वेदान्तसारः/प्रथमाध्यायः/प्रथमः पादः
श्रीः
श्रीभगवद्रामानुजविरचितः
वेदान्तसारः
प्रथमाध्याये प्रथमः पादः
जेिज्ञासाधिकरणम् १
समस्तचिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरायाखिलात्मने।
श्रीमते निर्मलानन्दोदन्वते विष्णवे नमः ॥
VEDANTASARA
OF
SRI.RAMANUJA
ADHYAYA I, PADA I
JIJNASIDHIKARANA 1
I BOW unto Visnu1, who has as his body all the sentient and non-sentient beings, who is the self of all objects, who is associated with Sri and who is the ocean of bliss untainted with impurity.
^1 The Supreme God In VisishtAdvaita philosophy and religion
परमपुरुषप्रसादात् वेदान्तसार 1 उद्ध्रियते-
अथातो ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा ॥ १ ॥
अत्रायमथशब्द आनन्तर्ये वर्तते, अतःशव्द्रशिरस्कत्वात् । अतः- शब्दश्च पूर्ववृत्तस्य हेतुभावे । पूर्ववृत्तं च कर्मज्ञानमिति विज्ञायते, आरिप्सितस्य ब्रह्मज्ञानस्य वेदार्थविचारैकदेशत्वात्। अधीतवेदस्य हि पुरुषस्य, कर्मप्रतिपादनोपक्रमत्वाद्वेदामां, कर्मविचारः प्रथमं कार्य इति "अथातो घर्मजिज्ञासा" इत्युक्तम् । कर्मणां च प्रकृतिविकृतिरूपाणां
Vedantasara or the quintessence of Vedanta is extracted and offered to the public by the grace of the Highest Person.
1. Athto Brahma-jijnasa
Then therefore the inquiry into the Brahman.
Here the word, then is used in the sense of coming thereafter; because it is followed by the word therefore. The word, therefore, is used in the sense of causation of that which has been concluded previously. What has been concluded previously, is understood to be the knowledge of ritualistic works; because the inquiry into the Brahman, which is desired to be commenced here, happens to be a portion of the inquiry into the meaning of the Vedas. Indeed, for the person, who has completed his study of the Vedas, the first duty is to make an inquiry into the ritualistic works, as the Vedas commence to deal with them in the beginning. Hence it is stated " Then therefore the inquiry into the Dharma " (Mim. 1. 1. 1). Taking the topic of Dharma separately, it is determined in the series of Sutras ending with "The priestly function must be common for all the castes as all are able to do it" (Mim. 12-4-40) that
1सारार्थ A 1, M 1. I This is the Purvapakshasutra of the last Adhikarana.
धर्मार्थकामरूपपुरुषार्थसाधनतानिश्चयः "प्रभुत्वादार्त्विज्यम्" इत्यन्तेन सूत्रकलापेन संकर्मेण 1</> कृतः ।
एवं वेदस्यार्थपरत्वे कर्मणां च तदर्थत्वे तेषां च केवलानां त्रेिवर्गफलत्वे निश्चिते सतेि, वेदैकदेशभूतवेदान्तभागे केवलकर्मणामल्पा- स्थिरफलत्वं ब्रह्मज्ञानस्य चानन्तस्थिरफलत्वमापाततो दृष्ट्वा, अनन्तरं मुमुक्षोरवधारितपरिनिष्पन्नवस्तुबोधजननशब्द्रशत्तेः पुरुषस्य ब्रह्मबुभुत्सा जायत इति 'अथातो ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा' इति कर्मविचारानन्तरं तत एव हेतोर्ब्रह्मविचारः कर्तव्य इत्युक्तं भवतेि ।
the rituals of Prakrti and Vikrti kinds2 are only the means to attain the three-fold object of human pursuit viz. Dharma (i.e. ritualistic works), Artha (i.e. wealth) and Kama (i.e.gratification of desire)
The Vedas naturally imply their meaning. The ritualistic works are their meaning. It is also determined that these mere works can grant only the three-fold object of human pursuit stated above. It is roughly realised in Vedanta, which is a portion of the Vedas, that the ritualistic works give only small and transitory results and the Brahman-realization only can produce infinite and eternal results. Then, in the person, who wants to attain Moksa (i.e. final release), and who has determined,
1ससंकषेण M 2, M 4; संकर्षणेन M 1, M 3. सँकर्षेण् आकर्षेण ; बेदार्थविचाररुपसामान्यविषयात् कर्मविचारस्य पृथक्करणेनेत्यर्थः
2The Prakrti is that, of which details are fully mentioned in the code. The Vlkru is that, of which details are not fully mentioned in the code, but have to be borrowed from the Prakriti तदिदमाह श्रुतिः-“ परीक्ष्य लोकान् कर्मचितान् ब्राह्मणो र्निर्वेद- मायान्नास्त्यकृतः कृतेन । तद्विज्ञानार्थे स गुरुमेवाभिगच्छेत्समित्पाणिः श्रोत्रेियं भ्रह्मनिष्ठम् । तस्मै स विद्वानुपसन्नाय सम्यक् प्रशान्तचित्ताय शमान्विताय । येनाक्षरं पुरुषं वेद सत्यं प्रोवाच तां तत्वतो ब्रह्मविद्याम् ।" इति । ब्राह्मणः वेदाभ्यासरतः । कर्मचितान् कर्मणा संपादितान् लोकान् आराध्यक्षयेिष्णुत्वेन क्षयस्वभावान् कर्ममीमांसया परीक्ष्य । अकृतः नित्यः
that words can denote even the objects that have been already in existence, the desire to know the Brahman springs up. Therefore, it is stated in the Sutra, " Then therefore the inquiry into the Brahman" (Br. S. 1-1-1) that after the inquiry of Karman, by the very same reason the inquiry into the Brahman is to be made.
Here is the scriptural statement thus-' Having examined the worlds obtained by works, let a Brahmana acquire distaste on ritualistic works, as the object which is not in the scope of being effected could not be gained by action; to know that object let him approach with sacred fuel in hand necessarily a preceptor, who is learned in the Vedas and has a steady footing in the Brahman. To him (i.e. to such a pupil) who with tranquil mind and restrained senses has thus approached, that wise person (the guru) should speak of the knowledge about the Brahman by which he (the pupil) can know the ever-existing and indestructible Purusa (person)' (Mund 1-2-12 & 13). Here the Brahmana is one, who is en- gaged in the study of the Vedas. The word Karmacitan means , gained through the works'. The word worlds (lokan) means to imply 'those worlds that are destructible by nature as the
परमपुरषः कृतेन कर्मणा न संपाद्य इति यो निर्वेदमायात् , स तद्वि- ज्ञानार्थं गुरुमेवाभिगच्छेत् समित्पाणिः श्रोत्रियं वेदान्तवेदिनं ब्रह्मनिष्ठं साक्षात्कृतपरमपुरुषस्वरूपम् । स गुरुः सम्यगुपसन्नाय तस्मै येन विद्यावेिशेषेण अक्षरं सत्यं परम्पुरुषं विद्यात्, तां ब्रह्मविद्यां प्रोवाच प्रब्रूयादित्यर्थः | स गुरुमेवाभिगच्छेत्, तस्मै स विद्वान् प्रोवाचे- त्यन्वयात् अप्राप्तत्वाच्च ; विधावपि लिटो वेिधानात्--" छन्दसि लुङ्लङ्लिटः ' इति ॥
deities worshipped are destructible'. He should determine thus on inquiry into Karman-' The Highest Person who is eternal can not be attainable by works '. He (i.e. the pupIl) then acquires distaste in all worldly objects. To know That (Brahman) he should approach the preceptor alone with fuel in hand. The word, srotriya means, 'one who is learned in the Vedas up to the end'. The words 'who has a steady footing in the Brahman mean' One who has appre- hended the true nature of the Highest Person'. Then he (the preceptor) should speak of the knowledge of the Brahman to him (the pupil) who approached him properly, with which knowledge the pupil can know the Eternal Highest Person. The perfect tense in the word Provocashould be taken to mean the injunction, because of the construction-' The pupil should approach the preceptor alone and the learned preceptor should teach him'. More over, the teaching by the preceptor is not known ordained otherwise.
The perfect tense is ordained in the sense of injunction by the rule-' In Veda, the aorist, imperfect and perfect tenses are used in other senses also'. (Pan. 3-4-6). जन्माद्यधिकरणम् २
जन्माद्यस्य यतः ॥ २ ॥
- अस्य विचित्रचिदचिन्मिश्रस्य व्यवस्थितसुखदुःखोपभोगस्य जगतो
जन्मस्थितिलया यतः, तद् ब्रह्मेति प्रतिपाद्यति श्रुतिरित्यर्थः ; "यतो वा इमानि भूतानि जायन्ते । येन जातानि जीवन्ति । यत्प्रयन्त्यभिसंविशन्ति । तद्विजिज्ञासस्व । तद् ब्रह्मेति" इति । सूत्रे यत इति हेतौ पञ्चमीं, जनिस्थितिलयानां साधारणत्वात् । जनिहेंतुत्वं च निमित्तोपादान-
JANMADYADHIKARANA 2
2. JanmAdyasya yatah
- (The Brahman is He) from whom (proceed) the
creation, etc. of this Universe.
- The scriptural text is this- 'From whom all these
रूपं विवक्षितम् । ' यतः' इति हि श्रुतिरुभयविषया । कथमिति चेत्, 'यतो वा इमानि' इति प्रसेिद्धवन्निर्देशात् ; प्रसिद्धेश्वोमय- विषयत्वात् । "सदेव सोम्यदमग्र आसींदेकमेवाद्वितीयम् + तदैक्षत बहु स्यां प्रजायेयेति । तत्तेजोऽसृजत" इत्यत्र सदेवेदमग्र एकमेवा- सींदित्युपादानतां प्रतिपाद्य, अद्वितीयमेित्यधिष्ठात्रन्तरनिवारणात् सच्छब्द- वाच्यं ब्रह्मैव निमित्तमुपादानं चेतेि विज्ञायते । "तदैक्षत बहु स्यां प्रजायेय" इत्यात्मन एव विचित्रस्थिरत्रसरूपेण बहुभवनं संकल्प्य तथैव सृष्टिवचनाञ्च | अतः श्रुतावपि 'यतः' इति हेतौ पञ्चमी ।
To the question-how is it? the reply is this-There is a clear reference to Him as being the cause of the creation,etc. (of the world) in the expression 'from whom etc.' as if He were a well-known celebrated Being. His celebrity includes the twofold causation said above. (Consider) the text 'Existence alone, my dear boy, this was in the beginning one only, without a second. . . . It thought 'May I become many and be born'. It created Tejas' (Chand. VI-2-1 & 3). Here the expression ' Existence alone this was in the beginning one only' proves that He is the material cause (of the Universe). The expression' without a second' refutes a different substratum. Hence it becomes known that the Brahman, who is denoted by the word 'existence' is both the efficient cause and the material cause (of the Universe). It is known also from the scriptural text " It thought 'May I become many and be born" that He did resolve to assume many variegated forms of sentient and non-sentient beings and then He did create (the Universe). Therefore the expression 'from whom is used in the scripture with the ablative case in this sense of causality in general,
- अत्रैव--ब्रह्मणो जगन्निमित्तत्वमुपादानत्वं च प्रतिपादितमर्थविरोधात्
"अस्मान्मायी सृजते विश्वमेतत्" इत्यादिविशेषश्रुत्या चाक्षिप्य " प्रकृ- तिश्च प्रतिज्ञादृष्टान्तानुपरोधात्, अभिध्योपदेशाच्च साक्षाच्चोभयाम्नानात्, आत्मकृतेः" इत्यादिभिः सूत्रैः परिहरिष्यते ।
- ननु च सर्वज्ञं सर्वशक्ति सत्यसंकल्पं निरवद्यतया निरस्तसमस्तापुरु-
षार्थगन्धं ब्रह्मैवात्मानं विचित्रचिदचिन्मिश्रं जगद्रूपमिदं सर्वमसृजतेति कथ- मुपपद्यते ? तदेतत् सूत्रकारः स्बयमेव परिचोद्य परिहरिष्यति । "अपितौ तद्वत्प्रसङ्गादसमञ्जसम्" " इतरव्यपदेशाद्धिताकरणादेिदोषप्रसक्तिः" इति चोद्यम्। परिहारस्तु–" न तु दृष्टान्तभावात्" "अधिकं तु भेदनिर्देशात्"
In this text (Brahmasutra) itself the fact that the Brahman is both the material cause and the efficient cause (of the Universe) has been objected on the ground of logical contradiction and of the specific statement in the Vedic text, viz. "The magician created the Universe from this" (S'vet.IV -1..9) and subsequently maintained after refuting the objection in the Sutras1-4-23 to 26.
How then does the Brahman- who is omniscient and omnipotent, who wills the truth and who has discarded all things unworthy to be of human pursuit as He himself being not tainted with evil-create the Universe, which is a mixture of various wonderful sentient and non-sentient beings? The author of the Sutras himself will raise this objection and answer it. He raises the objection in Sutras 11-1-8 and 11-1-21 and answers it in Sutras 11-1-9 and 11-1-22.
