sribhashya -adhyaya3-padha4-adhikaraNa1

[Guest guest]

sribhashyam

 

 

 

aDhyaya-3-pAdha-4

 

 

 

PurushArTHADHiakaraNam-3-4-1

 

 

 

suthra-1-purushArTHah athah sabdhAdhithi bAdharAyaNah-3-4-1

 

 

 

The enquiry into the unity or diversity of the meditqations has resulted

in determining, in which cases the attributes mentioned in the

meditations are to be combined, and in which case they are not. Now this

section examines whether the highest purusharTHa , the principal object

of human life,that is moksha, is a direct result of meditation or of the

works for which the meditation is subsidiary.BhAdharAyaNa is of the

opinion that the purushArTHa is the direct result of meditation because

scripture declares so. The texts like 'brahmavidhApnOthi param, (

Tait.2-1-1)the knower of Brahman attains the supreme,'vedhAhamEtham

purusham mahAntham Adhithya varNam thamasah parasthAth; thamEvam vidhvAn

amrtha iha bhavathi , nAnyAh panThA visdhyathE ayanAya,(Svet.3-8) I know

that great Person of sun-like lustre beyond the darkness. A man who

knows Him truly passes over death; there is no other path to go' (Svet.

Up. III, 8); and 'yaTHA nadhyah syandhamAnAh samudhrE astham gacchanthi

nAma rupE vihAya; thaTHA vidhvAn nAmarupAth vimukthahparAthparam

purushmupaithi dhivyam,(Mund.3-2-8) as the rivers flowing, disappear

inthe ocean, losing name and form,so the wise man, free from name and

form,goes unto the highest of the high, the supreme divinity.

The poorvapkshin comes with an objection to this.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-2-seshathvAth purushArTHavAdhah yaTHA anyeshu ithi jaiminih-3-4-2

 

The suthras 2to7 gives the view of the opponent which is refuted by the

subsequent suthras.

 

Knowledge is subsidiary to the sacrificial acts and hence the statement

about the benificial result through meditation is only arTHavaAdha,

laudatory, says Jaimini.

 

 

 

The discussion is between vedantin and mimAmsaka. For the latter no

scriptural statement is valid authority unless it is connected with

action, as seen in the debate regarding the suthra 'Thatthu

samnvayAth,' (BS.1-1-4) The opponent says that purushArTHa cannot be the

result of meditation. the statements such as 'brahmavidhbbrahmaiva

bhavathi' are only to acquire the knowledge of the real nature of the

sacrificer.So the meditation is a purifying rite subsodiary to the act

of sacrifice.The declaration of result through meditation is not direct

but only through the performance of sacrifice and hence such statements

are only laudatory according to the aphorism of poorvamimamsa

'dhravyasamskArakarmasu parArTHathvAth phalsruthih arTHavAdhah

syAth,(Pu.mi.su.4-3-1)

 

 

 

It could not be argued by the vedanthin that the object of meditation is

something different from the individual self engaged in acts of

sacrifice, being the attainment of Brahman by those desirous of

emancipation (mumukshu), which has been already established by the

earlier suthras, and hence meditation cannot be subsidiary to

sacrificial act. Though the texts like 'that thou art' declare the

identity of the individual slef with Brahman, who is proved to be the

inner self of all by the other suthras,the real purport of the vedantha

texts is to tell us about the real nature of the self and hence they are

only laudatory and subsidiary to the act of sacrifice.as no one will be

inclined to do sacrifice unless he knows that he is different from the

body and hence meditations are connected with the sacrificial acts by

providing this knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-3-AchAradharsanAth-3-4-3

 

 

 

Because it is known from scriptures from the conduct of men of

realisation.

 

 

 

Asvapathi and Janaka who were men of realisation are seen from the

scriptures to be engaged in sacrificial acts.Asvapathi tells the rshis

'yakshyamANo vai bhagavanthO aham asmi, (Chan.5-11-5)I am about to

perform a sacrifice.' Smrthi also confirms that the Brahman knowledge

does not preclude one from sacrificial acts as the Lord himself has said

'karmaNaiva hi samsiddhim AsTHithA janakAdhayah,' (BG-3-20)Janaka and

others attained perfection only through karma, which means vedha vihitha

karma like sacrifices.Thus knowledge is not independently fruitful but

only acquired for the purpose of purifying the doer as it shows the real

nature of the self.

 

 

 

suthra-4-thath sruthEh-3-4-4

 

 

 

That is known by the scriptures also.

