वेदान्तसारः/प्रथमाध्यायः/चतुर्थःपादः
"
प्रथमाध्याये चतुर्थः पादः
आनुमानिकाधिकरणम् १
आनुमानिकमप्येकेषामिति चेन्न शरीररूपक-
विन्यस्तगृहीतेर्दर्शयति च ॥| १ ॥
एकेषां कठानां शाखाय!मानुमानेिकं प्रधानमपि जगत्कारणत्वेन
"महतः परमव्यक्तमू इत्युच्यत इति चेत् , नं ; पूर्वत्र ** आत्मानं
ADHYAY A I, PADA IV
ANUMANIKADHIKARANA 1
1. Anumanikamapyekesamiti cenna, sarirarupaka-
vinyastagrhiterdarsayati ca
If it be said that some (mention) that which is proved by inference (as the cause of the creation etc. of the world); we deny this, because (there is mention of the body in metaphor) and (the text) shows this.
In the scriptural text belonging to some of the Vedic seers (i.e. Kathas) the Pradhana, that could be proved by inference, is stated to be the cause of the world. The text is this- 'Beyond Mahat is the Avyakta (or unmanifest Prakrti' (Kalh. 1.3-11). It is not so. The scriptural text, १] प्रथमाध्याये चतुथैः पाद्ः ११७
रथिनं विद्धि इत्यादेिषूपासनोपायेषु वशीकार्यत्वाय रथिरथादिरूपकविन्य- स्तेषु शरीराख्यरूपकविन्यस्तस्यtत्राव्यक्तशब्देन गृहीतेः ! "इन्द्रियेभ्यः परा ह्यर्थाः इत्यादिना हि वशीकार्यत्वे परा उच्यन्ते । तथाचोत्तरत्र श्रुतिरेव दशैयतेि----"यच्छेद्वाड्मनसी प्राज्ञः इत्यदिना t!
सूक्ष्मं तु तदर्हत्वात् ॥ २ ॥
सूक्ष्ममव्यक्तमेव शरीरावस्थं कार्यार्हमित्यव्यक्तशब्देन शरीरमेव गृह्यते ॥ यद्वेि रूपकविन्यtस्तानामेव ग्रहणं, किमर्थम् "अव्यक्तात्पुरषः परः इति - अत आह ---
'Know the self as riding in a chariot' (Kath. 1-3-3) men- tions in a metaphorical sense, the various means of meditation as the chariot-rider, chariot etc. in order to teach their control. There the body which is mentioned as chariot should be taken as meant by the word Avyakta. Consider the text, 'Higher than the senses are their objects etc.' (Kath. 1-3.10). Here the objects are mentioned as higher in the matter of control. The subsequent passage, viz. 'The intelligent should suppress his speech and mind' (Kath. 1-3-13) teaches the same thing.
2. Suksmam tu tadarhatvat
. But the subtle is the body; on account of its capacity.
The Avyakta (i.e. the unevolved Prakrti), that is of subtle state, assumes the state of the body, and is capable of entering into activities. Therefore the word, Avyakta, denotes the body.
If the things that are mentioned metaphorically are meant here, then why is it stated thus, 'Higher than the Avyakta is the Person' (Kath. 1-3-11)? The Sutrakara says in reply thus ११४ वैदान्तसारः [अधि.
तदधीनस्वादर्थवत् ॥ ३ ॥
पुरुषाधीनत्वादात्मशरीरादिकमर्थवदुपासननिर्वृत्तये भवति । पुरुषो ह्यन्तर्यामी 'सर्वैमात्मादिकं प्रेरयन्नुपासनोपायत्वेन वशीकार्यकाष्ठा प्राप्यश्चेति "सा काष्ठा सा परा गतिः" इत्युच्यते ॥
ज्ञेयत्वावचनाच्च ll ४ ॥
अत्राव्यक्तस्य ज्ञेयत्वावचनाच्चं न कापिलमव्यक्तमू॥
3. Tadadhinatvadarthavat
Matter in its subtle state subserves an end, on account of its dependence on Him (viz. the Supreme Person).
The individual selves and the body etc. are dependent on the Highest Person. Hence they serve the purpose of helping for the perfection of the meditation. Indeed the Highest Person, being Inner Ruler, directs all the individual selves, etc. for the meditation. Hence He is one of the means of the meditation and occupies the foremost place of those that must be brought under influence. He is also reachable by the meditators. The scripture states thus, " He occupies the highest pJace. He is the Highest course' (Kath. 1-3-11).
4. Jneyatvavacanacca
And on account of the absence of statement of its being an object of knowledge.
There are no statements to prove that the Avyakta (i.e. unevolved Prakrti) is an object of knowledge. Hence it cannot be the Avyakta of Kapila's School.
1 सर्वात्मादिकं M 1, M 3.
