पूर्णेन्द्वयुततुल्यया ॥वरदाभयहस्तं च द्विभुजं पद्मलोचनम्। रेखामयेन चक्रेण शङ्खेन च करद्वये ॥ अङ्कितं निर्विकाराङ्‌घ्रिस्थितं परमशोभनम्।  अन्यूनानतिरिक्तैः स्वैर्गुणैः षड्‌भिरलंकृतम् ॥ समं समविभक्ताङ्नं सर्वावयवसुन्दरम्। पूर्णमाभरणैः शुभ्रैः सुधाकल्लोलसंकुलैः ॥ रश्मिभूतैरमूर्तैः स्वैरच्युताद्यैरविच्युतम्। एका मूर्तिरियं दिव्या पराख्या वैष्णवी परा ॥" leaving these there are some ślokas from the Pādma saṁhitā [1.2] which is considered to be the continuation of Jayākhya saṁhitā as well it is very clear in context it says "भगवतः आद्यंरूपम्", "Śrī Bhagavān's Original Rūpa" and begins saying "आदिमध्यान्त रहितमवृद्धि क्षयमच्युतम् ॥ नित्यं निरुपमं ज्योति र्नित्यतृप्तं निरञ्जनम्। सर्वाकारं निराकारं तमसः परमव्ययम् ॥ तत्कारणवशा त्तस्मादाविरासीत्सनातनात्।द्विहस्तमेकवक्त्रं च शुद्धस्फटिकसन्निभम् ॥ " from whom came four armed Vāsudeva "वासुदेवात्ततो जातो वासुदेवाह्ययोऽपरः। एकवक्त्रश्चतुर्बाहुश्चक्रा द्यायुधलक्षणः ॥" who is the source of Vyūha vāsudeva and Nārāyaṇa, "स वासुदेवो भगवान् सृष्टिस्थित्यन्तमुक्तिदः। आत्मानं स द्विधाचक्रे पुनः केनापि हेतुना ॥ तयोरेको वासुदेवश्शुद्धस्स्पटिकसन्निभः। नारायणो द्वितीयस्तु नीलाम्बुदसमप्रभः ॥" as said in the Bhiṣṃa Parva chapter 61—यदेतत्परमं गुह्यं त्वत्प्रसादमयं विभो। वासुदेव तदेतत्ते मयोद्रीतं यथातथम्॥ सृष्टा सङ्कर्षणं देवं स्वयमात्मानमात्मना। कृष्ण त्वमात्मनास्राक्षी: प्रद्युम्नं चात्मसंभवम्॥ प्रद्युम्नाच्चानिरुद्धं त्वं यं विदुर्विष्णुमव्ययम्। अनिरुद्धोऽसृजन्मां वै ब्रह्माणं लोकधारिणम्॥ वासुदेवमयः सोऽहं त्वयैवास्मि विनिर्मितः। विभज्य भागशोऽऽत्मानं व्रज मानुषतां विभो॥, "". Thus the form whose name is unknown in the quoted reference of Jayākhya samhitā (6.73) by the opponent, must emanate from any of these forms described in the process. Most like the Vyūha vāsudeva form as prakāśa saṁhitā describes vyūha vāsudeva as such "वासुदेवादि भार्यासीत् सर्वदा सानपायिनी । चतुर्मुखो वासुदेवः ब्रह्मणो बिम्बरूपकः ।।", which is similar to the form desribed in Jayākhya 6.73 and on.

Śrī Kṛṣṇa the Original Vāsudeva whose effulgence is as pure as a sphaṭika gem, however in Mathurā , Dvārka etc does show his four armed form, That is why that description is found in the prayers of several sages and devotees, that is because kukṣi-gataḥ paraḥ pumān aṁśena sākṣād bhagavān “the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself, with all His plenary portions, such as Baladeva, is now within your womb” Also in the 3rd chapter of Goloka Khaṇḍa of Garga-saṁhitā, All the forms of the Supreme Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa enter into him hence the following conclusion is made by the devas "paripūrṇatamaṃ sākṣāc chrī-kṛṣṇaṃ ca svayaṃ prabhum", Thus it shows that Kṛṣṇa is that Vaidūrya gem in which other forms are visible by the devotee due to their own inclination and worship. The four vyūhas, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyūmna, Aniruddha are eternally situated. We find in Gopāla tāpani yatrāsau saṃsthitaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ strībhiḥ śaktyā samāhitaḥ, ramāniruddhapradyumnai rukmiṇyā sahito vibhuḥ. There relation is based described by the analogy of the vaidūrya gem, because the gem does have his own definite shape and color but when it is seen from different perspectives it appears different, however it doesn't mean that their perception is wrong or an illusion, it is just an aspect of the Lord and as it is non different from the gem’s intrinsic properties it is related to all the properties of the gem thus it is said that they are full of all the guṇas of the Lord. Yet they do not showcase certain guṇas in their manifest form. In the Pañcarātra literature it has been described that the Caturvyūha get unmanifested of 2 guṇas each down the gradation [Though this is not accepted by us]. Nārāyaṇa who is the vilāsa of Kṛṣṇa[Self same Lord in different form Prābhava Prakāśa] is Para Vāsudeva, the caturvyūha are his āvarana deities, Just as they are for Lord Kṛṣṇa as said in the svayambhuva āgama while describing the caturdaśākṣari mantra. In Laghubhāgavatāmṛta of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, it has been proven that Śrī Dvibhūja Kṛṣṇa is the original form of Advaya Tattva described in ŚB 1.2.11 vadanti tat tattva vidas tattvajñānam advayam.  by taking various arguments of various sampradāyas in consideration.

As we know from the Chāndogya Upaniṣad 3.17.6,  taddhaitadghor āṅgirasaḥ Kṛṣṇaya devakīputrāyoktvovācāpipāsa eva sa babhūva so'ntavelāyāmetattrayaṃ pratipadyetākṣitamasyacyutamasi prāṇasaṃśitamasīti, “The Seer Ghora-Angirasa practiced this puruṣa Yāga with the dedication as "This is subservient to Kṛṣṇa, the son of Devaki''. That Ghora-Angirasa had no thirst, as he came upon Brahmavidyā through this. At the last moment of his life he said to Brahman "You are eternal (akṣitam asi), you are full of auspicious qualities (acyutam asi), you are the subtle truth enlivening the universe(prāṇasaṃśitamasīti).”

Also as said in the Vāmana purāṇa, ‘न तु नारायणादीनां नाम्नामन्यत्र सम्भवः ।अन्यनाम्नां गतिर्विष्णुरेक प्रकीर्तितः’ इति ॥  and  also in the  skanda purāṇa,  ‘ऋतेा नारायणादीनि नामानि नामानि पुरुषोात्तमः । प्रादादन्यत्र भगवान् राजेावर्तेा स्वकं पुरम्’ इति ॥ and other texts like bhāllaveya śrūti, vṛddha haritā smṛti, yajñavalkya smṛti, vaikhānasa gṛhyasūtras etc. By the aphorism 'sarve sarva-guṇaiḥ pūrṇāḥ sarva-doṣa-vivarjitāḥ ||' and many instances of being called so we can safely say that the name Nārāyaṇa belongs to Kṛṣṇa also.

Now let’s come to the topic of discussion. The whole of point of this work is explaining ‘Kṛṣṇastu bhagavān svayam’, “But Kṛṣṇa is Bhagavān himself”. For this we need to take the whole chapter in consideration. This starts from the 2nd chapter: who is the Bhagavān ? 

vāsudeva-parā vedā vāsudeva-parā makhāḥ

vāsudeva-parā yogā vāsudeva-parāḥ kriyāḥ

vāsudeva-paraṁ jñānaṁ vāsudeva-paraṁ tapaḥ

vāsudeva-paro dharmo vāsudeva-parā gatiḥ

In the revealed scriptures, the ultimate object of knowledge is Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Personality of Godhead. The purpose of performing sacrifice is to please Him. Yoga is for realizing Him. All fruitive activities are ultimately rewarded by Him only. He is supreme knowledge, and all severe austerities are performed to know Him. Religion [dharma] is rendering loving service unto Him. He is the supreme goal of life. That means kṛṣṇastu bhagavān svayam has its root in first canto 2nd chapter itself. 

sa evedaṁ sasarjāgre bhagavān ātma-māyayā

sad-asad-rūpayā cāsau guṇamayāguṇo vibhuḥ

In the beginning of the material creation, that ‘Absolute Personality of Godhead’ (Bhagavāna) [Vāsudeva], in His transcendental position, created the energies of cause and effect by His own internal energy.