The individual self is declared to be distinct from the Brahman in the series of scriptural texts and smrti passages stated below :-
i Badarayana is called the author of the Sutras here.
इतेि च | "क्षरं त्वविद्या ह्यमृतं तु विद्या विद्येविद्ये ईशते यस्तु सोऽन्यः" "स कारणं करणाधिपाधिपो न चास्य कश्चिज्जनिता न चाधिपः" " क्षरं प्रधानममृताक्षरं हृरः क्षरात्मानावीशते देव एकः" । अचिद्वर्गे स्वात्मनो भोग्यत्वेन हरतीतेि भोक्ता हर इत्युच्यर्ते ।
"द्वाविमौ पुरुषौ लोके क्षरश्चाक्षर एव च ।
क्षरः सर्वाणि भूतानि कूटस्थोऽक्षर उच्यते ॥
अत्तमः पुरुषस्त्वन्यः परमात्मेत्युदाहृतः ।
थो लोकत्रयमाविश्य विभर्त्यव्यय ईश्वरः ॥
'The destructible is the Avidya or action. The immortal is the Vidya or knowledge. He (the Brahman), who com- mands the Vidya and the Avidya is distinct from the soul.' (S've. 5-1).
'He is the cause. He is the lord of the lord of the senses (i.e. of the Jiva or the individual self). He has neither progenitor nor master' (S' ve . VI-9).
'The destructible is the Pradhana or Prakrti; the immortal and the indestructible is the Hara (i.e. the individual self) and the Lord alone rules over the destructible Prakrti and the individual self'(S've.1-10).
The enjoying soul is said Hara because he takes the non-sentient things for his enjoyment.
'These are two Purusas in the world, the destruc- tible and the indestructible. The destructible represents all beings, while the indestructible is said to be the unchanging one' (Bh. Gita XV -16). But other than these, is the Highest Purusa called the Supreme Soul, who as the eternal Lord, supports the three worlds, having entered them. (Bh. Gitti XV -17).
2 यस्मप्त् क्षरमतीतोऽहमक्षरादपि चोत्तमः ।
अतोऽस्मि लोके वेदे च प्रथितः पुरुषोत्तमः ॥"
इत्यादिश्रुतिस्सृतिगणेन प्रत्यगात्मनो भेदेन ब्रह्मणो निर्देशादपुरुषार्थभागिनः प्रत्यगात्मनोऽधिकमर्थान्तरभूतं ब्रह्म । तश्च प्रत्यगात्मशरीरकतया तदात्मभूतम् ।
प्रत्यगात्मनस्तच्छरीरत्वं ब्रष्श्णस्तदात्मत्वं च "य आत्मनि तिष्ठन् + यस्यात्मा शरीरम्" " एष सर्वभूतान्तरात्मापहतपाप्मा दिव्यो देव एको नारायणः" इत्यादिश्रुतिशतसमधिगतम् | सशरीरस्यात्मनः कार्या- वस्थाप्राप्तावपेि गुणदोषन्यवस्थितेर्दृष्टान्तभाबात् ब्रह्मणि न दोषप्रसक्तिरेिति नासामञ्जस्यं वेदान्तवाक्यस्येतेि " न तु दृष्टान्तभावात्" इत्युक्तम् |
Because I transcend the destructible beings and am also higher than the indestructible Ji'va, am I celebrated in the world and in the Veda as the Supreme Person (Bh. Gita XV -18).
The Brahman is Superior than and distinct from the individual self, who experiences distress and sorrow which are not fit to be the scope of human pursuit. The Brahman has for His body the individual selves and He is their Self. This fact has been established by hundreds of scriptural passages such as (a)" Remaining in the self + has the self as His body" (Madhy-) and (b) "He is the inner self of all beings; He is devoid of all pains; He is the Divine Lord; He is the only one God Narayana (Sub. VII). Though the embodied soul assumes the state of an effect, yet he is not tainted with evils of the effect, because the good and bad attributes are restricted in each case. There are illustrative examples for this. Therefore the Brahman is not tainted with evils. Hence there is no absurdity In the passages of Vedanta. This has been asserted in Sutra, 2.1.9. The illustrative example is
दृष्टान्तश्च देवमनुष्यादिशब्दवाच्यस्य सशरीरस्यात्मनः 'मनुष्यो बालो युवा स्थवेिरः' ईति नानावस्थाप्राप्तावपि वालत्वयुवत्वस्थविरत्यादयः शरीरगता दोषा नात्मानं स्पृशन्ति, आत्मगताश्च ज्ञानसुखादयो न शरीरमेितेि अतः कार्यावस्थं कारणावस्थं च ब्रह्म प्रत्यगात्मशरीरकतया तदात्मभूतमिति प्रत्यगात्मवाचिना शब्देन ब्रह्माभिधाने तच्छब्दसामानाधिकरण्ये च हेतुं वक्तुं निरसनीयं मतद्वयं "प्रतिज्ञासिद्धेर्लिङ्गमाश्मरथ्यः । उत्क्रमिष्यत एवंभावादित्यौडुलोमिः:" इत्युपन्यस्य "अवस्थितेरितेि काशकृत्स्नः " इति हेतुरुक्तः। तत्सृष्ट्वा | तदेवानुप्राविशत् | तदनुप्रवेिश्य । सच्च त्यच्चाभवत्" इत्यादिना प्रत्यगात्मन आत्मतयावस्थानात् ब्रह्मणस्तच्छब्देनाभिधानं तंत्सामानाधिकरण्येन व्यपढेशश्चेत्युक्तम् ।
this :-The self, that has a body, is denoted by various words, such as god, man etc. It assumes the various states of child-hood, youth, old age, etc. Yet the child-hood, youth, old age etc. are the faults that are attached to the body. They do not touch the self. In the same way the pleasure etc. that are closely attached to the self, do not touch the body . Therefore, the Brahman, both in the states of effect and cause, has the individual souls as His body and is the Self of those individual souls. Therefore the Brahman is denoted by the word, denoting the individual soul. Then it is right to state that the word, soul applies to the Brahman, because the Brahman and the individual selves co-exist in the same grammatical equation. In order to reason this fact, two other schools that have
to be refuted have been stated in Sutras 1-4-20 and 21 and the Siddhanta views of reasoning are advanced in sutra 1.4-22. In the scriptural text, 'Having created it, He entered into it; having entered into it, He became the sentient and theतथा “वैषम्यनैर्घृण्ये न सापेक्षत्वात् | न कर्माविभागादिति चेन्नानादित्वादुपपद्यते चाप्युपलभ्यते च" इति देवमनुष्यादिविषमसृष्टेर्जीवकर्मनिमेित्तत्वं जीवानां तत्तत्कर्मप्रवाहाणां चानादेित्वं च प्रतिपाद्य, तदनादित्वं च "नित्यो नित्यानां चेतनश्चेतनानाम्" "ज्ञाज्ञौ द्वौ" इत्यादिश्रुतिषूपलभ्यत इत्युक्त्वा, तदनादित्वेऽपि प्रलयकाले चिदचिद्वस्तुनोर्भोभोक्तृभोग्ययोर्नामरूपविभागाभावात् विभागाभावात् "आत्मा वा इदमेक एवाग्र आसीत् | नान्यत् क्रिञ्चन मिषत्" इत्यादावेकत्वावधारणमुपपद्यत इतेि सूत्रकारेण स्वयमेवोक्तम् ।
non-sentient beings'. (Tait. 11-6-1), it is seen that He remains in the position of the Self to all individual selves. Hence, the Brahman is denoted by the word, denoting the individual soul. It is also stated that He is mentioned as being coextensive in the same grammatical equation with the individual soul. The inequalities in creation as god, men, etc. are
caused by the Karmans done by the individual selves. This is asserted in Sutra, II-1-34. The individual souls and the stream of Karmans that is attached to them, have not a beginning. This is asserted in Sutra 2-1-35. That they have not a beginning has been established in the following scriptural
texts, " The Eternal among eternals, the Intelligent among the Intelligents" (S've. VI-13). " The two, namely, the Intelligent and non-intelligent' (S've.1-9). Though they have not a beginning, yet at the time of the deluge i.e. Pralaya, the sentient and the non-sentient beings, that assume the form of the enjoyer and the enjoyed can not be distinguished by the
तथाच 'नात्मा श्रुतेर्नित्यत्वाच्च ताभ्यः' इति प्रत्यगात्मनो नित्य- त्वादनुत्पत्तिमुक्त्वा 'ज्ञोऽत एव' इति तस्य ज्ञातृत्वमेव स्वरूपमित्यु- क्तम् । 'उत्क्रान्तिगत्यागतीनाम्' इत्यादिना तस्याणुत्वं चोक्तम् । 'तद्गुण- सारत्वात्तु तद्वयपदेशः प्राज्ञवत् । यावदात्मभावित्वाच्च न दोषस्तद्दर्शनात्' इति ज्ञातुंरेवात्मनो ज्ञानशब्देन व्यपदेशो ज्ञानगुणसारत्वात् ज्ञानैकनि- रूपणीयस्वभावत्वाच्चेत्युक्तम् । 'नित्योपलब्ध्यनुपलब्धिप्रसङ्गोऽन्यतरनियमो वान्यथा' इति ज्ञानमात्रस्वरूपात्मवादे हेत्वन्तरायत्तज्ञानात्मवादे सर्व- गतात्मवादे च दोष उक्तः । 'कर्ता शास्त्रार्थवत्त्वात् | उपादानाद्विहारो- पदेशाच्च । व्यपदेशाच्च क्रियायां न चेन्निर्देशविपर्ययः । उपलब्धिवदनियमः| शक्तिविपर्ययात् । समाध्यभावाच्च | यथा च तक्षोभयथा | 'इत्यात्मन एव
That the self is eternal and not produced has been proved
in Sutra II-3-18. That knowledge is the essential character-
istic of the self has been proved in Sutra II-3-19. That the
self is atomic in size has been proved in Sutra 11-3-20. The
self, who is the knower, has been mentioned by the term knowledge; because he has knowledge, as his essential attribute and because also he has to be defined and investigated by the means of the attribute, knowledge. This has been stated in Sutras 11-3-29 & 30. In the Sutra 11-3-32 are stated the defects that arise in the schools that accept knowledge as the self, that accept the knowledge produced by other means as the self and that accept the self as being present everywhere. That the self is the doer of good and bad works and not Prakrti has been stated in Sutras 11.3.33 to 39.
शुभाशुभेषु कर्मसु कर्तृत्वम्; प्रकृतेरकर्तृत्वम्; प्रकृतेश्च कर्तृत्वे तस्याः साधारणत्वेन सर्वेषां फलानुभवप्रसङ्गादि च प्रतिपादितम्। 'परात्तु तच्छ्रुतेः 1 कृतप्रयत्नापेक्षस्तु विहितप्रतिषिद्धावैयर्थ्यादिभ्यः। 'इत्यात्मन एव कर्तृत्वं परमपुरुषानुमतिसहकृतमित्युक्तम् ।
'अंशो नानाव्यपदेशादन्यथा चापि दाशकितवादित्वमधीयत एके | मन्त्रवर्णात् | अपि च स्मर्यते । प्रकाशादिवत्तु नैवं परः । स्मरन्ति च ।' इति, 'अनीशया शोचति मुह्यमानः | जुष्टं यदा पश्यत्यन्यमीशमस्य महिमानमेति वीतशोकः' क्षरं त्वविद्यां ह्यमृतं तु विद्या विद्याविद्ये ईशते यस्तु
Suppose the Prakrti is the doer, then this Prakrti happens to remain common to all the individual selves. As such, all the individual selves must enjoy the fruits thereof. In Sutras II-3.40 & 41, it is stated that the effert of the self has the approval of the Highest Person. The inherent property and the natural state of the self has been stated to be many. They are-(a) dependent on Karman, (b) subject to affliction, (c) not all knowing, (d) his Mukti (or final liberation) is dependant upon the means of worship. That of the Brahman is stated to be (a) not tainted with faults, (b) all knowing, (c) Possessed of true will, (d) lord of all beings, The authorities are: 1. Brahma-Sutras II.3.42 to 46. 2. 'The Purusa i.e. the individual self sits immersed in grief, and being ignorant and powerless, he feels sorry; when he sees another, the Lord, well worshipped, then he being relieved from grief, attains His greatness' (S've. IV -7). 3. 'The destructible is the Avidya or Ka,man and the immortal is the Vidya or knowledge and He (the Brahman)
who commands them is distinct' (S've. 5. 1).सोऽन्यः' 'प्राज्ञेनात्मना संपरिष्वक्तो न बाह्यं किंचन वेद नान्तरम्' 'तयोरन्यः पिप्पलं स्वाद्वत्त्यनश्नन्नन्यो अभिचाकशीति' 'ज्ञाज्ञौ द्वावजावीशनीशौ' 'पृथगात्मानं प्रेरितारं च मत्वा जुष्टस्ततस्तेनामृतत्व- मेति' 'यदा पश्यः पश्यते रुक्मवर्ण कर्तारमीशं पुरुषं ब्रह्मयोनिम् | तदा विद्वान् पुण्यपापे विधूय निरञ्जनः परमं साम्यमुपैति' 'स कारणं करणाधिपाधिपो न चास्य कश्चिज्जनिता न चाधिपः' 'यः सर्वज्ञः सर्ववित्' 'परास्य शक्तिर्विविधैव श्रूयते स्वाभाविकी ज्ञानबलक्रिया
4. 'Being embraced by the Intelligent Self, he knows neither the external thing nor the internal thing.' (Br IV -3-21). 5. 'One of them eats the sweet Pippala fruit, while the other shines in splendour without eating at all' (Mund. 111-1-1). 6. 'The two unborn, the Intelligent and the non-intelligent are the lord and non-lord' (S've. 1-9). 7. 'By knowing the individual self and the Impeller to be different, he, being blessed by Him attains immortality' (S've. 1-6). 8. · When the seer beholds Him, the golden-coloured, the creator, the Lord, the Person and the cause of the Matter,then the wise not tainted with evils, becomes entirely equal to Him, having discarded Punya and Papa (i.e. the effects of good and bad deeds) , (Mund. III-1-3). 9. 'He is the cause. He is the Lord of the lord of the senses (i.e. the individual self). He has neither generator nor master' (S've. VI-9). 10. 'He who understands all and knows all ' (Mund. I.I.9). 11. 'His supreme power is proclaimed, indeed, as varied and natural and consisting of activity provoked by knowledge and strength' (S've. VI-8).
