Notes on BSB I-i-2-1B

[Guest guest]

Notes on BSB: I-i-2-1B

 

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

janmaadi adhikaraNam 2

suutra 1 : janmaadyasya yataH |

 

1.3 General meaning of the suutra:

 

The suutra grammatically is incomplete and we need to supply two

words to complete it. This is called ' adhyaahaaraH ', meaning

supplying the words required completing the suutra grammatically.

The full suutra is ' janma aadi asya yataH, tat brahma ' - one can

also add ' bhavati ' in the end, which is automatically implied in

Sanskrit. Meaning of the suutra is 'Brahman is that from which the

origin, etc., of the world takes place' - simply ' sR^ishhTi aadi

kaaraNam, brahma '. The ' aadi ' or etc., includes ' sthithi ' and '

laya '. Hence the final meaning is ' jagat sR^ishhTi, sthiti, laya

kaaraNam, brahma ', Brahman is that from which the origin,

sustenance and annihilation of the world takes place. (Shankara uses

the word bha~Ngam instead of laya since janmaadi is neuter gender and

to maintain the same neuter gender or a samaahaara dvandva compound).

Vyasacharya uses the pronoun ' asya ' and from the context it refers

to ' asya jagataH ', of this world or universe. The word ' yataH '

means yasmaat kaaraNaat - from which cause. tat brahman meaning that

is brahman. Hence the final general meaning of the suutra is

'Brahman is that cause, from which the origin, sustenance and

dissolution of the universe takes place'.

 

Being a nyaaya prasthaanam, every suutra must present a ' anumaana

vaakyam '. The nyaaya vaakyam that can be derived from this suutra

is: ' brahma asti, lakshaNa sattvaat, ghaTavat ' Brahman is

existent, because there is lakshaNam for Brahman, just as a pot. the

vyaapti vaakyam is, ' yatra yatra lakshaNa sattvam, tatra tatra

vastu sidhhiH '. Therefore brahma vichaara can be possible since

Brahman exists.

 

1.4 The vishhaya vaakyam for the suutra:

 

As discussed before every suutra must have a upanishhad statement or

statements that it should have based on which Vyasacharya formulates

the suutra. For this suutra the vishhaya vaakyam is from ' bhR^igu

valli ' of taittiriiya Upanishhad [iII:i:1]. The mantra is :' yato

vaa imaani bhuutaani jaayante | yena jaataani jiivanti | yat

prayantyabhisa.nvishanti | tad vijij~naasasva | tad brahmeti |' This

bhR^igu valli statement is brahma taTastha lakshaNa vaakyam.

'Brahman is the sR^ishTi kaaraNam, sthiti kaaraNam and laya

kaaraNam'. This is the vishhaya vaakyam of the second suutra. This

concludes the general analysis of the suutra.

 

2. Now word by word analysis of the suutra.

 

The first word is janmaadi, which is a compound word consisting of

janma and aadi. Janma referring to creation and aadi means etc.

referring to the sthiti or sustenance and laya or annihilation.

 

2.1 Objection 1.

 

A puurvapakshii comes forward and comes with a suggestion for the

meaning. Shankara has interpreted the janmaadi as the three-fold

aspect, janma, sthiti and layam or janmaadi trayam. Puurvapakshi

says that there is another book known as 'niruktam', the science of

etymology, authored by 'Yaaska'. In that, Yaaska points out that

every object in the creation goes through six-fold phenomenon and not

three. He calls them as ' shhaD bhaava vikaaraaH ', six-fold change

for objects or padaartham. While enumerating these six, Yaaska starts

with 'janma'. He says: 'jaayate, asti, vardhate, vipariNamate,

apakshiiyate, vinashyati', birth, existence, growth, modification,

decay and death. From that nirukta we came to know that every object

in the universe goes through janmaadi shaTkam. Hence the suggestion

of the puurvapakshii is that in the suutra, janmaadi means janmaadi

shaTkam, the six-fold aspect starting from janma in tune with

Yaaska's nirukta rather than janmaadi trayam, the three-fold aspect,

that Shankara proposes.