As we have earlier discussed That Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the ultimate shelter of Bhāgavatam, He is the subject of Bhāgavatam. And the vyūhāvatāra Vāsudeva is his āvaraṇa devatā. So the Vāsudeva being mentioned here is Kṛṣṇa himself and not the vyūhāvatara. In Vāsudevopaniṣad, He has been described as devakī-putra.  In the 11th chapter of the 12th canto of Bhāgavatam after describing the form of the Mahāpuruṣa, says that the  caturvyūha emanated from him. At the end of this description, Kṛṣṇa has been glorified in verse 25th as the friend of Arjuna and resident of Vṛndāvana then in verse 26th one is advised to quietly chant the description of the Mahāpuruṣa. We can easily deduce that the Mahāpuruṣa, Vaikuṇṭhādhīpa Viṣṇu is non different than Kṛṣṇa, In these prayers also in the 18th verse Kṛṣṇa has been called Bhagavān bhagavān bhaga-śabdārthaṁ. The former is the Vīlāsa [prābhava prakāśa] of the later. In the Uttarakhaṇḍa chapter 228, the Caturvyūha and other forms are described as surrounding Vaikuṇṭhanātha. In the 10th Canto in Śrī Akrūra’s we understand that Kṛṣṇa is indeed the svayam rūpa of the avatāri of whom the caturvyūha are a form of, Lord Brahmā in the second canto 9th chapter saw the same form of Lord Kṛṣṇa during the start of the sarga this is the motive behind the use of the epithet sātvatāṁ pataye.  This is the upabrahamaṇa of the Gopāla tāpanī upaniṣad 1.6—

yo brahmāṇaṃ vidadhāti pūrvaṃ

yo vidyāṃ tasmai gopayati sma kṛṣṇaḥ,

taṃ ha devamātmabuddhiprakāśaṃ

mumukṣuḥ śaraṇaṃ vrajet ||

"It was Kṛṣṇa who in the beginning instructed Brahma in Vedic knowledge and who disseminated Vedic knowledge in the past. They who desire liberation surrender to Him, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who grants transcendental knowledge to His devotees.

This account  is also found in the Śvetāsvatara Upaniṣad 6.18—

yo brahmāṇaṃ vidadhāti pūrvaṃ

yo vai vedāṃśca prahiṇoti tasmai 

taṃ ha devaṃ ātmabuddhiprakāśaṃ

mumukṣurvai śaraṇamahaṃ prapadye ||

He ordained Brahma the Creator from old and sent forth unto him the Veda, I will hasten unto God who standeth self-revealed in the Spirit & in the Understanding. I will take refuge in the Lord for my salvation;

Also in the Brahmā Saṁhitā—

atha tepe sa suciraṁ prīṇan govindam avyayam

śvetadvīpa-patiṁ kṛṣṇaṁ goloka-sthaṁ parāt param

prakṛtyā guṇa-rūpiṇyā rūpiṇyā paryupāsitam

sahasra-dala-sampanne koṭi-kiñjalka-bṛṁhite

bhūmiś cintāmaṇis tatra karṇikāre mahāsane

samāsīnaṁ cid-ānandaṁ jyotī-rūpaṁ sanātanam

śabda-brahma-mayaṁ veṇuṁ vādayantaṁ mukhāmbuje 

vilāsinī-gaṇa-vṛtaṁ svaiḥ svair aṁśair abhiṣṭutam

Brahmā, being desirous of satisfying Govinda, practiced the cultural acts for Kṛṣṇa in Goloka, Lord of Śvetadvīpa, for a long time. His meditation ran thus, "There exists a divine lotus of a thousand petals, augmented by millions of filaments, in the transcendental land of Goloka. On its whorl, there exists a great divine throne on which is seated Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the form of eternal effulgence of transcendental bliss, playing on His divine flute resonant with the divine sound, with His lotus mouth. He is worshiped by His amorous milkmaids with their respective subjective portions and extensions and also by His external energy [who stays outside] embodying all mundane qualities."

In the Anuśāsana Parva — 

nāhaṃ bṛhattaro brahman nāpy anantaś ca sattama, lokānāṃ mama sarveṣāṃ nāthabhūto bṛhattaraḥ. nandagopakule gopakumāraiḥ parivāritaḥ, samastajagatāṃ goptā gopaveṣeṇa saṃsthitaḥ.  madrūpaṃ ca samāsthāya jagatsṛṣṭiṃ karoti saḥ, aiśānam āsthitaḥ śrīmān hanti nityaṃ hi pāti ca. viṣṇuḥ svarūparūpo 'sau kāraṇaṃ sa harir mama, taṃ pṛccha muniśārdūla sa cānanto bṛhattaraḥ. tato 'vatīrya bhagavān brahmalokān mahāmuniḥ, nandagopakule viṣṇum enaṃ kṛṣṇaṃ jagatpatim.  bālakrīḍanakāsaktaṃ vatsajālavibhūṣitam, pāyayitvātha badhnantaṃ dhūlidhūmrānanaṃ param. gāhamānair hasadbhiś ca nṛtyadbhiś ca samantataḥ, pāṇivādanakaiś caiva saṃvṛtaṃ veṇuvādakaiḥ. praṇipatyābravīd enaṃ nārado bhagavān muniḥ, āścaryo 'si ca dhanyo 'si hy anantaś ca bṛhattaraḥ. vettāsi cāvyayaś cāsi vettum icchāmi yādṛśam,  tataḥ prahasya bhagavān nāradaṃ pratyuvāca ha.  mattaḥ parataraṃ nāsti mattaḥ sarvaṃ pratiṣṭhitam,  matto bṛhattaraṃ nānyad aham eva bṛhattaraḥ.  

There is a conception that, Garbhodakśāyi is the source of all manifestations, but they should refer to the very first śloka of this chapter  1.3.1— 

jagṛhe pauruṣaṁ rūpaṁ bhagavān mahad-ādibhiḥ

sambhūtaṁ ṣoḍaśa-kalam ādau loka-sisṛkṣayā

In the beginning of the creation, the Lord first expanded Himself in the universal form of the puruṣa incarnation and manifested all the ingredients for the material creation. And thus at first there was the creation of the sixteen principles of material action. This was for the purpose of creating the material universes. [1.3.1]

Also it is said that the source of this Garbhodakśāyī viṣṇu, Kāranodakśāyī viṣṇu is the first incarnation of the Lord, ādyo ’vatāraḥ puruṣaḥ parasya kālaḥ svabhāvaḥ sad-asan-manaś ca dravyaṁ vikāro guṇa indriyāṇi virāṭ svarāṭ sthāsnu cariṣṇu bhūmnaḥ, “Kāraṇārṇavaśāyī Viṣṇu is the first incarnation of the Supreme Lord, and He is the master of eternal time, space, cause and effects, mind, the elements, the material ego, the modes of nature, the senses, the universal form of the Lord, Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, and the sum total of all living beings, both moving and nonmoving.” [2.6.42]

If one says that Aniruddha is the avatāri then they should read the 3.1.34 of Bhāgavatam—

apisvid āste bhagavān sukhaṁ vo yaḥ sātvatāṁ kāma-dugho 'niruddhaḥ

yam āmananti sma hi śabda-yoniṁ mano-mayaṁ sattva-turīya-tattvam

May I inquire whether Aniruddha is doing well? He is the fulfiller of all the desires of the pure devotees and has been considered from yore to be the cause of the Ṛg Veda, the creator of the mind and the fourth plenary expansion of Viṣṇu.

As Śrī Mārkaṇḍeya said to Vajra in the Viṣṇudharmottara ascertaining the identity of Aniruddha [Grandson of Kṛṣṇa] is The Vyūha Aniruddha, kṣirodakśāyī— layābdhi-shto ’niruddho ‘yaṁ pitā te, “He who is situated in the waters of destruction, Aniruddha is your father”; kalpa-kṣaye vyatīte tu taṁ tu devaṁ pitāmahāt, aniruddhaṁ vijānāmi pitaraṁ te jagat-patiṁ, “When the destruction at the end of  the kalpa ended, I understood from Brahmā that the lord of the universe is your father, Aniruddha.” [Viṣṇu-dharmottara 1.79.3]

This Aniruddha is the grandson of Kṛṣṇa so by nature he can’t be the avatāri of Kṛṣṇa, the proposition that Kṛṣṇa is Vāsudeva is easily asserted here, Vāsudeva however is one of the 8 āvaraṇa deities of Kṛṣṇa in the chapter expounding the caturdaśākṣari mantra in the svāyambhūva āgama. Thus we see that the sequence of manifestations starts from the very first śloka and not from the 5th.  The 2nd verse however describes Garbhodakśāyī viṣṇu and not Śrī Aniruddha. The phrase "nānāvatārāṇāṁ nidhānaṁ" is misunderstood as reservoir of multifarious avatāras, the word nidhānaṁ according to Śabda-kalpadruma is “कार्य्यावसाने प्रवेशस्थानम्”, The entrance  at the end of scheduled work. Thus the phrase nānāvatārāṇāṁ nidhānaṁ actually says ‘Through Garbhodakśāyī, multifarious avatāras from paravyoma enter and exit the universe’. The definition of Avatāra is viśva-kāryārthaṁ apūrvā iva cet svayam, dvārāntareṇa avatārās tadā smṛtaḥ, “appears in this  world as as ever-unique, either directly or through an agent, for certain purposes in the material world, they are known as avatāras”. The agent of their appearance can either be a tad-ekātma-rūpa or a devotee, Śrī Nṛsiṁha appeared from the Supersoul form inside the pillar, and Śrī Kṛṣṇa apparently appeared through Śrī Vasudeva.

