You are here: SriPedia - Oppiliappan - Archives - Sep 2006

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00025 Sep 2006

 
Sep 2006 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


The suthra refers to the passages beginning with the word 'ArambhaNa,' namely 'vAchArambhaNam vikArah nAmadhEyam mrthikWEthyEva sathyam,' followed by 'sadhEva soumya idhamagra Aseeth,EkamEva adhvitheeyam, the Being only was at the beginning ,one only without a second' and 'thadhaikshatha bahusyAm parajAyEya thatthEjo asrjatha, it willed to become many and created fire,' and 'anEna rupEna AthmanA anupravisya nAmarupE vyAkaravANi, I will enter along with this individual self and make names and forms,' and the passage ends with 'EthadhAthmyam idham sarvam thath sathyam thathvamasi svEtha kethO, all this is ensouled by Brahman  that is the truth that thou art svEtha kethu.' These texts confirm the non-difference of Brahman from the world which exists in the relation of body and soul  with Brahman.

 

This is the purport of the whole passage beginning with the question whether Svethakethu has learnt all that is to be learnt and when he answered in the negative, the father instructs him, saying that by knowing that everything is known as by knowing the clay all its effects like pots are known etc., thus showing that Brahman is the cause of the world and also non-different from the world, its effect.

 

For the sake of activities such as fetching water etc the clay attains a new name and form but the substance persists as clay only. Therfore it is said that the clay alone is true as it persists even when the name and form is lost. Ramanuja says that the statement 'mrtthikEthyEva sathyam' means 'pramANEna upalabhyatha ithyarTHah, na thu dravyAntharathvEna;athah thasyaiva mrdhiraNyAdhEh dhravyasya samsTHAnAntharabhAvathvamAthrENa buddhisabdhAnthrAdhayah upapadhyanthE, yaTHaikasyEva dhevadhatthasya avasTHA bhedhaih bAlah,yuvA,sTHavirah ithi buddhisabdhAntharAdhayah kAryAvisEshAscha dhrsyanthE.

 

This means as follows:

The clay or gold  alone is known to be true  through valid means of cognition because the pots, ornaments etc are not different  entities altogether but only another state of existence of the causal substance  just as the same individual Devadattha is seen to change into different forms such as a boy,youth, old man etc acoording to different stages in life.

 

When the pot is destroyed only the particular form is destroyed and not the substance, as it exists as potsherds and other forms but the clay persists in all stages and hence the argument that origination and destruction makes the effect a new substance is not correct. To say that if the effect preexisted in the cause then its origination is meaningless, says Ramanuja, is the argument of the one who has no knowledge of origination and destruction . What originates is only a different form of the cause and that alone is destroyed. Hence the sathkAryavAdha, that is the effect is real and non-different from the cause , is not affected. It is not also correct to say that if a nonexisting form of the cause is originated it is asathkAryavAdha because the same sustance is cognised as existing through out as when the clay becomes pot it gives up its previous form only and again when broken assumes the form of potsherds.

 

Then Ramanuja proceedsto explain the passage beginning with 'sadhEva soumya idham agra Aseeth,EkamEva adhvitheeyam, sath alone was in the beginning one only without a second.' This means that the world of sentient and nonsentient beings was in the beginning one only without names and forms. one only without a second shows that Brahman which is denoted as 'sath' is the material as well as the efficient cause. This and the next statement' it willed to become many ,' proves that theworld is non-different from Brahman. then 'anEna jivEna AthmanA anupravisya nAmarupE yvAkaravANi, denotes that Brahman  is the self of all. This is also stated in the text 'thath srshtvA thadhEva anuprAvisath thadhanupravisya saccha thyaccha abhavath,'(Tait.3-2)

 

Brahman being the self of all the whole world of sentient and insentient beings constitutes the body of Brahman and hence the imperfections of the body cannot adhere to the soul, that is Brahman who is free form evil and the abode of all divine attributes. Ramanuja quotes from other scriptural texts also to prove the non-difference between Brahman and the world, that is, between the cause and the effect- 'sarvam khalu idham brahma,'(Chan.3-14-1) all this is brahman 'nEha nAnasthi kimchana' (Brhd.4-4-19) there is no plurality here, 'yathra hi dvaitham iha bhavathi thadfhithara itharam pasyathi,yathra  thvasya sarvam Athmaiva abhooth thath kEna kam pasyEth,' (Brhd.2-4-13) where there is plurality one sees another but when all has become his self what he will see, by whom? That is , non-difference is only real.

 

Thus all words denote Brahman only as the sentient and insentient beings are His modes being His sarira, says Ramanuja, 'chidhachitvasthu sarirathayA thatprakAram brahmaivasarvadhA sarvasabdhAbhiDHEyam.' When the sentient and the insentient are in subtle state nondistinguishable by name and form  it is the causal state ,kAraNAvasTHA and when they are in gross state cognisable by name and form it is the state of effect,kAryAvasThA. Hence the world is not different from Brahman.

 

Ramanuja dismisses the theory of unreality of the world saying that in that case the non- difference between the cause and effect cannot be established. Like wise he sets aside the views of bhEdhAbhEdhavAdhin also as being in conflit with the declaratios of sruthi smrithi and purANas.

 

All  sruthi along with smrthi and puraNa proclaim in one voice that the Lord of Lords, all-knowing all -powerful,of infallible will, free of blemish, not conditioned by place, time or entity, of  unlimited transcendental bliss, as the one supreme cause.

 

Ramanuja quotes from several texts to prove the above declaration especially from Mahanarayana upanishad ' EkO ha vai nArAyaNa Aseeth na brahmA nesAnO nEmE dhyAvaprthivee na nakshatrANi nApOnAgnirna sOmO na sooryah,' there were no other deity than Narayana in the beginning, as B5rahman and narayana are synonymous in visishtadvaita. Ithhasa and purana also confirm this, says Ramanuja, quoting from Manu the text beginning with 'thathah svayambhoorbhagavAn, the self manifested Lord ,' and continuing to say,'apa EVa sasarjAdhou thEshu veeryam apAsrjath, He created waters and planted His seed into it.'

 

To the possible objection that the effects are known to be different on account of the different terms and ideas  and as such they cannot be merely dfferent states of the same entity. This is answered by the next suthra.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

__._,_.___


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




__,_._,___
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list