 

Shankara gives two answers for this objection.

 

First Yaska is a human being. Hence 'niruktam' is paurushheyam or

authored by a human. Hence the author can only talk about objects

within the creation and cannot discuss the creation of the whole

universe since the human intellect does not have an access to study

the jagat kaaraNam or the cause of the whole universe. For example,

Yaska cannot talk about the origin of aakaasha or space. He can

speculate about the origin but that is not pramaaNa or valid means of

knowledge. Hence his discussion can only be confined to bhautika

prapa~ncha or objects within the creation. Hence the six-fold aspect

that he discusses concerns only about the objects within the

universe. Here in the suutra we are discussing the origin of the

whole universe that includes the space and even time. Hence Yaska's

statement is irrelevant here.

 

For this puurvapakshii comes forward with counter statement. Why one

should dismiss Yaska text is as not valid pramaaNam? It can be a

valid pramaaNam just as smR^iti (like Bhagavad geeta) text since it

is based on shruti and is not his intellectual product. Then, even

though it is paurusheyam, authored by a human, it gets validity as

pramaaNa similar to apaurusheya text. Hence Yaaska's statement about

the six-fold aspect can be taken as referencing to the entire cosmos

rather than just to objects within the cosmos. Hence Yaska's

statement should be relevant here.

 

For this Shankara says, even if Yaska's statement is taken as

pramaaNam, it has only the borrowed validity since it is presumably

based on the shruti statement. But the interpretation that is given

is based on direct shruti statement, which has intrinsic validity

and not the borrowed validity. Shruti talks about janmaadi trayam or

the three-fold aspect only and not the six-fold aspect. The

taittiriiya upanishhad mantra above very clearly states the

three-fold aspect and not the six-fold aspect. This is the first

answer to puurvapakshii.

 

The second answer is simple. Vyasacharya has written the entire

Brahmasutra for analyzing the Vedanta statements only and that is the

stated purpose of the Brahmasutra. Hence it is also called vedanta

suutraani or uttaramiimaa.nsa suutraani. Hence when Vyasa uses the

word 'janmaadi', one should give the meaning in tune with Upanishads

and not that in tune with Yaska's nirukta text or any other text.

Therefore 'janmaadi' in the suutra should refer to the three-fold

aspect involving creation, sustenance and annihilation. Then what

about the six-fold modifications that Yaska talks about? Since that

refers to the objects, which are within the universe, it is part of

the three-fold aspect discussed in the Upanishad mantra. Hence it is

included and not excluded from the three-fold aspect of the

Upanishhad statement. Hence the primary meaning of the 'janmaadi' is

the janma , sthiti and layam , and by implication it can include the

six-fold aspect discussed by Yaaska.

 

With this the objections of first puurvapakshii are answered.

 

2.2 Objection 2.

 

Now the arguments of a second puurvapakshi are as follows:

 

According to advaitin, the sR^ishhTi , sthiti and laya are cyclic

processes and not a linear process. If this is linear, then advaitin

will be faced with more severe question, 'When all this began?'

Hence advaitin circumvented the problem by arguing that it is cyclic

process and therefore the question of beginning does not arise, since

every point in a cycle is both beginning as well as the end point.

The pramaaNam for that advaitin quotes:

 

avyaktaadiini bhuutaani vyaktamadhyaani bhaarata |

avyakta nidhanaanyeva tatra kaa paridevanaa || B.G.2-28

 

The beings are unmanifested before creation and unmanifested after

annihilation and manifested temporarily in between. Therefore why

grieve for such temporal things.

 

ayaktaad vyaktayaH sarvaaH prabhavanti aharaagame |

raatri aagame praliiyante tatraiva avyakta sanj~nake || B.G. 8-18.

 

All beings and things get manifested from their unmanifested state

when the creation starts (when Brahma's day starts) and return to

unmanifested form when the creation folds (when Brahma's night

starts).