Some may object with Padma samhita 1.2.31-34 अनिरुद्धादभूत्कृष्णः कल्कीति and take in testimony of sattvata jayakhya and ishwara samhitas, and get refuted easily by reading the Sātavata saṁhitā's vibhava devatā description of 'kṛṣṇa'—पक्षमासोपवासांश्च कृष्णमिन्दीवरश्याममूर्ध्वबाहुं जटाधरम्। पादेनैकेन तिष्ठन्तमाहरन्तं च मारुतम्॥ १४५ ॥ एकत्रिषड्द्विषड्रात्राद्यतिकृच्छ्रपरायणम्दि शन्तमनुचिन्तयेत् ॥ १४६ ॥ कृष्णाजिनोत्तरीयाश्च सर्वे काषायधारिणः । ब्रह्मलिङ्गधराः सर्वे सर्वे ब्रह्मपरायणाः ॥ १४७ ॥, Which contradicts the description of Svayam Bhagavāna Kṛṣṇa from the Gopāla Tāpanī. Thus this Kṛṣṇa with the attributes "कृष्णाजिनोत्तरीयाश्च सर्वे काषायधारिणः", is the Kṛṣṇa of Padma samhita 1.2.31-34 'अनिरुद्धादभूत्कृष्णः कल्कीति' also mentioned in Mahabharata 'कृते युगे महाराज पुरा स्वायंभुवे ऽन्तरे। नरो नारायणश् चैव हरिः कृष्णस् तथैव च॥'. Even Madhvācārya believes in existence of two Kṛṣṇas "पैङ्गिखिलेषु- 'विशेषका रुद्रवैन्येन्द्रदेवराजन्याद्या अंशयुतान्यजीवाः । कृष्णव्यासौ रामकृष्णौ च रामः कपिलयज्ञप्रमुखाः स्वयं सः", However this includes both the kṛṣṇas in the category of Avatāras, Avatāra as previously discussed means descend, By the above quoted Ṛca 1.164.31, 1.22.18, त्रीणि पदा वि चक्रमे विष्णुर्गोपा अदाभ्यः । अतो धर्माणि धारयन् ॥, which both are referent of Kṛṣṇa alone as per the Khila sūktas "कृष्ण विष्णो हृषीकेश वासुदेव नमो अस्तु ते....अमृतेशाय गोपाय गोविन्दाय नमो नमः".

In the 23rd verse—

ekonaviṁśe viṁśatime vṛṣṇiṣu prāpya janmanī

rāma-kṛṣṇāv iti bhuvo bhagavān aharad bharam

In the nineteenth and twentieth incarnations, the Lord advented Himself as Lord Balarāma and Lord Kṛṣṇa in the family of Vṛṣṇi [the Yadu dynasty], and by so doing He removed the burden of the world.

Śrī Jīva Comments—

bhagavān iti sākṣāt śrī-bhagavata evāvirbhāvoʼyam, na tu puruṣa-sañjñasyāniruddhasyeti viśeṣa-pratipatty-arthaṃ tatra tasya sākṣād-rūpatvāt śrī-kṛṣṇa-rūpeṇa nijāṃśa-rūpatvād rāma-rūpeṇāpi bhāra-hāritvaṃ bhagavata evety ubhayatrāpi bhagavān aharad bharam iti śliṣṭam eva, ato rāmasyāpy aniruddhāvatāratvaṃ pratyākhyātam, śrī-kṛṣṇasya vāsudevatvāc chrī-rāmasya ca saṅkarṣaṇatvād yuktam eva ca tad iti||

The word Bhagavān here indicates the direct appearance of Bhagavān, not from the puruṣa named Aniruddha. The word Bhagavan distinguishes Kṛṣṇa from others. Kṛṣṇa and Balarāma are both addressed as Bhagavan since Kṛṣṇa is directly Bhagavan and Balarāma is his direct expansion. They both relieved earth of its burden. Thus even Balarāma also rejected as anexpansion of Aniruddha since Kṛṣṇa manifests Vasudeva and Balarāma manifests Saṅkarṣaṇa.

Here the concept of sannidhi and yogyatā comes we know pretty well from the statements of Gopāla tāpanī upaniṣad, Mahānārāyaṇa upaniṣad, Kṛṣṇopaniṣad, Brahma saṁhitā, Nārāyaṇopaniṣad, Vāsudevopaniṣad, Chāndogya upaniṣad and several mantras of Ṛgveda where the real identity of Viṣṇu as a Gopa has been described. The Parama pada of Viṣṇu described in Ṛgveda 1.22.20, Is the supreme station of Lord Gopāla as said in Ṛgveda 1.154.6, 

tā vāṃ vāstūny uśmasi gamadhyai yatra gāvo bhūriśṛṅgā ayāsaḥ, atrāha tad urugāyasya vṛṣṇaḥ paramam padam ava bhāti bhūri, “O Krishna and Balarama, we aspire to attain that place where You enjoy transcendental pastimes, and where there are beautiful surabhi cows with large horns.   The Vedas describe that place as the transcendental abode of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who fulfills all desires.”

vyākhyātaṁ ca—tāṁ tāni vāṁ yuvayoḥ kṛṣṇa-rāmayor vāstūni līlā-sthānāni gamadhyai prāptuṁ uśmasi kāmayāmahe | tāni kiṁ viśiṣṭāni? yatra yeṣu bhūri-śṛṅgā mahā-śṛṅgyo gāvo bahu-śubha-lakṣaṇā iti vā | ayāsaḥ śubhāḥ | ayaḥ śubhāvaho vidhir ity amaraḥ | devāsa itivaj jas-antaṁ padam | atra bhūmau tal-loke vede ca prasiddhaṁ śrī-golokākhyam urugāyasya svayaṁ bhagavato tac-caraṇāravindasya paramaṁ prapañcātītaṁ padaṁ sthānaṁ bhūri bahudhā avabhātīty āha veda iti | 

In this verse the word “taḥ” means “these”, “vāṃ” means “of You both”, or in other words “of Krishna and Balarama”, “vāstūni” means “places of pastimes”, “gomadhyai” means “to attain”, and “usmasi” means “we desire”. The question may be asked: “How may the pastime places be more elaborately described?” The answer is given in the phrase beginning with the word “yatra”. “yatra” means “in which places”, and “bhūri-śṛṅgyah” means “cows with large horns”. The word “bhūri” is explained in the passage from the Upanisads: “The word ‘bhuri’ here means ‘great’ not ‘numerous’. The dictionary explains: The word bhūri means either numerous or great.” “Ayasah” here means “beautiful”. This is confirmed by the Amara-kosa, which gives the following definition:“The word ‘ayaḥ’ here means beautiful'”.The word “ayāsaḥ” here uses the affix ‘asah” as in the word “devasaḥ”.   “Vṛṣṇaḥ” means “fulfilling all desires” [Belonging from Vṛṣṇi dynasty], “atra” means “in this place celebrated in the Vedas as Goloka’, “urugāyasya” means “of the Supreme Personality of Godhead”, “bhūri’ means “manifested in many ways”, and “āha” means “the Vedas declares”. 

As also said in the the Trīpādavibhūti Mahānārāyaṇopaniṣad—

रामकृष्णाद्यवतारेष्वद्वैतपरमानन्दलक्षणपरब्रह्मणः

परमतत्त्वपरमविभवानुसन्धानं स्वीयत्वेन श्रूयते सर्वत्र ॥

In the descents as Rāma[Balarāma] and Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Brahman, characterized by non duality and supreme bliss, their opulences and all other paraphernalia are their own. [Because they are Bhagavān themselves just appearing two for the sake of pastime]

Also in Mahābhārata—

evaṁ bahu-vidhai rūpaiś carāmīha vasundharām |

brahma-lokaṁ ca kaunteya golokaṁ ca sanātanam || 

O son of Kuntī, in this way I exist in innumerable forms here on earth, in Vaikuṇṭhas, and in the eternal Goloka. ( Mahābhārata, Śānti-parva 342.138)

yajuḥsu—mādhyandinīyā stūyate dhāmāny uśmasi ity ādau | viṣṇoḥ paramaṁ padam avabhātīti bhūrīti cātra prakārāntaraṁ paṭhanti śeṣaṁ samānam ||, “An example of this Vedic description is found in the following words of the Madhyandina Yajur Veda: “We aspire to go to the transcendental abode of Lord Vishnu, which is filled with many wonders.”

Thus the word Kṛṣṇa is very much yogya of being called Bhagavān Svayam. Referring back to the 23rd verse, we see the dvanda compound rāmakrṣṇau breaking this word gives and Rāma and Kṛṣṇa who are respectively termed as the 19th and 20th avatāras. The compound rāmakṛṣṇau brings the word Kṛṣṇa in the sannidhi of the word Bhagavān, thus we see a hint of the paribhāsa sūtra, Here Kṛṣṇa is directly being termed as Bhagavān and Balarāma is his direct expansion. The phrase aharad bharam means Bhagavān Kṛṣṇa through the agency of Balarāma, Arjuna etc levates the burden of mother earth as said in the verse 2.7.35 of Bhāgavatam yāsyanty adarśanam alaṁ bala-pārtha-bhīma-vyājāhvayena hariṇā nilayaṁ tadīyam. Thus Kṛṣṇa has been called Bhagavāna in the 23rd verse itself, however 28th verse ascertains that Kṛṣṇa is svayam bhagavān, not a superimposition on the term nor a pūrṇāvatāra of Bhagavāna. We had already explained that Lord.

Some are of the opinion that Kṛṣṇa and Balarāma are black and white hairs of Lord Viṣṇu, but this is not true, some commentator take this reference to be the mention of the respective complexions of the Lords. None of the commentators agree to this,except some for sure. Attaching black and white hair to Viṣṇu limits him to deterioration of time. One may argue the Lord contains everything thus he have white hairs too, we agree to this but the mention of white hair in viṣṇu’s body is for the line of Śrī Lakṣmi on his chest. Thus if Balarāma is that white hair then it equates him with Lakṣmi and not Nārāyaṇa. However if we look into the context of Viṣṇu purāṇa 5.1— एवं संस्तूयमानस्तु भगवान् परमेश्वरः ।उज्जहारात्मनः केशौ सितकृष्णौ महामुने ॥ उवाच च सुरानेतौ मत्केशौ वसुधातले । अवतीर्य भुवो भारक्लेशहानिं करिष्यतः॥, Here उज्जहारात्मनः means He brought out [invoked] 'उज्जहार्' two personalities by his soul 'आत्मनः' [as they are his source and his very Soul]. केश means Lord of Brahmā, Ka + īśa, केशौ means Two lords of Brahmā. Then Viṣṇu becomes far more specific saying 'मत्केशौ', 'मत् च 'क'स्य च ईशौ', My [Viṣṇu's] and Ka [Brahmā]'s Lords [Śrī Kṛṣṇa and Balarāma] having appeared on earth 'अवतीर्य भुवो' will remove the burden of Earth 'भारक्लेशहानिं करिष्यतः'. 

