sribhashya-adhyaya3-end of padha2

[Guest guest]

parADHikaraNam-3-2-7

 

 

 

suthra-30-paramathah sEthoonmAnasambhanDHa

 

bhEdhavyapadhEsEbhyah-3-2-30

 

 

 

There is something higher than Brahman because of the mention of bridge,

measure, connection and difference.

 

 

 

 

 

This suthra is by way of fallacious prima facie view (poorvapaksha)

that there must be a higher being than Brahman, the material and

efficient cause of the world.

 

 

 

The text 'atha ya Athma sa sEthurviDHrthih ,' mentions that the Self is

the bridge, the embankment,(Chan.8-4-1) to be crossed 'Etham sEthum

TheerthvAanDHassan ananDHO byavahi',(Chan.8-4-2) by which a blind person

is able to see. Since a bridge is something to go across to reach the

other side there must be something else to be reached after crossing it.

 

Brahman is also mentioned as being limited by the text 'parimitham idham

param brahma chathushpAdbrahma shOdasalkalam, ' (Chan.3-18-2) the

supreme Brahman is limited, has four feet and sixteen parts, which

indicates the existence of something other than Brahman which is

unlimited, to be reached by that bridge. Also the texts 'amrthasya param

sEthum, the highest bridge of immortality'(Svet.6-19) and

'amtrthasyaisha sEthuh(Mund.2-2-5) he is the bridge of the immortal,'

all of which indicate something higher to be reached through the bridge,

that is Brahman.

 

 

 

That there is something higher is also shown by 'parAthparampurusham

upaithi,(Mund.3-2-8) he goes to the purusha who is higher than the

highest and 'thEnEdham poorNam purushENa sarvam,thathO yadhuttharatharam

thadharoopamanAmayam, by this person the whole universe is filled and

what is higher than that is formless and without suffering.So from

these it is claimed that there is something higher than Brahman.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

suthra31-sAmAnyAth thu-3-2-31

 

 

 

Because of similarity.

 

 

 

The suthra refutes the view given above. The word 'Sethu ' does not mean

someting to be attained but the next phrase to the text quoted says

'EshAmlOkAnAm asambhEdhAya' meaning , for the nonconfounding of these

worlds.Ramanuja defines the word 'sEthu' as 'sinOthi baDHnAthi svasmin

sarvam chidhachitvasthujAtham asnkirNam ithi sEthuh uchyathE' Brahman

binds the world of sentient and insentient beings in itself so that

there is no confusion and everything is in order (setu being derived

from 'si'to bind) Etham sEthum theerthvA means after crossing the bridge

,that is reaching the shore of vedanta, viz mastering it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-32-buddhyarTHah pAdhavath-3-2-32

 

 

 

Brahman is denoted as having limitation for the sake of meditation like

four feet etc.

 

 

 

The expressions such as 'chathushpAdhbrahma shodasakalam,' cited to

prove that Brahman has limit or measure is only to fecilitate

comprehension and for meditation because the texts like 'sathyam jnAanam

anantham brahma' clearly show that Brahman who is the cause of the

universe is unconditioned and immeasurable.The texts speaking about

measure like the one 'vAkpAdhahprANah pAdhah chakshuh

pAdhAhsrothrampAdhah,' (Chan.3-18-2) which declares that the

speech,prANa,eye and the ear as being the four quarters of Brahman, are

for the sake of meditation.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-33-sTHAnavisEshAth prakAsAdhivath-

 

3-2-33

 

 

 

The limitation are due to the special places as in the case of light

etc.

 

 

 

Just as light, AkAsa etc are viewed as though limited by windows, pots

and so on though they are spread everywhere, Brahman is also spoken of

as connected with the limiting adjuncts like speech eye etc.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-34-upapatthEscha-3-2-34

 

 

 

And it is possible.

 

 

 

>From the text 'amrthasyaishasEthuh,' it need not be concluded that

there is something higher than Brahman is to be attained because Brahman

is both the means and the end as ascertained by the statement

'yamEvaishavrNuthE thEna labhyathE,' he whom the Self chooses , by him

the Self can be gained.'

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-35-thaTHA anyaprathishEDHAth-3-2-35

 

 

 

Similarly because of denial of anything alse.

 

 

 

The texts quoted to prove that there is something higher like

'parAthparam purusham, (Mund.3-2-8)the supreme purusha above the

highest,' and 'aksharAth parathah parah, ((Mund.2-1-2) higher than the

imperishable,'etc are not so accepted because the sruthi explicitly deny

the existence of anything higher as seen from the texts like 'yasmAth

param nAparamasthi kimchith yasmANNANeeyO na jyAyO asthi

kaschith,(Svet.3-9) there is nothing else higher that Brahman and

nothing subtler or greater.