 

Hence advaitins that sR^ishhTi , sthiti and laya ,

creation, sustenance and annihilation are cyclic processes. Thus in

a cyclic process one can not claim which one of three is the

beginning. If so, puurvapakshii questions how did Vyasacharya say -

janmaadi asya jagataH, because the word -aadi - in Sanskrit literally

means beginning with. The secondary meaning only is etc. Hence the

literary meaning of the suutra should be - the three phenomenon of

the universe beginning with creation. Because of the cyclic nature,

why didn't suutra say, beginning with sthiti or beginning with laya

instead of beginning with janma, unless it is a linear process and

not a cyclic process?

 

Shankara gives two answers to this objection.

 

Even though it is a cyclic process and hence one cannot in principle

talk about the beginning in these phenomena, human comprehension

generally goes in a particular order. In the events there is no

order. But in our - pratipatti - or our understanding there is an

order. If I have to talk about the destruction or death of

something, it presupposes the existence of that thing. Hence its

laya presupposes its sthiti. Likewise, if I have to talk about the

existence of something, it presupposes its origin. Hence the

understanding of laya presupposes the understanding of sthiti and

which in turn presupposes the understanding of shrushhTi. Only after

the child is born, we inquire into whether it is surviving or dying.

Hence Shankara says understanding requires this logical sequence.

Thus what Vyasacharya presents is - pratipatti kramaH - the order in

understanding the phenomenon.

 

The second answer is that Vyasacharya is writing the suutra keeping

the shruti vishhaya vaakyam in his mind. Even though there is no

order in the sR^ishhTi , sthiti and laya , shruti gives a particular

order. Hence the choice of the order is dictated by the shruti

vaakyam itself. In addition similar order is discussed in several

shruti texts. For example, B.G 11-2 starts - bhava apyayau hi

bhuutaanaam , meaning the sR^ishhTi and laya of the beings.

 

With this the analysis of the word janmaadi is completed.

 

End of Notes on BSB I-I-2-1B.

--

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, K. Sadananda wrote:

 

> [...]

> 2.2 Objection 2.

>

> [...]

> Hence advaitins that sR^ishhTi , sthiti and laya ,

> creation, sustenance and annihilation are cyclic processes. Thus in

> a cyclic process one can not claim which one of three is the

> beginning. If so, puurvapakshii questions how did Vyasacharya say -

> janmaadi asya jagataH, because the word -aadi - in Sanskrit literally

> means beginning with. The secondary meaning only is etc. Hence the

> literary meaning of the suutra should be - the three phenomenon of

> the universe beginning with creation. Because of the cyclic nature,

> why didn't suutra say, beginning with sthiti or beginning with laya

> instead of beginning with janma, unless it is a linear process and

> not a cyclic process?

>

> Shankara gives two answers to this objection.

>

> Even though it is a cyclic process and hence one cannot in principle

> talk about the beginning in these phenomena, human comprehension

> generally goes in a particular order. In the events there is no

> order. But in our - pratipatti - or our understanding there is an

> order. If I have to talk about the destruction or death of

> something, it presupposes the existence of that thing. Hence its

> laya presupposes its sthiti. Likewise, if I have to talk about the

> existence of something, it presupposes its origin. Hence the

> understanding of laya presupposes the understanding of sthiti and

> which in turn presupposes the understanding of shrushhTi. Only after

> the child is born, we inquire into whether it is surviving or dying.

> Hence Shankara says understanding requires this logical sequence.

> Thus what Vyasacharya presents is - pratipatti kramaH - the order in

> understanding the phenomenon.

>

> The second answer is that Vyasacharya is writing the suutra keeping

> the shruti vishhaya vaakyam in his mind. Even though there is no

> order in the sR^ishhTi , sthiti and laya , shruti gives a particular

> order. Hence the choice of the order is dictated by the shruti

> vaakyam itself. In addition similar order is discussed in several

> shruti texts. For example, B.G 11-2 starts - bhava apyayau hi

> bhuutaanaam , meaning the sR^ishhTi and laya of the beings.

>

> With this the analysis of the word janmaadi is completed.

>

 

namaste.

 

One of the names of shri lalitA in shrilalitAtrishatI is

layasthityudbhaveshwarI, the one who is responsible for

laya, sthiti and udbhava (dissolution, sustenance and creation).