However another meaning can be as follows — The Keśas here mean Viṣṇu’s  śakti [as in the nṛsiṁha purāṇa सितकृष्णे च मच्छक्ती कंसाद्यान्धातयिष्यतः ॥, My power inherent in Kṛṣṇa Balarāma [as they are his source] killed kaṃsa] and not his hair because it will contradict numerous Śrūti and smṛti pramāṇas, as previously described. We know know that as Kṛṣṇa is the fountainhead of all manifestations, every manifestation is situated in him, the definition of keśa given in Śrī sahasranāma bhāṣya of Śrī Parāśara is अंशवो ये प्रकाशन्ते मम ते केशसंज्ञिताः, My aṁśas which are resplendent are known by the term keśa. Thus such a keśa [yugāvatāra kṛṣṇa and śakti of Viṣṇu] entered Śrī Kṛṣṇa who is svayam bhagavān, as said in the

Mahābhārata Anuśāsana Parva. 147.53—

तत्र च त्रितयं इष्टं भविष्यति न संशयः। 

समस्ता हि वयं देवास्तय देहे वसामहे ॥

Mahādev says to the Sages —"We all the Devatās reside in his (Śrī Kṛṣṇa's) body. After taking his Darśan you get the fruit of taking Darśan of all three of us {Brahmā, Viṣṇu and I (Śiva)} because we too reside in his body, and there's no doubt on this."

Also in Garga Saṁhitā Golok khaṇḍa chapter 3 the same entrance of all manifesations in the primary manifestation that is Kṛṣṇa is mentioned.

In Mahābhārata,  Śānti Parva's 47th Adhyāya it is known as Bhīṣma Stava or Stavarāja to Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa—

भीष्मस्तु पुरुषव्याघ्रः कर्मणा मनसा गिरा ।

शरतल्पगतः कृष्णं प्रदध्यौ प्राञ्जलिः स्थितः ॥ ७॥

Śrī Bhīṣma Deva prayed to the Supreme Lord while being in the Arrow bed. He says— 

आरिराधयिषुः कृष्णं वाचं जिगमिषामि याम् । तया व्याससमासिन्या प्रीयतां पुरुषोत्तमः ॥ १०॥

शुचिः शुचिषदं हंसं तत्परः परमेष्ठिनम् । युक्त्वा सर्वात्मनात्मानं तं प्रपद्ये प्रजापतिम् ॥ ११॥

Mahābhārata, Vana Parva 192/5-6—

अहं विष्णुरहं ब्रह्मा शकश्चाहं सूराधिपः। अहं वैश्रवणो राजा यमः प्रेताधिपस्तथा ॥ 

अहं शिवश्च सोमश्च कश्यपोsथ प्रजापतिः। अहं धाता विधाता च यज्ञश्चाहं द्विजोत्तम॥

The Supreme Personality of Godhead says to Mārkaṇdeya —

"O Best among Dvijas (Mārkaṇdeya)! I alone am Brahmā, Viṣṇu, Indra, Kuvera, Yama the King of the Pretas. I am Śiva, Prajāpati Kaśyap, Sōma. I am the ultimate supporter, I am decider of everyone's fate and the Yajña." 

The Sage Mārkanḍeya specifies that whom he saw was none other than Kṛṣṇa, who is the relative of the pānḍavas, यः स देवो मया दृष्टः पुरा पद्मायतेक्षणः । स एष पुरुषव्याघ्र संबन्धी ते जनार्दनः।।

Mahābhārat, Vana Parva, 12.21-22—

स त्वं नारायणो भूत्वा हरिरासीः परंतप।  ब्रह्मा सोमश्च सूर्यश्च धर्मो धाता यमः अनलः।।

वायुर्वैश्रवणो रूद्रः कालः खं पृथिबी दिश। अजश्चराचर गुरुः स्रष्टा त्वं पुरुषोत्तम॥

Arjuna Prays to Śrī Kṛṣṇa —"O Lord Śrī Hari! You first become Nārāyaṇa, then appeared in this form. You alone are Brahmā, Sōma, Sūrya, Dharma, Dhātā, Yama, Anala, Vāyu, Kūver, Rūdra, Kāla, Sky, Pṛthivī, all the directions, The Master and Creator of all and the Unborn." 

One may object that Arjuna is addressing Śrī Viṣṇu in the stuti by quoting 12.10 [Kumbhakonam] which says "पुरुषस्याप्रमेयस्य सत्यस्यामिततेजसः । प्रजापतिपतेर्विष्णोर्लोकनाथस्य धीमतः ।।", But the person in his ecstacy overlooks the previous shlokas which says "पार्थानामभिषङ्गेण तथा क्रुद्धं जनार्दनम् । अर्जुनः शमयामासा दिधक्षन्तमिव प्रजाः ॥ ७॥ सङ्क्रुद्धं केशवं दृष्ट्वा पूर्वदेहेषु फल्गुनः ।

कीर्तयामास कर्माणि सत्यकीर्तेर्महात्मनः ॥ ८॥", Keeping all the verses in view we can easily deduce that Kṛṣṇa is the subject of the stūti "सङ्क्रुद्धं केशवं दृष्ट्वा" is primary in this analysis. Thus Kṛṣṇa is the referent of 'स त्वं' in the previously quoted verse. The whole Shruti is about Kṛṣṇa previously taking the incarnation as Nārāyaṇa ṛṣi and subsequently as Nārāyaṇa. Actually the śrūti "नारायण परं ब्रह्म तत्त्वं नारायणः परः" is dedicated to Kṛṣṇa alone, Kṛṣṇa has directly been called Nārāyaṇa in the Ṛg khila 2.14 while describing Kāliyā mardan līlā "कालिको नाम सर्पो नव नाग सहस्र बलः । यमुन ह्रदे ह सो जातो यो नारायण वाहनः also it specifies about Kṛṣṇa " कृष्णाय गोपिनाथाय चक्रिणे सुरवैरिणे । "; सुरवैरिणे; name is specific to Kṛṣṇa alone as he broke the pride of Indra, Here the term Nārāyaṇa refers to Original Nārāyaṇa not the expansion of Sthūla Vāsudeva [pādma saṁhitā]. Another Verse which was quoted by a certain purvapakṣin was not found in the main corpus of BORI nor in the Kumbhakonam editions of Mahābhārata thus the claim hasn't been entertained.

Mahābhārata 1.1.193-194 —

bhagavānvāsudevaśca kīrtyate'tra sanātanaḥ | sa hi satyamṛtaṃ caiva pavitraṃ puṇyameva ca || 193 || śāśvataṃ brahma paramaṃ dhruvaṃ jyotiḥ sanātanam | yasya divyāni karmāṇi kathayanti manīṣiṇaḥ || 194 ||

If there is a doubt regarding the name Vāsudeva, it has already been cleared in the 60th Śloka— vāsudevasya māhātmyaṃ pāṇḍavānāṃ ca satyatām | durvṛttaṃ dhārtarāṣṭrāṇāmuktavānbhagavānṛṣiḥ ||

In the Mahābhārata it said  कृष्णो ‘द्वितीयः केशवः’ सम्बभूव, केशो योऽसौ वर्णतः कृष्ण उक्तः ॥, The popular meaning is contradictory to the previously mentioned quotations from the same text. The black Lord of Brahmā became the second Keśava!, [Here One may become surprised] to mitigate that doubt the second line says ‘That Lord of Brahmā who is blackish in complexion’. If we popular novice meaning of the above verse then it would straightaway contradict "अनुग्रहार्थं लोकानां विष्णुर्लोकनमस्कृतः ।वसुदेवात्तु देवक्यां प्रादुर्भूतो महायशाः ॥ अनादिनिधनो देवः स कर्ता जगतः प्रभुः ।अव्यक्तमक्षरं ब्रह्म प्रधानं निर्गुणात्मकम् ॥ आत्मानमव्ययं चैव प्रकृतिं प्रभवं परम्।पुरुषं विश्वकर्माणं सत्त्वयोगं ध्रुवाक्षरम् ॥ अनन्तमचलं देवं हंसं नारायणं प्रभुम्।धातारमजरं नित्यं तमाहुः परमव्ययम् ॥ पुरुषः स विभुः कर्ता सर्वभूतपितामहः ।धर्मसंवर्धनार्थाय प्रजज्ञेऽन्धकवृष्णिषु ॥" [महाभारत। आदि पर्व। अध्याय ५७], "To show mercy upon the material universe the ever gloried Lord worshipped by the Viṣṇulokas [multiple vaikuṇṭhas, uncovers his eternal form through vasudeva in devaki.........took birth among the andhakas and vṛṣṇis [eternal form as previously described]". Thus we understand that This Black Lord became the Second Keśava, The Original one was already born in the house of Nanda Mahārāja, as confirmed by Yogamāyā in Bhāgavatam जात: खलु तवान्तकृत् ।यत्र क्‍व वा पूर्वशत्रु ‘Your Old enemy, has already taken birth somewhere else’. Thus there exists two Kṛṣṇa as said in the Kṛṣṇa yāmala— kṛṣṇo ’nyo yadu-sambhūto yaḥ pūrṇaḥ so ’sty ataḥ paraḥ vṛndāvanaṁ parityajya sa kvacin naiva gacchati,  ‘The Kṛṣṇa known as Yadu-kumāra is Vāsudeva Kṛṣṇa. He is different from the Kṛṣṇa who is the son of Nanda Mahārāja. Yadu-kumāra Kṛṣṇa manifests His pastimes in the cities of Mathurā and Dvārakā, but Kṛṣṇa the son of Nanda Mahārāja never at any time leaves Vṛndāvana.’