 

 

 

To the question as to what is that which is indicated in the text

'thathO yadhuttharatharam,' (Svet.3-10) as being beyond it, Ramanuja

gives the reply as follows: In the passage immediately preceding that

'vedhAhamEtham purusham mahAntham Adhithya varNam thamasah

parasthAth;thamEva vidhithvA athimrthyum Ethi nAnyah panTHA vidhyathE

ayanAya,(Svet.3-8) I know Him the supreme purusha of the hue of the Sun,

who is beyond darkness, knowing Him one crosses over death to

immortality and there is no other way than this.' And the next verse

says 'yasmAth param nAparamasthi kimchith, higher than whom nothing else

exists.'

 

So the texts quoted at the outset, to prove the existence of higher

entity than Brahman, only show that there is a supreme person with all

His transcendental qualities who is superior to the aggregate of all

individual souls., namely Brahman . This alone is the explanation in

accordance with the meaning of the whole passage.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-36-anEna sarvagathathvam AyAmasabdhAhibhyah-3-2-36

 

 

 

The omnipresence of Brahman is known from scripture regarding the extent

of Brahman.

 

 

 

The omnipresence of brahman is known from the texts that describe

Brahman to be all pervading. 'thEnEdham poorNam purushEna sarvam, all

this is filled with this person,'(Svet.3-9) yacchakimchith jagath sarvam

dhrsyathE srooyathE api vA antharbahischa thathsarvam vyApya

nArAyanassThithah, (Mahanarayana. 13-5) Other sruthi texts like

'brahmaivEdham sarvam ,AthmAivEdham sarvam , ' also denote Brahman to be

higher than anything else.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PHalAdhikaraNam-3-2-8

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-37-phalamatha upapatthEh-3-2-37

 

 

 

>From Him alone the fruit of actions is possible.

 

 

 

As the mere actions cannot secure results, being insentient it is only

from the Lord who is worshipped through action the fruits of actions

ensue.Ramanuja says this is only appropriate as 'sa Eva hi sarvajnah

sarvasakthih mahOdhArah yAgadhAnahOmAdhibhih ArADHithahAIhika Amushmika

bhOgajAtham svsasvarupa avApthirupam apavargam cha dhAthumeeshte.'

 

 

 

This means, He only being all-knowing, all-powerful, supremely

generous, pleased by sacrifices, gifts, offerings, meditation,etc has

the power to bestow enjoyment in this world and the next, and also

release to attain Him.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-38-sruthathvAccha-3-2-38

 

 

 

And also from the scripture.

 

 

 

The texts like 'sa va Esha mahAnajaAthmA annAdhO vasu dhAnah' says the

sruthi meaning that the great unborn Self is the eater of food ( accepts

the offering) and giver of wealth (friut of actions) and 'ESha

hyEvAnandhayathi' that He alone gives joy, proves this point.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-39Dharma jaiminiratha Eva-3-2-39

 

 

 

Jaimini thinks that religious work brings friuts of action for the same

reason.

 

 

 

Jaimini thinks on the other hand that the works alone brings the result,

as against the above view. In his opinion the acts like sacrifices

create a power known as apurva wich brings the result at the appropriate

time. He quotes the text from purvamimamsa 'svargakAmO yajEtha, which

enjoins that one who desires heaven should perform the sacrifice.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-4-poorvam thu bAdharayaNah hEthuvyapadhEsAth-3-2-40

 

 

 

But Badhrayana has the former view because Brahman has been declared as

the cause.

 

 

 

Badharayana thinks that Brahman is the bestower of the fruits of

actions. Even in the statements like 'vAyurvai kashEpishtA dhEvatha,'

where Vayu is praised to be the fruit giver being swift, only Brahman is

referred to according to the text 'yO vAyou thishTan yasya vAyuh

sariram' etc. where brahman is denoted as the indweller and ruler of

Vayu and others. It is also declared by the Lord in Gita 'yOyO yAmyAm

thanum bhakthah sraddhayA archithum icchathi thasya thasya achalAm

sraddhAm thAmEva vidhaDHAmyaham,'

 

'Whomsoever devotee wishes to worship with faith to whichever divine

form, I make that faith unshakable for him.' Als He declares that He

alone is the one to whom all offering reaches as He is the

master,'ahamhi sarva yajnAnAmbhOkthA cha prabhurEvacha.'

 

 

 

Ramanuja concludes by saying that, as the king is propitiated through

his officials so too the Lord is worshipped by means of other forms.The

vedanta texts give the highest knowledge on the subject which

transcends all others, that of the supreme self, who is free from all

imperfections, and abode of auspicious qualities; and all sacrifices,

gifts, oblations are indirectly propitiate him just as the worship,

meditation etc do so directly. Thus propitiated, He bestows happiness

in this world and enabled the soul to attain final Release.

 

This is the end of phaladhikarana.

 

 

 

The end of second padha of the third adhyaya.