Part 5-Experiencing Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja's Divine Works

[Guest guest]

==========================================================================

Part 5 - Experiencing Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja's Divine Works

==========================================================================

In the context of the verse " Tat Tvam Asi " in the Sat Vidyaa of Chaandokya

Upanishad, the discussion continues in Vedaartha Sangraha.

 

The Advaita calls the Brahman as " Nirvisesham " meaning devoid of all

characteristics/attributes. On the contrary, the Veda identifies the reality

of Brahman as " Satyam Jgnyaanam Anantam " meaning the Brahman is having its

identifying " Swaroopa Niroopaka Dharmas " characteristics, namely unchanging,

sentient and infinite natures. The Advaita in order to overcome this

contradiction argues that " Satyam Jgnyaanam Anantam " does not explain the

Brahman as told above as " Savisesham " (with characteristics/attributes) but

declares Brahman by negating that Brahman is changing, insentient and finite.

According to Advaita, " Satyam " says, " Brahman is not a changing entity " ,

" Jgnyaanam " says that " Brahman is not insentient entity " , and " Anantam " says,

" Brahman is not finite entity " . Therefore according to Advaita, even " Satyam

Jgnyaanam Anantam " declares the Brahman as " Nirvisesham " . They quote the Veda

" Nishkalam Nishkriyam Nirgunam Niranjanam " and argue that it declares Brahman

as " devoid of body, actions, characteristics " and " aloof not impure " . In the

same ground as " Satyam Jgnyaanam Anantam " , they explain " Vignyaanam Anantam "

of the Veda.

 

At this level of debate, we need to understand that the Upanishad statements

are broadly classifiable into two types namely:

1. kAraNa Vaakya

2. Chodaka Vaakya

The kAraNa Vaakyas are those declarative statements of the Vedanta which state

that the Brahman is the cause of the universe

The Chodaka Vaakyas are those declarative statements of the Vedanta which

state the nature of Brahman who is characterised by qualities/attributes thus

identifying the Brahman as Purushotthaman.

 

" Sat Eva Somya Edamagre Aasit " , " Eko ha vai NaaraayaNa Aasit " are examples for

kAraNa Vaakyaas.

 

" Satyam Jgnyaanam Anantam " , " Aanandam Brahma " are examples for Chodaka

Vaakayaas.

 

If we accept the argument of Advaita that all the Chodaka Vaakyaas intends

only to negate the qualities/attributes, then a doubt arises which is as

follows. According to Advaita, all the Chodaka Vaakaas intends to tell

" Brahman is not so " - therefore all the Chodaka Vaakyaas simply mean " Brahman "

(as opposite to being possessing the qualities) then, only one such Vaakya is

sufficient and all other Chodaka Vaakyaas are meaningless. Why there are so

many Chodaka Vaakayaas? Why should the Veda repeat the same thing? The

Advaita, to overcome this argues that " Even though all Chodaka Vaakyaas convey

the same meaning, each one of them is meaningful as each one quotes different

characteristics and then negates that the Brahman is not of that nature " .

Further according to Advaita, an entity cannot have different attributes.

 

Bhagavat Ramanuja in his Vedaartha Sangraha refutes the above manner in which

Advaita interprets the Chodaka Vaakyaas as follows in a detailed manner,

shaking the basic concepts postulated in Advaita itself.

 

" Naithadevam; Ekavignyaanena sarva vignyaana prathignyaanam, sarvasya

mithhyaatve sarvasya Jgnyaathavyasyaabhaavaath na sethsyati,

satya-mithyaathvayoho ekathaa prasakthirvaa, api tu, eka vignyaanena sarva

vignyaana pratignyaa sarvasya thadaathmakathvenaiva satyathve sidhyathi "

 

The Sat Vidhya of Chaandokya Upanishad has an avowal which is " by knowing the

reality of one entity (cause which is the upAdAna kAraNam), everything

(effects-kAryam) becomes to be known " . This is what " Eka Vignyaanena Sarva

Vignyaanam " conveys. The Upanishad has declared that " Sat " is that cause and

the universe composed of manifold chit and achit entities are the effects. The

Upanishad intends to only convey that by knowing the Brahman (Sat) everything

is known.

 

" Utha tamaadesam apraakshya: yenaasrutam srutham bhavathi amatham matham

avignyaatham vignyaatham " - " Do you know that " Adesa " , by knowing which all

things which were not heard becomes heard (known), all that which were not

contemplated becomes contemplated and all unknown becomes known? "

 

Bhagavat Ramanuja argues that " if Eka Vignyaanena Sarva Vignyaanam is taken to

mean that only Brahman is reality and nothing other than Brahman is reality,

then that meaning can only be prejudice of Advaita and cannot be the purport

of the Upanishad. The Advaita's own interpretation is possible if and only if

it was " Eka Vignyaanena Sarva-ABHAVAAVA Vignyaanam " - meaning, " knowing the

reality of one entity leads to the knowledge of unreality (falsehood) of

everything " . But it is only " Eka Vignyaanena Sarva Vignyaanam " ! The word

" Sarva " means " Everything " . Is it possible in anyway to interpret this word

" Sarva " as " Sarva-abhaava " meaning " Everything is unreal " ? If it is possible

for Advaita, then it is only illogical and against the Upanishad.

