Notes on BSB I-i-4-1F

[Guest guest]

Notes on BSB I-i-4-1F

 

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

samanvaya adhikaraNam.h .- 4

suutra: tat tu samanvayaat.h .-1F

 

Notes on BSB I-i-4-1F

 

2. The next point of puurvapakshii '-s argument is that vedaanta j~naanam

being useless as such should be applied towards karma (according to bhaTTa

matam) or upaasanaa (according to praabhaakara matam).

 

The reason these matam -s insist on this application is because they cannot

totally reject part of the Veda-s as useless and part useful. They are

forced to make this

connection to make the so-called useless statement useful.

 

Shankara says there is nothing more ridiculous than these forced

connections.

It is impossible to apply or connect siddhabodhaka vedaanta vaakyam -s to

karma or upaasanaa. In the previous siddhaanta it is argued that the Vedanta

need not be connected since it give j~naanam which is useful to solve the

fundamental human problem whose root cause is ignorance. In this siddhaanta

it is argued that it cannot be connected with karma or upaasanaa even if one

wants to try to do that. The first reason Shankara says is the vedaanta

j~naanam eliminates duality, which is the very basis for karma and

upaasanaa.

 

tat kena kaM pashyet (there seer-seen distinctions gone) - na iha naanaa

asti

ki.nchana (there is no speck of plurality) - yasmin sarvaaNi bhuutaani

aatmaa eva abhuut ( where all the beings other than the self non-existent),

etc says Vedanta. upaasanaa also requires upaasya - upaasaka bheda , karma

requires kartR^i - karaNa aadi bheda and Vedanta knocks off all these

bheda -s involving subject-object dualities. After a knowledge of Advaita

how can Advaita j~naanam be applied in the field of dvaitam. It is

impossible.

 

2) In addition to being kartaa , the Vedanta knowledge involving Advaita

knocks off the notions of varNaashrama which is one of the criteria for

certain yaaga-s. For example a Brahmin alone is qualified for certain

yaaga-s - brahmaNaH bR^ihaspati savena yajeta , - the bR^ihaspati sava

yaagam can be performed by a Brahmin only.

raajaa raajasuuyane yajeta - Only the king can perform the raajasuuya yaaga.

Not only varNa status, one has to retain aashrama status for performing

yaga.

Without a wife one cannot perform certain yaaga-s that a house-holder has to

do.

What brahmachaari can do, a gR^ihastha cannot do. What gR^ihastha can do a

brahmachaari should not.

 

na varNaaH na varNaashrama aachaara dharmaaH

na me dhaaraNaa - dhyaana - yoga - aadayaH api |

anaatma - aashrayaa ahaM - mama - adhyaasa - haanaat

tat ekaH avashishhTaH shivaH kevalaH aham.h || 2 ||

 

Shankara - dashashlokii

 

Hence Vedanta negates kartR^itvam and varNaashrama status and having

negated that how can it be combined with karma and upaasanaa which require

kartR^itvam?

 

The third reason: Vedanta positively condemns karma and upaasanaa as bandha

hetu or cause for bondage. In MunDaka Upa. (1-2-7)

 

plavaa hi ete adR^iDhaa yaj~naruupaa

ashhTaadashoktam avaram yeshhu karma |

etat shreyaH ye abhinandanti muuDhaaH

jaraa mR^ityum te punaH eva apiyanti ||

 

Those people who hold on to karma hoping that it will take them across

the ocean of sa.nsaara , they are all muuDhaaH - most ignorant. They will go

to heaven and come back and again go through the cycle of sa.nsaara. Hence

after the vedaanta j~naanam the person loses the purushhaarthatva buddhi in

karma. Hence how can it be possible to connect vedaanta j~naanam to karma?

Similarly upaasanaa also -

na karmaNaa na prajayaa dhanena tyaagena eke

amR^itatvam aanashhuH - [Kaivalya up. 2]

 

karma cannot give moksha after saying that how can Veda say that therefore

perform karma?

 

vedaanta vij~naana sunischitaarthaaH sa.nnyaasa yogaat

yatayaH shuddhasatvaaH |

 

In Gita - sarva dharmaan parityajya maam ekam sharaNam

vraja | - Hence the third reason is that vedaanta j~naanam is contradictory

to karma

therefore it can never combine with karma. Hence Shankara declares in

Atmabodha

-

avirodhitayaa karma , avidyaa na nivartayet.h |

vidyaa avidyaam nihanti eva tejaH timira sa~Nghavat.h ||

 

karma is being opposite cannot remove ignorance. Only knowledge can remove

ignorance just as the light removes the darkness. Hence one cannot say that

siddhabodhaka vaakyam-s should be connected to kaaryabodhaka vaakyam-s.

In the karmakaanDa one may be able to connect to the kaaryabodhaka

vaakyam-s. There the knowledge is how and why one should perform the

rituals. But the Vedanta is dealing with a different problem and one cannot

force any connection to the siddhabodhaka vaakyam-s of Vedanta to karma or

upaasana.