१] प्रथमाध्याये चतुथैः पादः ११९
वदतीति चेन्न, प्राज्ञो हि प्रकरणात्॥ ९ ॥
"अशब्दमस्पर्शम् इत्यारभ्य "निचाय्य तम्' इति वदतीतेि
चेत् ; न ; "तद्विष्णोः परमं पदम्' "एष सर्वेषु भूतेषु गूढोत्मा न प्रकाशते इत्यादिना प्रकृतः प्राज्ञो हि "नेिचाय्य तम् इति ज्ञेय उच्यते|॥
त्रयाणामेव चैवमुपन्यासः प्रश्नश्च ॥ ६ ॥
उपास्योपासनोपासकानां त्रयाणामेवास्मिन् प्रकरणे ज्ञेयत्वेनोपन्यासः
5. Vadatiti cenna, prajno hi prakaranat
Should it be said that the text declares it to be known; we say, not so, because the Intelligent Self is referred to in the context.
If it be said that the scriptural text beginning with · It is without sound, without touch' and ending with 'knowing it.' (Kath. 1-3-15) declares that Avyakta is the object of knowledge, it is not so. The intelligent Self is referred to in the scriptural text 'Knowing Him' who is read in the context of the passage' That Highest place of Visnu (Kalh. 1-3-9). 'This Self is hidden in all beings and does not shine forth' (Kath. 1-3-12).
6. Trayanameva caivamupanyasah prasnasca
And of three only, there is the mention in this way and also the question.
In the Upanisad under discussion there is the mention, in the form of questions and answers, of only three things, viz. the object of the meditation. the nature of the meditation
1 तम् omitted M 2. १२० वेदान्तसारः [अधि.
प्रश्नश्व् ; न प्रधानादेः | "अध्यात्मयोगाधिगमेन देव्ं मत्वा इत्यादेि, रुपन्यासः | "येयं प्रेते वेिचिकित्सा मनुष्ये अस्तीत्येके इत्यादिकश्च प्रश्नः|॥|
महद्वच्च ॥ ७ ॥
"बुद्धेरात्मा महान् परः" इत्यात्मशब्दाद्यथा न तान्त्रिको महान्, तथाव्यक्तमपीतेि |॥
चमसाधिकरणम् २
चमसवदविशेषात् ॥ ८ ॥
and the person engaged in the meditation. But there is no mention at all of the Pradhana etc. The mention is this-, They know the Lord through knowledge of the self, obtained with concentrated mind' (Kath. 1-2-12). The question is this 'Some say that there is something after death; some say no (Kath. 1.1.20).
7. Mahadvacca
And as in the case of the Mahat.
'Higher than the intellect is the great self' (Kath. 1-3-10). Here the word, Mahan, refers not to the Mahat of the Samkhyas because the usage of the word Atman. Similarly their Avyakta also should not be taken as meant.
CAMASADHIKARANA 2
8. Camasavadavis'esat
. On account of there being no mention of the special characteristic; as in the case of Camasa.'
Camasa is a cup used in the sacrifice for drinking Soma juice.
३] प्रथमाध्याये चतुथैः पादः १२१
"अजामेकां लोहेितशुक्लकृष्णां बहीः प्रजाः स्रृज्ञमानाम् इत्यत्र न तन्त्रसिद्धा प्रकृतिः कारणत्वेनोक्ता | जन्माभावयोगमात्रेण न तस्या एव प्रतीतिः, "अर्वाग्बिलश्चमसः" इतिवत् प्रकरणे विशेषकाभावातू | यथा "इदं तच्छिरः इति हि चमसो विशेप्यते यौगेिकशव्दाद्विशेष प्रतीतिर्हि विशेषकापेक्षा |
ज्योतिरुपक्रमा तु तथा ह्यधीयत एके ॥ ९॥
ज्योतिर्ब्रहा | ज्योतिरुपक्रमा ब्रह्मकारणिकेयमजा । तथाहि ब्रह्म-
The scriptural text 'The unborn one, red, white and black who produces many creatures' (S'vet. IV-5) does not state that the Prakrti of the Samkhyas is the cause of the creation, etc. of the world. It cannot be said, that on consideration of the derivative meaning, 'Viz. the absence of birth, the prakrti alone is understood here, because in this context, the word Aja has not been used in any particular sense, as in the case of the word Camasa used in the text, "The Camasa with downward mouth' (Brh. II-2-3). Here the word Camasa, is used in a special sense. The scriptural text in support of this is this- 'It is the head' (Brh. 11-2-3). The apprehension of a particular thing by a derivative word is due to the mention of its qualifying attributes.
9. ]yotirupakrama tu tathahyadhiyata eke
It (Prakrti) has the light for its origin, for thus some read in their text.
The word 'light' means ' the Brahman '. That means that this Aja (i.e. Prakrti) has the Brahman for its origin.
1 ज्योतिरुप्रक्रमा omitted A I, M 1. l' १२.२ थेदान्तसारः [अवि.