 

As the Advaita argues that " Only the Brahman is reality and all other things

other than that Brahman which appears to be " reality " are actually illusions;

all of them just appears to be the same Brahman which alone has existence " is

the meaning of " Eka Vignyaanena... " , Bhagavat Ramanuja criticises that

argument and refutes it as follows: " If this counter-argument of Advaita is to

be admitted, then as per Advaita, both Brahman and Universe are of same

nature, the Advaita itself has to accept either " Brahman is reality and also

universe is reality " OR " universe is unreal and Brahman is also unreal " .

Therefore, such a counter-argument of Advaita proves troublesome for Advaita

itself.

 

Advaita argues in another way now: Just in the case where a particular student

is pointed out as " the intelligent " , all the other students in that class

automatically becomes to be known as " without intelligence " . Similarly where

the Vedanta declares the Brahman as " the existent " , all other entities becomes

to be known automatically as " non-existent " . If this is another

counter-argument of Advaita in interpreting and establishing their own idea

regarding " Eka Vignyaanena... " , then Bhagavat Ramanuja refutes and rejects

this argument again as illogical and against the Veda. This argument of

Advaita directly contradicts the " Sarva Vignyaanam " meaning " knowledge about

everything " . To admit the argument of Advaita, we have to do an intrusion by

adding a word " Mithya " (meaning illusion/falsehood) which is not at all

present in the Veda. Only if such a " intrusion " is done, the Advaita's

viewpoint that " Everything else other than the Brahman is illusion " can be

admitted. This cannot be done at all and it is totally inadmissible to add the

word " Mithya " which is not in anyway related to the Upanishad Vaakyaas. The

Upanishad has stated two knowledge - one knowledge is about the reality of

Brahman and the other is about the reality of universe and also clearly stated

that both the knowledge are same in the aspect of Brahman being the upAdAna

kAraNam of the Universe (all chit and achit entities). That is the Brahman who

has the subtle (Sukshama) Chit and Achit entities as his Body (before

creation) has expanded (stUla) Chit and Achit entites as his Body (created

universe). But as per Advaita, if we admit their argument, then according to

them one of the knowledge is about " reality " and the other is about the

" unreality " . The " Eka Vignyaanena... " therefore gets clearly contradicted as

" reality " and " unreality " cannot be equated. The Upanishad on the other hand

has proved Visistadvaita Shree Vaishnava philosophy by " Yatha Somya " and

without leaving room to any doubt has established Visistasya Advaitam and

Visistayoho Advaitam. The explanation follows: The Upanishad has to be very

carefully studied. It says that before the creation of this universe, only

" Sat " was existing. It says that nothing else was there. The " Sat " wished to

become many that is " Sat " wished to create the universe (innumerable chit and

achit entities) from itself. Then it wished again to create " Tejas " etc., and

enter into them as " Antaryaami-Antaraatma " (soul) and give name, form etc., to

them. The " Sat " did as it wished. From this it is very clear that the Brahman

is the one entity and the universe has that Brahman as its " Aatma " (soul) -

because the Brahman is inside the universe, supporting, controlling and owning

the universe for its purpose. The universe is the inseparable attribute

(aprutak-sidha viseshanam), mode (prakAram), body (sareeram/roopam) of

Brahman. Therefore the knowledge of Brahman automatically leads to the

knowledge of the universe (all chit and achit entities) which has the same

Brahman as its " Aatma " (soul). The " Eka Vignyaanena Sarva Vignyaanam " thus

clearly establishes only the Visistadvaita Shree Vaishnava philosophy. The

Upanishad has shattered the concept of " Nirvisesham " to pieces.

 

Bhagavat Ramanuja extraordinarily presents the meaning of the " Aadesa " sabda

(word) used in the Sat Vidya of Chaandokya Upanishad. The purport of

Uddaalaka's question is thus explained after which follows the explanation of

the entire Sat Vidya verses which concludes with " Tat Tvam Asi " explanation.

The reader has to read the original words of Bhagavat Ramanuja in this portion

of Vedaartha Sangraha - only then, he/she can understand the unparalleled and

unsurpassed divinity and immeasurable wisdom of our Bhagavat Ramanuja who is

greater than my life to me. In fact, even this is just a sample for his

greatness, which is infinite. Every single letter in the works of our greatest

Aacharya stands as proof for this.