निष्कलं निष्क्रियं शान्तं निरवद्यं निरञ्जनम्' 'नित्यो नित्यानां चेतनश्चेतनानामेको बहूनां यो विदधाति कामान्' । नित्यानां बहूनां वेतनानां य एको नित्यश्चेतनः कामान् विदधातीत्यर्थः | 'पतिं विश्व- यात्मेश्वरम्' इत्यादिषु प्रत्यगात्मनः परमात्मनश्च कर्मवश्यत्वेन शोचि- त्वेनासर्वज्ञत्वेनोपासनायत्तमुक्तित्वेन निरवद्यत्वेन सर्वज्ञत्वेन सत्यसंकल्पत्वेन सर्वेश्वरत्वेन समस्तकल्याणगुणाकरत्वादिना च स्वरूपस्वभावनानात्वव्यप देशात् । तयोरेव 'तत्बमस्ति' अयमात्मा ब्रह्म' 'योऽसौ सोऽहं, सोऽहं सोऽसौ' 'अथ योऽन्यां देवतामुपास्ते अन्योऽसावन्योऽहम- मीति न स वेद' 'अकृत्स्नो ह्येषः + आत्मेत्येवोपासंति' ' ब्रह्म दाशा
12. 'He is without parts, without action, tranquil and without defect, without taint' (S've. VI-19). 13. 'He, who is the Eternal among the eternals, the intelligent among the intelligents, fulfils the desires of many, being Himself only one' (S've. VI-13). 14. 'He is the Lord of the entire world, and the master of one's Self' (Maha. Ndr. 1-3). The Brahman pervades all the individual souls. There.. fore He is mentioned as one with them. The authorities are :- (1) 'That thou art' (Chand. VI-8-7). (2) 'This self is the Brahman' (Br. VI.4.5). (3) 'Therefore whatever that (deity) is, that am 1 and whatever I am, that is that (deity) , (Ait. Ar. II-2-46). (4) 'And then he, who worships that deity who is distinct, thinking that (that deity) is separate and he (the worshipper) is separate, he does not know the truth' (Br. [.4-10). (5) , This (the Jiva) is imperfect + should worship Him the Brahman) as his self' (Br. I-4-7).
1अनित्यानामिति छित्वा व्याख्यान्तरं कृतमुपनिषद्भाष्ये.ब्रह्म दासा ब्रह्मेमे कितवाः' इतेि च सर्वजीवात्मव्यापित्वेनाभेदव्यपदेशाच्चो- भयव्यपदेशाविरोधेन परमात्मांशो जीवात्मेत्यभ्युपगन्तव्यम् | न केवलं न्यायसिद्धमिदम् | श्रुतिस्मृतिभ्यां चांशत्वमुक्तं जीवात्मनः 'पादोऽस्य विश्वा भूतानि' ममैवांशो जीवलोके जीवभूतः सनातनः' इति |
अंशत्वं नामैकवस्त्वेकदेशत्वम् । तथा सत्युभयोरेकवस्तुत्वेन विशेषो1 उदङ्कपाट्यांशः न स्यादित्याशङ्कय 'प्रकाशादिवत्तु नैवं परः' इति परिहरति ! अन्यविशेषणतैकस्वभावप्रकाशजातिगुणशरीरविशिष्टान् अग्निव्यक्तिगुण्यात्मनः प्रति प्रकाशजातिगुणशरीराणां यथा ह्यंशत्वम्, एवं परमात्मानं प्रत्यगात्मशरीरकं
(6) 'The Brahman are the fishermen, .the Brahman are
the slaves, the Brahman are these gamblers' (Brahmasukta).
Therefore, it is to be granted that the self is a portion
of the Brahman, so that the two statements mentioned
above will not contradict each other.
This is not established by reasoning alone. The fact
that the individual souls are part of the Brahman has been
proved by the following scriptural texts and Smrti passages :-
1. 'His one fourth part constitutes all the worlds'
(Puru. Su. 3-22).
2. 'In the word of life, the eternal soul is indeed a
portion of mine' (Bha. Gi. XV -8).
The objection-a portion of an object means a part
of a single unit. Therefore logically there is no possibility of any distinction between these two-is set aside in Sutra 11. 3. 45.
The luminosity, the species, the attribute and the body
belong to the fire, the substance, the attributed thing and the soul which are distinct from them. Yet they form a portion of the fire etc. In this way the individual souls
1वस्तुत्वेदनविरोधो A 2,M 1. विरोधः स्यात् M 2, 3.
प्रति प्रत्यगात्मनोऽंशत्वम् | एवमंशत्वे यत्स्वभावोंडशभूतो जीवः, नैवमंशी परमात्मा ; सर्वत्र विशेषणविशेष्ययोः स्वरूपस्वभावभेदात् । एवं च 'कतां शास्त्रार्थवत्त्वात्' परात्तु तच्छ्रुतेः ?' इत्यनन्तरोक्तं च न विरुध्यते ।
एवं प्रकाशशरीरवज्जीवात्मनामंशत्वं पराशरादयः स्मरन्ति--
'एकदेशस्थितस्याग्नेर्ज्योत्स्ना विस्तारिणी यथा ।
परस्य ब्रह्मणः शक्तिस्तथेयमखिलं जगत् ॥'
'यत्त्किंचित्सृज्यते येन सत्त्वजातेन वै द्विज ।
तस्य सृज्यस्य संभूतौ तत्सर्वं वै हरेस्तनुः' ॥
'ते सर्वे सर्वभूतस्य विष्णोरंशसमुद्भवाः॥'
इति।
become a portion of the Brahman, who has them as His body. The individual souls which are portions of the Brahman, have their own inherent characteristics; but the Brahman, of whom the individuals souls are portions, does not possess those characteristics because the things and their attributes are always found to be distinct from each other in regard to their natural state and inherent characteristics. Thus no contradiction arises in what is stated in Sutras 11-3-33 and 40. That the individual souls are portions of the Brahman in the same way as luminosity, etc. is stated by Parasara and others- (1) 'The fire remains in one place; but its light spreads all round. In this way, all the worlds are the manifestations of the power of the Brahman' (Visnu 1-22-56). (2) 'Oh! twice-born one, which ever is created for its generation by an agent, it forms the body of Hari' (Visnu 1-22-38). (3) 'All these are produced from a portion of Visnu who
appears as all beings' (Visnu 1-22-20).अन्यथा पारमार्थिकापारमार्थिकोपाधिसमाश्रयणेन प्रत्यगात्मनोऽंशत्वे ब्रह्मण एव वेदान्तनिवर्त्याः सर्वे दोषा भवेयुरिति 'आभासा एव च' इत्यादिनोक्तम् ।
अतः सर्वदा चिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरकतया तदात्मभूतमेव ब्रह्म|कदाचिदविभक्तनामरूपचिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरं तत्कारणवस्थम्; कदाचिच्च विभक्त- नामरूपचिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरं तत्कार्यावस्थं ब्रह्म । सर्वदा चिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरकतया तद्विशिष्टत्वेऽपि ब्रह्मणः परिणामित्वापुरुषार्थाश्रयत्वे शरीरभूतचेतनाचेतन- वस्तुगते । आत्मभूतं ब्रह्म सर्वदा निरस्तनिखिलदोषगन्धानवधिकातिशया- संख्येयज्ञानानन्द्याद्यपरिमितोदारगुणसागरमवतिष्ठत इति ब्रह्मैव जगन्निमित्त-
Otherwise, if it is viewed that the individual souls become a portion of the Brahman due to a certain limiting conditions, that are either of a true or of untrue nature all the faults, intended to be set aside by the Vedanta texts do attach themselves to the Brahman. This has been stated in Sutra II-3-49. and so on.
Therefore, the Brahman has always as his body all the sentient and non-sentient beings and is the Self of all those beings. The Brahman is in the state of cause at that time, when His body constitutes the sentient and non-sentient beings without distinct names and froms. He is in the state of effect at that time, when His body constitutes the sentient and non-sentient beings with distinct names and forms. Though the sentient and the non-sentient beings are the body of the Brahman; yet the sentient and the non-sentient beings, who form the body of the Brahman, do undergo changes and are the seat of the evils. Even then, the Brahman who is the Self of these objects, is the ocean of auspicious qualities, such as knowledge, bliss, etc. which are innumerable, unsurpassable
मुपादानं नेति 'यतो वा इमानि' इत्यादि वाक्यं प्रतिपादत्येवेति जन्माद्यस्य यतस्तद् ब्रह्मेति सुष्ठूक्तम्।
'सदेव सोम्येदमग्र आसीत् । एकमेवाद्वितीयम् + तदैक्षत। बहु स्यां प्रजायेय' इति। अस्य चायमर्थः--'यस्यात्मा शरीरम्' 'यस्याक्षरं शरीरं यस्य पृथिवीं शरीरं यस्याव्यक्तं शरीरम्, एष सर्वभूतान्तरात्मा- पहतपाप्मा दिव्यो देव एको नारायणः' इत्यादिश्रुतेर्ब्रह्मणः सर्वदा चिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरकत्वात् सदेवेदमिदानीं स्थूलचिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरकत्वेन विभक्त-
in excellence and opposed to all evils. That Brahman is the efficient cause and the material cause of the world is established by the text, 'From whom all these beings are born Tait. III.1.1). Thus this has been correctly stated-He is the Brahman, from whom proceed the creation, etc. of this universe.
Consider the scriptural text-' Existence alone, my dear boy, this word was in the beginning one only, without a second. It thought may I become many and be born' (Chand. VI-2-1). The meaning of this text is this-That Brahman has always all the sentient and the non.sentient beings as the body has been proved by the following scriptural texts- (1) 'He, whose body is the self' (Madh. Brahmaa). (2) 'He, whose body is the indestructible one, He, whose body is the earth, He, whose body is the Avyakta, He is the inner Self of all beings; He is devoid of sins, He is the Divine Lord. He is the One Niirayat;a' (Sub. VII-I ).
Now the Existence, that has the sentient and non-sentient beings in a gross form as Its body, manifested Itself as havingनामरूपम्, अग्रे प्रलयकाले सूक्ष्मदशापन्नचिदचिचिद्वस्तुशरीरकतया नामरूप- विभागानर्हमेकमेवासीत्। स्वयमेव ब्रह्म सर्वज्ञं सर्वशक्ति निमित्तान्तरानपेक्ष- मद्वितीयं चातिष्ठत् । 'तदैक्षत बहु स्यां प्रजायेय' इति | तन्नामरूपविभागानर्ह- सूक्ष्मचिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरकतयैकमेवावस्थितं नामरूपविभागार्हस्थूलदशापत्त्या बहुप्रकारं स्यामित्यैक्षत । स्यां, प्रजायेयेतेि व्यष्टिसमष्टिव्यपदेशः | चिदचितोः परस्य ; प्रलयकालेऽपि व्यवहारानर्हसूक्ष्मभेदः सर्वैर्वेदान्ति- भिरभ्युपगतः, अविद्याकृतभेदस्योपाधिकृतभेदस्य चानादित्वाभ्युपगमात् |
a distinct name and form. It in the beginning i.e. at the time of the deluge, remained only one having as Its body all the sentient and non-sentient beings in a subtle form, and did not manifest Itself as having a distinct name and form. The Brahman Himself who is omniscient and omnipotent, remained without a second, not requiring any other efficient cause.