कारणिकाया एव प्रतिपादकमेतत्सरूपं मन्त्रं च तैत्तिरीया अधीयते। "अणोरणीयान्महतो महीयानू इत्यारभ्य "अतः समुद्रा गिरयश्व इत्यादेिना सर्वस्य ब्रह्मण उत्पत्त्या तदात्मकत्वप्रतिपादनसमये "अजामेकाम् इति पठन्ति । अतस्तत्प्रत्यभिज्ञानादियं ब्रह्मकारणिकेतेि निश्चीयते॥
कल्पनोपदेशाच्च मध्वादिवदविरोधः ॥ १० ॥
कल्पना सृष्टिः । यथा "सूर्याचन्द्रमसौ धाता यथापूर्वमकल्पयत् इति' । "अप्त्मान्मायीं सृजते विश्वमेतत् इत्यादिना सृष्टयुपदेशादजात्व -
The Taittiriyas read in their text that the Aja had the Brahman for its cause. The text begins with 'smaller than the small, greater than the great, etc.' (Tait. 11-10-1) and ends with, 'From Him the seas and the mountains etc.' (Tait. 11-10-3). This proves that everything is born from the Brahman and has the Brahman for its self. In the context of the elucidation of this truth they read the text 'The unborn one etc.' (Tait. 11-10-5). Therefore it is decided that Brahman is the cause of the Prakrti, because of the remembrance of the teaching mentioned above.
10. Kalpanopdes'acca madhvadivadavirodhah"
And on account of the teaching of the Kalpana (i.e. creation), there is no contradiction as in the case of the Madhuvidya.
'Kalpana means 'creation'. It is so stated in the scriptural text, ' The creator created the sun and the moon as they were before' (Tait. 11-1-38). The creation of the Prakrti has been taught in the text, ' The Lord of wonderful power created this universe out of this' (S'vet. IV -9). Therefore no contradiction arises in Pradhana's being unborn and also
l इति omitted A1. M 3. Tait. Grantha edition followed, ३] प्रथमाध्याये चतुर्थः पादः १२३
ब्रुहत्कार्यत्वयोरविरोधः| अविरोधश्च प्रलयकाले नामरुपे वेिहायाचिद्वमत्वपि सूक्ष्मरूपेण ब्रह्मशरीरतया तिष्ठतीत्यजात्वम् | सृष्टिकाले नामरूपे भजमाना प्रकृतिर्ब्रहाकारणिका । यथा आदित्यस्य सृष्टिकाले वस्वादेिभोग्यरसाधारतया भधुत्वं कार्यत्वं च । तस्यैव प्रलयकाले मध्वादिव्यपदेशनर्हसूक्ष्मरूपेणा वस्थानमकार्यत्वं च मधुविद्यायां प्रतींयते "असौ वा आदित्यो देवमधु "नैवोदेता नास्तमेता, एकल एव मध्ये स्थाता इति । तद्वत् ॥
संख्योपसंग्रहाधिकरणम् ३
न संख्योपसंग्रहादपि नानाभावादतिरेकाच्च ॥ ११|॥
being produced by the Brahman. The non-sentient beings, at the time of the deluge, give up name and form and remain as the body of the Brahman, They are called unborn in that stage. At the time of creation they take name and form and hence they are caused by the Brahman Consider the following example-In the Madhuvidya it is stated that the sun, at the tlme of creation, assumes the state of 'honey' and also the state of effect, as he becomes the seat of those objects, that are pleasing to the taste of 'Vasu, etc. At the time of deluge, he assumes a subtle form, that cannot be indicated as 'honey' and he does not assume the state of effect. The scriptural texts in support of this are-
(a) 'Verify the Sun, is the honey of the gods' (Chand, III-I-I). (b) 'He does not rise, neither does He set. He remains alone in the middle' (Chand. III-11-1).
SAMKHYOPASAMGRAHADHIKARANA 3
11. N a samkhyopasamgrahadapi nanabhavadatirekacca
Not from the mention of the number even (could it be the Prakrti); because it is stated that He (assumes) many forms and that He is other than (the Prakrti). १२४ वेदन्तसारः [अधि.
"यस्मिन् पश्च पञ्चजनाः इत्यत्र पञ्चर्वैिशतिसंरूंयोपसंग्रहादपेि न तान्त्रिकाण्येतानि, यस्मिन्निति यच्छ्ब्दनिर्दिष्टब्रह्माधारतया तेभ्थः पृथग्भावात् | एतेषां तत्वातिरेकाश्च । यच्छब्दनिर्दिष्टमाकाशश्चेति द्वयमतिरिक्तम् ! संख्योपसंग्रहादपीत्यपिशब्दान्नात्र पश्चर्विशतेिसंख्यासंग्रहः । ** दिक्संख्ये संज्ञायाम् इति संज्ञाविषयोयं पञ्चजना इति । पञ्वजना नाम केचित् | ते पञ्चेति पञ्च पञ्चजना इत्युच्यते ; सप्त सप्तर्षय इतिवत् !