 

Also in the Vāyu purāṇa 23.206-207 it is said that Kṛṣṇa appears in the World only once a Kalpa—अष्टाविंशे पुनः प्राप्ते परिवर्त्ते क्रमागते। पराशरसुतः श्रीमान् विष्णुर्लोकपितामहः ।। यदा भविष्यति व्यासो नाम्ना द्वैपायनः प्रभुः। तदा षष्ठेन चांशेन कृष्णः पुरुषसत्तमः। वसुदेवाद्यदुश्रेष्ठो वासुदेवो भविष्यति ।। "When the twentyeighth revolution has arrived in due course and the glorious Visnu, the great father of the worlds becomes Dvaipāyana Vyasa, then Krsna, The Supreme personality of Godhead, by a sixth of his part, will be born of Vasudeva as Vasudeva, the chief of Yadus.", And he himself appears in the house of Nanda Mahārāja with 6 opulence in fullest. This is also known by the statements of Brahma-Vaivarta purāṇa’s 4th canto 6th chapter also the Mahābhārata makes it clear that Avatāra of Kṛṣṇa happens once in a kalpa viz  "गच्छ प्रभो रक्ष चास्मान् प्रपन्नान्कल्पेकल्पे जायमानः स्वमूर्त्या।।".  Some may put the following objection—yatrāvatīrṇo bhagavān kṛṣṇākhyo jagad-īśvaraḥ, vasudeva-gṛhe janma tato vṛddhiś ca gokule, ‘How Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead and Lord of the universe, descended into this Yadu dynasty, how He took birth in the home of Vasudeva, and how He then grew up in Gokula — all this is described in detail.’ To them Śrī Śuka gives the answer in 10th canto 77th chapter, ṛṣayaḥ ke ca nānvitāḥ yat sva-vāco virudhyeta nūnaṁ te na smaranty uta, ‘but those who speak in this illogical way are contradicting themselves, having forgotten their own previous statements.’

Some even say that the name Hari doesn’t belong to Lord Kṛṣṇa but denotes Śrī Nārāyaṇa primarily that is why they say Lord Nārāyaṇa is the avatāri by the verdict of 1.3.26, due to the use of the name Hari, But they do not know Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa says in the 10th canto—yasyāham anugṛhṇāmi hariṣye tad-dhanaṁ śanaiḥ; “If I especially favor someone, I gradually deprive him of his wealth.” This why Lord Kṛṣṇa is called Hari, thus the name in 1.3.26 is used for Kṛṣṇa only, also it is said in Kṛṣṇa upaniṣad,  goparūpo hariḥ sākṣān” “the original form of Hari is Goparūpa”. Thus 1.3.26 also doesn’t pose any objection to Kṛṣṇa being the Mūla Rūpa. In Mahābhārata's Śānti Parva from the converstation of Śrī Bhīṣma and Śrī Yudhīṣṭhira "Yudhiṣṭhira uvāca— ayaṃ sa bhagavān devaḥ pitāmaha janārdanaḥ, sanatkumāro vṛtrāya yat tad ākhyātavān purā. Bhīṣma uvāca—

mūlasthāyī sa bhagavān svenānantena tejasā, tatsthaḥ sṛjati tān bhāvān nānārūpān mahātapāḥ. turīyārdhena tasyemaṃ viddhi keśavam acyutam,

turīyārdhena brahmāṇaṃ tasya viddhi mahātmanaḥ, turīyārdhena lokāṃs trīn bhāvayaty eṣa buddhimān. arvāk sthitas tu yaḥ sthāyī kalpānte parivartate sa śete bhagavān apsu yo 'sāv atibalaḥ prabhuḥ tān vidhātā prasannātmā lokāṃś carati śāśvatān sarvāṇy aśūnyāni karoty anantaḥ; sanatkumāraḥ saṃcarate ca lokān sa cāniruddhaḥ sṛjate mahātmā; tatsthaṃ jagat sarvam idaṃ vicitram" "Yudhiṣṭhira said: "This is that divine Lord, Bhagavān Janārdana [Kṛṣṇa sitting with them], the grandsire of all, who once imparted this knowledge to Sanatkumāra for the benefit of Vṛtra." Bhīṣma said: "The Supreme Lord, the foundational source of all existence, remains established in His infinite effulgence. From that transcendental state, He manifests various forms and phenomena through His immense spiritual potency. By a quarter of His energy, understand Him as Keśava, the infallible one. By another quarter, understand Him as Brahmā, the great soul. By yet another quarter, He sustains the three worlds with profound intelligence. That unchanging Lord, who abides within creation, transforms at the end of a kalpa. Reclining in the cosmic waters, He, the immensely powerful and supreme being, supports and sustains the eternal worlds with His benevolent nature. The infinite being fills all realms, making them complete and free of void. Sanatkumāra moves through these worlds, illuminating them. That same Aniruddha, the great soul, creates all that exists, and this entire wondrous universe rests within Him.""

According to the philosophy of Pañcarātra, Para Vāsudeva expands into vyūha vāsudeva and he in turn expands into saṅkarṣaṇa and so on till Śrī Aniruddha. Thus the Vāsudeva mentioned in chapter 2 is Para vāsudeva. Thus according to Chāga Paśu nyāya— पशुचोदनायामनियमोऽविशेषात्   छागो वा मन्त्रवर्णात् ॥६।८। ३१ ॥ [ Jaimini Sūtra],   Where it is laid down as to an offering of an animal, there is no rule for wanting anything special. On the other hand, it is goat by the force of the text [Thus Bhagavān described at the introduction of Chapter 3 is Kṛṣṇa himself].  As said in the Viṣṇu purāṇa for the term ‘Bhagavān’, एवमेष महाञ्छब्दो मैत्रेय भगवानिति। परमब्रह्मभूतस्य वासुदेवस्य नान्यगः॥ ७६॥ . All names of Viṣṇu apply to Śrī Kṛṣṇa as they are none different by default however earlier a conversation of Śrī Parāśara and Śrīmati Maitreyī was quoted for the same. As Brahmā is seemed to recognise Mahāviṣṇu by matching his qualities with Kṛṣṇa’s qualities whom he had met before the creation in the Trīpādavibhūti Mahānārāyaṇopaniṣad— tasmāttvameva vaktā tvamevagurustvameva pitā tvameva sarvaniyantā tvameva sarvaṃ tvameva sadā dhyeya iti suniścitaḥ, THEREFORE [after matching his qualities with Kṛṣṇa, the Svayam Rūpa] you alone are the speaker [who spoke to me before creation], you alone are my Guru [whom I was taught the vedas by at the beginning of creation], you alone are my father, you alone are the controller of everything, you alone are everything [My Guru, My Father, My Controller] you alone are the object of meditation, I am totally convinced of this [that you are Kṛṣṇa’s manifestation].

Thus the name Vāsudeva also originally belong to Kṛṣṇa for he is the son of Vasudeva in Nityavibhūti,  here means Para Vāsudeva to be more precise. In the introductory verse to the 3rd chapter we see the use of the term Bhagavān— jagṛhe pauruṣaṁ rūpaṁ

bhagavān mahad-ādibhiḥ sambhūtaṁ ṣoḍaśa-kalam ādau loka-sisṛkṣayā. Then it starts the description of several manifestations of the Lord like Kāraṇodakśāyī, Garbhodakśāyī till the Śāktāveśas. That is why the summum bonum verse 1.3.28 says—ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ , These are parts [aṁśa, matsya, varāha etc.], opulences [kalāḥ, pṛthu, svayambhuva brahmā, Parśurāma etc.], Puruṣa expansions [puṁṣaḥ, Kāranodakśāyī, Garbhodakśāyī etc.], 

kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam, But(tu) Kṛṣṇa is Bhagavān himself [in his original form, goparūpo hariḥ sākṣān] indrāri-vyākulaṁ lokaṁ mṛḍayanti yuge yuge, They [These incarnations] pulverize the enemies of Indra who cause havoc in the planetary systems, millennium after millennium. One may say that Aṁśa avatāras do not protect Indra but there are ample reference where they do so in a psychological way. The theory of two Kṛṣṇas is very much visible from the Paiṅgi khila—विशेषका रुद्रवैन्येन्द्रदेवा राजन्याद्या अंशयुतान्यजीवाः। कृष्णव्यासौ रामकृष्णौ च रामकपिलयज्ञप्रमुखः स्वयं सः इति।, Garuḍa [Son of Vinatā], Ananta [Son of Kadru], Brahmā, Rudra, Pṛthu, Indra, devas, kings and others are other jīvas who are endowed with an amsa.Nandanandana Kṛṣṇa Vyāsa, Balarāma Yādava-Kṛṣṇa, Rāma, Kapila, Yajña and Others are He[Nandanandana Kṛṣṇa] Himself. [examining the compound कृष्णव्यासौ we find two words, Kṛṣṇa and Vyāsa, here we see that both have same number of words so pāṇini 2.2.34 doesn’t apply on them, thus we should understand that aphorism वासुदेवार्जुनाभ्यां वुन्, The more worthy [in terms of  aṁśi bhāva] should come first thus Kṛṣṇa is the subject of the śrūti vākya here and is denoted directly at the starting and later by the pronoun ‘sa’. Thus we can rewrite the vākya as कृष्ण: व्यास रामकृष्णौ च रामकपिलयज्ञप्रमुखः स्वयं सः इति।] Also in the Gautama Khila it is said स एवैको भार्गवदाशरथिकृष्णाद्यास्त्वंशयुतान्यजीवाः इति गौतमखिलेषु, He[Śrī Vrajendra Nandana] is alone is the source of śāktāveśa avatāras like Parśurāma, Līlā avatāras like Śrī Rāma, and His Yugāvatāras like Kṛṣṇa [Not Vrajendra Nandana] along with all the Jīvas. Here it is worth mentioning Śrī Varāha purāṇa which says—

svāṁśaś cātha vibhinnāṁśa iti dvedhāṁśa iṣyate | aṁśino yat tu sāmarthyaṁ yat svarūpaṁ yathā sthitiḥ || tad eva nāṇu-mātro’pi bhedaḥ svāṁśāṁśinoḥ kvacit | vibhinnāṁśo’lpa-śaktiḥ syāt kiñcit sāmarthya-mātra-yuk || iti