The meaning of the scriptural text, 'It thought-May I become many and be born' (Chand. VI-2-1) is this- The Brahman remained only one having as His body, all
the sentient and non-sentient beings, that had neither name nor form in their subtle state. It thought of becoming many by assuming a gross form, that has a distinct name and form. The words, 'May become' and' Be born' indicate respectively the distributive and aggregate forms of creation. All Vedantins accept this doctrine viz-At the time of deluge, the intelligent and the non-intelligent beings do assume a subtle and indescribable difference from the Highest Person. Other Vedantins also accept the differnce between them produced by ignorance or limiting conditions as beginningless. Here the peculiarity is this: In the other schools the Brahman becomes ignorant and is associated with limiting conditions. This is opposedइयांस्तु विशेषः--ब्रहैवाज्ञमुपाधिसंबद्धं चेति सर्वश्रुतिस्मृतिन्यायविरो- धोऽन्येषाम् । तदभावादविरोधश्चास्माकमिति ॥
शास्त्रयोननित्वाधिकरणम् ३
शास्त्रयोनित्वात् ॥ ३ ॥
एवं चिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरकतया तद्विशिष्टस्य ब्रह्मण एव जगदुपादानत्वं निमित्तत्वं च नानुमानगम्यमिति शास्त्रैकप्रमाणकत्वात्तस्य 'यतो वा इमानि भूतानि' इत्यादि वाक्यं निखिलजगदेककारणं ब्रह्म बोधयत्येवेति सिद्धम् ॥
to what is stated in all scriptural and Smrti texts and reasoning. There will be no such opposition in our school, as all these (i.e. ignorance and limiting conditions) are not recognised.
SASTRAYONITVADHIKARA 3
3. Sastrayonitvat.
(That the Brahman is the cause of the creation etc. follows altogether from the scripture), because the scripture alone forms the source (of the knowledge related to Him). The Brahman, who has as His body all the sentient and non-sentient beings, is the material cause and also the efficient cause of the Universe. This fact could not be apprehended by reasoning; but could be proved by scriptures alone. Therefore it is established that the scriptural text 'From whom, all these things are born (Tait. III. 1) discerns the Brahman, who is the only cause of all the worlds.
समन्वयाधिकरणम् ४
तत्तु समन्वयात् ॥४॥
पुरुषार्थतयान्वयः समन्वयः; । शास्त्राख्यप्रमाणस्य पुरुषार्थपर्यव- सायेित्वेऽपि, ब्रह्म स्वस्य परस्य चानुभवितुरविशेषेण स्वरूषेण गुणै- र्विभृत्या चानुभूयमानमनवधिकातिशयानन्दरूपमिति पुरुषार्थत्वेनाभिधेय- तयान्वयात् ब्रह्मणः शास्त्रप्रमाणकत्वमुपपन्नतरमिति निरवद्यम् ॥|
ईक्षत्यधिकरणम् ५
निखिलजगदेककारणं ब्रह्म वेदान्ताः प्रतिंपादयन्तीत्युक्तम् । तस्यैक- स्यैकदैव कृत्स्नजगन्निमित्तत्वं तस्यैवोपादानतया जगदात्मकत्वं च नानुमानादि-
SAMANVAYADHIKARANA 4
4. Tattu samanvayat.
That (viz. the fact that the scriptures form alto- gether the source of the knowledge relating to the Brahman) results, however, from (His constituting) the true purport (of the scripture).
His constituting the true purport of the scripture is the same as His being the object of human pursuit. Though the function of the proof, known as scripture, ends in determining the object of human pursuit; Yet the Brahman, who is experienced equally by Himself and others in His natural state, in His peculiar characteristics and in His great splendour, is of unsurpassed bliss and this is intended to be denoted by the Sastra. Therefore it is quite right that Brahman could be proved by the S'astra. Thus there is no any defect.
IKSATYADHIKARANA 5
It has been previously stated that the Vedantas establish
the Brahman, as the sole cause of the entire universe. Heगम्यमिति शास्त्रैकप्रमाणकत्वात्. तस्य चानवधिकातिशयानन्दरूपतया परमपुरुषार्थत्वाद्वेदान्ताः प्रतिपादयन्त्येवेति स्थिरीकृतम् | अतः परं पादशेषेण जगत्कारणतया प्रधानपुरुषप्रतिपादनानईतया सर्वज्ञं सत्यसंकल्पं निरस्ताविद्यादिसमस्तदोषगन्धमपरिमितोदारगुणसागरं ब्रह्मैव वेदान्ताः प्रतिपादयन्तीत्युच्यते । तत्र तावत् प्रधानं वेदान्तप्रतिपादनानर्हमित्याह--
ईक्षतेर्नाशब्दम् ॥ ५ ॥
alone is the efficient cause of the entire universe. At the same time He is in the form of the univeri;e, as He is its material cause also. This fact has to be determined by the Sastras only as the inferential reasoning is incapable of proving it. He is the highest object of human pursuit; because His essential characteristic constitutes the unsurpassable bliss. Therefore the Vedantas surely teach about Him. This fact has been firmly established before. Then in the rest of this Pada it is stated that as the Prakrti and the individual selves are not fit to be mentioned as the cause of the world. The Vedantas teach about the Brahman only, who is omniscient. who possesses a true will, who is hostile to all evils such as ignorance etc. and who is the ocean of innumerable noble qualities.
Of these, the author first states that the Prakrti could not be mentioned in the Vedanta as the cause of the world.
5. Iksaternas'abdam.
. Because the predicative root, Iks is used (in connection with the activity of what constitutes the cause of the world) that which is not in the scope of the scripture alone (viz. the Pradhana or Prakrti,) is not (referred to in the scriptural passage relating
to the cause of the world).अशब्दम् आनुमानिकं प्रधानम् । न तत् वेदान्तवेद्यम् । कुतः ? ईक्षतेः। 'सदेव सोम्येदमग्र आसीदेकमेवाद्वितीयम्' इति प्रस्तुतजगत्कारण- व्यापारवाचिन ईक्षतेर्धातोः श्रवणात्' तदैक्षत बहु स्याम्' इति ॥
गौणश्चेन्नात्मशब्दात् ॥ ६ ॥
तत्तेज ऐक्षत' इत्याद्यचेतनेऽपि वस्तुनीक्षतिः श्रूयते । स हि तत्र गौणः । एवमत्रापि प्रधान एवेक्षतिर्गौण इति चेत् ;नैतदुपपद्यतें, प्रस्तुते
That which is not capable of being revealed by the scripture alone, is meant here by the term As'abda i.e. Anu-manika that which is established by the process of logical inference, i.e. the Pradhana. The meaning is that the Pradhana, is not apprehended by the Vedanta. Why? Because the root Iks (to see, i.e. to think) is used. That is because the root, Iks is used in the scriptural passage ' It thought May I become manifold and be born' (Chand. VI.2.3) to denote the activity of the universal cause; closely related to what is stated in the text, 'Existence alone, my dear boy, was in the beginning, one only without a second' (Chand. VI-2-1).
6. Gaunas'chennatmasadat.
. If it be said that it (viz. the root lks), is used here in a figurative sense, it cannot be so; because there is the word Atman (mentioned in the context).
In the scriptural statement' That fire thought' (Chand. VI-2-3) the root Iks is used in conection with the action of the non-intelligent substance also. The root apparently is there used in a figurative sense. Likewise in the case of the Pradhana also, the root Iks is used in a figurative
4सच्छब्दवाच्ये श्रूयमाणाच्चेतनवाचिन आत्मशब्दात्। 'स आत्मा, तत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो' इति ह्युत्तरत्र श्रूयते।
तेजःप्रभृतिष्वपि न गौणमीक्षणम्। तेजःप्रभृतिशब्दैरपि तत्तच्छरीरकं ब्रह्मैवाभिधीयते, 'अनेन जीवेनात्मनानुप्रविश्य नामरूपे व्याकरवाणि' इति ब्रह्मात्मकजीवानुप्रवेशादेव सर्वस्य वस्तुनो नामरूपभाक्त्वात्। 'तत्सृष्ट्वा। तदेवानुप्राविशत् | तदनुप्रविश्य । सच्च त्यच्चाभवत् । निरुक्तं चानिरुक्तं च । निलयनं चानिलयनं च । विज्ञानं चाविज्ञानं च | सत्यं चानृतं च सत्यमभवत्' इति चेतनमचेतनं च पृथङ् निर्दिश्य तदुभयमनु-
sense. This is not intelligible; because in the context of the import of the word Sat, the word Atman denoting the intelligent one is used. In the subsequent portion there is the passage-' He is the Self' That thou art, Oh! 'S'vetaketu' (Chand. VI-8-7).
In fact as regards fire etc. also the power of seeing is not to be explained in a figurative sense, because the words fire etc. denote the Brahman only who has them as His body. All these objects are distinguishable as having a name and form; because the Brahman has entered them, through the individual souls which constitute His body. It is because there is the statement, 'Indeed entering in the form of the individual self, I evo]ve the differentiation of names and forms' (Chand. VI-3-2). The intelligent and the non.intelligent substances are separately stated in the text 'Having created it, He entered the same; Having entered it, He became Sat and Tyat (intelligent and non-intelligent), describable and not describable, the support and supported, the animate and inanimate, the truth and untruth. Yet he remained truth' (Tait. II-6). Having entered the both, He became that and that i.e. He
प्रविश्य तत्तदभवत् तत्तच्छब्दवाच्योऽभवदिति हि समानप्रकरणे स्पष्टम- भिहितम्॥
तन्निष्ठस्य मोक्षोपदेशात् ॥ ७ ॥
इतश्च प्रधानादर्थान्तरभूतं1 सच्छब्दाभिहितं जगत्कारणम्, सच्छब्दाभिहिततत्त्वनिष्ठस्य मोक्षोपदेशात् | 'तस्य तावदेव चिरं यावन्न विमोक्ष्येऽथ संपत्स्ये' इति हि तन्निष्ठस्य मोक्ष उपदिश्यते। प्रधान- कारणवादिनामपि' हि प्रधाननिष्ठस्य मोक्षो नाभिमतः ॥
became the meaning of the words denoting that and that. Thus the fact has been clearly stated in the same context.
7.Tannisthasya moksopadeSat.
Because it is taught that he, who is firmly devoted to that (viz. the Sat) obtains final release.
By the following reason also, the cause of the world mentioned by the term Sat is other than the Pradhana or Prakrti. It is taught in the context that he, who is firmly devoted to the Truth meant by the term Sat obtains final release. It is taught in the scriptural text, 'For him so long there is delay, as long as he is not freed from the body; then he will reach the Brahman. (Chand. VI.14.2) that he, who is firmly devoted to Him, obtains final release. Consider the school that accepts Pradhana to be the cause of the creation etc. of the world. Even they belonging to that school do not accept the fact,-that he, who is firmly devoted to Pradhana, obtains final release.
1अर्थान्तरं A 1,M 2,M 4. 2वादिनापि M 1,2
2नाभिहितः M 1,2.हेयत्वावचनाच्च ॥ ८ ॥
यदि प्रधानमत्र विवक्षितं, तदा तस्य हेयत्वम् अध्येयत्वमुच्येत। न तदुच्यते। मोक्षसाधनतया ध्येयत्वमेव ह्यत्रोच्यते 'तत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो' इत्यादिना ॥
प्रतिज्ञाविरोधात् ॥९॥
इतश्च न प्रधानम्, एकविज्ञानेन सर्वविज्ञानप्रतिज्ञाविरोधात् । सच्छब्दवाच्यतत्त्वज्ञानेन तत्कार्यतया चेतनाचेतनसर्ववस्तुज्ञानं 'येनाश्रुतं
8. Heyatvavacanacca.
Because also it is not declared that it (viz. what is denoted by the word sat or existence) deserves to be discarded.
If the Pradhana were meant as the cause of the creation etc. then it would have been taught that what is denoted by the word Sat or existence deserves to be discarded. This has not been done. In the passage 'That thou art, Oh! S'vetaketu (Chand. VI.8.7) it is stated that he should be firmly devoted to that viz., Sat, as the means of final release.
9. Pratijnavirodhat.
Because also there would then be the contradiction of the proposition (enunciated in the context).
From the following reason also the Pradhana is not the cause of the creation etc; because it contradicts the proposition of cognition of all things from the cognition of a single thing. From the scriptural text, 'From which the
1हेयत्वात् M 2, 4.श्रुतं भवति' इत्यादिना प्रतिज्ञातम्। तद्धि प्रधानकारणवादे विरुध्यते, चेतनस्य प्रधानकार्यत्वाभावात्। प्रधानादर्थान्तरभूतब्रह्मकारणवादे चिद- चिद्वस्तुशरीरकं ब्रह्मैव नामरूपविभागाविभागाभ्यां कार्यं कारणं चेति ब्रह्मज्ञानेन कृत्स्नस्य ज्ञाततोपपद्यते॥
स्वाप्ययात् ॥१०॥
इतश्च न प्रधानम् । 'स्वप्नान्तं मे सोम्य विजानीहीति । यत्रै-
unheard becomes heard, etc.'(Chand. VI-l.3) arises the proposition that the knowledge of that entity, which is denoted by the word Sat, produces the knowledge of all the sentient and non-sentient beings as they are its effect. Then there is contradiction in the school that accepts the Pradhana as the cause of the world; because Pradhana cannot produce the sentient being. Consider the school that accepts Brahman, who is different from the Pradhana, to be the cause of the world. Then the Brahman, having as his body all the sentient and non-sentient beings, with distinct names and forms is the effect and without distinct names and forms is the cause. Hence it is correct to say that by the knowledge of the Brahman the knowledge of everything is produced.