प्राणादथो वाक्यशेषात् ॥ १२ ॥
· He, on whom the five Five-things etc.' (Brh. IV.4-17). Here it may be argued that the Prakrti is meant, because there is a reference to its modification into twenty five kinds; however the Prakrti is not meant here. The words, 'On Him indicate that He is the support of that Prakrti and is different from that Prakrti. He belongs to a different category over and above the twenty-five categories. The objects denoted by the words, 'He' and 'Akasa' are different from the twenty- five varieties ot Prakrti. The word 'even' used in ' from the mention of the number even' indicates that the number twenty-five is not meant here. The word 'Pancajana', denotes a class of things known by the name of Pancajana. Panini states-' The words denoting direction and number are compounded with nouns provided the compound-word denotes the name of a thing' (Panini, II-I-50). 'This is similar to the statement, ' Seven seven-sages.'
12. Pranadayo vakyasesat
The word, Pancajana, refers to the breath, etc. on the ground of the complementary passage. ३] प्रथमाध्याये चतुर्थः पाः १२ँ५
पन्चनसंज्ञेिता; प्राणादयः पञ्चेन्द्रियाणीति "प्रiणस्य प्राणमुतं चक्षुषश्चक्षुः इत्यादिवाक्यशेषादवगम्यते | चक्षुःश्रोत्रसाहचर्यांत्प्राणान्न शब्दावपि स्पर्शनादीन्द्रियविषयौ ॥
ज्योतिषैकेषामसत्यन्ने ॥ १३ ॥
एकेषां शाखिनां काण्वानामू "अन्नस्यान्नम् इत्यसति, "तं देवा ज्योतिषां ज्योतिः इत्र्युपक्रमगतेन ज्योति:शब्देन पञ्व पञ्चजना इन्द्रियणीति ज्ञायन्ते । ज्योतिषां ज्योतिः प्रकाशकानां प्रकाशकं ब्रह्मेत्युक्त्वt, अनन्तरं "पञ्च पञ्चजनाः 'इत्युक्तेस्ते प्रकाशकानि पञ्चेन्द्रियाणीति गम्यते [|!
We see from a complementary passage, viz. ' They who know the breath of the breath, the eye of the eye, etc.' (Madhyamdina-Sakha) that the five things are the breath, etc. Because they are used in juxtaposition "with the words eye and the ear, the words 'breath' and 'the food' denote the organs of touch etc.
13. Jyotisaikesamasatyanne
In the text of some, the word light (i.e. Jyotis) indicates the five sense-organs, even though the word. food is not (used in their text). -
In the text of the Kanvas, the words, 'food of the food' are not used. But they begin "with the statement, ' Him the gods worship as the light of the lights' (Brh. IV-4-16). Here the word, 'light' used in the context along with the five five-things refers to the sense-organs. The words 'The light of lights' mean the Brahman who is the illuminator of illuminators. Then the words, 'the five five-things' are introduced. Hence, by the 'word· Pancajana. we understand the five organs.
1 इ:युक्तेते A I, M 1. १२ वैद्दान्तसitः [अधिं.
कारणत्वाधिकरणग्ं ४
कारणत्वेन चाकाशादेिषु यथाव्यपदिष्टोक्तेः ॥ १४ ॥
आकाशादिपु कार्यवर्गेषु कारणत्वेन सर्वत्र वेद|न्तवाक्येपु' "असद्वा इदमग्र आसीत् "तद्धेदं तर्ह्यव्याकृतमासीत् इत्यादेिष्वनिर्ज्ञातविशेषेपु "आत्मा वा इदमेक एवाग्र आसीत् { स ईक्षत लोकान्नु सृजै इति विशेषवाचिवाक्यनिर्दिष्टस्यैवोक्तेर्न तान्त्रिकाव्याकृतादिकारणवादप्रसङ्गः t{
समाकषात् ॥ १५ ॥
KARANATVADHIKARANA 4
. .
14. Karanatvena cakasadisu yathavyapadistokteh
And on account of (the Brahmnan) as described being declared to be the cause of the ether etc.
In all the Vedanta passages the Pradhana has not been declared to be the cause of ether, etc :-' Verily the Asat was in the beginning' (Tait. 1-7-1). 'Then, indeed, this remained undifferentiated' (Brh. 1-4-7). Here the special characteristics of the cause are not apprehended. But the special characteristics of the cause are apprehended in the scriptural text, 'The Self alone was in the beginning.' It thought, 'may I creat the worlds' (Ait. I-I). Hence it does not arise that Prakrti etc. of the Samkhya school, should be the cause of the creation.
15. Samakarsat
On account of bringing down (from another passage).