 

 

 

By the text 'yadhEva vidhyayA karOthisraddhayA upanishadha thadhEva

veeryavattharam bhavathi, (Chan.1-1-10) whatever one does with

knowledge, faith and upanishad that becomes more powerful,' is not to be

taken to refer to udhgeetha only as per the context because the direct

statement, vAkya, being more powerful than the context,prakaraNa.Hence

the vidhya referred to in the text means only the knowledge in general.

 

 

 

[Here the rule applied here by the mimamsaka is that of purvamimamsa

which says that when the six items,

namely,sruthi-linga-vAkya-prakaraNa-sThAna-samAkhyA, that is, direct

assertion,indication,syntactical connection,context, position and

designation, relate to the same thing, each succeding one is weaker

than the preceding one because it it conveys its meaning less directly,

that is, by invoking the aid of the preceding

ones.(Pu.Mi.suthra.III-3-14) ]

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-5-samanvArambhaNAth-3-3-5

 

 

 

Because both go together.

 

 

 

The text 'tham vidhyAkarnaNou samanvArabhEthE,(Bhd.4-4-2) he is

followed by both knowledge and works,' shows that knowledge and work go

together.

 

 

 

suthra-6-thadhvathO viDHAnAth-3-4-6

 

 

 

Because scripture enjoins work.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scripture enjoins work for the one who acquired knowledge as can be seen

from the text AchAryakulAth veEdhamaDHeethya yaTHAbhiDHaNam

karmAthiseshENa abhi samAvrthya kutumbE suchou dhEsEsvADHyAyam

aDHeeyAnah,(Chan.8-15-1) he who has learnt the veda according to the

prescribed rule in the time left over after perfofming his duty to the

guru, after coming back from the guru's house settles down in his

household and continues the study of the veda in a clean place.'Hence

the knowledge of Brahman has no independemt fruit but only as connected

with works enjoined in the vedas.

 

 

 

suthra7-niyamAth-3-4-7

 

 

 

On account of the compulsory rule.

 

 

 

It is said 'KurvannevEha karmANijijeevishEcchatham samAh, (IsA. 2) which

explicitlyprescribes work for the whole lifetime to one who has the

knowledge of the self.Hence for all the reasons mentioned in the

foregoing suthras the opponent claims that the knowledge is only in

connection with sacrificial activites.

 

 

 

 

 

Suthra-8-aDHikaupadhEsAtthu bAdharAyaNasya Evam dharsanAth-3-3-8

 

 

 

Because the scripture teaches about the one who surpasses the individual

self, the view of BadharAyaNa is vailid.

 

 

 

Ramanuja explains the term 'aDHika upadhEsa' in the suthra thus:

'karmasu karthuh jeevAth

hEyaprathyaneeka-anavaDHika-athisaya-kalyANaguNAkarathvEna aDHikasya

,arTHAnthara bhoothasya parasya brahmaNah vEdhyathayA upadhEsAth.'

 

 

 

The meaning of the above passage is this:The scriptures teaches us of

the supreme being who surpasses the individual self, the doer of

works,by His limitless and wonderful auspicious qualities and who is

free from imperfections and hence different from the individual self.

 

 

 

These qualities of the supreme self , says Ramanuja , cannot by any

stretch of imgination be attributed to the individual self either in the

state of bondage or in release.In the texts like 'apahathapApmA ajarO

vimrthyuh vishokO vijighathsO apipAsah sathyakAmah sathya samnlalpah,He

is free from evil,old age,death,sorrow,hunger and thirst, and those

which speak about Brahman as the cause of the world , as the ruler,

inner self of all, of nature of bliss etc., there is not even

slightest reference to the miserable individual self,as insignificant as

a glow worm, entangled in the body due to nescience.The result of the

knowledge of Brahman is declared to be immortality on attaining

Him.Therefore the knowledge of Brahman is the means of purushArTHa.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-9-thulyam thu dharsanam-3-3-9

 

 

 

The scriptures equally support both views.