The sequence starts with laya. shri shankara, in His bhAShya

on this name, explains why it is justifiable to start with

laya rather than shruShTi: "Adau laya shabdo pAdAnena anAditvaM

prapancasya sUcitam.h.".

 

Is there a conflict between the two explanations?

 

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

------

[Guest guest]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Gummuluru Murthy wrote:

>

> namaste.

>

> One of the names of shri lalitA in shrilalitAtrishatI is

> layasthityudbhaveshwarI, the one who is responsible for

> laya, sthiti and udbhava (dissolution, sustenance and creation).

> The sequence starts with laya. shri shankara, in His bhAShya

> on this name, explains why it is justifiable to start with

> laya rather than shruShTi: "Adau laya shabdo pAdAnena anAditvaM

> prapancasya sUcitam.h.".

>

> Is there a conflict between the two explanations?

>

> Regards

> Gummuluru Murthy

> ------

>

 

namaste.

 

In my post above, I inadvertantly omitted the meaning in English of

shri shankara's saying "Adau laya shabdo pAdAnena anAditvaM

prapancasya sUcitam.h.".

 

Starting with laya indicates the anAdi nature of the jagat.

 

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

------

[Guest guest]

>

>namaste.

>

>One of the names of shri lalitA in shrilalitAtrishatI is

>layasthityudbhaveshwarI, the one who is responsible for

>laya, sthiti and udbhava (dissolution, sustenance and creation).

>The sequence starts with laya. shri shankara, in His bhAShya

>on this name, explains why it is justifiable to start with

>laya rather than shruShTi: "Adau laya shabdo pAdAnena anAditvaM

>prapancasya sUcitam.h.".

>

>Is there a conflict between the two explanations?

>

>Regards

>Gummuluru Murthy

 

I do not see any since it is cyclic and therefore neither beginning

nor end - Since lalita is personification of shakti that is required

for destruction -I think importance is given for the laya first.

When wheel is rotating whether it is clockwise or counter clockwise

depends from which side you are looking at the wheel, particularly

when we have no absolute reference to look at the wheel.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

--

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623

[Guest guest]

n Tue, 9 Jan 2001 09:58:51 -0330, Gummuluru Murthy

<gmurthy wrote:

>On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, K. Sadananda wrote:

>

>

>> [...]

>

>> 2.2 Objection 2.

>>

>

>namaste.

>

>One of the names of shri lalitA in shrilalitAtrishatI is

>layasthityudbhaveshwarI, the one who is responsible for

>laya, sthiti and udbhava (dissolution, sustenance and creation).

>The sequence starts with laya. shri shankara, in His bhAShya

>on this name, explains why it is justifiable to start with

>laya rather than shruShTi: "Adau laya shabdo pAdAnena anAditvaM

>prapancasya sUcitam.h.".

>

>Is there a conflict between the two explanations?

 

namaste

 

Mathematically this problem is indeterminate. At t= -infinity, we can

not determine a cyclic function (like sin(t) ) whether it is sthiti,

layA or udbhava.

 

Even logically, since sAmsAra is AnAdi, then what should be first is

sthithi and only then layA comes. Unless God finds the state in such a

mess and decides to destroys first and start it all over again. May be

latter is the case that is why it starts with layA.

 

 

AUM layasthityudbhaveshvaryai namaH

 

My 2c.

 

 

 

=====

ambaaL daasan

 

Ravi

 

sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI

 

http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org

 

 

 

Photos - Share your holiday photos online!

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

You have quoted

>Shankara has interpreted the janmaadi as the

>three-fold aspect, janma, sthiti and layam or

janmaadi >trayam.

 

I have the following interpretation (based on my "free

will"!).

1. We cannot categorize anything beyond our intellect

using the intellect, hence nothing can be said about

Brahman or what happens in it.

 

2. I know nothing about Shrishti or pralaya. Even my

own birth, I do not remember.