I कiरणवाक्येषु M 3. ९; प्रथमाध्थाये चतुर्थः पाद्ः 127
"सोऽकामयत बहु स्यां प्रजायेय इति पूर्वैनेिर्दिष्टस्र्यैव सर्वज्ञस्य "असद्वा इदमग्र आसीत् इत्यत्र समाकर्षाच्च स एवेति गम्यते । "तद्वेदं तर्ह्यव्याकृतमासीत् इति निर्दिष्टस्यैव "स एष इह प्रविष्ट आ नखाग्रेभ्यः "पश्यत्यचक्षुः इत्यत्र समाकर्षादेष एवाव्याकृतशब्द्रनिदिष्ट' इतेि निश्चीयते । असदव्याकृतशब्दौ तदानीं नामरूपविभागाभावादुपपधेते ॥t
जगद्वाचित्वाधिकरणम् ५
जगद्वाचित्वात् ॥ १६ ॥
"ब्रह्म ते ब्रुवाणि "इत्युपक्रम्य" यो वै बालाक, एतेषां पुरुषाणां
The scriptural text 'He thought may I become many' (Tait. 1-6-2) mentions the All-knowing Brahman. The same word denoting the Brahman is brought down in interpreting the text' Verily the Asat was in the beginning' (Tait. 1-7-1). Therefore He alone is meant here. In the same manner the text. 'Then, indeed, this remained Avyakrta (Un differentiated) (Brh. 1-4-7) mentioned the Brahman. The same word is brought down in interpreting the text 'He entered in here, even to the fingernail-tips' (Brh. 1-4-7) and 'He sees without eyes' (S'vet. III-19). The words Asat (non-existing) and Avyakrta (Undifferentiated) have to be explained to mean Him, who has neither name nor form at the beginning.
JAGADVACITVADHIKARNA 5
16. Jagadvacitavat
Because it denotes the world.
The scriptural text begins with, ' Let me tell you about the Brahman' (Kaus. III-4). and ends with, 'Oh Balaki, He,
1 एवाव्याकृत इति A 1, M 1. Kaus. Grantha edition followed. १२४ वेदुान्तसारः [अधि.
कर्ता यस्य वैतत्कर्म स वै वेदितव्यः इत्यत्र कर्मशव्दस्यैतच्छब्दसामा- नाधिकरण्येन क्रियत इति व्युत्पत्या जगद्वाचित्वत् परमेवं ब्र॑हा वेदेितव्य- तयोपदिष्टम् ॥
जीवसुरव्यप्राणलिङ्गान्नेति चैत् तद्वयारुयातम्॥ १७॥
"एतैरात्मभिर्भुङ्क्ते" "अथास्मिन् प्राण एवैकधा भवति इति च "जीवमुख्यप्राणलिंड्गान्न पर इति चेत् , एतत् प्रतर्दनविद्यायामेव परिहृतम् ।
who is the maker of these persons and to whom this work belongs, He, indeed, is to be known '(Kaus. III-26). Here the word, 'work' which is used in the same grammatical equation with the word, 'this' refers to the world, as it is said to be the product. Therefore what is taught here is that the Highest Brahman should be known.
17. Jivamukhyapranalinganneti cet tadvyakhytam
Should it be said that this is not so, on account of the distinguishing characteristics of the individual selves and of the Chief vital breath (i.e. Prana) rnen. tioned therein; we reply, that this has been explained before.
In the scriptural texts, 'He enjoys with the individual selves' (Kaus. -44) and 'Then with this Prana alone, he becomes one' (Kaus. III-39) the Highest is not referred to; because there are stated only the distinguishing characteristics of the individual selves and Prana. This objection has already been answered in the chapter dealing with the Pratardanavidya. In consideration of the context, it has
1 जीवादि M 2, 3. ९] प्रथमाध्याये चतुर्थः पादः १२९
पूर्वापरपर्यालोचनया ब्रह्मपरत्वे निश्चिते, तदनुगुणतया नेयमन्यल्लिड्गमितेि ॥
अन्यार्थे तु जैमिनिः प्रश्नव्याख्यानाभ्या-मपिचैवमेके ॥ १८ ॥
"तौ ह स्रुप्तं पुरुषमाजग्मतुः इत्यादिना देहातिरिक्तजीवसद्भाव- प्रतिपादनं,' तदतिरिक्तपरमात्मसद्भावज्ञापनार्थमिति "क्वैष एतद्वालाके पुरुषोशयेिष्ट" इति प्रश्नात्, "अथास्मिन् प्राण एवैकधा भवति इतेि
been determined that the Brahman is meant here. Therefore, other characteristics should be explained in consonance with the fact already established.
18. Anyartham tu Jaiminih prsnavyakhya
-nabhyamapi caivameke
But Jaimini thinks that it has another purpose, on account of the question and answer; and thus some also say.
That the individual selves are other than the body has been stated in the scriptural text, , They two, approached the person, who was asleep' (Brh . II-1-15). This statement is intended to teach that the Highest Self is other than the individual selves. This fact has been proved by the question and answer found in other scriptural text. The question is this-' "Where, O Balaki, did this person sleep ?' (Kaus. III.35) The answer-' Then he becomes one with this Prana '. (Kaus. III-39). This answer bears the same idea
I प्रतिबोधनं A 1 M 2
17 १३९ वेट्रान्तसारः |अधि.