Aṁśas, or portions, are of two types: self same (svāṁśa) and differentiated (vibhinnāṁśa). A svāṁśa is defined as a portion endowed with the same prowess (sāmarthya), the same intrinsic nature (svarūpa), and the same existential status (sthiti) as the whole (aṁśi) that encompasses it. There exists not even an atom (aṇu) of distinction (bheda) between a svāṁśa and its aṁśi. The vibhinnāṁśa, on the other hand, has minute potency and limited prowess.

Śrī Jīva comments—

atrocyate—aṁśānām aṁśi-sāmarthyādikaṁ tad-aikyenaiva mantavyam | tatra yathāvidāsina ity-ādau tasyākṣayatvena tāsām akṣayatvaṁ yathā tadvad aṁśāṁśitvānupapatter eva | tathā ca śrī-vāsudevāniruddhayoḥ sarvathā sāmye prasakte kadācid aniruddhenāpi śrī-vāsudevasyāvirbhāvanā prasajyate | tac ca śruti-viparītam ity asad eva | tasmād asty evāvatāry-avatārayos tāratamyam |

In this regard, the following is to be said: The aṁśa’s identity of prowess, nature, and so on with that of the aṁśi is to be understood as due specifically to their oneness [of categorical being, jātiyatva]. This situation is comparable to that of rivulets flowing from an inexhaustible lake, where the inexhaustibility of the rivulets is due to the inexhaustibility of their source; otherwise, it would be impossible to distinguish between the part (aṁśa) and its all-encompassing whole (aṁśi). 

Thus if there were no difference between Aṁśa and Aṁśi then those words would be rendered meaningless in this regard and can’t be used in this context, though they are One, difference is actually null in quality and as they are non different there is no bheda, thus there is Absolute abheda in quality but are existing in variegated ways since eternity. The difference of Aṁśa and Aṁśi is only is exhibition of certain qualities as said in the laghu bhagavatamrta 'śakter vyaktis tathāvyaktis tāratamyasya kāraṇam', the word used is avyakti 'non manifestation' not abhāva 'Non existence'. The example given is  "tatra yathāvidāsina ity-ādau tasyākṣayatvena tāsām akṣayatvaṁ yathā tadvad aṁśāṁśitvānupapatter eva" "The example of the lake and many rivers was given (SB 1.3.26). Because the source is ever undiminished, they also are undiminished at all times. Thus since the Bhagaván is undiminished, so are his amsas [Advaita Tattva krsna appears different by his Acintyasakti]. But like the lake and the river, there is also difference." If we consider Madhvācārya’s interpretation of ‘tu’ being used in the sense of ‘eva’, Then also there is no negation of our proposition because it would simple mean, Kṛṣṇa is indeed(eva) The Lord Himself ! As He writes in the commentary of this verse “एते प्रोक्तावताराः । मूलरूपी कृष्णः स्वयमेव”,  The term ‘ete’ means the before mentioned Avatāras [starting from Kāraṇodakśāyī etc.], Kṛṣṇa is indeed the Lord himself.

One may object that how can ‘Kṛṣṇa’ being a singular subject be the subject of a plural verb ? to that we reply the subject of the verse is ‘ete’ and not Kṛṣṇa, we do not run into any problem if we consider this interpretation. "ete" is verily the subject of mṛdayanti, according to Chāga Paśu nyāya— पशुचोदनायामनियमोऽविशेषात्   छागो वा मन्त्रवर्णात् ॥६।८। ३१ ॥ [ Jaimini Sūtra],   Where it is laid down as to an offering of an animal, there is no rule for wanting anything special. On the other hand, it is goat by the force of the text. Initially, Mṛdayanti may have two referents here Kṛṣṇa and 'ete', there is no mention of any special rule here thus the befitting referent of mṛdayanti is 'ete', as during a sacrifice when a person says "bring" it naturally means the goat is to be brought not the yajamāna himself. Thus due to no mention of any special rule Kṛṣṇa can't be the referent of mṛdayanti. This interpretation doesn't contrast with the sannidhi criteria as verbal yogyatā is superior to sannidhi as yogyatā is directly associated with the meaning of the vākya "अर्थाबोधो योग्यता ।". "ete cāṁsa....", "Kṛṣṇastu Bhagavān svayam" this is a case of "सन्दिग्धेषु वाक्यशेषात्॥" [Pūrva mimāṁsa 1.4.29], it is said in Taittīrīya Brāhmaṇa "aktāḥ śarkarā upadadhāti" "One puts in wetted pebbles" followed by "tejo vai ghṛtam" "Lustre is indeed Ghee", here reading the first part one may have doubt that by what should the pebbles be wetted by anything like fat or oil, clearing the doubt the next verse says "lustre is indeed Ghee", thus clearing the doubt that pebbles are to be wetted by ghee alone. Same here "ete cāṁsa...", "These are parts..." doubt is they are part of whom ?, the next line answers "Kṛṣṇastu Bhagavān svayam", "Kṛṣṇa is indeed Bhagavān Himself", Thus clearing the doubt, and establishing that the aforementioned forms are all parts of Kṛṣṇa who is Bhagavān himself.

If someone is stubborn to prove that Kṛṣṇa is the subject that is also grammatically correct because ‘mṛḍayanti’ means ‘they protect’ upon doing proper anvaya it becomes "एते चांशकला: पुंस: कृष्णस्तु भगवान् स्वयम् इन्द्रारिव्याकुलं लोकं ते मृडयन्ति युगे युगे ॥" here the naturally added ‘ते’ pronoun ["यत्रानवसरोऽन्यत्र पदं तत्र प्रतिष्ठितम् ।वाक्यं वेति सतां नीतिः सावकाशे न तद्भवेत्" 'In a simple or complex sentence, that word or clause may be supplied as an ellipsis, without which (word or clause) the meaning of the sentence would be incomplete, but need not be so supplied where this can be dispensed with, such is the rule of the learned. (Brahma Samhita.)'] is important because according to pāṇini 1.2.59 अस्मदो द्वयोश्च, The kāśikā vṛtti says—अस्मदो योऽर्थस्तस्यैकत्वे द्वित्वे च बहुवचनमन्यतरस्यां भवति। अहं ब्रवीमि, वयं ब्रूमः। आवां ब्रूवः, वयं ब्रूमः॥ सविशेषणस्य प्रतिषेधो वक्तव्यः॥ अहं देवदत्तो ब्रवीमि। अहं गार्ग्यो ब्रवीमि। अहं पटुर्ब्रवीमि॥ युष्मदि गुरावेकेषाम्॥ त्वं मे गुरुः। यूयं मे गुरवः॥The plural of the pronoun अस्मद् 'I', is used optionally, though the sense requires a singular or a dual number. Thus "I speak" or "we speak" (अहं ब्रवीमि or वयं बुमः), may be spoken by one person; similarly two persons may either use the dual case or the plural case; thus आवां ब्रूवः 'we two speak' or वयं ब्रूमः 'we speak.'

Vart:- There is prohibition when the pronoun of the 1st person is qualified by an attribute :- as अहं देवदत्तो ब्रवीमि, 'I Devadatta am speaking.' अहं गार्ग्यो ब्रवीमि, 'I Gargya am saying.' Here we cannot use the plural.

Vart:- The word गुरु 'master' may have plural form though referring to one person, when following the word युष्मद्; as त्वं मे गुरुः or यूयं मे गुरवः, 'Thou art my master,' or 'you are my master.'

