sribhashyam -adhyaya-1-padha2 In the first section of the first chapter of Sribhashya it has been shown that a person who has studied the veda comes to understand that the fruits of karma are transient, after the study of the purvamimAmsa, that is, the ritualistic part,and takes up the study of sArirakamimAmsa, the portion dealing with Brahman, in order to acquire the knowledge that will secure him release from the bondage of karma. The vedantic texts describe the sentient and insentient beings as the body of Brahman who is their inner self, and who controls them from within. it was also shown that Brahman is the first cause and can be known only through scriptures. All vedanta texts are shown to refer only toBrahman and not insentient pradhAna or individual souls.Thus it was confirmed that the reference to AkAsa, prANa, light and Indra actually denote only the supreme self. This Supreme Self ,Brahman is Narayana, possessing infinite auspicious qualities of whom the world of sentient and insentient beings is the sarira. Still there are some texts that refer to the beings inside pradhAna or individual souls. In this section the texts that have obscure reference to the individual soul are discussed while in the next direct references are taken up and in the last pAdha of the aDhyAya the texts that refer to the individual soul are shown to denote Brahman only. sarvathraprsiddhyaDHikaraNam-1-2-1 suthra-1-sarvathra prasiddhOpadhEsAth-1-2-1 Everywhere (itis Brahman who is denoted) because of the well known teaching. The Chandhogya upanishad contains a text 'aTHa khalu krathumayah purushah bhavathi thaTHEthah prethya bhavathi;sa krathumkurveetha - manOmayahprANasarirah bhArupah,(chan.III-14-1,2) man is the creature of thought in this world and the next. So let him think (meditate) on himself as made of mind whose body is prANa and whose form is light. Here the doubt is whether the individual self having the attributes of mind etc. is to be meditated or the Supreme self.The poorvapaksha view is that it is the individual self that is denoted because the mind and prANa are the instruments of the individual self, while the Brahman is denoted as 'aprANah hyamanAh, (Mund.2-1-2) without prANa, without mind. Brahman cannot be taken as the object of upasana because in the the previous sentence 'sarvam khalu idham brahma,all this is Brahman,' is mentioned and as the object of meditation in this text has specifically been mentioned as manOmayah prANasarirah. The concluding text of the passage 'Ethadbrahma,(chan.III-14-4) this is Brahman ' meaning the inner self is also the individual self mentioned as Brahman by extolling it. This view is refuted by the above suthra. The entity referred to as manOmaya etc is Brahman because there are abundant vedanthic texts that ascribe the qualities such as consisting of mind, prANa as sarira etc. Ramanuja quotes here texts such as 'manOmayah prANAsariranethA, consists of the mind, ruler of the subtle body,'(Mund.2-2-7), 'sa EshO antharhrdhaya akAsah;thasmin ayam purushah manOmayah;amrthO hiraNmayah, (Tait.1-6-1) there is AKAsa within the heart and in it is this purusha consisting of the mind, immortal and golden' and 'prANasya prANah, it is the prANa of the prANa and so on. The expression aprANO hyamanAh only means that Brahman does not depend on mind or prANa. The text 'sarvamkhalu idham brahmatajjalAn ithi shAntha upAseetha ', all this is brahman, originating from, merging into, and sudtained by it ;thus one should meditate with calm mind,' can also be interpreted as being calm one should meditate on Brahman as the inner self, which is subsequently described as having mind and prANa in the text quoted at the outset, namely,'sa krathum kurveetha' etc. There is a fresh doubt raised here that whether the individual self only is denoted with the word 'Brahman'. The opponent says that it is so because the word 'all' denotes everything from the creator BrahmA to the common blade of grass, 'brahmAdhisthamba paryantham' which will apply only to the individual soul by the principle of coordination as the self is one, seen differently due to avidhya. This world of imperfections cannot mean Brahman. The word brahman is used sometimes with respect to the individual soul and that is why,the opponent declares the Brahman is termed as Parabrahman by way of distinction. The individual soul is Brahman in the state of release and hence the text must mean only the individual self and also the text 'tajjalan' can be interpreted to mean that the individual soul who is Brahman, enters into various embodiment due to avidhya and realises his true nature in the state of release. This is refuted by the above suthra 'sarvathra prasiddhOpadesAth.' 