10. Svapyayat.
Because also, there is (mentioned in the context) the withdrawal (of the individual soul) into its own Self.
By the following reason also the Pradhana is not the cause of the creation etc. of the world. The scriptural passage-' Know from me, my dear boy, what deep sleep
1विभागभावाभावाभ्यां A1, M 4.तत्पुरुषः स्वपिति नाम सता सोम्य तदा संपन्नो भवति। स्वमपीतो भवति। तस्मादेनं स्वपितीत्याचक्षते । स्वं ह्यपीतो भवति' इति जीवस्य' चेतनस्य सुषुप्तस्य सतां संपन्नस्य स्वाप्ययवचनात् प्रधानादर्थान्तरभूतं सच्छब्दवाच्य- मिति विज्ञायते। स्वमपीतो भवति; आत्मानमेव जीवोऽपीतो भवतीत्यर्थः।
चिदचिद्वस्तुशरीरकं तदात्मभूतं ब्रह्मैव जीवशब्देनाप्यभिधीयत इति नामरूपव्याकरणश्रुत्योक्तम् | तज्जीवशब्दाभिधेयं परं ब्रह्मैव सुषुप्तिकालेऽपि प्रलयकाल इव नामरूपपरिष्वङ्गाभावात् केवलसच्छब्दाभिधेयमिति 'सता सोम्य तदा संपन्नो भवति । स्वमपीतो भवति' इत्युच्यते ।
is; when any person is known to be asleep, he is then in union with the Sat. He withdraws into his Self. There- fore they say, he sleeps; because he is absorbed into His Self (i,e. into the Brahman)' (Chand. VI-8-1)-declares that the individual self, who is asleep and is in union with the Sat, has withdrawn himself to his Self. Hence it is known that what is denoted by the word Sat, is an object other than the Pradhana. The expression, ' Has withdrawn him self to his Self' means becomes merged or absorbed into his Self.
It is declared in the scriptural passage relating to the differentiation of names and forms, that the Brahman Himself, who has the intelligent and non-intellegent beings for His body and forms their selves, is denoted by the word self which ordinarily means the individual self. By means of the statement, 'He is then in union with the Sat; He withdraws into his Self' (Chand. VI-8-1), it is taught that the Brahman, who is denoted by the word mentioning jiva, is free from any association with names and forms at the time of deep sleep also, as He is at the time of universal
1जीवस्य omitted A 1.तथा समानप्रकरणे नामरूपपरिष्वङ्गाभावेन प्राज्ञेनैव परिष्वङ्गात् प्राज्ञेनात्मना संपरिष्वक्तो न बाह्यं किंचन वेद नान्तरम्' इत्युच्यते । आ मोक्षाज्जीवस्य नामरूपपरिष्वङ्गादेव हि स्वव्यतिरिक्तविषयज्ञानोदयः । सुषुप्तिकाले हि नामरूपे विहाय सता संपरिष्वक्तः पुनरपि जागरदशायां नामरूपे परिष्वज्य तत्तन्नामरूपो भवतीति श्रुत्यन्तरे स्पष्टमभिधीयते। यथा 'सुप्तः स्वप्नं न कंचन पश्यति, अथास्मिन् प्राण एवैकधा भवति ।'
dissolution and He is hence to be denoted merely by the word Sat or Existence.
To the same effect, it is stated in a similar context elsewhere that, owing to his (i.e. the individual self) not being associated with names and forms, he is embraced by Him who is omniscient; and consequently it is said that, 'when he is embraced by the omniscient Self, he does not know anything that is external or internal' (Brh .IV -3.21). Indeed till his final release the individual soul is associated with names and forms; and it is, therefore, there is born in him the knowledge of objects other than himself. At the time of deep sleep he certainly gives up names and forms, and is embraced by the Sat (i.e.by the Brahman); and again in waking state, he becomes associated with names and forms and becomes possessed with various names and forms. This is clearly stated in other scriptural passages, namely, 'when he (i.e. the individual self) is deeply asleep, he sees no dreams whatsoever, and he becomes one wholly with the Prana (Brahman).' (Kaus.II.30). 'From that Self, the Pranas (i.e. Jivas) proceed towards their own places' (Kaus. II-34). To the same effect is the
1कथंचन M 24.'एतस्माद्वा आत्मनः प्राणा 1यथायतनं विप्रतिष्ठन्ते' । तथा 'त इह व्याघ्रो वा सिंहो वा वृको वा वराहो वा+यद्यद्भवन्ति तदा भवन्ति' इति ॥
गतिसामान्यात् ॥११॥
सकलोपनिषद्भतिसामान्यादस्यामप्युपनिषदि न प्रधानं कारणमिति ज्ञायते | 'आत्मा वा इदमेक एवाग्र आसीत् | नान्यत्किंचन मिषत् |स ईक्षत लोकान्नु सृजा इति | स इमान् लोकानसृजत' 'तस्माद्वा
following scriptural passage also-' To whatever state these beings belonged before the deep sleep, namely of a tiger, or a lion, or a wolf, or a boar etc. they come again to that state when they wake' (Chand. VI-9-3).
11. Gatisamanyat.
Because there has to be similarity of import (between the passage under reference and the other passages relating to the case of the creation etc. of the world).
There has to be similarity of import among all other Upanishadic passages and the upanishadic passage under reference. Hence it is known that the Pradhana is not the cause of the creation, etc. of the world. In all the scriptural passages stated below, the Lord of all is made out to be the cause of the world-
(1) 'The Self, indeed, this one only was in the begin- ning. Nothing else lived. He thought, May I create the 'Worlds. He created these worlds' (Ait. I-1).
1यथायथंA 1.एतस्मादात्मन आकाशः संभूतः' 'स कारणं करणाधिपाधिपो न चास्य कश्चिज्जनिता न चाधिपः 'इत्यादिसकलोपनिषत्सु सर्वेश्वर एव हि सर्वजगत्कारणमिति प्रतिपाद्यते ॥|
श्रुतत्वाच्च
श्रुतमेवं ह्यस्यामुपनिषदि 'आत्मनः प्राणः + आत्मन आकाशः' इत्यादावात्मन एव सर्वोत्पत्तिः । अतः प्रधानादचेतनादर्थान्तरभूतः सर्वज्ञः पुरुषोत्तम एव जगत्कारणं ब्रह्मेति स्थितम् ॥
(2) 'From that same Self, the spatial ether came into existence' (Tait. II.1-1).
(3) 'He is the cause. He is the Lord of the lord of the senses. He has neither progenitor nor superior' (S've. VI-9).
12. Srutatvacca
Because also it is revealed (in the very Upanisad in which the passage under discussion occurs, and in other Upanisads, that the Supreme Self is the cause of the universe).
Indeed, in this Upanisad (viz. the Chandogya) in the following passages, 'From the Self the Prana came into existence etc, and from the Self, the spatial ether came into existence (chand. VII-26-1)' it is stated that all are produced from the Self only. Therefore that the cause of the universe is the Brahman who is all-knowing Highest person and distinct from the inanimate Pradhana, stands firmly.
आत्मन इत्येवात्रत्येषु सर्वेषु तालपत्रकोशेषु पाठः । मुद्रितकोशपाठस्तु आत्मत इति।
5आनन्दमयाधिकरणम् ६
आनन्दमयोऽभ्यासात्'॥१३॥
यद्यपि प्रधानादर्थान्तरभूतस्य प्रत्यगात्मनश्चेतनस्येक्षणयोगः संभवति, तथापि प्रत्यगात्मा बद्धो मुक्तश्च न जगत्कारणम्,'तस्माद्वा एत- स्मादात्मन आकाशः संभूत:' इत्यारभ्य 'तस्माद्वा एतस्माद्विज्ञानमयात् | अन्योऽन्तर आत्मानन्दमयः' 'इति तस्यानन्दमयत्वप्रतिपादनात्। कारणतया व्यपदिष्टोऽयमानन्दमयः' प्रत्यगात्मनोऽर्थान्तरभूतः सर्वज्ञः परमात्मैव |
ĀNANDAMAYĀDHIKARANA 6
13. Anandamayobhyasat
That, which is denoted by the term Anandamaya (is the Brahman); because there is (in the context), the repetition of various grades (of bliss which culminate in the Anandamaya or the Highest Bliss). No doubt the individual self, that possesses intelligence and that is different from the Pradhana, has the power of seeing; yet the individual self, neither in the state of bondage nor in the state of final release: can be the cause of the universe. The scriptural text beginning with 'From the same self, the spatial ether came into existence' and ending with , Different from this 'Vijnanamaya' is the Inner-Self Anandamaya ', (Tait.II-1-1) declares that the Anandamaya, mentioned as the cause of the universe, is the all-knowing Highest
1 इत्यस्य A1, M 2. 2अयमात्मानन्दमयः M 1, M 2.
3 Vijnanamaya is the individual soul whose essential characteristic is knowledge. 4'Anandamaya is the Brahman whose essential characteristic is the abundant bliss,
कुतः? अभ्यासात् | आनन्दमयस्य निरतिशयदशाशिरस्कानन्दमयत्वेनाभ्या- सात् । 'ते ये शतं प्रजापतेरानन्दाः। स एको ब्रह्मण आ नन्दःयतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते। अप्राप्य मनसा सह | आनन्दं ब्रह्मणो विद्वान्। न बिभेति कुतश्चन' इति हि 1वेद्यत्वेनायमानन्दमयोऽनवधिकातिशयो- ऽभ्यस्यते॥
विकारशब्दान्नेति चेन्न प्राचुर्यात् ॥ १४ ॥
'स वा एष पुरुषोऽन्नरसमयः' इति विकारार्थमयट्प्रकरणा-
Self, who is other than the individual soul. Why? Because of the repetition. Because there is repetition of the bliss in various grades which culminates in the Anandamayana and which (bliss) forms the summits of unsurpassable condition. This Anandamaya of the unsurpassable condition is repeatedly mentioned in the text, for meditation 'The hundred-fold of the bliss of Prajapati is equal to the single bliss of the Brahman (Tait. II.8-4), 'Wherefrom speeches together with the mind return not having reached it. He who knows the. Brahman's bliss fears not from anything' (Tait. 11-3-8).
14. Vikarasabdanneti cenna pracuryat
It may be said that owing to there being the affix (Maya) significant of modification, (the Anandamaya is) not (the Brahman); but it is not (right to say) so because that (affix Maya) signifies abundance.
The affix Mayat means modification in the context 'That this person is Annarasamaya {i.e. the modification of
1वेद्यत्वेनायमात्मा A 2, M 1.दानन्दमय इत्यस्यापि विकारार्थत्वं प्रतीयते । अतोऽयमानन्दमयो नाविकाररूपः परमात्मेति चेन्न, अर्थविरोधात् प्राचुर्यार्थ एवायं मयडिति विज्ञायते । " तस्माद्वा एतस्मादात्मन आकाशः संभूतः" इति1 ह्यविकार अात्मा प्रकृतः । प्रकरणे च विकारार्थत्वं प्राणमय एव परित्यक्तम् । 2 उक्तेन न्यायेनानन्दप्राचुर्यात् परमपुरुष एवायमानन्दमयः ॥
तद्धेतुव्यपदेशाच्च ॥ १५ ॥
" एष ह्येवानन्दयाति " इति जीवान्प्रत्यानन्दहेतुरयमानन्दमयो व्यपदिश्यते । अतश्चायं न प्रत्यगात्मा ॥
the essence of food)' (Tait. 11-1-3). Therefore, the term Anandamaya also means the modification of bliss. Hence Anandamaya is not the Highest Self, that does not undergo modification. It is not so. Because there is contradiction of the purport, the affix Mayat is understood to mean here 'abundance'. The scriptural text 'From that very same Self, the spatial ether came into existence'(Tait. II-I-I) refers to the Self, that does not undergo modification. The notion that the affix Mayat denotes modification, has been given up already in the case of Pranamaya. Following this argument, it should be accepted that the Anandamaya is only the Highest person; because there is an abundance of bliss in Him.
15. Taddhetuvyapadesacca
Because also this Anandamaya is declared (in the
contex) to be the cause of that (which forms the bliss
of the individual selves).
'For,He Himself causes the bliss' (Tait. 11-7-1). In this passage it is declared that Anandamaya causes the bliss of
1 इत्यविकार A 1. 2 उक्तन्यायेन A 1,M 1. '६]'प्रथमाध्याये प्रथमः पादः ३७
मान्त्रवर्णिकमेव च गीयते ॥ १६ ॥
"सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं ब्रह्म " इति मन्त्रवर्णोदितमेव "तस्माद्वा एतस्मात्" इत्यादिनानन्दमय इति गीयते । अतश्च न प्रत्यगात्मा ॥ नेतरोऽनुपपत्ते: ॥ १७ ॥
इतरः प्रत्यगात्मा मन्त्रवर्णोदित इति नाशङ्कनीयम्, " सोऽश्नुते
the individual selves. Therefore the Aandamaya is not the individual self.
