Question: scriptural basis for dharma-bhUta-jnAna

[Guest guest]

SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH

 

Dear Members,

 

I am not well-read on SrI rAmAnuja's works.

 

but I am curious as to the scriptural basis upon which SrI rAmAnuja

develops the ontological entity, "dharma-bhUta-jnAna" (attributive

knowledge) of jIva .

 

rAmAnuja-dAsan

//Ramkumar

[Guest guest]

I am not sure whether Ramanuja cites any scriptures in explicit support of

his view of consciousness (j~naana) as both substance and attribute; but he

does give an example (in the Mahasiddhanta section of his Sribhashya 1.1.1):

 

'A lamp, having illumination for its nature, shines by itself, and also

illuminates other things by its lustre. That is to say, just as one single

substance of light exists as lustre and as possessing lustre ... so the

self, having the sole form of consciousness (cit), [also] has awareness

(caitanya) for its attribute. Having the form of consciousness means being

self-illuminating.'

 

The attributive function of consciousness is also a reasonable conclusion

based on scriptural passages denoting the self as conscious, or a 'knower'

(j~na, j~naat.r), such as Prashna Up. 4.9, or Brahmasutra 2.3.18.

 

Ramanuja Dasa,

Martin Gansten

[Guest guest]

Martin Gansten writes:

> The attributive function of consciousness is also a reasonable conclusion

> based on scriptural passages denoting the self as conscious, or a 'knower'

> (j~na, j~naat.r), such as Prashna Up. 4.9, or Brahmasutra 2.3.18.

 

Dear Martin, Ramkumar and others:

 

Sorry for the late reply, but there is another vAkya from

the Upanishads that lend credence to the theory of dharma-

bhUta-jnAna. I cite here Dr. S.M. Srinivasa Chari's book

on the Upanishads:

 

The knowledge of the jiva according to Upanisadic teaching is

an essential attribute of the jiva. The Brhadaranyaka in a

significant statement mentions that the knowledge of the

jivatman is imperishable:

 

na hi vijnatah vijnatuh viparilopo vidyate (Br Up 4.3.30)

 

Though this text is interpreted differently by both Samkara and

Madhva, the fact that the Upanisad mentions the two terms

vijnata (vijnatah) and vijnati (vijnateh) in the same

statement denotes two separate ideas viz., the first one

applicable to the jivatman which is the knower or vijnata

and the second to its knowledge or vijnati.

 

Another vAkya that hints at this theory is Svetasvatara Upanishad

5.9, where the jiva is declared to be a finite, atomic entity, a

"part of the hundredth part of the point of a hair divided a

hundredfold". Yet, this finite jiva can "attain infinity", meaning

it can comprehend infinity:

 

vAlAgra SatabhAgasya SatadhA kalpitasya ca |

bhAgo jIvaH sa vijneyaH sa ca anantyAya kalpate ||

 

If the jIva did not "possess knowledge", which is what

dharma-bhUta-jnAna means, how could it comprehend infinity?

It is well-established that the jIva is atomic in essence,

and that its knowledge is subject to variation. For it to be

atomic as well as attain infinity, it must possess knowledge

that is functionally different from this, that can expand to

infinity. This is the 'dharma-bhUta-jnAna', as opposed to the

'svarUpa-bhUta-jnAna' which is the essential nature of the jIva.

 

I don't know if Sri Ramanuja actually employs these vAkyas in

elucidating these ideas; but they do support his central thesis.

 

aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

Mani