 

 

 

The argument that the men are of realisation is shown in the scritures

to follow the path of karma is not wholly true because there is evidence

for the other view also.In aithareya upanishad we have a text 'rshayah

kAvashEyAh;kimarTHA vayamaDHyEShyAmahe, kimargTHA vayam yakshyAmahE,the

sages descended from Kavisa said: for what purpose should we study the

vedas and for what purpose should we perform sacrifices.' As those who

have acquired brahman knowledge are seen to give up karma as being of no

use for them who desire salvation, the meditation on Brahman cannot be

susidiary to sacrifice. But, says Ramanuja sacrificial acts may be

performed by men of realisation( such as janaka and ASvapathi) without

attachment to fruits and hence it is appropriate that they were

mentioned as doing the sacrificial rites.On the other hand sacrifices

that are done with expectation of fruit are opposed to knowledge of

Brahman which has only moksha as the result. Hence the meditaion on

Brahman cannot be subsidiary to sacrificial acts

 

 

 

suthra-10-asArvathrikee-3-3-10

 

 

 

The declaraion is not universal.

 

 

 

In the sentence 'what he does with knowledge becomes more

powerful'(Chan.1-1-10) is not applicable to all meditations but only to

that os udhgeetha and connected with the injunction 'let him meditate on

the udhgeetha' (Chan.1-1-1) The phase whatever he does with knowledge

refers only to udhgEetha and not action in general so as to include the

act of sacrifice

 

suthra-11-vibhAgah sathavath-3-3-11

 

 

 

There is division as in the case of hundred.

 

 

 

In the fifth suthra it is said that knowledge and works go together as

denoted by 'tham vidhyAkarmaNee samanvArabhEthe,he is followed by

knowledge and works.' This suthra refutes the view.

 

 

 

The results of vidhya and karma are different and they are clubbed

together in the sense that kniowledge brings its own result and so does

the works. Iis analageous to the statement 'kshethra rathna vikryiNam

sathadhvayam anvEthi, the man selling land and a gem got two hundred

which actually means that he got hundred for the land and hundred for

the gem.

 

 

 

suthra12-aDhyayanamAthravathah-3-4-12

 

 

 

It refers to him who has merely made verbal sudy of the vedas.

 

 

 

This suthra is in refutation of the sixth where it wa argued that works

are prescribed to one who has learnt the vedas. The text quoted 'vEdham

aDheethya----kutumbou suche dhese svAdhyAyanam aDheeyAnah, ( Cha.8-15-1)

which means that after learning the vedas one should study what he has

learnt while being in the family doing the works prescribed by the

vedas, apply only to one who has simply learnt the text of the vedas and

not to one who has cognised the meaning.The one who has mastered the

vedas becomes engaged in the worlks if he is desorous of the fruits of

karma or if he wishes for release, applies himself to the study of the

upanishads.Moreover mere learning of the meaning does not constitute the

knowledge of the upanishads in the same way as performing the sacrifices

does not mean that one has understood the real nature of them.Hence

vidhya which consists in devout meditation resuting in the highest

purushArTha, is entirely different from the mere knowledge of Brahman

through the study of vedas.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-13-nAvisEshAth-3-4-13

 

 

 

No; because thereis no restriction.

 

 

 

This suthra refutes what is said in the seventh, that work is prescribed

(niyamAth) to the one with knowledge.The text quoted 'kurvannEvEha

karmANi jijeevishEth satham samAh,(Isa.2) doing the works he lives for

hundred years,' does not restrict the man of knowledge to performance of

sacrificial acts because it does not refer to any particular work and

may be taken to mean a work which is subsidiary to knowledge.The line in

Gita 'karmaNaiva hi samsiddhim AsThithA janakAdhayah, Janaka and others

attained perfection through work only ,'means that for the knower of

the self, knowledge and work continue till the end of life.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-14-sthuthayE anumathirvA-3-4-14

 

 

 

Or permission is given for the sake of glorification.

 

 

 

The upanishad begins with 'IsAvasyam idham sarvam,(Isa-1) all this is

pervaded by the Lord,' which refers to knowledge of Brahman and the

subsequent passage 'kurvannEvEha karmANi,'etc is by way of giving

permission to do all work in glorification of knowledge which is shown

in the next sentence 'Evam thvayi nAnyaTHA ithah asthi na karma lipyathE

narE,thus in no other way can you be free from the taint of evil deeds.

This means, a man who is not completely absorbed in Athman has no other

alternative than engaging himself in meritorious activities in order not

to be tainted by evil. Therefore knowledge is not subsidiary to work.

 

 

 

suthra-15-kAmakArENa chaike-3-4-15

 

 

 

In some according to wish.