16. Mantravarnikameva ca giyate
Because also that the same Being, who is denoted by the words of the Mantra (in the context)) is declared (as the Anandamaya). That same Brahman, who is described by the words of the Mantra, 'The Brahman is Reality, Knowledge,Infinity' is spoken of as the Anandamaya in the passage 'Verily from this' (Tait. 11-1-1). Hence the Anandamaya is not the individual self.
17.Netaronupapatteh
He, who is other (than the Brahman) is not (that Being, who is described by the words of the Mantra) because (in such a case) there would be inappropriate- ness.
It should not be doubted that the other (individual self) is denoted by the words of the Mantra. The individual self, either in his state of bondage or in the state of final release, cannotसर्वान् कामान् सह । ब्रह्मणा विपश्चिता इति प्रत्यगात्मनो बद्धस्य
मुक्तस्य चेदृशविपश्चित्त्वानुपपत्ते: । "सोऽकामयत | ब्रहु स्यां प्रजायेय
इति विचित्रस्थिरत्रसरूपबहुभवनसंकल्परूपमिदं विपश्चित्वमिति ह्युत्तरत्र
व्यज्यते । मुक्तस्य सर्वज्ञस्यापि जगद्वचापाराभावादीदृशविपश्चित्त्वासंभवः ॥
इतश्च---
भेदव्यपदेशाच्च ॥ १८ ॥
तस्माद्वा एतस्माद्विज्ञानमयात् । अन्योऽन्तर आत्मानन्दमयः"
इति हि विज्ञानमयात् प्रत्यगात्मनो भेदेनायमानन्दमयो व्यपदिश्यते ।
have such Vipas'cittva or extraordinary intellect mentioned
in the scriptural text, 'He enjoys all desires and the intelligent Brahman (Tait.II-1-2). It is stated in the subsequent text, 'It thought, may I become many' (Chand. VI-2-1 & 3), that the intelligence (Vipas'cittva) is only in the form of the will of the lord in assuming many forms of wonderful things including movable and immovable beings. Though the liberated soul, is all-knowing, yet he cannot create the world. Hence he cannot have such Vipas'cittva (intelligence) of the type stated
above.
18. Bhedavyapadesacca ॥१८॥
Because also there is (in the context) the declara- tion of difference (between the individual self and the Brahman). That the Anandamaya is distinct from the individual soul known as Vijnanamaya is declared in the Scriptural text, 'Different from this Vijnanamaya (the individual soul)
is this Inner-self, the Anandamaya (Tait. II-5). It should notन च विज्ञानमयविषयतयोदाहृते श्लोके "विज्ञानं यज्ञं तनुते इति व्यपदेशात् विज्ञानमयो बुद्धिमात्रमित्याशङ्कनीयम् । यतः सूत्रकार एवे- मामाशङ्कां परिहरिष्यति--"व्यपदेशाच्च क्रियायां न चेन्निर्देशविपर्ययः इति । "विज्ञानं यज्ञं तनुते" इति यज्ञादिक्रियायां जीवस्य कर्तृत्वव्यपदे- शाच्च जीवः कर्ता, विज्ञानशब्देन जीवस्य व्यपदेशात् । बुद्धिमात्रव्यपदेशे तु विज्ञानेनेति निर्देशविपर्ययः स्यात् , बुद्धेः करणत्वादिति ॥
इतश्च-
कामाच्च नानुमानापेक्षा ॥१९॥
"सोऽकामयत । बहु स्याम् इति स्वकामादेवास्य" 'जगत्सर्गः
be doubted that the term Vijnanamaya means mere intellect
on tbe ground that the Vijnamaya is mentioned as mere
intellect in the text 'Vijnana (intellect) performs the sacrifice'
(Tait. II-5-1). The Sutrakara himself will clear this doubt
in Sutra II-3-35. In the scriptural text' The intellect per-
forms the sacrifice (Tait.II-5-1), the word intellect denotes the individual self who is the agent of the sacrifice. If the word, Vijnana means intellect alone and not the individual self, then the reading of the text would be in a different way; because intellect is only an instrument of action.
19. Kamacca nanumanapeksa
Because also His will (is in itself the cause of
creation) the Pradhana is not needed (by Him in the
act of creation).
That the creation of the world is effected by His will
alone is stated in the scriptural statement, 'He desired may I
श्रूयते 1 प्रत्यगात्मनो हि यस्य कस्यचित्सर्गे आनुमानापेक्षा दृश्यते | अनुमानगम्यं 'प्रधानमानुमानम् ॥
इतश्च---
अस्मिन्नस्य च तद्योगं शास्ति ॥२०॥
अस्मिन् आनन्दमये अस्य प्रत्यगात्मन आनन्दयोगं शास्ति रसो वै सः । रसं ह्येवायं लब्ध्वानन्दी भवति इति । अतः प्रत्यगात्मनो- ऽर्थान्तरभूतः सर्वज्ञः पुरुषोत्त्तमो जगत्कारणभूत आनन्दमयः ।।
become manifold and be born' (Tait.II-6.1). It is seen tbat the individual soul requires the Pradhana for the production of something. The Pradhana is Anumana because it is proved by the inferential reasoning.
20. Asminnasya ca tadyogath Shasti
Because also the scripture declares that the indi- vidual self's acquisition of the bliss takes place when he is in association with this (Anandamaya).
The scriptural text declares that this individual soul gets bliss on reaching Him. The scriptural text is this 'Bliss, indeed, is He. Having obtained that very same Bliss, he (i.e. the individual self) becomes blissful (Tait.II.7.1). There- fore Anandmaya is the all-knowing Highest Person, who is the cause of the world and who is other than the individual self.
1आनुमानं प्रधानम् M 1,अन्तरधिकरणम् ७
अन्तस्तद्धर्मोपदेशात् ॥२१॥
अयं जगत्कारणभूतो विपश्चिदानन्दमयः कश्चिदुपचितपुण्यविशेषो जीवविशेषो देहयोगाद्विज्ञायते ; नायं परमात्मेति नाशङ्कनीयम् । "य एषोऽन्तरादित्ये हिरण्मयः पुरुषः इत्यादौ श्रूयमाणः पुरुषः परमपुरुषः परमात्मैव | कुतः ? तद्धर्मोपदेशात् । "स एष सर्वेषां लोकानामीशः सर्वेषां कामानाम् "तस्योदिति नाम ! स एष सर्वेभ्यः पाप्मभ्य उदितः" इति
ANTARADHIKARANA 7
21. Antastaddharmopadeshaat
He, who is within the sun and the eye is the Brahman; because His attributes are declared in the context.
It should not be doubted that the Anandamaya, who is the cause of the world, omniscient and blissful is understood to be an individual self endowed with extraordinary merits and not the Supreme Self, because he is said to have a body. It refers to the Supreme Person and the Highest Self, that is denoted by the word, Person, occurring in the scriptural statement 'The Person, who is seen within the sun, He is brilliant like gold etc.' (Chand. I-6-6). Why? Because His attributes are declared in the context. The attributes of the Highest Person, who is other than the individual self, are (a) His unlimited Lordship over all the worlds and all the desires (b) His not being under the influence cf Karman. The scriptural authorities are-'He is the lord of all the worlds
6निरुपाधिकसर्वलोकसर्वकामेशत्वं स्वत एवाकर्मवश्यत्वं च प्रत्यगात्मनोऽर्थान्तरभूतस्य 'परमपुरुषस्यैव हि घर्मः । 'वेदाहमेतं पुरुषं महान्तम् | आदित्यवर्णे तमसः परस्तात्' इत्यादिषु त्रिगुणात्मकप्रकृत्यनन्तर्गताप्राकृतस्वासाधारणरूपवत्वं च ज्ञानादिगुणवत्तस्यैव हि श्रूयते । ज्ञानादयोऽपि 'सत्यं ज्ञानम्' 'यः सर्वज्ञः सर्ववित्' 'परास्य शक्तिर्विविधैव श्रूयते स्वाभाविकी ज्ञानबलक्रिया च' 'इत्यादिषु श्रुतत्वात् तस्य गुणा विज्ञायन्ते। तथा 'आादित्यवर्णं तमसः परस्तात्' इत्यादिष्वप्राकृतस्वासाधारणरूपश्रवणात् तद्वत्ता च विज्ञायते ।
and also of all desires', 'His name is 'High'. This same person is risen above all sins' (Chand. I-6-7). The scriptural text, 'I know this Great Person of sun-like lustre, who is altogether beyond darkness' (Tait. Ar.III-13-1) states that He has an immaterial form, that is peculiar to Him and that could not be included among the modifications of the Prakriti of Triguna (i.e. Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas) in the same way as the quality of knowledge.That knowledge, etc. are His attributes is clearly seen in the scriptural texts- (1) 'The Brahman is the Reality, Knowledge' (Tait. II.1-1). (2) 'He, who knows all and understands all' (Mund 1-1-9). (3) 'His supreme power is declared, as varied and natural as well as His activity with knowledge and strength,' (S'vet. VI-8). That He has a divine form peculiar to Him-self has been stated in the scriptural text, 'He is of sun-like lustre and altogether beyond darkness' (Tait. Ar.III-13-1). Hence He is known to be of that form.
'परमात्मन एव संभवति M1,M3, परमात्मन एव धर्मः A 2,तदेतद्वाक्यकारश्चाह-'हिरण्मयः पुरुषो दृश्यत इति प्राज्ञः सर्वान्तरः स्यात्, लोककामेशोपदेशात् तथोदयात्पाप्मनाम्' इत्युक्त्वा,तद्रूपस्य कार्यत्वं मायामयत्वं वेति 'स्यात्तद्रूपं कृतकमनुग्रहार्थं तच्चेतसामैश्वर्यात्' इति निरसनीयं मतमुपन्यस्य, 'रूपं वातीन्द्रियमन्तःकरण- प्रत्यक्षनिर्देशात्' इति । व्याख्यातं च द्रमिडाचार्यैः-'न वा मायामात्रम् । अञ्जसैव विश्वसृजो रूपम् । तत्तु न चक्षुषा ग्राह्मम् । मनसा त्वकल्मषेण साधनान्तवता गृह्यते | 'न चक्षुषा गृह्यते नापि वाचा' 'मनसा तु विशुद्धेन' इति श्रुतेः । न ह्यरूपाया देवताया रूपमुपदिश्यते ।
The Vakyakara also states thus- 'The passage 'The Golden Person is beheld' (Chand. I-6-6) refers to the Wise and Inner One, because He is described as the Lord of the world and the Lord of desires and also as raised high above evils'. Then in the next sentence' His form is artificial and is assumed to bless His devotees because He displays His sovereign power' he (the Vakyakara) introduces for refutation the view that His form must be a phase of effect or it must be illusory. Then (he himself) replies thus-'His form is indeed beyond the reach of the sense-organs; because it is mentioned to be perceived by Antahkarana (or inner sense.' Dramiddacharya has commented upon it thus-'The form of the creator of the universe is not illusory; it is real and natural. It cannot be apprehended by the eye; but could be apprehended through the mind, which must be free from impurity, by one, who has resorted to a different means of attaining Him'. The scriptural text is this- 'He is not apprehended by the eye, nor by speech' ; but can be known only by a pure mind ' (Munda. III.1-8). It is not taught that gods, who have no real form, have a form; because the
The author of the Vakya, an explanatory treatise on the Chandogyopanisad, is Brahmanandin alias Tanka.
यथाभूतवादि हि शास्त्रम् । 'माहारजनं वासः' 'वेदाहमेतं पुरुषं महान्तम् । आदित्यवर्णम्' इति प्रकरणान्तरनिर्देशाच्च साक्षिणः' इति । 'हिरण्मय इति रूपसामान्याश्चन्द्रमुखवत्' इति च वाक्यम् । तच्च व्याख्यातं तैरेव--'न मयडत्र विकारमादाय प्रयुज्यते, अनारभ्यत्वादात्मनः' इत्यादिना । अतः प्रघानात् प्रत्यगात्मनश्चार्थान्तरभूतो निरुपाधिक- विपश्चिदनवधिकातिशयानन्दोऽप्राकृतस्वासाधारणदिव्यरूपः पुरुषोत्तमः परं ब्रह्म जगत्कारणमिति वेदान्तैः प्रतिपाद्यत इति निरवद्यम् ॥
भेदव्यपदेशाच्चान्यः ॥२२॥
scripture describes things as they are. This is also because in a different context, it is stated about the Universal witness thus--'The form of this person is like a saffron coloured robe' (Br.II-3-6) 'I know this great Person of sun-like lustre' (Tait-Ar.III-12-7). This passage also is found in the work Vakya. The phrase He is the Golden Person is to be explained on the similarity of colour of both, like in the case at the expression 'moon-face'. Dramida himself, has commented upon the passage thus-'The affix, mayat, is not used in the sense of modification; because the Self is not produced '. Thus the Vedanta texts determine the Brahman, who is other than the Pradhana and the individual self. He has unlimited omniscience (Vipas'cittva), whose natural characteristic is unsurpassed bliss, who possesses a divine form that is peculiar to Him, and not made of matter He is the Highest Person and the cause of the world. Thus there is not any defect.