Thus the usage of the word mṛḍayanti is appropriate in reference to Kṛṣṇa because his Gurutatva is being emphasized here. One may object by that by pāṇini 1.2.58, A single class noun can denote a class जात्याख्यायामेकस्मिन् बहुवचनमन्यतरस्याम्, but this doesn’t help the text rather than over complicating it bringing in the literary fault called avimṛṣṭa-vidheyāṃśa, also this rule is only valid of class noun [Jāti] not for name proper nouns as said in the vārtika "जातिग्रहणं किम्? देवदत्तः। यज्ञदत्तः।". It has already been shown that the word ‘Kṛṣṇa’ does have the yogyatā of being called svayam Bhagavān and such assertion is grammatically correct as well. Moreover the term Kṛṣṇa in this context is a proper noun as in the rudḥī artha it means the son of Mother Yaśodā, who is Paraṁ Brahma, also the Mahābhārata says the same कृषिर् भूर्-वाचकः शब्दो णश् च निर्वृति-वाचकः । तयोर् ऐक्यं परं ब्रह्म कृष्ण इत्य् अभिधीयते ॥ ‘Kṛṣ’ is the root – Bhū, meaning existence; ‘ṇa’ – The word signifies renunciation, that is, bliss. By adding the ‘ṇa’–suffix to the ‘Kṛṣ’-dhātu, the word ‘Kṛṣṇa’ has represented the Supreme Brahman. The word ‘Kṛṣṇa’ should be understood as the blissful entity [raso vai saḥ]. We find similar sayings as that of Śrīmad bhāgavata 1.3.28 in Nārada Purāṇa 2.58.45—

देवि सर्वेऽवतारास्तु ब्रह्मणः कृष्णरूपिणः ।।

अवतारी स्वयं कृष्णः सगुणो निर्गुणः स्वयम् ।।

O Devī! All avatāras emanate from the Supreme Brahman in the form of Kṛṣṇa. But Kṛṣṇa, who is both inclusive of attributes (saguṇa) and beyond all attribution (nirguṇa), is the avatārī Himself.

In the Brahma Vaivarta purāṇa 4.117.12—

सर्वे चांशकलाः पुंसःकृष्णस्तु भगवान्स्वयम् ।। 

All these avatāras are either portions or minute portions of the Puruṣa, but Kṛṣṇa is Svayam Bhagavān.

In the Brahma saṁhitā—

रामादि-मूर्तिषु कला-नियमेन तिष्ठन्

नानावतारम् अकरोद् भुवनेषु किन्तु ।

कृष्णः स्वयं समभवत् परमः पुमान् यो

गोविन्दम् आदि-पुरुषं तम् अहं भजामि ॥

I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, who manifested Himself personally as Kṛṣṇa and the different avatāras in the world in the forms of Rāma, Nṛsiṁha, Vāmana, etc., as His subjective portions.

यत्रानवसरोऽन्यत्र पदं तत्र प्रतिष्ठितम् । वाक्यं वेति सतां नीतिः सावकाशे न तद्भवेत्इति ब्रह्मसंहितायाम् , In a simple or complex sentence, that word or clause may be supplied as an ellipsis, without which (word or clause) the meaning of the sentence would be incomplete, but need not be so supplied where this can be dispensed with, such is the rule of the learned. (Brahmā saṁhitā), Also the wise says in regard of Veda sammata Correct vivid meaning, ऋजुमार्गेण सिध्यतोऽर्थस्य वक्रेण साधनायोगः ॥, “ No one tries to accomplish in a round-about way a thing which can be affected by direct means.” Thus one should abide with the rule of the learned and dispel kūtarka. 

On close inspection we see in the Vedas, that Viṣṇu has been described as a cowherd only not with his traditional form of four arms. However verses like ‘ajasya nābhī’ etc. are found they are to describe the Nārāyaṇa vilāsa expansion of Kṛṣṇa whose wife is Ramā as per the Brahma saṁhitā. To this some quote an inauthentic mantra which is one found in one of the recensions of the text which was never quoted even by Śaivācāryas to support their claim that Nārāyaṇa is an epithet of Śiva, that mantra is "ओंकारं चतुर्भुजं लोकनाथं नारायणम् ।", This mantra is quoted by none and is directly against the works like Paratattvaprakāśikā, Nārāyaṇaśabdanirūkti, thus the claim is automatically refuted by apasiddhāntadoṣa, let's see another verse that the person quotes, it's from Jabala Darśana upaniṣad— चतुर्भुजो महाविष्णुर्योगसाम्राज्यदीक्षितः ॥ १.१॥, However it doesn't talk about the Parā form of the Lord but describes an avatāra of him that is Śrī Dattātreya — "dattātreyo mahāyogī bhagavānbhūtabhāvanaḥ caturbhujo mahāviṣṇuryogasāmrājyadīkṣitaḥ", Thus this feature of four arms is for Śrī Dattātreya, The opponent further quotes 'smarannārāyaṇaṃ devaṃ caturbāhuṃ kirīṭinam' which is the vilāsa form of Śrī Kṛṣṇa as Śrī Nārāyaṇa [ŚB 10.14.14, Nārāyaṇo'ṅgaḥ yaḥ] . The next verse that he quotes is from Ātmabodha upaniṣad "śaṅkhacakragadādharāya tasmāt oṃ namo nārāyaṇāyeti", however this doesn't say that Nārāyaṇa is having four arms, this just says that he holds the śankhacakragadā etc. but it doesn't mean that he is physically holding them rather these symbols are imprinted in his foot sole and palms "रेखामयेन चक्रेण शङ्खेन च करद्वये, " the term 'brahmaṇyo devakī putraḥ', specifies the upaniṣad to address Kṛṣṇa. Next he misquotes some gṛhya sūtras and upaniṣads which are not being entertained here, Such mentions are found in the Sanatakumāra saṁhitā, Bṛhad Brahma samhitā and Brahma saṁhitā describing Goloka.

Some critics say that the example of milk and curd, bounds kṛṣṇa to powerlessness, but according to Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī it is just to demonstrate the rule of causation, Milk is the cause of Curd but curd is not the cause of Milk, Just as philosopher’s stone turns material it touches into gold but itself remains in the original condition like that Śrī Kṛṣṇa appoints a Jīva as Lord Śīva and invest some of his potency into him causing him to have some similarity of lowest degree with him. Also Brahma samhita is enlisted in the list of Pañcarātras namely, Mārkanḍeya saṁhitā etc, in some lists it comes in a compound as Brahmanārada, which are actually two different titles hence the lists do not touch the 108 mark always.

Some are even of the thought that Bhūma puruṣa is the source of Kṛṣṇa, but this is refuted as Kṛṣṇa is Para Vāsudeva himself and Vaikuṇṭhādhīpa is his vilāsa. If Bhūma puruṣa was superior to Kṛṣṇa why would he need to arrange for such a pastime to bring them there ?. Śrī Kṛṣṇa on the way to the abode does say that the Brahma Jyoti is his splendor as per the Harivaṁśa. Also the Paiṅgi Śrūti describes—पैङ्गश्रुतावपि तद्णपातित्वेन श्रूयते "एष पुरुष एष प्रकृतिरेष आत्मैष ब्रह्मैष लोक एष अलोक एष योऽसौ हरिरादिरनादिरन्तोऽनन्तः परमः पराद् विश्वरूपः"इति॥ श्रीभगवान्॥ Painga-śruti also counts Brahman as part of Bhagavān: "This puruṣa [Caturvyūha], this prakṛti [Material Nature], this ātmā [Jīvātmā], this Brahman, this world and the worlds beyond sight, are Śri Hari, who has no beginning and no end, who is within everything, beyond everything and also manifests the universal form."

Śrīla Viśvanāth cakravartipāda gives a nice commentary on the verses and quotes them as an ending note. ŚB 10.89.59—

युवयोर् वां मे कलया अवतीर्णाव् इति सम्बोधनम् । शीघ्रं मे अन्ति समीपे इत आगच्छतम् इत्य् अर्जुन-मोह-प्रयोजकोऽर्थः । वास्तवार्थस्तु हे कलावतीर्णौ कलाभिः स्व-शक्तिभिः सहैवावतीर्णौ भूयः पुनर् अपि युवाम् अवनेर्भारान् असुरान् हत्वा मे अन्ति ममान्तिके तान् प्रस्थापयितुं त्वरयेतम् । ण्यन्ताल्-लिङि रूपम् । अन्तीत्यव्ययं चतुर्थ्यन्तम् । अत्रागत्य ते मुक्ता भवन्त्व् इति तद्-धाम्नो मुक्त-गम्यत्वेन हरिवंशोक्तत्वात् । द्वितीयस्कन्धेऽपि क्रम-मुक्ति-सृतौ अष्टावरण-भेदानन्तरम् एव मोक्ष-श्रवणात् ॥ ५९

Mahā-Visnu said, "You two who have appeared as My parts, please come back (itam) quickly (tvaraya) to Me (me anti)." He says this to bewilder Arjuna. The real meaning is, "You two, who have descended along with your kalās, your personal energies (kalās:sva-śaktibhih), should kindly return to Me after killing the demons who burden the earth. Please quickly send these demons here to Me for the sake of their liberation." The verb is a dual imperative form. Anti is an un-declined word, meaning "towards proximity." "Let them come here and be liberated." It is stated in Śrī Hari-vamsa and in the Second Canto of Srīmad-Bhāgavatam that the path of gradual liberation passes through the intermediate station of Lord Mahā-Viṣṇu's abode, outside the eighth shell of the universe.

This explanation has it's roots in the 27th verse of the 70th chapter of the 10th canto— लोके भवाञ्जगदिन: कलयावतीर्ण: सद्रक्षणाय खलनिग्रहणाय चान्य: ।, (The kings in their prayer to Kṛṣṇa say) "You are the predominating Lord of the universe and have descended into this world with Your personal power to protect the saintly and suppress the wicked."

The second part is seen in 2.7.35—

यास्यन्त्यदर्शनमलं बलपार्थभीम-व्याजाह्वयेन हरिणा निलयं तदीयम् ॥

"either with the Lord Hari directly or with Him under His names of Baladeva, Arjuna, Bhīma, etc. And the demons, thus being killed, would attain either the impersonal brahmajyoti or His personal abode in the Vaikuṇṭha planets."

