sribhashya-rest of arambhanadhikaranam2-1-6

[Guest guest]

suthra-16-bhAvE cha upalabDHEh-2-1-16

 

 

 

Because the cause is seen in the effect.

 

 

 

In the ornaments of gold, the cause, that is gold, is recognised and not

any other cause such as clay. Therefore as in the case of Devadatta, who

is recognised in all his different stages of childhood, youth and old

age, the cause itself exists as the effect in a different state. Even

the naiyayika who claims that the effect is different, acknowledges the

different state of the effect as compared to the cause, which alone

accounts for the difference in name and form and hence there is no need

to assume that the effect is a new substance.

 

 

 

Ramanuja refutes the view that the similarity of the cause and the

effect is due to the jati, that is the generic property or due to the

inherent cause, the samavayi karana, because both disprove the

origination of a different effect. While it is said that scorpion etc

are perceived to emerge from cow dung in which the opponent sees no

continuation of the causal substance, Ramanuja says that it is the

earthen element which persists as the body of the worms or scorpion.

Then the opponent comes up with the argument that in smoke there is no

presence of fire to which Ramanuja replies that it is the contact with

wet fuel that is the cause of smoke,which is recognised to persist in

the smoke through smell, and not fire.Therefore it is proved that the

cause and the effect are not different.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-17-satthvAth cha aparasya-2-1-17

 

 

 

Because of the existence of the effect in the cause.

 

 

 

The effect exists in the cause as proved by such statements as 'all

these pots were clay in the morning.' Similarly it is said that sath

alone was in the beginning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-18-asadvyapadhEsAth na ithi chEth na; dhrmAnthrENa; vAkyaseshAth

yukthEh sabdhANhrAccha

 

 

 

It cannot be said that the effect was non-existent in the cause on

account of the declaration 'asadhEva idham Aseeth 'nonexistence was in

the beginning because it was due to another attribute,from another

subsequent text, by reasoning and by other texts.

 

 

 

The attribute of being the world of nama and rupa was alone nonexistent

in the beginning, as the pot was nonexistent as such, before its

creation and by its name. From the subsequent passage that the

nonexistent created, willing to become, 'thadhasdhEva samabhavOakurutha

syAm ithi, ' it is proved. Reasoning also makes us say that the pot

exists when it is seen in the particular shape and that it does not

exist before its creation when it is present in the form of clay or when

it is broken into pot sherds. Also from another text which says

'kuthasthu khalu soumya Evam syAth, how can this come about ,' thus

dismissing the asath as the cause and establishing that the existence

only was there, 'sadhEva soumya idhmagra Aseeth.'

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-19- patavaccha-2-1-19

 

 

 

And like the piece of cloth.

 

 

 

As the threads alone bear the name of a cloth in their state of effect

Brahman becomes the world in its kAryAvasthA.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-20 yaTHA cha prANAdhih-2-1-20

 

 

 

Like prANA etc'

 

 

 

Just as the same life breath assumes different names like prANA APana

etc within the body, Brahman being one only manifests as the variegated

world. Therefore, concludes Ramanuja, 'paramakAraNAth parasmAth

brahmaNah ananyathvajagathah siddham, the world is not different from

the supreme cause, namely the supreme Brahman.

 

Thus ends Arambhanadhikaranam.