'tajjalan' refers to Brahman as something well known. 'All this is Brahman' having Brahman as their inner self. The causality of Brahman has been established by the text 'yathO vA imAni bhoothAni jAyanthe,' which shows that all beings emerge from merge into and sustained by Brahman. Also the text further continues to say 'AnandhO brahma ithi vyajAnAth AnandhAth Eva khalu imAni bhoothAni jAyanthe, (Taitt.III-6) bliss is brahman, from bliss all these beings originate,' and the text 'sa kAraNam karaNADHipADHipO na chAsya kaschit janithA na chADHipah, He is the cause and the Lord of the lords of indriyas and there is no creator for Him nor any one above Him. Thus it is clearly stated that Brahman is the Lord of the individual self who is the master of the senses and Brahman is the cause of everything. Therefore all beings originate from , merge into and sustained by Brahman and so He is the inner self of all. Ramanuja concludes by saying that 'athah sarvaprakAram sarvAthmabhootham param brahma shAnthah bhoothvA upAseetha ithi sruthirEva parasya brahmaNah sarvAthmakathvam upapAdhya thasya upAsanam upadhisathi,' therefore, the Supreme Self, Brahman, having everything as its mode, being the Self of all should be meditated with calm mind, is the indtruction by the sruthi. Parabrahman as the cause has the sentient and the insentient in their subtle state as its sarira, which in their gross state is the effect. Hence Brahman is the inner self of all, always. Thus the attribute of Brahman as being free from imperfections and possessing auspicious qualities is not impeded in any way because the defects of the sarira does not affect the self. The individual self cannotbe identified with the world because the jivas are different in different bodies and the individual soul even in the state of release is not capable of creation etc. So the word Brahman denotes only the Supreme self. suthra-2-vivakshitha gunOppatthEscha-1-2-2 And because the qualities to be stated apply to Brahman only. The qualities that are to be stated viz. 'manOmayah prANasarirah bhArupah sathya sankalpa AkAsAthmA sarvakarmA sarvakAmah sarvaganDHah sarvarasah sarvamidham abhyAtthO avAkyanADarah.' Ramanuja takes up the qualities one by one and explains. 1. manomayah- consists of mind. Brahman can be grasped by pure mind. 'parisuddhamanasA Ekena grAhyah.' the pure mind is acquired through the disciplines vimoka etc explained in the jinAsADHikaraNa. By this the attribute of Brahman as diferent from everything else, free from imperfections and possessing auspicious qualities are denoted. As impure mind will grasp only impure objects the requisite of pure mind for grasping Brahman of such qualities is emphasised. 2.prANasarirah- Having prANa as sarira. Being the sarira means to be supported by, dependent on and to be subservient to the sariri, the self. 3.bhArupah - resplendent form. 4.sathyasankalpah -infallible will. 5.akAsAthmA - Subtle and pure like the AkAsa. Or the self of even the AkAsa.Or shining by itself (AKAsathi) it makes everthing else shine. (AkAsayathi) 6.sarvakarmA - The whole world is His doing. All actions are His. 7.sarvakAmah - All desires are His. 8.sarvaganDHah sarvarasah - To whom all supreme excellent odours and tastes belong, which are not connected with the ordinary ones, which are negated in Brahman by the words 'asabdam asparsam' etc. 9.abhyAttah -He makes all these qualities His own 10. avAkee - He does not speak , because, He is 11. anADHaraH - He does not care for anything being avapthasamasthakma, in full possession of everything. All these qualities apply to brahman only. suthra-3-anupapatthesthu na sArirah-1-2-3 Because these qualities do not apply it is not the individual self. Ramanuja dismisses the view that it is the indiviual self which is mentioned by saying 'Thamimam guNasAgaramparyAlOchayathAm sarira sambhanDHena aparimitha duhkha sambanDHayogyasya baddhamukthavasTHasya jivasya