"सता सोम्य तदा संपन्नो भवति इति वाक्यसमानार्थकात् प्रति- वचनाच्चावगभ्यते 1 एके वाजसनेयिनोऽपि, 'एतत्प्रश्नप्रतिवचनसमानाथै* वाक्यं स्पष्टमधीयते च--"कैष तदा" इत्यार्दि "य एषोऽन्तईदय काशस्तस्मिन्छेते इत्यन्तम् t!
वाक्यान्वयाधिकरणम् ६
वाक्यान्वयात्त् ॥l १९ ॥
"न वा अरे पत्युः कामाय पतिः प्रेियो भवत्यात्मनस्तु कामाय
इत्यारभ्य, आत्मा वा अरे द्रष्टुव्यः इत्यादिनोपदेिष्टः परमात्मा ;
as contained in the text 'My dear, then he has reached the Being' (Chand. VI-8-l). Some (i.e. Vajasaneyins) recite the passage bearing the same meaning as contained in the question and answer given above. It begins with 'where then was this person' (8rh. 11-1-16) and closes with, ' He sleeps in Akasa, that is encased in the heart' (Brh. 11-1-17).
VlKYANVAYADHIKARANA 6
19. Vakyanvayat
On account of the sentences giving a connected meaning. What is taught in the scriptural passage, beginning with 'Verily, a husband is dear, not for the love of the husband, but for the love of the Self' and ending with 'The Self, my dear, is to be seen, etc.' (Brh . 11-4-5) is the Highest Self.
1 प्रश्न" omitted M 1, 2. *6 सरुपं A 1, M 3 ६] प्रथमाध्याये चतुर्थः पाद- १३१
"अमृतत्वस्य तु नाशास्ति वित्तेन इत्यारभ्य, "आत्मनि खल्वरे दृष्टे श्रुते मते विज्ञात इदं सर्वै विदितम् इत्यादेः “ येनेदं सर्व विजानाति इत्यन्तस्य कृत्स्नस्य वाक्यस्य परमात्मन्येवान्वयात् ॥
अस्मिन्प्रकरणे प्रकरणान्तरे च जीववाचिशब्देन परमात्मनोऽभिधाने तत्सामानाधिकरण्ये च कारणं मतान्तरेणाह–
प्रतिज्ञासिद्धेर्लिङ्गमाश्मरथ्यः ॥ २९ |॥|
"आत्मनेि खल्वरे दृष्टे" इत्यादिना परमात्मज्ञानेन सर्वविज्ञान
There is a reference to the Highest Self in the text, beginning with 'For immortality, however, there is no hope through the wealth.' (Brh. 11-4-2) and concluding with "when the Self is seen, hearkened, thought on and understood, then all this is known" (Brh. IV-5-6) and' "By means of which one understands all this" (Brh. IV-5-15). All these sentences are with reference to the Highest Self.
In this context and also in other context the words denoting Jiva mean the Highest Self and are used in gramma- tical equation with the word denoting Him The Sutrakara gives the reason for this according to the different views in the following Sutras-
20. Pratijnasiddherlingamas'marathyah
It is a mark indicating that the proposition under discussion is proved. Thus Asmarathya thinks.
The Highest Self is meant here, in order to establish the proposition, namely, "All this will become known through the knowledge of the Highest Self" as stated in the १३२ वेदान्तसारः [अधि . प्रतेिज्ञासिद्धये जीवस्य तत्कार्यतया तस्मादनतिरिक्तत्वं ज्ञापयितुं जीवशब्देन परमात्माभिधानमित्याश्मरथ्यः ॥
उत्क्रमिष्यत एवंभावादित्यौडुलोमिः ॥ २१ ॥
उत्क्रमिष्यतो मुक्तस्य परमात्मस्वरूपभावादात्मशब्देन परमात्माभि- धानमित्यौडुलोमिः||
अवस्थितेरिति क्राशकृत्लः ॥ २२ ॥
"य आत्मनि तिष्ठन्नात्मनोऽन्तरः" इत्यादेिना 'जीवात्मनेि
scriptural text-' when the Self is seen etc.' (Brh. IV.5.6). Asmarathya opines that the Highest Self is denoted by the words referring to Jiva in order to bring to our remembrance the fact, that the Jivas are not different from the Highest Self, as they are effected by Him.
21. Utkramisyata evambhavadityaudulomih
Because the individual selves, when they depart, possess the characteristics of the Highest Self; thus Audulomi thinks.
Audulomi thinks that the word referring to the "self" denotes 'the Highest Self'; because the Mukta (i.e. the released soul) possesses the charcteristics of the Highest Self.
22. Avasthiteriti Kasakrtsnah
On account of the Brahman's abiding within the individual self; thus Kasakrtsna thinks.
The teacher, Kasakrtsna, thinks that the Highest Self is the self of the individual selves as stated in the text-' He, who
1 जीवात्मनः: A 1. M 3. ७] प्रथमाध्याये चतुर्थः पादः १३३
'परमात्मन आत्मतयावस्थितेरिति काशकृत्स्र आचार्यो मन्यते' | इदमेव मतं सूत्रकारः स्वीकृतवानेिति मत॒द्वयमुपन्यस्य तद्विरोध्येतदभिधानादन्य- स्यानभिधानाच्च निश्चीयते !ि
प्रकृत्यधिकरणम् ७
प्रकृतिश्च प्रतिज्ञादृष्टान्तानुपरोधात् ॥ २३ ॥
जगदुपादानकारणमपि परं ब्रह्म, न निमित्तमात्रम्; "स्तब्धोस्युत तमादेशमप्राक्ष्यो येनाश्रुवं श्रुतं भवति इति येनादेष्ट्रा निमेित्तभूतेन
remaining within the self, controls the self' (Brh. III.7.22. Madhy.) It is understood that the Sutrakara has accepted this view because after stating the views of the two schools mentioned above, he introduced this view in refutation of those views. More- over he has not stated any other view in refutation of this view. Hence it is decided that it must be the view of the Sutrakara.
PRAKRTYADHIKARANA 7
23. Prakrtisca pratijnadrstantanuparodhat
The Brahman is the material cause also on account of this truth not being in conflict with the proposition under discussion and the illustrative example.
The Highest Brahman is also the material cause of the world. He is not the instrumental cause alone. The scriptural text says thus-' You are proud. Did you ever ask about the Ruler (i.e.Ades'a) by hearing whom the unheard becomes heard?' (Chand. VI.l.3). It means "By the knowledge of Him, who is the Ruler, all this world of sentient and non-sentient beings
1 परमात्मन्: omitted A 1, M 3. मेने A 1, M 3. 2 अपि omitted M 1. १३४ वैदान्तसारः [अधि.
विज्ञातेन चेतनाचेतनात्मकं कृत्स्नं जगद्विज्ञातं भवतीत्यादेष्टृविज्ञानेन सर्वविज्ञानप्रतैिज्ञातदुपपादनरूपमृत्कार्यदृष्टान्तानुपरोधातू | आदिश्यतेऽने- नेत्यादेशः । 'आदेशशब्देनादेष्टाभिधीयते । आदेशः प्रशासनम्; "एतस्य वा अक्षरस्य प्रशासने गार्गेि इत्यादेिश्रुतेः ॥
अभिध्योपदेशाच्च ॥ २४ ॥
"तदैक्षत बहु स्यां प्रजायेय इतेि निमेित्तभूतस्येक्षितुर्विचित्रचिद्- चिद्रूपजगदाकारेणात्मनो बहुभवनसंकल्पोपदेशाच्चोपादानमपीतेि विज्ञायते ॥
become known.' The proposition is this-' AIl this will be- come known, if the Universal Ruler is known '. The illustra- tive example here is the clay. The above mentioned truth should be accepted so that the said proposition and the example may not be contradicted. The word Ades'a used in the text denotes the Ruler; because it means Him by whom the world is ruled over. Thus the word, Ades'a. means the Ruling Person. The scriptural text in support of this is thus- '0 Gargi, at the command of that imperishable etc.' (Brh. III-8-9).
24. Abhidhyopadesacca
Because also of the statement of His thought.
He thought 'may I become many' (Chand. VI-2.3). This scriptural text proves that the Person, who possesses the character of thinking and who is the instrumental cause, transformed Himself into the form of the world, consisting of various sentient and non-sentient beings through His will. Hence, it is known that He is the material cause also of the world.
I इत्युपदेश A 1, M 1. ७] प्रथमाध्याये चतुर्थः पादः १३५
साक्षाच्चोभयाम्नानात् ti २९ ॥
"ब्रह्म वनं ब्रह्म स वृक्ष आसीत् "ब्रह्माध्यतिष्ठद्भुवनानि धारयन् इत्युपादानं निमित्तं च ब्रहौवेति 'स्वशब्देनोभयाम्नानाश्च ॥
आत्मकृतेः t| २६ ॥
"सोकामयत इति निमित्तभूतस्य स्वस्यैव जगदाकारेण कृते "तदात्मानं स्वयमकुरुत इत्युपदिश्यमानायाः परमपुरुषो जगन्निमित्त मुपादानं चेति विज्ञायते ॥
25. Saksaccobhayamnanat
And on account of both being directly declared it the scriptures.
"The Brahman is the wood. That Brahman became the tree. The Brahman stood supporting the worlds' (Tait. Brh. II-8-9). This scriptural text shows that the Brahman in both the instrumental cause and the material cause of the world. This fact has been declared in distinct word in the scriptural text.
26. Atmakrteh
On account of the statements as regards the Self transforming.
