Notes on BSB I-i-1-1H

[Guest guest]

Notes on BSB I-I-1-1H

 

sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h |

asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h ||

 

I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who

is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all

the way up to my own teacher.

 

vaatsalya ruupa.n triguNairatiitaM

aananda saandram amalairnidhaanam.h .|

shrii chinmayaananda guro praNiitaM

sadaa bhaje.aha.n tava paada pa~Nkajam.h ||

 

Who is the very embodiment of motherly affection who is beyond the

three guNa-s, who is full with bliss, and who is the very source of

purity who is the best among the teachers, Shree Chinmayaananda, to

his lotus feet I (sadaa) always prostrate.

---------

samanvaya adhyaaya - I

spashhTa brahma li~Nga vaakya samanvaya paada- i

jij~naasaa adhikaraNa 1

suutra 1: athaato brahma jij~naasaa

 

Conclusion:

 

The final topic of the first suutra is conclusion. In the

conclusion, the same concepts are discussed in a technical format in

which the Brahmasuutra should be presented.

 

This may be more of an academic interest, but is worth knowing the

format used. Hence no new ideas will be discussed in this section

other than following a technical format for the presentation of

suutra literature. One can read as review of the topic.

 

In the introduction we mentioned that topics are discussed under the

heading of 'adhikaraNam'. In the first adhikaraNam there is only one

suutra and appropriately named as jij~naasaa adhikaraNam based on the

first suutra 'athaato brahma jij~naasaa'. Every adhikaraNam has to

be presented in a format that includes five factors starting from

vishhaya as outlined in the definition sloka given in the Notes I of

Brahmasuutra. These are 1. vishhayaH, the subject matter, 2.

vishayaH or sa.nshayaH or doubt, 3 puurvapakshaH, the view of an

opponent, 4. sidhhantaH, our conclusions and 5. sangatiH, the

connection of this topic with the overall. This format is called

adhikaraNa nirNayaH and Shankara follows this format with each

adhikaraNa.

 

For the jij~naasaadhikaraNam, the subject matter is Vedanta

shaastram. The doubt is 'vichaaraNiiyam vaa or na vichaaraNiiyam

vaa' , whether it should be studied or is it worth studying or not

worth studying? Should we receive this notes or not, or even if we

receive it, 'as some one complained recently that we are dumping on

his head', is it worth studying now, delete it or store it in a file

to study later as it is not of high priority right now; or complain

that we are unnecessarily targeted with something that we are not

interested and these is a violation of a law, etc.? These are doubts

that need to be resolved. The third factor is the puurvapakshaH -

the view of an opponent that should be presented along with his

reasoning as anumaanam. For example, we can present a puurvapaksha

in anumaana vaakyam as:

 

'vedaanta shaastram na vichaaraNiiyam, anubandha chatushhTaya

abhaavaat, vyatirekeNa dharma shaastravat.h |'

 

vedaanta shaastram should not be studied, since it does not have

anubandha chatushhTayam, unlike dhramashaastra.

 

Therefore according to a puurvapakshii, there is no anubandha

chatushhTayam (the four-fold requirements starting from adhikaarii

etc - see the Notes I-I-1-1A). In brief, this puurvapakshi argues

first that no adhikaari is ever possible. This is because viveka is

impossible, vairaagya no one has it, shama aadi shaTkasampatti nobody

seems to have it, including the so-called great sages of the lore who

cursed left and right, and nobody seems to have the intense desire

for moksha, the mumukshutvam. Hence saadhanachatushhTaya sampatti is

asambhavam or impossible. Hence there is no one who is adhikaarii.

There is no student who is qualified to study - such students are

available only in the books like kaThopanishhad and not in this world

and definitely not in this kaliyuga, when dharma is only on one leg.

Thus, the first factor in the anubandha chatushhTayam, i.e. a

qualified student, is not there.

 

We have problem also with the second factor i.e. subject matter -

Brahman - we are consistently discussing pages and pages about a

hare's horn, which is not there. How can there be a nirguNam vastu

at all for one to inquire about. And if we ask the question how to

know it, the answer we get is that ' we cannot know it' - and

upanishhad in fact declares that 'he who knows it knows not!' It is

different from the known and at the same time different from the

unknown, one cannot see it, hear it, speak about it or think about

it -and at the same time pages and pages are written about that which

is unthinkable and unspeakable. From all this, it is very clear that

it is just consistent brain washing. There is no such thing as

Brahman and it is just mere bhrama of the student and the teacher.