prasthutha guNa lEsa sambanDHO pi na upapadhyathaithi na asmin prakaraNEsAriraparigrahashankA jAyatha ithyartTHah ,' considering the ocean of auspicious qualities, that is, Brahman, it is clear that there cannot be even a trace of reference in this context to the individual self, who experiences limitless grief due to its connection with the body and who suffers bondage and gets released. suthra-4-karmakarthrvyapadhEsAccha-1-2-4 Because of the mention of the attainer and the attained. In the same chapter of ChandhOgya there is a passage that mentions the jiva attaining Brahman on death.'Etham ithah PrethyaabhisambhavithAsmi, when I depart from hence I shall attain Him,' So the attainer and the attained being distinguished they are different . The word ' Him ' refers to the one denoted as 'manOmaya,' Brahman and the attainer is the individual self. suthra-5- sabdhavisEshAth-1-2-5 Because of the difference in the words. Inthe text 'Esha me AthmA antharhrdhaye' (Chan.3-15-4) the one doing the meditation is put in the genitive case (mE) and the object of meditation (AthmA) is in nominative case. So it is clear that the two are different. Ramanuja quotes here a text from sathapatha brAhmaNA (X-vi-3-2) in which this is made clear. 'vreehirvA yavO vA syAmAkO vA syAmAka thandulO vA, Evam ayam antharAthmani purushO hiraNmayah yaTHA jyothraDoomam,' like a grain of rice, grain of barley, grain of canary or a kernel of canary seed, thus the golden purusha, who is the inner self, exists like fire without smoke.' The word denoting the individual self is in locative case while the golden purusha is in the nominative. Therefore only Brahman is the object of meditation. suthra-6-smrthEscha-1-2-6 >From the smrthi also. The Brahman is mentioned as the inner self and the object of meditation in the Gita also. 'sarvasya chAham hrdhisnnivishtO, (BG.XV-15) I am inside all beings,'and IsvarassarvabhoothaAnAm hrddhEse arjuna thishTathi ; bhrAmayan sarva bhoothAniyanthrArooDAni mAyayA; thameva saraNamgaccha,the lord oh Arjuna, is established in the heart of all beings, driving them around through His mAya as though mounted on a machine.' This shows the individual jiva as the meditator and Brahman as the object of meditation. suthra-7-arbhakoukasthvAth thathvyapadhEsAccha- 1-2-7 If it is said that Brahman is not denoted because of minuteness and the smallness of abode, it is not so. Brahman is so described for meditation and is like AkAsa. The description of the inner self as residing inside the heart, the smallest abode and as being smaller than the grain 'aNeeyAn vreehErvA yavAdhva,' it is argued that it is only the individual self and not Brahman, who is spoken of in other texts as being unlimited while the jiva is said to be 'ArAgramAthram,' size of the tip of spiked stick. This suthra refutes this saying that Brahman is so described for the sake of meditation and is not minute in reality.The same text says 'jyAyAn prthivyAth jyAyAn anthrikshAth jyAyAn dhivojyAyAnEvhyO lokEbhyah,it is infinite like AkAsa greater than the earth and sky etc.' The omnipresence is not affected by being described as minute because being subtler than the AkASa its all pervasiveness is unaffected by the abode it is said to occupy. Ramanuja explains the whole passage thus: Beginning with 'sarvam khalu idham brahma, all this is Brahman,' it enjoins meditation on Brahman as the inner self and the cause of the world.Next it declares the attainment of Brahman through meditation and gives the characterstics of Brahman as being manOmaya, prAnasarira etc. Nextmentions Brahman as abiding in the heart as the inner self. From all this it is clear that the minuteness and smallness of abode is only for the purpose of meditation suthra-8-sambhogaprApthirithi chEth na vaisEshyAth-1-2-8 If it is said that being inside the body Brahman will be subjected to joy and sorrow like the indiidual self, it is not so because of the difference in the nature of the two. The reason for joy and sorrow is not the fact that the soul is inside the body but it is because of karma which does not apply to Brahman. Thus ends sarvathraprasiddhyDHikaraNam. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oppiliappan/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Oppiliappan-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |