sribhashya-adhyaya3-padha3-adhikaranas17,18 and 19

October 6, 2006

thannirDHAraNAniyamADHikaraNam-

3-3-17

suthra-41-thannirvaNAniyamah thaddhrshtEh prthgghyaprathibanDhah-3-3-41

There is no restriction of that meditation on the udhgeetha because that is seen ; for there is separate fruit which is nonobstruction.

The meditation on "OM" as udhgeetha, 'OmithyEthdhaksharam udhgeeTham upAseetha' (Chan.1-1-1) and others are mentioned in connection with sacrificial rites. The question is whether this meditation which is connected to the sacrificial rites through udhgeetha is a neccsary part of the sacrifice like the ladle made of parNa wood, or not necessary.

The suthra says that there is no restriction of the meditation concerned regarding the sacrificial rites because thddhrshtEh, it is seen to be so. The text itself says 'thEna ubou kuruthah yaschaithadhEvam vEdha yascha na vEdha, (Chan.1-1-10) both perform the sacrifice one who knows (the knowledge implied in the meditation) and one who does not know.' So the text mention separate fruit for the meditation,namely,'yadhEva vidhyayA karOthi sraddhayA upanishadhA thadhEva veeryavattharam bhavathi, whatever he does with knowledge, with faith, with the Upanishad, that becomes more vigorous,' which imparts greater strength to the sacrifice in order to be free from obstacles in attaining the fruit. The general result of the sacrifices such as attaining heaven etc. is different from this.The meditation is not thus necessary though it may be done for attaining greater strength in performance of the rites.Thus ends the thannirDHAraNAniyamADHikaraNam.

pradhAnAdhikaraNam-3-3-18

suthra-42-pradhAnavadhEva thadhuktham-

3-3-42

Just as in the case of oblations this has been said.

In the section on dhaharavidhya in ChandhOgya, after mentioning the meditation on Brahman in the lotus of the heart,there is a separate mention of the qualities of Brahman viz sathyakAma sathyasanlalpathvAdhi. The question is that whether in the meditation on the latter, the meditation on Brahman as qualified by those attributes is also to be repeated.The opponent is of the opinion that since Brahman is the possessor of the attributes and as the meditation on Brahman possessed of all attributes is already enjoined it is not to be repeated for the sake of the attributes.

The suthra refutes this view by saying that the meditation has to be repreated as in the case of oblation.When Brahman is meditated as prescribed in the section on dharAkAsa, it is done with reference to His essential nature while in the section mentioning the attributes like freedom from evil etc. it is Brahman qualified by these attributes.

This is similar to the case of sacrificial oblations where the offering of purOdAsa is offered to Indhra. The text in Taittiriya samhitha 'yaTHEndhrAya rAjne purodAsam EkAdhasakapAlam nirvapEth, to Indhra, the king, purodAsa is to be offered in eleven potsherds ,' continues the same injunction repeating 'indhrAya aDHirAjAya,' to Indhra the ruler, 'indhrAya svarAjnE', to Indhra the sovereign, etc.where oblations are separaely offered to Indhra, qualified by kingship, rulership etc. and therefore considered as different deities.Thus ends the pradhAnADHikaraNam.

lingabhooyasthvADHikaraNam-3-3-19

suhtra-43-lingabhooyasthvAththaddhi baleeyasthadhapi-3-3-43

Because of the abundance of signs which are sfronger than the context.This also is declared.

In Taittiriyaka, NarayaNa anuvAka, immediately after dhaharavidhya there is the text 'sahasraseersham dhevam visvAksham visvasambhuvam visvam narAyaNam dhevam aksharam paramam prabhum, this universe is truly the divine person only, the Lord NarayaNa,who is many headed ,many eyed,and produces joy for the universe, the imperishable supreme ruler.'

Here the doubt raised is that whether this meditation describes attributes to be included in the meditation of dhahaavidhya or does this passage describes the attributes of the supreme self to be meditated in all upanishads.The opponent holds the former view because the context is about dhaharavidhya.

The suthra refutes this saying that the section describes only the qualities of the supreme self because of the abundance of signs to that effect.The supreme self is denoted in all meditations as akshara, sambhu parabrahman etc. and finally as Narayana.This is true in dhaharavidhya also.thus ends the lingabhooyasthyaDHikaraNam.