 

3. I am left with only one fact of experience, our day

to day life. In this, there are 3 states, Jagrat,

Swapna and Sushupti. There is a witness who has to be

equally present in all these 3 states. Hence the

witness, is the

source of the three states, waking, dream and deep

sleep. Therefore Janmadi thraya can mean these 3

states and the one beyong Janmadi is That.

 

Does this sound preposterous or is it viable ?

 

Anand

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photos - Share your holiday photos online!

 

[Guest guest]

>

>3. I am left with only one fact of experience, our day

>to day life. In this, there are 3 states, Jagrat,

>Swapna and Sushupti. There is a witness who has to be

>equally present in all these 3 states. Hence the

>witness, is the

>source of the three states, waking, dream and deep

>sleep. Therefore Janmadi thraya can mean these 3

>states and the one beyong Janmadi is That.

>

>Does this sound preposterous or is it viable ?

>

>Anand

 

Shree Anand - your free will seem to free enough to work! At the

micro-cosmic level what you said about the waking, dream and deep

sleep state as the cycle is our common experience. Extension of this

to the macro cosmic state is the janma-sthiti- bhangam - from the

point of the totality. This is what is picturized in terms of day

and night of the charturmukka Brahma (four-headed brahma) who is in

charge of creation process.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

--

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623

[Guest guest]

HariH Om,

 

This seems to be a Shrishti-Dhrishti vada that you

have put forth. Is'nt this then just the same the crow

sitting on the cocount tree and simulatneously a

cocount falling ? I mean by this that I see creation

and My mind immediately searches for a reason and

catches hold of this Shrishti-Drishti vada. This is

Maya.

How would you interpret this verse in Ajata Vada ?

 

Anand

 

>

> Shree Anand - your free will seem to free enough to

> work! At the

> micro-cosmic level what you said about the waking,

> dream and deep

> sleep state as the cycle is our common experience.

> Extension of this

> to the macro cosmic state is the janma-sthiti-

> bhangam - from the

> point of the totality. This is what is picturized

> in terms of day

> and night of the charturmukka Brahma (four-headed

> brahma) who is in

> charge of creation process.

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

> --

> K. Sadananda

> Code 6323

> Naval Research Laboratory

> Washington D.C. 20375

> Voice (202)767-2117

> Fax:(202)767-2623

>

>

 

 

 

 

Photos - Share your holiday photos online!

 

[Guest guest]

>

>How would you interpret this verse in Ajata Vada ?

>

>Anand

 

As we continue our series, Shankara will bring out some of the points

you have raised. We have addressed already that it is a taTastha

lakshaNa of Brahman. We will later talk about the suutra indicating

Brahman as the material cause - and later raise the issue how a

conscious entity can be a material cause for an unconscious entity,

jagat which is jadam. Let us wait as the teaching unfolds slowly.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda

--

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623

[Guest guest]

--- "V.M.Sundaram" <venkataraman wrote:

> > "vishvasya sRshTi- vilaya-sthiti hetubhuutaa"

>

> > (she who causes creation - dissolution - sustenance of the

> > universe).

>

> It would seem that not only the starting point but even the

> order of

> the cylic sequence

> is variable, as long as the three functions are listed.

>

> ---- V.M.Sundaram.

 

namaste

 

I agree with you.

 

In fact for the same name(Prof. Murthy quoted only the last part of

shankara's commentary), right at the beginning shankara says that the

name should be considered in the reverse order. That is udbhava,

sthiti, and laya.

 

The text starts with "vaipIritya visheshhaNa.m yojya.m". I may be

transliterating the first word incorrectly, as I read the text last

night and I am not sure about the grammatical form and do not remember

it either. But it derives from vipariita meaning opposite. Often

shankara gives more than one interpretation for the name. Here he

starts with saying it should considered in the reverse order. At the

end he reasons why it is OK for the name to start with laya.

 

More importantly, trishati has a constraint of starting each 20 names

with one axara from shrIvidya mantra. Here this set of 20 has la as the

starting letter.

 

 

 

 

 

=====

ambaaL daasan

 

Ravi

 

sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI

 

http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org

 

 

 

Photos - Share your holiday photos online!