22. Bhedavyapadesaccanyah
And He is different (from the sun and the other
individual selves) because also there is the declaration of difference (between the Brahman on the one hand and the sun and other individual selves on the other).'य आदित्ये तिष्ठन्नादित्यादन्तरो यमादित्यो न वेद यस्यादित्यः शरीरं य आदित्यमन्तरो यमयति स त आत्मान्तर्याम्यमृत इत्यधिदैवतम् । य आत्मनि तिष्ठन्नित्याधिभूतम् । यः सर्वेषु लोकेषु तिष्ठन्नित्यधिलोकम् । यः सर्वेषु भूतेषु तिष्ठन्नित्यधिभूतम् । यः सर्वेषु वेदेषु तिष्ठन्नित्यधिवेदम् । यः सर्वेषु यज्ञेषु तिष्ठन्नित्यधियज्ञम्' इत्यन्तर्यामिब्राह्मणे, सुबालोपनिषदि च 'यः पृथिवीमन्तरे संचरन्' इत्यारभ्य 'योऽव्यक्तमन्तरे संचरन्, योऽक्षरमन्तरे संचरन्, यो मृत्युमन्तरे संचरन्, यस्य मृत्युः शरीरं यं मृत्युर्न वेद, एष सर्वभूतान्तरात्मापहतपाप्मा दिव्यो देव एको नारायणः'
The scriptural text, 'He who dwelling in the sun, is within the sun, whom the sun does not know, whose body is the sun, who internally rules the sun- He is thy Self, internal ruler and immortal,' (Madh. Brh. III-7-9) proves that He is greater than the gods. That He is above the individual self is stated in the scriptural text, 'He who dwelling in the individual self etc.' That, He is above the world, is stated in the scriptural text, 'He, who dwelling within all the worlds, etc.' The scriptural text, 'He, who dwelling within all beings' proves that He is greater than all beings. That He is above all the Vedas is stated in the scriptural text, ' He who dwelling within all the Vedas, etc.' That He is above all sacrifices is stated in the text, ' He, who dwelling within all the sacrifices.' All these texts are found in Antaryamibrahamana. The Subalopanishad passage, beginning with 'who is moving within the earth' and proceeding 'who is moving within Ayakta, who is moving within Akshara (imperish able), who is moving within Mrtyu (death), whose body is Mrtyu, whom Mrtyu does not know. 'This is the Internal Self of all beings. This is free from all sins. He is the Divine Lord, He is the one Narayana' (Suba. VII-1) points
1 एष ते A 1.इति सर्वदेवसर्वलोकसर्वभूतसर्ववेदसर्वयज्ञसर्वात्मोपरि वर्तमानतया तत्तच्छरीरकतया तत्तुदन्तरात्मतया तत्तदवेद्यतया तत्तन्नियन्तृतया चैभ्यः सर्वेभ्यो भेदव्यपदेशाच्चायमपहतपाप्मा नारायणः प्रधानात् प्रत्यगात्मनश्चार्थान्तर-भूतो निखिलजगादेककारणमिति सिद्धम् ।
आकाशाधिकरणं प्राणाधिकरणं च ८, ९
आकाशस्तल्लिङ्गात् ॥२३॥
अत एव प्राणः ॥२४॥
out that He is above all gods, all worlds, all beings, all Vedas, all sacrifices, and all souls. He possesses them as His body. He is their Inner-Self. He is not apprehended by them. He is their controller. Thus he is described as different from all these. Hence it is proved, that Narayana who is free from all sins, and who is other than the Pradhana and the individual selves, is the sole cause of the world.
AKASHADHIKARANA 8
AND
PRANADHIKARANA 9
23. Akashastallingat
24. Ata eva pranah
That which is denoted by the word Akasha, (is the Brahman); because His peculiar characteristics (are mentioned in the context in relation to what is denoted by that word). For the same reason (which has been given in the case of Akshara), He, who is denoted by the word Prana (also in the context is the Brahman).
1 पाप्मादिः M 1.सर्वाणि ह वा इमानि भूतान्याकाशादेव समुत्पद्यन्त आकाशं प्रत्यस्तं यन्ति' 'सर्वाणि ह वा इमानि भूतानि प्राणमेवाभिसंविशन्ति प्राणमभ्युज्जिहते' इत्यादौ 'सदेव सोम्येदमग्र आसीत्' इत्यादिना सामान्येन निर्दिष्टस्य जगत्कारणस्य 'भूताकाशप्राणसहचारिजीववाचिशब्दाभ्यां विशेषनिर्णयशङ्कायां 'सर्वाणि ह वा इमानि भूतानि' इति प्रसिद्धवन्निर्दिश्यमानो जगत्कारणत्वादिलिङ्गात् भूताकाशजीवाभ्यामर्थान्तरभूतः परमपुरुष एवात्राकाशप्राणशब्दनिर्देिष्ट इति निश्चीयते ।
Consider the texts, 'All these beings are, indeed, born out of the Akshara; they go unto the Akshara at the end'. (Chand. I-9-1). 'All these beings, indeed, enter into the Prana and are evolved out of the Prana' (Chand. I-11-5).
The doubt, that arises here, is this :- These passages distinctly specify with the terms Akshara and Prana, the universal cause mentioned in the text 'Existence alone, my dear boy, was in the beginning' with general term Sat. Here the terms Akshara and Prana denote the popular ether (one of the five elements) and Jiva functioning with co-operation of vital breath of air. The doubt is cleared thus-In the texts quoted above the words Ha 'Vai (indeed) point out that the reason for accepting the object as the universal cause is well-known. Therefore the cause denoted by the terms Akshara and Prana must be the Highest Person who is distinct from the popular ether and vital air. Here what is well known is this-The Highest Person is the cause of the world. He became many as a result of His will. He possesses unsurpassed bliss. He grants bliss to the self.
भूताकाशप्राणसहृकारि A 1. निर्दिश्यमानात् M 1,2.
शब्दाभ्यां निर्दिष्टः A 1, M 3,प्रसिद्धिस्तु-बहुभवनसंकल्परूपेक्षणानवधिकातिशयानन्दजीवा- नन्दहेतुत्व विज्ञानमयविलक्षुणत्वनिखिलभुवनभयाभयहेतुत्वसर्वलोकसर्वकामेशत्वसर्वपाप्मोदयाप्राकृतस्वासाघारणरूपविशिष्टस्य रविकरविकसितपुण्डरीकनयनस्य सर्वज्ञस्य सत्यसंकल्पस्य करणाधिपाधिपस्य परमपुरुषस्यैवनिखिलजगदेककारणत्वमिति स एवाकाशप्राणशब्दाभ्यां जगत्कारणत्वेनाभिधीयत इति निश्चयो युक्त एव ॥
ज्योतिरधिकरणम् १०
ज्योतिश्चरणाभिधानात् ॥२५॥
'अथ यदतः परो दिवो ज्योतिर्दीप्यते विश्वतः पृष्ठेषु सर्वतः
He is other than the Vijnanamaya (the individual self). He causes fear and non-fear to the whole world. He is the Lord of all worlds. He is the Lord of all desires. He is free from all evils. He possesses a divine form, that is peculiar to Him. His eyes resemble the lotus, that blossoms forth, when it is in contact with the rays of the sun. He is all knowing and He possesses a true will. He is the Lord of the Lord of sense organs. Therefore, it is right to conclude that the words, Akasha and Prana refer to Him as the cause of the world.
JYOTIRADHIKARNA 10
25. Jyotischaranabhidhanat
That which is denoted by the word, ]yotis, (is the Brahman); because there is mention of (His) feet (in the connected context). It is revealed in the scriptures to the effect-'Now that light which shines beyond this Heaven, on the backs of all
तत्प्रसिद्धस्तु A 1.पृष्ठेष्वनुत्तमेषूत्तमेषु लोकेष्विदं वाव तद्यदिदमस्मिन्नन्तः पुरुषे ज्योतिः' इत्यत्र संर्वस्मात्परत्वेन निर्दिश्यमानतया सकलकारणभूतज्योतिषः कौक्षेयज्योतिषैक्याभिधानात्, स्ववाक्ये 'विरोधिलिङ्गादर्शनाच्च प्रसिद्धमेव ज्योतिर्जगत्कारणत्वेन प्रतिपाद्यत इति शङ्कायां, यद्यपि स्ववाक्ये 'विरोधि लिङ्गं न दृश्यते; तथापि पूर्वेस्मिन् वाक्ये 'पादोऽस्य विश्वा भूतानि । त्रेिपादस्यामृतं दिवि' इति प्रतिपादितस्य सर्वभूतचरणस्य परमपुरुष्यैवद्युसंबन्धितयात्रापि प्रत्यभिज्ञानात् स एव ज्योतिःशब्देन सर्वस्मात् परत्वेन सकलकारणतयाभिधीयते | अस्य च कौक्षेयज्योतिषैक्याभिधानं फलायोपदिश्यत इति न कश्चिद्विरोधः | अखिलजगदेककारणभूतः परम-
the things, on the backs of everything, in the highest worlds than which there is no higher, that is that same as this light, indeed, which is here within the Person (Chand. III-13-7). Here the following doubt arises-The word, Jyotis (light), is to be taken as the cause of the creation, etc. of the world; because it is denoted as Higher than all objects. It is also taught to be the same as digestive heat in the stomach. In this passage nothing is seen to prove contradiction with the supposition. Therefore, the popular Jyotis (light), alone is to be taken as the cause of the creation. etc. of the world. If it be so doubted, the reply is this-It is true that in this passage nothing is seen to prove contradiction with the supposition. Yet, in the same context, the passage- 'All beings make up His one foot; His three feet represent the immortal beings in the Highest Heaven' (Chand. III-12-6) occurs wherein all beings are declared to form the foot of this Highest Person who is in relation to the
1 विरोध A 1,2.
7पुरुषोऽपाकृतस्वासाधारणदिव्यवर्णो दिव्यरूपस्तमसः परस्ताद्वर्तत इति तस्यैव निरतिशयदीप्तियोगात् ज्योति:शव्दाभिधेयत्वं विश्वतः पृष्ठेषु सर्वतः पृष्ठेष्वनुत्तमेषूत्तमेषु लोकेष्वप्राकृतेषु वासश्च युज्यत एव ॥
छन्दोऽभिधानान्नेति चेन्न तथाचेतोऽर्पणनिगमात्तथा हि दर्शनम् ॥२६॥
Highest Heaven. The same Person is recognized here. Hence the word, Jyotis, refers to Him, as the cause of the creation, etc. of the world and as higher than all objects. And, in the teaching that this Jyotis is one with the digestive heat of the stomach, there is nothing wrong; because the oneness is enjoined for the purpose of meditation for attaining the desired result. The Highest Person is the only cause of the world. He possesses an extraordinary devine colour, that is peculiar to Him and not a modification of the Prakrti, He possesses a divine form. He is beyond darkness (i.e. Prakrta world). He has unsurpassed lustre. Hence it is right to say that He who is denoted by the word Jyotis, lives on the back of all the worlds, on the back of everything and also in all the higher worlds than which there is no higher.
26. Chandobhidhananneti chenna tatha chetorpananigamat; tathahi darshanam"
If it be said that on account of the metre(Gayatri) being mentioned (in the context, the light or Jyotis mentioned above is) not the Brahman; it is not right to say so; because the teaching here relates to the concentration of the mind the Brahman conceived as that same Gayatri; indeed the scripture declares it accordingly. अप्राकृतेषु omitted A 1, M 2, 3.
पूर्वत्र 'गायत्री वा इदं सर्वम्' इति गायत्र्याख्यं छन्दः प्रस्तुतमिति नात्र परमपुरुषाभिधानमिति चेत् ; नैतत्, परमपुरुषस्यैव गायत्रीसादृश्यानुसंधानोपदेशात्, तस्य छन्दोमात्रस्य सर्वभूतात्मकत्वानुपपत्तेरेवेति निगम्यते । अन्यत्रापि ह्यन्यस्य छन्द:सादृश्यात् छन्दोनिर्देशो दृश्यते-'ते वा एते पञ्चान्ये' इत्यारभ्य 'सैषा विराट्' इत्यादौ ॥
भूतादिपादव्यपदेशोपपत्तेश्चैवम् ॥२७॥
In a former passage in the same context, the metre known as the Gayatri is mentioned in the statement' The Gayatri, indeed, is all this' (Chand. III-12-1). Therefore the Highest Person should not be taken to have been meant in the passages quoted above. To this question we say-This is not so. It is taught there that the Highest Person is to be meditated upon as similar to Gayatri. The conclusion is that it is impossible for that which is merely a metre to be in the form of all beings. Elsewhere, also a word, which ordinarily denotes a metre, is used to denote other thing in consequence of its similarity with it. Vide the passage beginning with- 'Now these five and the other five' and ending with' this same is viraj , (Chand. IV -3-8).
27. Bhutadipadavyapadeshopapatteshcaivam
Because also it is appropriate only thus to declare that (intelligent) beings and other objects form the feet of the Gayatri).