 

" Ayamarhta: Swethakethum Pratyaaha - " SthabdhOsi; utha tham AADESAM

apraakshya: ithi; - Paripoornam iva lakshyase | taanaachaaryaan prathi

tamapyaadesam prushtavaanasi ? ithi | Aadisyathe AnEna Ithi Aadesa: | Aadesa:

Prasaasanam; " Ethasya Vaa Aksharasya prasaasane Gaargi Sooryachandramasow

vidhrutow tishtatha: ithyaadibhiraykaarthyaath | thathaa cha Maanavam vacha:

" Prasaasitaaram sarveshaam " ithiyaadi | Athraapi ekameva ithi

jagathupaadaanataam prthipaadya Adviteeya padena

adhishtaatrantharanivaaranaath asyaiva adhishtatrutvamapi prathipaadyane |

Atha: " Tam prasaasitaaram jagadupaadaanabhUthamapi prushtavaanasi? Yena

sruthena mathena vignyaanena asrutam amatham avignyaatham srutham matham

vignyaatham bhavathi " ithyuktham isyaath | " nikila jagadudaya vibhava layaadi

kaaraNa BhUtham Sarvagnyatva - Satyakaamathva - Satyasankalpathvaadyaparimitha

udaara GuNa Saagaram kim Brahma tvayaa srutham? " ithi Haardo Bhaava: | "

 

The Upanishad verses get explained as follows: - Udaalaka addressed his son on

seeing him and questioned him - " O! Swethaketho! You look as if you have

learnt everything! Have you learnt that " Aadesa " from your preceptors? "

 

What is the meaning of the term " Aadesa " ? Its meaning is given as per the

lexicons and linguistic/grammatical rules of Sanskrit as " Aadisyathe AnEna

Ithi Aadesa: " . The Sanskrit term " Aadesa " originates from prefix " Aa " joining

with the root of verb " Disch " . (Please note that the pronunciations and their

letter-representations in English are little varied; knowledge in Sanskrit

language easily helps in comprehending these concepts). This root of verb has

the meaning " to control " (Niyamanam). As the Brahman controls the entire

universe, the Brahman is denoted by the word " Aadesa: " - This is a very

important point to note here. Only if the meaning of " Aadesa " term is

ascertained here, the purport of the Bruhadaranyaka Upanishad's verses

" Ethasya Vaa Aksharasya prasaasane Gaargi Sooryachandramasow vidhrutow

tishtatha: " and the words of Manu (in Manu Smruthi) who explained the verses

as " Prasaasitaaram sarveshaam " can be comprehended accurately. " Ethasya Vaa

Aksharasya prasaasane Gaargi Sooryachandramasow vidhrutow tishtatha: " states

that " The heavenly bodies like sun, moon etc., are supported by the command of

Brahman " (Brahman is the controller of everything). The " Prasaasitaaram

sarveshaam " of Manu Smruthi explains the same purport of the Upanishad as

" Everything/Everyone is controlled by Brahman " . The meaning of the term

" Prasaasane " (in Bruhadaaranyaka Upanishad verse) and that of the term

" Prasaasitha " (in Manu Smruthi verse) is the same for the term " Aadesa " in

Chaandokya Upanishad's Sat Vidya. In the terms " Prasaasane " and " Prasaasitha " ,

the prefix is " Pra " but the root with which it joins is the same as it is in

" Aadesa " . The meaning here is therefore same. Therefore " Aadesa: " denotes

" Brahman " who controls the entire universe (all chit and achit entities).

 

Further to ascertain this meaning of the term " Aadesa: " , the Upanishad is

carefully studied. The Upanishad has clearly stated that " Ekameva Adveeteeyam "

This " Eva " in the terms " Ekameva " stresses that the Brahman is the only

material cause of the universe. Further the term " Adveeteeyam " states clearly

that no one other than Purushotthama: (Brahman) controls the entire universe.

Therefore the Upanishad declares that " controlling the entire universe " is the

unique characteristic of Brahman by using the term " Aadesa: " to denote Brahman

- Shreeman NarayaNa: who is Pundareekaaksha:. I used the term Pundareekaaksha:

(Brahman has divine lotus-like beautiful eyes which are celebrated not only by

this Upanishad but also by all smurthis, itihaasaas, puranas and aagamaas)

specifically just to make it very clear that the Vedanta's philosophy is

Visistadvaita Shree Vaishnavam and only Visistadvaita Shree Vaishnavam. (Refer

" Antas TathDharmOpadesath " Brahma Sutra here for an interesting and

establishing aspect).

 

The verses of the Upanishad " Yenaasrutam Srutam Bhavathi... " etc., and the

example of clay quoted by the Upanishad beyond doubt establishes that the

Brahman is the material cause (upAdAna kAraNam) of the universe. Here an

important aspect has to be noted. Just the mere existence of clay (cause) is

not enough for imparting the knowledge of things made of clay like pot

(effect). Therefore the term " Yena " here has to be understood as " By knowing

which " . This enlightens us by imparting knowledge about the fact that Brahman

is absolutely with infinite auspicious/divine characteristics/attributes that

are peerless. " Uthatam Aadesam Apraakshaya: " is summarised as follows:

Udaalaka asked his son Swethakethu " Have you known the Brahman who is having

absolutely infinite auspicious/divine attributes like omniscience

(sarvagnyatvam), omnipotence (sarvasakthitvam) and omnipresence

(sarvavyaapakatvam) and is the only material cause of the universe? "

 

==========================================================================

To be continued...

==========================================================================

Thanks & Regards

M.S.HARI Ramanuja Daasan.

 

 

 

 

 

__________________

Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1