 

 

 

In some sAkhAs we find that the life of the householder can be given up

by one who possesses Brahman knowledge.For instance the text 'kim

prajaya karishyamOyEshAm no ayam Athma ayam Lokah,(Brhd.4-4-22) what

shall we do with the offspring ,we, to whom the is world is the self,'

shows that knowledge is not subsidiary to works because in such case

voluntary renunciation would not have been possible.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-16- upamardham cha-3-4-16

 

 

 

And destruction.

 

 

 

There is vedantha text which explicitly states the destruction of all

work by knowledge of Brahman. In the passage 'bhidhyathE

hrdhayagranTHih, cchidhyathE sarva samsayAh, kseeyanthE asya karmAni

thasmin dhrshtE parAvarE,(Mund.II-2-9) all his knots of the heart are

broken, all his doubts are cut asunder, all his karma is destroyed when

he has seen the high and low(Brahman) This would not be possible if

knowledge is subsidiary to works.

 

 

 

 

 

syuthra-17-oorDHva rEthassu cha sabdhE hi-

 

3-4-17

 

 

 

Scripture declares that knowledge belongs to celebates.

 

 

 

Those in the fourth asrama of sannyasa need not perform agnihothra and

other rites. This is stated in the scripture as 'ye chEmE araNyEsraddhA

thapa ithyupAsathe, (Chan.5-10-1 )those in the forest(meaning

sannyasins) practise penance with faith.And 'EnamEva pravrAjinah lOkam

icchanthah pravrajanthi,wishing for the Brahman only the sannyasins

renounce the world.' The text relating to the life long performance of

works 'yAvajjeevam agnihOthram juhOthi' refers only to those who have

not renounced the world.

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-18-parAmarsam jaiminih achOdhanAth cha apavadhathi hi-3-4-18

 

 

 

It is only a reference because of a the absence of injunction according

to Jaimini.

 

 

 

There is no injunction regarding celebacy, is the opinion of Jaimini,

the mimAmsAchArya.The text 'thrayO dharmaskanDhAh, there are three

stages of life as basis of dharma, do not contain any injunction, but

only laudatory to the meditation on Brahman as it ends with

'brahmasamsThah amrthathvam Ethi,' the declaration that one who knows

Brahman attains immortality.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-19-anushTEyam bAdharAyaNahsAmyasruthEh-3-4-19

 

 

 

They are to be practised ,thinks Badhrayana,for the scripture refers

equallty to all stages of life.

 

 

 

According to Badarayana, all the stages of life including sannyasa are

of equal importance.In the passage 'thrayO dharmaskanDHAh yajnO

adhyayanam dhAnam ithi praTHamah,thapa Eva dvitheeyObrahmacharyAchArya

kulavAsee thrtheeyah,(Chan.2-23-1)three are the branches of religeous

duty,sacrifice,studyand gifts are the first, austerity alone is the

second, and the celebate student of sacred knowledge who lives in the

house of his guru all his life isthe third, which ends as 'brahmasamsTHO

amrthathvam EThi, he who is established in Brahman attains immortality,

all the traits mentioned, namely sacrifice, charity,study , austerity

and celebacy cannot be said to belong to the householder only. While

sacrifice, study and gifts relate to the householder,austerity denotes

the stages of vAnaprastha and sannyasa. And the sentence 'who is

established in Brahman attains immortality' refers to all stages of life

as it is possible to be a brahmasamsTha in any stage.What the text means

is that those who are desirous of wordly results, being devoid of the

knowledge of Brahman perform the religious rites for the fulfilment of

their desires but one who does them while being established in Brahman

attains immortality. The text 'yE chEmE araNyE sraddhA thapa

ithupAsathE,(Chan.5-10-1) and those who in the forest ,practise penance

with faith,'as it mentions the path of light for them, shows that the

sannyasa is recognised by the scripture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

suthra-20-viDHirvA DHAraNavath-3-4-20

 

 

 

 

 

Or an injunction as in the case of carrying.

 

 

 

The text quoted above about the three stages of life is to be accepted

as an injunction as it is not established by any otheremeans.This is

similar to the statement 'aDHasthAth samiDHam DHArayan anudhravEth,

carrying the figsticks below the ladle he runs,' relating to agnihOthra

where the carrying of figsticks in that manner is taken as an injunction

as it has not been declared anywhere else. So the injunction

'yAvajjeevam agnihOthram juhOthi,' applies only to those who are not

free from attachment. The conclusuion is that as the knowledge of

Brahman is enjoined for the sannyasins it is not subsidiary to

sacrificial activities but is in itself a purushAQrTHa.This is the end

of purusharTHADHikaraNam.