sribhashya -adhyaya2-padha3-adhikaranas 2and3

[Guest guest]

AthmADHikaraNam-2-3-3

 

 

 

suthra-18-nAtmA struthEh nithyathvAccha thAbhyah-2-3-18

 

 

 

Not self because of scriptural texts and the eternity from them.

 

 

 

After confirming the creation of AkAsa and others from Brahman now the

question is about the individual self. The poorvapakshin says that it is

originated, as known from the texts such as 'sanmoolAh soumya imAh

sarvAh prajAh sadhAyathanAh sathprathishTAh,(Chan.VI-8-6)all these

beings, have their root in'sath', abide in it and rest in it, and 'yathO

vA imAni bhoothAni jAyanthe,(Tait.3-1-1) from whom all these beings

originate,' etc. they say that the texts such as 'that thou art'

professing the unity of the Atman with Brahman cannot be taken to mean

that the Atman is eternal since Brahman is so, because from the texts

such as 'EthadhAtmyam idham sarvam, all this is ensouled by Brahman' and

'sarvam khalu idham brahma, all this is Brahman,' it would mean that

everything is eternal and hence unoriginated. Therefore the individual

self is created.

 

 

 

The suthra refutes this saying that the individual self is not

originated as could be shown from the sruthi. The texts such as 'na

jAyathE mriyathE vA vipaschith,(KatO.1-2-18)the intelligent self is

neither born nor dies.' and ' ajO nithyam sAsvathO ayam purANah na

hanyathE hanyamAnE sarirE, this self is unborn,eternal, ever existent

and ancient who is not killed when the body is destroyed.'(KatO.1-2-18)

 

 

 

The opponent asks that if the soul is not originated how can the

promissory statement EkavijAnEna sarvavijnAnam be true? Ramanuja replies

that the soul also being the effect, the non-difference between the

cause and effect is indicated by the promissory statement. But being an

effect does not mean that the soul is originated because the effect is

only avasTHAnthara or another state of the causal substance. This

avasTHAnthara of the individual self is different from that of AkAsa

etc. because the state of being the effect consists in the inteligence

becoming expanded with respect to the individual self whereas it is a

change of essential nature in the case of AkAsa etc.

 

 

 

In the causal state Brahman has the sentient and the insentient in their

subtle form as its sarira while in the state of effect the insentient

changes in its essential nature attaining name and form and becomes the

object of enjoyment and the sentient soul attains an expansion of

itntelligence enabling it to experience the fruit of actions.The texts

that speak of origination of soul only mean its embodiment and not

origination while those which deny the origination declare that there is

no change in the essential nature of the soul. Thus the soul is also the

effect of Brahman and it is not contraditory to the promissory

statement.

 

Thus ends AtMADHikaraNam.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

jnADHikaraNam-2-3-4

 

 

 

Therefore the knower.

 

 

 

Now the nature of the soul is examined. Buddhists and sankhyans hold

the view that the soul is pure consciousness while for the vaiseshikas

it is inert having knowledge as its adventitous quality.The opponent who

holds the former view quotes from sruthi texts such as 'vijnAnam yajnam

thanuthE,karmANi thanuthEpi cha,(Taitt.2-5-1) the knowledge performs

sacrifice and the actions.

 

 

 

Others say that knowledge is only an adventitious quality as there is no

intelligence present in the state of deep sleep etc. The knowledge,

they say, is present only when the soul is connected with the body, as

the sruthi also declares that 'na prEthya sajnA asthi,there is no

consciousness when he soul leaves the body.'

 

 

 

The suthra refutes this by saying that the self is of the nature of

knower and not mere knowledge nor inert. This is proved from the sruthi

itself. In ChAndhOgya text in the section where prajApathi describes the

released and unreleased souls by saying 'aTHa yo vedha jiGHrANeethi sa

AthmA, one who knows "I smell" he is the self.Similarly in

BrhadhAraNyaka it is said as a reply to the question 'kathama AthmA,who

is the self,' that 'yO ayam vijnAnamayah prANEshu

hrdhyanthrjyothirpurushah,(Brhd.4-3-7) he who is consisting of knowledge

is the light within the heart in the prAnas.' and 'Esha hi dhrashtA

srothA GHrAtha rasayithA manthA bOdDHA karthA vijnAnAthmA

purushah,(Pras.IV-9)this person is the seer,hearer smeller,taster

thinker knower doer and the knowing self.

 

 

 

To the objection that if the self is a knower, it being infinite and all

pervading, there will always be cognition everywhere the next suthra

replies.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-20-uthkrAnthigathyAgatheenAm-2-3-20

 

 

 

Because of passingout, going and returning, the self is atomic.

 

 

 

The sruthi mentions the soul going out, and coming in etc. which is not

possible if it is all pervading. in BrhadhAraNyaka upanishad ' 'Esha

AthmanishkrAmathi chakshushO vA murDHnO vAanyEbhyO vA

sariradhEsebhyah,))(Brhad.4-4-2)this self departs through the eyes or

the skull or any other part of the body,' and the return likewise

'thasmAth lokAth punarEthi asmai lOkaya karmaNE, from those worlds,

returns to this world for karma.'