पूर्वम् M 2. उपदेशत्वात् A 1. The metre, Gayatri is said to consIst of four quarters of six syllables in each.
भूतपृथिवीशरीरहृदयैश्चतुष्पदेति व्यपदेशश्च परमपुरुषे गायत्रीशव्दनिर्दिष्टे ह्युपपद्यत इति पूर्वोक्तप्रकार एव समञ्जस: ॥
उपदेशभेदान्नेति चेन्नोभयस्मिन्नप्यविरोधात्॥२८॥
पूर्वत्र 'त्रिपादस्यामृतं दिवि' इति परमपुरुषो व्यपदिश्यते । अत्र 'अथ यदतः परो देिवः' इति पञ्चम्या निर्दिष्टद्युसंबन्धि ज्योतिरेिति न प्रत्यभिज्ञेति चेत्;नैतत्, उभयस्मिन्नपि व्यपदेशे विरोधाभावात्;
The declaration that it has four feet namely the beings, the earth, the body and tbe heart is appropriate only in relation to the Highest Person who is here denoted by the word, Gayatri. Therefore the above mentioned interpretation alone is right.
28. Upadeshabhedanneti chennobhayasminnapyavirodhat
If it be said that, on account of there being a difference between the teachings (given in the context, what is denoted by the word Jyotis) is not the Brahman; it cannot be right to say so; because even in both those teachings there is nothing that is contradictory of each other.
In a former passage in the same context, namely, 'His three immortal feet are in the Highest Heaven' (Chand. III-12-6), the Highest Person has been pointed out clearly. Here in tbe scriptural text, 'That Jyotis which is beyond the Highest Heaven' (Chand 111-13-7), what is denoted by the oblative case is the light that is related to the Highest Heaven. Hence what is described in the former passage cannot be recognised in this subsequent passage. It is not so;
व्यपदेशविरोघाभावात् A 1, 2.यथा वृक्षाग्रे श्येनः, वृक्षाग्रत्परतः श्येन इति व्यपदेशः । अत्र देिवः परत्वमेवोभयत्र विवक्षितमित्यर्थः ॥
इन्द्रप्राणाधिकरणम् ११
प्राणस्तथानुगमात् ॥२९॥
आत्मनां हिततमरूपमोक्षसाधनोपासनकर्मतया प्रज्ञातजीवभावस्येन्द्रस्य 'प्राणोऽस्मि प्रज्ञात्मा । तं मामायुरमृतमित्युपास्स्व' इति विधानात् स एव जगत्कारणम् । कारणोपासनं हि मोक्षसाधनम् ।
because there is nothing contradictory in the two statements. For an analogous example there is this instance-'The hawk is on the top of the tree' and 'The hawk is above the top of the tree'. Therefore the purport in both the passages is that He is beyond the Highest Heaven.
INDRAPRANADHIKARANA 11
29.Pranastathanugamat
That which is denoted by the word Prana (is the Brahman); because it is undetstood in the context.
The scriptural text is this :-'Indeed, I am the Prana and the omniscient self; worship and meditate on me as life and immortality" (Kaus. III-2). The doubt that arises here is this-The above mentioned text teaches that Indra who is known as Jiva (individual soul), is the object of man's meditation which would give him the Moksha, most beneficial one. He (Indra) alone is the cause of the world; because the meditation on universal cause alone is the means of Moksha. The scriptural text in support of this is this-
स्वस्य M 2, 3. जगत्कारणो A 1.'तस्य तावदेव चिरं यावन्न विमोक्ष्येऽथ संपत्स्ये 'इति श्रुतेरिति नाशइनीयम् | प्राणशब्दसमानाधिकरणेन्द्रशब्द्रनिर्देिष्टो जीवादर्थान्तरभूत उक्तलक्षणः परमात्मैव । कुतः ? तथानुगमात्; परमात्मासाधारणानन्दाजरा- मृतादिष्वस्येन्द्रप्राणशब्द्रनिर्दिष्टस्यानुगमो हि दृश्यते 'स एष प्राण एव प्रज्ञात्मानन्दोऽजरोऽसृतः' इति ॥
न वक्तुरात्मोपदेशादिति चेदध्यात्मसंबन्धभूमाह्यस्मिन् ॥ ३०॥
'So long as he is not freed from the body, so long there is delay; then he will reach the Brahman' (Chand. VI-14-2).
To this doubt, the reply is this-This Being, who is denoted by the word, Indra mentioned in grammatical equation with the word Prana is the Highest Self characterised above and other than the individual Self. Why? Because it is so understood in the sequal. The particular character-istics of the Highest Self, such as Ananda (bliss), Ajara (undecaying) and Amruta (immortal) are found in the Being, who is denoted by the words, Indra and Prana. This is mentioned in the scriptural passage, 'That same Prana is the omniscient self who is bliss, undecaying and immortal' (Kaus.III-9).
30. Na vakturatmopadeshaditi cedadhyatmasambandhabhuma hyasmin
If it be said that on account of the speaker lndra declaring himself (to be the subject of worship) what is denoted by the words, Indra and Prana) is not (the Brahman; it is replied that it cannot be right to say so); because there is here the mention of a multitude of attributes belonging to the Self.
उपक्रमे 'मामेव विजानीहि' इति त्वाष्ट्वघादिना प्रज्ञातजीव- भावस्येन्द्रस्योपदेशादुपसंहारस्तदनुगुणो वर्णनीय इति चेत्; नैतत्; अध्यात्मसंबन्धभूमा ह्यस्मिन् । अध्यात्मम्;परमात्मधर्मः । परमात्मसंबन्धबहुत्व- मस्मिन्निन्द्रशब्दाभिधेये वाक्योपक्रमप्रभृत्योयसंहाराद् दृश्यते 'यं त्वं मनुष्याय हिततमं मन्यसे' इति हिततमोपासनं प्रारव्धम् । तच परमात्मधर्मः । 'तमेवं विद्वानमृत इह भवति । नान्यः पन्थाः' इत्यादिश्रुतेः । तथा 'एष एव साधु कर्म कारयति' इत्यादिना सर्वस्य कारयितृत्वम् ,
In the beginning of the topic there is the statement, 'Know me alone' (Kaus. III-1). Here indra is denoted as an individual self; because there are statements of attributes such as killing Vrtra, etc.' The conclusion should also be in consonance with this statement. This is not so; because there is in the context the mention of a multitude of attributes belonging to the Self. The phrase 'the attributes belonging to the self' means the attributes of the Highest Self'. From the beginning to the end of the sentence, it is seen that he who is denoted by the word, Indra, possesses many attributes belonging to the Highest self. The scriptural statements made in the outset, namely, 'You yourself choose for me that boon, which you think most beneficial to man' (Kaus. III.1) starts with the worship, that is most beneficial to man. That this worship is of the Highest Self is proved in the text, 'Thus knowing Him one becomes immortal here. There is no other path' (Purusa Sukta 20). Similarly, the Supreme Self is the impeller of all activities, in accordance with the passage- 'He Himself
induces him to do good work whom He wishes to lead beyond these worlds, etc." (Kaus. IlI-8). So also He is the aupport'एवमेवैता भूतमात्राः 'इत्यारभ्य 'प्रज्ञामात्राः प्राणेष्वर्पिताः 'इति सर्वाधारत्वम् ; तथानन्दादयश्च । 'एष लोकाधिपतिः 'इत्यादिना सर्वेश्वरत्वं च
शास्त्रदृष्ठ्या तूपदेशो वामदेववत् ॥३१॥
नामरूपव्याकरणादिशास्त्रात् सर्वैः शब्दैः परमात्मैवाभिधीयत इति दृष्ठ्या तज्ज्ञापनायायमिन्द्रशब्देन परमात्मोपदेशः । शास्त्रस्था हि वामदेवादयस्तथैव वदन्ति 'तद्धैतत्पश्यन् ऋषिर्वामदेवः प्रतिपेदे अहं मनुरभवं सूर्यश्च' इत्यादि ॥
of all, in accordance with the passage.' 'These subtle elements of beings are fixed on the elernents of intelligence, and the elements of intelligence are fixed on the Prana' Kaus.III-8). In the same way are stated the bliss and other attributes. That He is the Lord of all is proved by the statements, 'He is the Lord of all the worlds' (Kaus III-8).
31.'Shastradrstya tupadeso Vamadevavat'
And the teaching in the context is, in accordance with the view found in the scripture, as in the case of Vamadeva.
All the words denote the Highest Self; because the scriptures state that He transforms Himself into a gross being having name and form. In order to make one remember this, the Highest Self is mentioned here by the word, Indra. Vamadeva and others who realised this truth of the scriptures state accordingly. Vide 'After seeing this, the sage Vamadeva experienced- I have become Manu and the sun etc.' (Brh.I-4-10),
जीवमुख्यप्राणलिङ्गान्नेति चेन्नोपासात्रैविध्यादाश्रितत्वादिह तद्योगात् ॥३२॥
'त्रिशीर्षाणं त्वाष्ट्रमहनम्' 'यावद्ध्यस्मिन् शरीरे प्राणो वसति तावदायुः' इत्यादि जीवलिङ्गं मुख्यप्राणलिङ्गं चास्मिन् दृश्यत इति नैवमिति चेन्न ; उपासात्रैविध्याद्धेतोर्जीवशब्देन प्राणशब्देन च परमात्मनोऽभिधानम् । अन्यत्रापि परमात्मनः स्वरूपेण, भोक्तृशरीरकत्वेन,
32.'Jivamukhyapranalinganneti cennopasatraividhyadasritatvadiha tadyogat'
If it be said, that on account of the characteristics of the individual self and of the principal vital air being mentioned in the context, there is no reference to the Brahman here at all, it is replied that it cannot be (right to say) so; because the worship of the Brahman has a three-fold nature; because this three-fold nature of His worship is taken for granted; and because here (i.e. in the present context also) that (same kind of worship) may be appropriately referred to.
The characteristics of the individual self are mentioned in the scriptural texts-' I killed the three-headed Tvastra.' (Kaus. III-I). In the same text are given the characteristics of the vital wind 'As long as the Prana dwells in this body, so long surely there is life' (Kaus. III-2). Therefore it is presumed that the Brahman is not meant here. It is not so. The words referring to the individual self and Prana denote the Highest Self; because the worship of the Brahman has a three-fold nature. In another context also it is meant to serve the object of teaching of 8
भोग्यभोगोपकरणशरीरकत्वेनेति त्रैिविधमुपासनमाश्रितम् | यथा 'सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं ब्रह्म' इति स्वरूपेण, 'तदनुप्रविश्य | सच्च त्यच्चाभवत्' इत्यादि 'सत्यं चानृतं च सत्यमभवत्' इति भोक्तृशरीरकत्वेन भोग्यभोगोपकणशरीरकत्वेन च । इहापि तत्संभवादेवमुपदेशः 'जन्माद्यस्य यतः' इत्यादिषु सद्ब्रह्मात्मेतिसामान्यशब्दैर्हि जगत्कारणं प्रकृति- पुरुषाभ्यामर्थान्तरमिति साधितम् । 'ज्योतिश्चरणाभिधानात्' इत्यस्मिन् सूत्रे पुरुषसूक्तोदितो महापुरुषो जगत्कारणमिति विशेषतो निर्णीतम् । स
the three kinds of meditation in relation to the Highest Self, namely, the meditation of the Highest Self in His own essential nature, in His having the enjoyers or the individual selves for His body and having the enjoyable things and the auxiliary things of enjoyment for His body. In the following passage, namely, 'The Brahman is True, Knowledge and Infinite' (Tait. II-1), the meditation of the Brahman in His own essential nature is taken for granted. In the following passages, 'Having entered it, He became the Sat and the tyat' and 'while being the unchangeable one (Satya) and the changeable one, He has nevertheless remained true to His own nature' (Tait.II-6), the meditation of the Highest Self as having the enjoyers for His body and also as having the enjoyable things and the auxiliaries of enjoyment for His body is taken for granted. In the present context also, this three-fold meditation of the Highest Se!f is mentioned as it is appropriate. In the Sutra I-I-2, the cause of the world, that is denoted by the words, Existence, Brahman and the Self is proved to be the Person other than the individual selves and Prakrti. In the Sutra I-I-25, the cause of the world has been specifically determined to be the Highest Person
एव प्रज्ञातजीवाचिभिरिन्द्रादिशब्दैरपि क्वचित् क्वचिच्छास्रदृष्ट्या तत्तच्छरीरकतया चोपास्यत्वायोपदिश्यत इति 'शास्रदृष्ट्या तूपदेशो वामदेववत्' इति 'उपासात्रैविध्यात्' इति च साधितम् ॥
इति श्रीभगवद्रामानुजविरचिते वेदान्तसारे प्रथमस्याध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः ।
described in the Purushasukta. He Himself is denoted by the words Indra etc. which are known to denote the individual selves primarily, because He has to be worshipped with the body of those things in accordance with the scriptures. This fact has been established in Sutras I-I-31 and 32.
THUS ENDS THE 1ST PADA OF THE 1ST ADHYAYA.