The text, 'He desired' (Tait. I-2-6-2) shows that He is the instrumental cause. Again the text 'That Self created Himself.' (Tait. 1-2-7-1) shows that He made Himself in the form of the world. From these statements it is understood that the Highest Self is known to be both the instrumental cause and the material cause of the world.
I स्व, omitted M 2. · निमित्तस्य A 1. १३६ वैदान्तसारः [अधि,
परस्य ब्रह्मणो नेिरवद्मत्वसत्यसंकल्पत्वादेस्तद्विपरीतानन्तापुरुषार्थाश्रय- जगादाकारेणात्मकृतेश्चाविरोधः कथमित्याशङ्कयाह--
परेिणामात् ॥ २७ ॥
अत्रोपदिश्यमानात् परिणामात् तदविरोध एव । अविभक्तनाम- रूपातिसूक्ष्मचिद्चिद्वस्तुशरीरकः कारणावस्थः परमपुरुषः स्वयमेव“ सोऽका- मयत बहु स्यां प्रजायेय इतेि वेिभक्तंनामरूपचिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरको भवेयमेिति
The stainlessness and the true will are known to be characteristics of the Highest Self. He is again said to have created Himself into the form of the world. which is the seat of endless evils that are opposed to the above-mentioned characteristics and unfit to be the ambitions of men. How can this contradiction be averted? The author of the Sutras answers this question thus-
27. Parinamat
It is so owing to the modification.
No contradiction arises, as the scriptural text here teaches the modification. The Highest Person in the causal state has as His body the sentient and non-sentient beings in a subtle state, that cannot be distinguished with distinct name and form. He wills then that the sentient and non-sentient beings, that are His body, should have distinct names and forms. Then He separates from Himself all the sentient and non-sentient beings, that constitute His body in a subtle state. The scriptural authority is this He desired' May I become many' (Tait. I-2-6-2) , He created all this' (Tail. 1-2-6-2). He entered the sentient and non.sentient beings that constitute His ७j प्रथमाध्याये चतुर्थ पादः १३७
संकल्प्य, ' इदं सर्वमसृजत | यदिदंं किंच' इति स्वशरीरभूत- मतिसूक्ष्मंं चिदचिद्वस्तु स्वस्माद्विभज्य, 'तत् सृष्टृा ! तदेवानुप्राविशत्' इति स्वस्माद्विभक्ते चिदचिद्वस्तुनि स्वयमेवात्मतयानुप्रविश्य,' सच्च त्यच्चा. भवत् | निरुक्तंं चानेिरुक्तं च । निलयनं चानिलयनं च | विज्ञानं चावेि- ज्ञनं च । सत्यं चानृतं च सत्यमभवत् ' इति हि स्वस्य बहुभवनरूप. परिणाम उपदेिश्यते ! अतो न कश्चिद्विरोधः 1 अविभागावस्थायामपि जीवस्तत्कर्म न सूक्ष्मरूपेण तिष्ठतीति वक्ष्यति- 'न कर्माविभागादिति चेन्न, अंनादेित्वादुपपद्यंते चाप्युपलभ्यते च ' इति ॥
योनिश्च हि गीयते ॥ २८ ।
' यद्भूतयोनिम्' इल्यादिषु योनिश्च गीयते । अतश्चोपादानमपि |
body in the subtle state also and that are different from Him This is stated thus-' Having created it, He entered it' (Tait. 1-2.6-2). Then the scriptural text teaches that He has transformed Himself into many forms 'He became Sat and Tyat, defined and undefined, based and non-based, conscious: and unconscious, real and unreal; yet He remained as real' (Tait. 1-2-6-1). The above-mentioned texts teach that He took the modification into many forms. Therefore no contradiction arises. Even in the state of non-distinction the individual selves and their actions are in a subtle state So states Brahma-sutra 11-1-35.
28. Yonisca hi giyate He is sung as constituting the source also.
He is also called the source in the text-' The wise perceive Him as the source of beings' (Mund. 1-1-6). Therefore He is the material cause also.
1 अनु omitted M 2.
18 १३८ वेान्तसारः [अधि,
सर्वव्याख्यानाधिकरणम् ८
एतेन सर्वे व्याख्याता व्याख्याताः ॥ २९ ॥
' जन्माद्यस्य यतः ' इत्यादिनैतदन्तेन न्यायेन सर्वे वेदान्ता ब्रझपरा व्याख्याताः | द्विरुक्तिरध्यायपरिसमाप्तिद्योतनाय ॥
इति श्रीभगवद्रामानुजविरचिते वेदान्तसारे प्रथमस्या- ध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः
समाप्तश्चाध्याय:
SARVAVYAKHYANADHIKARANA 8
29. Etena sarve vykhyata vyakhyatah.
Thus all the texts have been commented upon; have been commented upon.
By these lines of arguments set forth from the second Sutra to the end of this chapter, it has been proved that all the Vedanta passages refer to the Highest Brahman. The repetition indicates that the chapter is closed.
THUS ENDS THE 4TH PADA OF THE 1ST ADHYAYA.
)"