Other verses are found to support the same such in 3.2.23, अहो बकी यं स्तनकालकूटं जिघांसयापाययदप्यसाध्वी ।लेभे गतिं धात्र्युचितां ततोऽन्यं ||, also in 10.14.35, सद्वेषादिव पूतनापि सकुला त्वामेव देवापिता||

Krama mūkti described here is explained from Bhāgavatam 2.2.22 onwards till 2.2.31.

But Arjuna was not bewildered by cryptic usage of हत्वेह भूयस्त्वरयेतमन्ति मे ॥ and made the following deduction upon his return—

निशाम्य वैष्णवं धाम पार्थ: परमविस्मित: ।

यत्किञ्चित् पौरुषं पुंसां मेने कृष्णानुकम्पितम् ॥ ६२ ॥

Having seen the domain of Lord Viṣṇu, Arjuna was totally amazed. He concluded that whatever extraordinary power a person exhibits can only be a manifestation of Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s mercy.

Some Alpaśrautas assert that Bhāgavatam is the glories of Viṣṇu [Caturbhūja] and Not Śrī Kṛṣṇa by quoting the verse "etad vaḥ kathitaṁ viprā viṣṇoś caritam adbhutam" This is indeed a very juvenile claim as we have earlier described that all the Names of Nārāyaṇa apply to Śrī Kṛṣṇa as it is said in some Śruti, कर्षणात् कृष्णो रमणात् रामो व्यापनात् विष्णुः, Kṛṣṇa is known by the name Kṛṣṇa because he attracts, Rāma because he sports, Viṣṇu because he is all pervading. This sequence of name is seen in the Rāsa Prasaṅga of Bhāgavatam where Kṛṣṇa attracted the Gopīs by his flute जगौ कलं वामद‍ृशां मनोहरम् ॥, sported with them र्व्रजसुन्दरीणा-मुत्तम्भयन् रतिपतिं रमयां चकार ॥by expanding into 16 million forms योगेश्वरेण कृष्णेन तासां मध्ये द्वयोर्द्वयो: । प्रविष्टेन as he did in Dvārkā later. In Bhāgavatam 10.13.19 Kṛṣṇa's Viṣṇutva/ vyāpakatva is mentioned directly सर्वं विष्णुमयं गिरोऽङ्गवदज: सर्वस्वरूपो बभौ ॥. 

If any scripture is seen to be contradicting bhāgavatam then Bhāgavatam is to be held the authority because it is the magnum opus of Śrī Vedavyāsa and his last work which he wrote in his maturity, it is the commentary on Brahma sūtras and Mahābhārata along with Gāyatri mantra, Gāyatri Mantra is considered the source of the vedas, from it comes Puruṣa sūkta and puruṣa sūkta is the culmulation of all the vedas, as per garuḍa purāṇa artho ’yam brahma-sutranam bharatartha-vinirnayah gayatri-bhasya-rupo ’sah vedartha-paribrmhitah grantho ’stadasa-sahasrah srimad-bhagavatabhidhah, "The Bhagavata is the authorized explanation of Brahma-sutras, and it is a further explanation of Mahabharata. It is the expansion of the gayatri-mantra and the essence of all Vedic knowledge. This Bhagavata, containing eighteen thousand verses, is known as the explanation of all Vedic literature.". As Bhāgavatam is the last of the eighteen Purāṇas, it is the highest authority of the vedic scriptures as it is famously known "पौर्वपर्ये पुर्व-दौर्बल्यम् प्रक्र्तिवत्"  [purva mimansa 6.5.54], "Between two contradictory expiatory injunctions, a later one is of greater force and sublates the earlier one." Some people however do not agree to the fact that Bhāgavatam is the last of the Purāṇas, because Mahābhārata lists 18 purāṇas and includes Bhāgavatam in it that means Bhāgavatam was written before Mahābhārata, but such claim is not true because, The Purāṇas are also eternal like the vedas and are called the 5th veda [इतिहासपुराणं पञ्चमं वेदानां वेदं ], Thus Vyāsa deva already knew about Śrīmad Bhāgavatam because he is described as being Viṣṇu he knows the past present and future as said in the Mahābhārata Svargārohana parva पाराशर्यो महाव्रतः | अगाधबुद्धिः सर्वज्ञो गतिज्ञः सर्वकर्मणाम् ||. Thus he knew that He will become frustrated after writing Mahābhārata and will write an illustrious Purāṇa which is the literary incarnation [प्रत्यक्ष कृष्ण एव हि] of the Lord named Bhāgavatam as the incarnations of the Lord are ever present [as described earlier] Bhāgavatam is also ever present. As said in Bhāgavata 12.13.10—इदं भगवता पूर्वं ब्रह्मणे नाभिपङ्कजे । स्थिताय भवभीताय कारुण्यात् सम्प्रकाशितम् ॥, also in 1.7.8 it's said— स संहितां भागवतीं कृत्वानुक्रम्य चात्मजम् । शुकमध्यापयामास निवृत्तिनिरतं मुनि: ॥, in 1.1.1 similar statement is seen— तेने ब्रह्म हृदा य आदिकवये, Later this line of Knowledge was passed down to Sage Atharva स ब्रह्मविद्यां सर्वविद्याप्रतिष्ठामथर्वाय ज्येष्ठपुत्राय प्राह ॥ who passed it to Aṅgirasa[The Brahma vidyā explained here is the Hayagrīva brahma vidyā which is a lakṣana of the bhāgavatam] In other words Brahmā taught bhāgavatam to Śrī Atharva who later taught it to Aṅgirasa, In his teachings to Śaunaka Aṅgira says तस्मै स होवाच । द्वेविद्ये वेदितव्ये इति ह स्म यद्ब्रह्मविदो वदन्ति परा चैवापरा च ॥ "There are two sorts of knowledge to he acquired. So those who know the Brahman say; namely, Para and Apara, i.e., the higher and the lower." तत्रापरा ऋग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेदोऽथर्ववेदः शिक्षा कल्पो व्याकरणं निरुक्तं छन्दो ज्योतिषमिति । अथ परा यया तदक्षरमधिगम्यते ॥ Of these, the Apara is the Rig Veda, the Yajur Veda, the Sama Veda, and the Atharva Veda, the siksha, the code of rituals, grammar, nirukta, chhandas and astrology. Then the para is that by which the immortal is known [Bhāgavatam] the later mantras of the Upaniṣad expounds Acintya bhedābheda philosophy [यथोर्णनाभिः सृजते गृह्णते च यथा पृथिव्यामोषधयः संभवन्ति । यथा सतः पुरुषात्केशलोमानि तथाऽक्षरात्संभवतीह विश्वम् ॥]. Thus By these reference one can ascertain that Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is ever existing, Vyāsa deva just manifests it at the end of each Dvāpara yūga. Also a disciplic succession of Acintya Bhedābheda, starting from Śrī Brahmā is found in these verses,[Thus it is proven that Acintya Bhedābheda is not a new invention but the actual purport of the Vedas]. Thus it is ascertained that the Bhāgavatam was always existing but Śrī vyāsa wrote it at the end of Dvāpara Yūga and then again expanded it after writing the Mahābhārata. The prototype which he wrote before Mahābhārata is the recension cited by Śrī Madhva. As infered from Sumadhvavijaya 4.52 अशेष-शिश्यैश्च तदाज्ञया तदा परीक्षणायैक्षि समस्त-पुस्तकम्। स तत्र हन्तैक-तमे स्थितं त्यजन् न तावदध्याय-निकायमभ्यधात्॥. However reading this article One should not seek to find difference between Bhagavadrūpas, for in the Upaniṣads its found "ramante yogino'nante nityānande cidātmani . iti rāmapadenāsau paraṃ brahmābhidhīyate", "sarvairdevaiḥ sevitaṃ divaṃ tatsāmnastṛtīyaṃ pādaṃ jānīyāt brahmasvarūpaṃ nirañjanaṃ paramavyomnikaṃ", "nārāyaṇa paraṃ brahma tattvaṃ nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ". Thus Rāma, Nṛsiṁha etc forms are non different from Kṛṣṇa and are Kṛṣṇa himself, and are eternally Para Brahman, thus we should not differentiate between them and worship them accordingly. Just as Kṛṣṇa is not the descendent of Bhṛgu nor of Raghu in the particular form still, Akrura addresses him as 'नमो भृगुणां पतये द‍ृप्तक्षत्रवनच्छिदे । नमस्ते रघुवर्याय रावणान्तकराय च ॥', we readily infer that it is the cumulation of attributes found in Bhārgava and Rāghava avatāras, in the same way when the specific attributes like 'svayam bhagavānatva' etc is used for other forms we must understand that it is specified for Kṛṣṇa alone, this type of meditation is valid as per 'upasaṁhāro’rthābhedād vidhi-śeṣavat samāne ca'. In conclusion as Baladeva prabhu wrote in Laghubhāgavatāmṛta tippaṇi 'अन्यत्वं भेदकार्य विशेषादेव; नतु भेदात, वस्तुनि भेदविरहादिति बोध्यम्॥' 'When speaking of “otherness” in relation to the Lord’s form (the Lord’s form and himself), actual difference is not implied, but rather visesa, or apparent difference, for the forms of the Lord is without actual differentiation.'

We are believers of Tat Kratu Nyāya, the principle that the result of an action accords with the performer’s resolve, As our main Goal is Kṛṣṇa-prema in our respective rasas, we have resolved ourselves only to the attainment of that and nothing else. Thus Our philosophical conclusions also show a tinge of such Bias backed with Śrūti and Smṛti Pramāṇas

Śrī Yaśasvīninandana Raṅganāthena kṛta ‘Kṛṣṇastu Bhagavān svayam’ nāmak Anuccheda  Saṁpūrṇaṁ