Guest guest Posted October 31, 2006 Report Share Posted October 31, 2006 - Saroja Ramanujam saranagathi-owner Monday, October 30, 2006 8:31 PM Virodhaparihara-Q.9 9.sEshathva avaDHAraNAth sareerAthmasiddhEh ithi vAchOyukthih anupapannA How can the sarira-sariribhAva explained in terms of seshathva? Ramanuja defines sarira as a substance which a sentient soul completely supports, aadhara-aadheya bhava, and controls, niyantha-niyaamya bhava for serving its own purpose and which is subordinate to the sentient soul, sesha--seshi bhava.. The world of cit and acit form the sarira of Brahman because they are supported, controlled and used by Brahman. The entry of Brahman into the cit and the acit in order to diversify them into name and form is supported by the sruti 'tadhaikshatha bahusyaam prajaayeya' Hence they exist in an inseparable relation with Brahman similar to the body and soul. This is what is referred to here as 'seshathva avaDhArNAth sarirAthma siddhi' The appropriateness of sarira-sariribhAva resulting from seshathva is establshed by Desika thus: vyavacchEdhAdhayOgasya sareerAthmathvamishyathE anyayOgavyavachEdhah nirvEdhAdhEsthu kAraNam In the moolamanthra 'a' stands for the Lord and 'u' is explained as none else while 'm' refers to the jiva. So the praNava of the moolamanthra indicates that the jiva is sesha to the Lord and to no one else. Thus the the meaning of 'u'kAra and 'm'akAra imply a dative case ending to 'a'kAra, that is, 'a' denoting Narayana, the word 'for' is affixed to it giving the meaning that the individual soul is sesha only to Narayana. The seshathva can be explained in two ways, namely, through ayOgavyavacchEdha and through anyayOgavyavacchEdha.What the 'a'kAra of the praNava denotes is the seshathva in the former sense,which is seshathva for no reason but natural one. Being such it has to be eternal. anyayOgavyavacchEdha on the other hand is what is denoted by the 'u'kAra o the praNava, that is seshathva to no one else.The doubt arises on account of misconception of one with the other. The sarira-sariri bhAva through seshathva is questioned for the following reason. All things of a person may belong to another but his sarira cannot be that of another.If it is argued that the sole criterion of sarira being that it cannot belong to another it will apply even in the case of the wife of a person, this is not so because even the wife or his own sarira can be made sesha to others but it does not mean that it has become the sarira of another. So seshathva cannot imply sarirathva. This confusion, says Desika is due to the inability to distinguish between ayOgavyavacchEdha and anyayOgavyavacchEdha.Sarira is something which never ceses to belong to the sariri and hence the sentient and the insentient which can never be said not to belong to the Lord through ayOga vyavacchEdha, must be His sarira. anyayOgavyavacchEdha is that the jiva is not sesha to any one else except the Lord which is implied through the 'u'kAra. This knowledge comes to the jiva through nirvEdha,that is, the sorrow born out of being slave to others, like the indhriyas so long, and he attempts to change this state of affairs through the means of prapatthi denoted by 'namah' in the moolamanthra.Thus the 'a'kAra of the praNava denotes sarira-sariri bhAva through aYogavyavacchEdha and the 'u'kAra implies the regret through the knowlege of anyayOgavyavacchEdha impelling the jiva to resort to upAya, the means of salvation denoted by the word 'namah.' May god bless you, Dr. Saroja Ramanujam, M.A., Ph.D, Siromani in sanskrit. Everyone is raving about the all-new Mail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.