 

The reason four: The fourth objection is related to the puurvamiimaa.nsaka

'-s

declaration that Brahman is not at all there. Shankara says it is not true.

To find out what is revealed by shaastra the puurvamiimaa.nsaka -s

themselves have come up with the procedure involving the shhaD - li~Nga or

six factors of determination. Their own criteria of shhaD - li~Nga or six

factors have been applied to Vedanta and it has been shown that Brahman is

revealed by the shaastram. upakramaadi shhaD - li~NgaiH tat brahma

shaastrasya vishhayaH

samanvayaat or nirnayaat |

When it has been clearly shown that Brahman is indeed revealed by Vedanta

how can one say that Brahman is non-existent, unless one is a naastika. In

that case you have to

reject swarga, heaven also, since you cannot establish that by pratyaksha or

anumaana etc and it is revealed only by Veda. Hence brahma asti, vedaanta

taatparya vishhayatvaat.

 

In addition puurvapakshii says that Brahman is not there, because it is

neither useful as an end or useful as a means, based on Vedantic statement

that it is neither saadhyam (goal) or sadhanam (means) - saadhya saadhana

vilakshaNam brahma. Sir, if Brahman is neither saadhanam or saadhyam and if

Vedanta says Brahman still exists, it is very clear that Brahman is the

saadhaka only i.e the one who is the seeker of saadhyam by saadhanam. If one

still claims that Brahman is non-existent he is

only denying himself or it is a self-denial, and by that very self-denial

one denies that very denial itself, or in other words one is proving

existence of oneself, thus by Vedanta teaching existence of Brahman - aham

brahma asmi is the essential teaching of Vedanta.

neti neti iti vachanena sarva saadhana

saadhya nishhedhena saadhana

saadhya vyatiriktam siddharuupam saadhakam - tat tvam

asi iti bodhayati |

 

The next argument is if aham is the Brahman and aham is ever revealed and I

do not need shaastra to reveal the self which is self-evident.

aham

aham iti baalyaadishhu api sarvaasu avasthaasu jaagrat

- swapna - sushhuptishhu

sarvadaa prasiddhatvaat sarvadaa prathamaanatvaat -

it is self-evident as I am I am from childhood on, in all our experiences in

waking, dream and deep sleep in all states and was the prathama purushha as

the first person singular existent entity. If shaastra is revealing that

then it is useless as a

pramaaNa since aham is self-evident fact.

 

For that Shankara answers aham or I am is known as saamaanya ruupeNa and not

as visheshha ruupeNa - as sat and chit but not as aananda - for that

Shankara says one has to read Ch. III where adhyaasa bhaashyam is

discussed. -

 

yadyapi aatma prasiddhaH , parantu adhyasta jiivaatma

ruupeNa eva

prasiddhaH na tu paramaatma ruupeNa . aha~Nkaara

ruupeNa prasiddhaH na tu saakshi

ruupeNa.

tvam pada vaachyaartha ruupeNa prasiddhaH na tu

lakshyaartha ruupeNa. -

 

Essentially, although self is self-evident, it is recognized only as a jiiva

or limited entity not as an all pervading entity, recognized as ego entity

but not as witnessing consciousness, recognized as conscious entities as I

and you but not as all pervading consciousness.

 

Hence shaastra has to reveal aatmaa as Brahman. Hence Vedanta is required as

pramaaNa. Hence brahma asti and that brahman is aham. This knowledge is

sufficient since it gives me the purushhaartha , the moksha . The knowledge

that

aham brahma asmi is useful since it negates my jiivatvam or abrahmatvam

status.

This argument is presented in simple Sanskrit as -

 

yathaa rajju sarpa

j~naanena rajju

adhyasta sarpa bhaavasya niv^ittiH bhavati , evam

aatmanaH brahmatva

j~naanena aatmani adhyastasya jiiva bhaavasya

nivR^ittiH bhavati | jiiva

bhaava nivR^ittiH eva moksha ruupa parama

purushaarthaH - katham

taadR^isha brahmaNaH nishhprayojanatvam swapne api

sha~Nkitum shakyate!

 

How can anyone doubt even in a dream that Brahman is useless when brahma

j~naanam gives the greatest purushhaartha called moksha itself. That is the

ultimate goal of human life itself. Hence brahman asti - aatmaruupeNa asti .

Vedanta is

required to give not saamanya j~naanam but visheshha j~naanam. Shankara

says for details refer to Ch. III- adhyaasa bhaashya.

 

One more argument against puurvamiimaa.nsaka. They argue: In Veda-s

karmakaanDa is of primary importance as swataH pramaaNa and Vedanta has

no independent validity but gets secondary importance as pramaaNa that too

only by hooking itself to karmakaanDa or upaasanaa. Shankara now provides an

offensive argument. Shankara says in fact it is the other way around. That

is karmakaanDam is apramaanam, j~naanakaanDam alone is pramaaNam. If

karmakaanDa gets validity it is only because of its association with

j~naanakaanDam. How is this proved?

 

You have to wait for the next post!

__________________________

________________

 

********

Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and

can be accessed at

advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/

for personal study.

 

***Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright

protected.

 

***

-- K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623