The teacher is confused and transmitting that confusion to his

student using very high sounding Sanskrit words which are self

contradictory with no substance, saying on one side 'He is smaller

than the smallest' and with the same breath contradicting that

statement by saying that 'He is bigger than the biggest'. And some

say He is aatmaa, but no aatmaa has been found anywhere in any body

by anybody. You say it is consciousness, there appears to be no

independent consciousness. Matter alone seems to be independent and

consciousness seems to depend on matter for its existence rather than

other way around. If you have any doubts look into discussions on

advaitin list serve during the months of August. Consciousness seems

to be an illusion happening in matter rather than the other way

around. Hence there is no such thing as Brahman or aatman and

therefore there is no subject matter to inquire into. Hence

adhikaarii naasti, vishhaya naasti - what about prayojanam - when

Brahman himself is not there what prayojanam we can talk about. It

is like the story in 'Emperor's clothes'!. Hence vedaanta shaastram

na vichaaraNiiyam - says the puurvapakshi.

 

siddhaanta anumaanam says, vedaanta shaastram vichaaraNiiyam,

anubandha chatushhTaayavatvaat, dharma shaastravat. anubandha

chatushhTaya is there. This means adhikaarii is there, vishhaya, the

subject matter is there and prayojanam and sambandha are also there.

Just because adhikaari-s are few, one cannot say adhikaari-s are nil.

This is true any time including in Krishna's time as declared in

Geeta - manushhyaaNaam sahasreshhu kashchit yatati siddhaye | - Of

the thousands of people very few are really interested in this Brahma

vidya.. Hence adhikaari-s are always few in number but not nil as

puurvapakshi claims. Similarly Brahman is there, since it happens

to be yourself. How can you negate Brahman? Brahman negation is

self-negation. Everyone knows that they are not mere matter - this

is my body, my mind and my intellect - the very statements indicate

that I am different from this body, this mind and this intellect. I

do not know who I am, yet I know I exist and I am conscious. I

enliven the body but body does not enliven me. People say when

someone dies that 'he is dead and gone', implying that he is

something different from the body to go somewhere else after the

death. I am not an object for someone to see, hear, feel or touch.

I am the very subject because of which the capacity to hear, feel,

think, etc. are possible in the enlivened matter. Only objects have

attributes or guNa-s, but I am not an object. I am the very subject

because of which objects are revealed or illumined by my

consciousness. I can not deny myself since I have to be there even

to deny myself. I can negate everything but cannot negate myself.

Hence I am the one who remains as the very substratum for every

thing. Brahman is not something different from me. Hence he is not

an object to have attributes. He is the very subject that I am.

Hence Brahman inquiry is the inquiry of the nature of one's own self

and thus the vishhaya of the Vedanta suutra-s. Prayojanam is also

there since it is moksha. It is freedom that I am inherently longing

for in all my pursuits in life. There are always some realized souls

existing at a given time even in this kaliyuga. Therefore sambandha

also exists. Hence the anubandha chatushhTaya is there, hence

Vedanta is vichaaraNiiyam, to be studied. Thus siddhaanta in the

adhikaraNa list is given.

 

The last requirement is sangatiH - the connection with the other

topics, particularly with the previous topics. Since this is the

first adhikaraNam, there is no connection to previous topic. Since

this adhikaraNam consists of the very first suutra, which is

anubandha or preface, it emphasizes the central theme of the whole

text as the inquiry of the nature of Brahman. By specifying the

pre-requisites for a student, it connects all other knowledge

required for a student to possess as the pre-requisites. This

completes the sangatiH and also the conclusion part of our analysis.

 

With this the analysis of the first suutra is over.

 

(A note: For Shankara the most of the puurvapakshi's are

non-vedantins, consisting of both aastika group and naastika group.

Post Shankara bhaashhyakaara-s, such as Shree Raamaanuja and Shree

Madhva have included Advaita philosophy as their puurvapaksha, in

fact their main puurvapaksha, since they have to reckon with the most

prevailing philosophy of their times, which is advaita, before they

establish their siddhaanta. It is fruitful to go into the discussion

of their major discussion of advaita and their objections to it. But

we will first complete Shankarabhaashhya so that we are better

equipped to address the issues that they have raised. )

 

We will next take the suutra 2 for discussions.

--

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Note: forwarded message attached.

 

 

 

 

 

Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.