sribhashya-adhyaya3-padha2-adhikarana-6

[Guest guest]

ahikundalADHikaraNam-3-2-6

 

 

 

suthra-26-ubhayavyapadhEsAth ahikundalavath-3-2-26

 

 

 

It has been established that the texts saying 'not this, not this,' deny

only the iyatthA the limitation of Brahman. It has also been shown that

Brahman is the highest and truth of the true. Now the relationship

between the nonsentient world and Brahman is examined in order to prove

that Brahman is free from imperfections. There are three alternative

views, namely ahikundalanyaya, the relation of a serpent to its coils,

prabhAprabhAvathOh iva EkajAthi yOga, that between the light and the

source of light and amsaamsibhAvEna viseshaNa viseshyathA , like that of

the part and the whole as the attribute and the substance. This and the

following two suthras deal with each of the alternatives.

 

 

 

>From the earlier suthras 'thadhanyathvam ArmbhaNa sabdhAdhibhyah,'

(BS.2-1-14) and 'prakrthischa prathishTAdhrshtAnthAnuparOdhAth,'

(BS.1-4-23) it has been shown that Brahman distinguished by the

sentient and the non-sentient beings in their gross form has originated

from Brahman distinguishd by the sentient and the non-sentient in their

subtle form.

 

 

 

The texts such as 'brahma Eva idham sarvam' (Brhd.2-5-1) all this is

Brahman and 'AtmaivEdham sarvam,'(Chan.7-25-2) all this is the Self,

speak about the identity of Brahman with the world while the texts like

'anEna jivEna AthmanA anupravisya,' relating the entry of Brahman into

everything to distinguish names and forms mention the difference.

Therefore like the serpent and its coils the world is different in

names and forms like the coils of the snake yet not different as they

are only Brahman in substance, like the snake that exists in its coils.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-27-prakAsAsrayavadhvA-3-2-27

 

 

 

Or like the light and its source.

 

 

 

If brahman is said to appear as the world like the serpent and its coils

there will be contradiction with the texts denoting the difference and

hence the analogy of the light and its source is adopted in as much as

though both are different yet they are the same being(thEjas) the

element fire.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-28-poorvavadhvA-3-2-28

 

 

 

Or the relation is as given before.

 

 

 

In the first alternative Brahman itself existing as the non-sentient

world, the imperfections of the world will be unavoidable with respect

to Brahman. The second alternative means that as fire constitutes the

substance in light as well as its source, Brahmanhood forms the

substance of the non-sentient world and Brahman, in which case Brahman

becomes a mere generic character and not a real entity that pervades

all. This means, instead of Brahman existing in all, it will be

Brahmanhood which forms the common basis of both the world and Brahman

and this is against the declaration in the sruthi that Brahman is the

supreme reality.

 

 

 

This leads to the conclusion that the relationship between Brahman and

the world is as described in the earlier suthras 'amsO

nANAvayapadhEsAth,' (BS.2-3-43) and 'prakASAdhivatthu nAivam parah' (BS.

2-3-45) according to which the non-sentient is also ,like the sentient

soul , an attribute of Brahman, being an inseparable part(amsa) of

Brahman. Thus the identity between the substance and the attribute as

well as the difference of the attribute and the substance is brought

out and hence Brahman is also shown as free from imperfections. Just as

the light of the entities belonging to the genus of luminous bodies like

a gem , which is inseparable from the gem etc, are considered as the

part of the luminous body,the sentient and insentient entities form a

part of Brahman.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-29-prathishEDHAccha-3-2-29

 

 

 

And because of denial.

 

 

 

The texts such as 'nASya jarayA Ethath jeeryathE' (Chan.8-1-5) it does

not age with aging of the body, and 'sa vA Esha mahAnaja AthmA ajarO

amarah' this is the great Self, unborn,undecaying and immortal, deny in

Brahman the attributes of the nonsentient world. Hence the relation

between the two is only that of substance and attribute and the

nonsentient world forms a part of Brahman.Therefore Brahman is free from

imperfections, abode of auspicious qualities and possesses twofold

characterestics.

 

Thus ends the ahikundalADHikaraNam.