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-21-svAthmanA cha uttharayOh-2-3-21

 

 

 

And as the going and coming being effected directly by the self it is

atomic.

 

 

 

Passing out of the body, meaning separation from the body, is applicable

even if the soul is infinite but going and coming indicates that it is

atomic.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-22-na aNuh athathsruthEh ithi cheth na itharADHikArAth-2-3-22

 

 

 

If it is said that it is not atomic because of scriptural statement as

otherwise, it is not so, as the subject matter of those texts is

Brahman.

 

The opponent quotes the text 'sa vA Esha mahAn aja AthmA, (Brhd.4-4-22)

that self is infinite and unborn,' to prove that it is not atomic but

this suthra refutes the view saying that it is Brahman who is referred

to in those texts as can be understood from the text 'yasya anuvitthah

prathbuddha Athma, he who knows the sentient self ,' meaning Brahman,

which was the topic introduced in the section.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-23-svasabdhOnmAnAbhyAm cha-2-3-23

 

 

 

Because the very word anu is used.

 

 

 

'EshO aNurAthmA chEthsAvedhithavyah, this atomic self should be

known,'(Mund.3-1-9) and 'ArAgramAthrOhyvarOpi dhrshtah,(Svet.5-8) the

lower one, (meaning the individual self ) is seen to be of the measure

of the tip of the goad, show that the self is atomic.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-24-avirODHaschandhanavath-2-3-24

 

 

 

Like the sandalpaste, no contradiction.

 

 

 

The self though atomic is able to prevade the whole body like the

sandalpaste that creates coolness for the whole body though applied in

one place.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-25-avasTHithi vaiseshyAth ithi cheth na,abhyupagamATH hrdhi

hi-2-3-25

 

 

 

If it is due to particular position the analogy is said to be

inappropriate, not so because the heart is accepted as the seat of the

soul.

 

 

 

The sruthi text 'yO ayam vijnAnamayah prANEshu

hrdhanthrjyothih,'(Brhd.4-3-7) shows that the self is found in the

heart.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-26-gunAthvA AlOkavath-2-3-26

 

 

 

Or due to its quality like light.

 

 

 

As the light placed in one corner lights up the whole room so does the

AtmA in the heart spreads consciousness all over.

 

suthra-27-vyathirEkO gandhavath thaTHA cha dharsayathi-2-3-27

 

 

 

There is distinction as in the case of smell as shown by the sruthi.

 

 

 

To the objection that if the essence of self is knowledge how can it be

the quality of the self.

 

 

 

The reply is given that, as the smell is the quality of the earth yet

inseparable from it,so too knowledge is the quality of the self.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra -28-prthagupadhEsAth-2-3-28

 

 

 

By separate mention.

 

 

 

The text 'na thu vijnAthuh vijnAthEh viparilOpO vidhyathE,(Brhd.

4-3-30)there is no absence of knowing on the part of the knower,'shows

the distinction between the knower, the self and the knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-29-thadguNasArathvAth thu hadvyapadhEsah prAjnavath-2-3-29

 

 

 

The declaration is due to knowledge being the essential quality as

Brahman is said to be knowledge.

 

 

 

As the text 'sathyam jnAnam anantham Brahma,' denotes Brahman as truth,

knowledge and infinity on account of the fact that these are HIs

essential qualities.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-30-yAvath AthmabhAvithvAth cha na dhOshah thaddharsanAth-2-3-30

 

 

 

There is no defect so long as the soul exists because it is so seen.

 

 

 

As knowledge is the quality that persists through out life there is

nothing wrong in denoting the soul by it. Ramanuja says that a cow with

broken horns is still called a cow because the cowness persists even if

the parts of the body are lost.Moreover the self also like knowledge is

self illumined and hence it is depicted as self.The objection that

knowledge is not an inseparable quality of the soul as it is not seen to

exist in deep sleep etc. is replied by the next suthra.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-31-pumsvAdhivathvasya sathah aBhivyakthiyOgAth-2-3-31

 

 

 

Because manifestation is possible only if it exists in deep sleep like

virility etc.

 

 

 

As virility which is potential in a male child manifests only on youth,

similarly knowledge existing in the deep sleep only manifests in the

waking state.Otherwise it cannot manifest on waking up. Therefore the

self is knower and is of atomic size.The text "na prEthyasya samjnA

asthi'(Brhd.2-4-12) only means that in release, the self does not

experience birth,death and pain as in the bound state and does not mean

that the self has no knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra32-nithyaupalabDhi anupalabDHimprasangahanyatharaniyamah vA

anyaTHA-2-3-32

 

 

 

Otherwise there will be perpetual perception or nonperception or

limitations of either of the two.

 

 

 

The self being omnipresent and all knowledge as some assume there will

be permanent perception or nonperception.but experience proves otherwise

as there is perception at times and nonperception at other times.If the

self is omnipresent there will be 'I" consciousness always everywhere.

hence to avoid these difficulties the self iis taken as atomic and has

knowledge for its quality.

 

Thus ends jnADHikaraNam.