The following paragraphs are explaining the Sat Vidya verses in detail
-
therefore the concepts are NOT repeated but are elaborated. The level
of
argument and counter-argument is getting higher.
The Upanishad has declared that the Brahman is the upAdAna kAraNam (material
cause) (and the nimiththa kAraNam (efficient/instrumental cause)) of
the
universe. Because of getting knowledge regarding Brahman, how is that
everything becomes to be known? This question is answered with explanation.
In
the world, we find that the cause (kAraNam) and the effect (kAryam)
are
different from one another. For example, potter is the efficient cause
and
clay is the material cause in making a pot. The pot is the effect.
Here, the
cause and the effect are different from one another. But the Sruthi
states
that in the creation of the universe, the cause and the effect are
one and the
same. A question arises here in this context - "If cause and effect
are one
then, are not the natures of the universe like impurities, being ephemeral
etc
becomes applicable to Brahman? Bhagavath Ramanuja answers this question
as
follows: Before creation, all the chit and achit entities were the
body of
Brahman in their subtle form (sUkshma-avastha). This means that all
the chit
and achit entities were not like as of date with form, name, species
identification etc. Brahman thus having the subtle chit and achit entities
is
the cause. The Brahman wished and created the universe by giving expanded
(sthUla-avastha) form (form, name, identification etc) to all chit
and achit
entities and entered into them as "Antaryaami-Antaraatma" and is having
all
the chit and achit entities as its body. The same Brahman having the
expanded
universe as his body is the effect. Therefore the cause and effect
are the
Brahman. As the universe is the body/mode/attribute
(Sareeram/Prakaaram/Apratuk-Siddha-Viseshanam) of the Brahman, the
Brahman who
is the soul is untouched by the impurities and natures of the universe.
Therefore the knowledge about Brahman, leads to the knowledge of everything
automatically.
Without knowing this, Swethaketu asked his Father "Kathannu Bhagavassa
Aadesa?" "How is that "Aadesa" revered Sir?" The basis of his question
is "The
natures of entities in the universe are manifold. How is that the knowledge
of
that one "Aadesa" leads to the knowledge of everything?" Bhagavath
Ramanuja
explains this very clearly so that the verse "Tat Tvam Asi" can be
taken up
for discussion.
The Brahman with subtle (sUkshma) chit and achit tatvas as his
body/mode/attribute (Sareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam-Dharmam) gets the
expanded
(sthUla) chit and achit tatvas as his body/mode/attribute
(Sareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam-Dharmam). Therefore the Brahman is the
upAdAna
kAraNam - material cause of the universe. As the Brahman wishes (Sankalpam)
and creates the universe as told above, he is the nimiththa kAraNam
-
efficient cause. As the Brahman is having infinite and divine powers
which are
extraordinary and beyond the reach of our sense organs, he needs no
other
accessories (Sahakaari) in this creation. The sUkshma and sthUla modes
of all
the chit and achit entities are only for the body (Roopam) of the Brahman.
The
reality-substance-nature (Swroopam) of Brahman therefore is called
"Avikaari
Swaroopam, Swaamsena Avasthitam" meaning "unchanging with infinite
divine-auspicious qualities and untouched by all impurities and is
in its own
absoulte pure nature". Here is that the one must carefully and clearly
understand that "Dharmam" is different from "Dharmi". "Viseshanam"
is
different from "Viseshyam". "Amsam" is different from "Amsi". "Prakaaram"
is
different from "Prakaari". "Sareeram" is different from "Sareere(Aatma)".
But
on the same time, it is to be again carefully and clearly understood
that
"Dharmaam-Dharmi", "Viseshanam-Viseshyam", "Amsam-Amsi", "Prakaaram-Prakaari",
"Roopam-Swaroopam", "Sareeram-Sarreere(Aatma)" are inseparably related
such
that the reality(substance), continuance of existence and actions of
"Dharmam/Viseshanam/Amsam/Roopam/Sareeram" are not independent but
absolutely
dependant on the "Dharmi/Viseshyam/Amsi/Prakaari/Swaroopam/Sareere(Aatma).
The
explanation follows:
"Dharmam" is a characteristic. "Dharmi" is that which possesses the
characteristic.
"Viseshanam" is attribute. "Viseshyam" is that which is attributed
by the
attribute.
"Amsam" is especial appearance. "Amsi" is that which has the especial
appearance.
"Prakaaram" is mode. "Prakaari" is that which has the mode.
"Sareeram" is body. "Sareere" is that which has body.
The terms "Dharmam", "Viseshanam", "Gunam", "Amsam", "Prakaaram" are
almost
synonymous terms. The terms "Dharmi", "Viseshyam", Amsi", "Prakaari"
are
almost synonymous terms.
The Brahman by its Swaroopam (reality-substance) is the eternal support
(Aadhaara), control (Niyaamaka) and owner (Seshi) of all Chit and Achit
entities and has all the chit and achit entities for his purpose of
sport
(leela) and enjoyment (bhoga). All the Chit and Achit entities are
eternally
and inseparably supported (Aadeyam), controlled (Niyaamyam) and owned
(Sesham)
by the Brahman and exist for the purpose of Brahman. Therefore, the
Brahman is
the "Aatma" of all chit and achit entites and all the chit and achit
entities
are the body (Sareeram) of Brahman. The "Aatma" is called "Sareere".
The
Sareeram is Apratak-Siddha Viseshanam of the Sareere. The Sareere is
the
Viseshyam.
When we see pot, flowerpot, vessels and such things made out of clay,
we think
that they are all different entities. But when we come to know about
clay
which is the material cause of all these things, then we understand
that the
pot etc., are only different forms/modes of clay. In similar manner,
though
the chit and achit entities are manifold, when we understand that Brahman
is
the cause of all these entities and all these are forms/modes of Brahman,
then
everything becomes to be known. It is to be noted here that Brahman
is not
Chit and Achit but Chit and Achit are modes/forms of Brahman. Therefore
the
Brahman is different from all chit and achits as Brahman is the
Viseshyam/Prakaaree/Sareere and all the chit and achit entities are
Viseshanam/Prakaaram/Sareeram of Brahman.
"Sat Eva Somya Edam Agre Aasit Ekameva Adveetheeyam" therefore confirms
that
the Brahman is the only upAdAna kAraNam and nimiththa kAraNam. The
sUksham
chit-achit visishta Brahman is called as "Sat". "idam" in "idam Agre"
talks
about the sthUla chit-achit visistha Brahman.
Let us examine the meaning of the term "Visistadvaita". It is derived
by two
ways - "Visistasya Advaitam - Visistadvaitam" and "Visistayoho Advaitam
-
Visistadvaitam".
"Visistasya Advaitam" means - The Brahman qualified by all chit and
achit
entities as his Saareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam (body/mode/attribute)
is
without a second entity meaning unparalleled and unsurpassed. This
brings out
the ultimate supremacy of Shreeman Narayana Para Brahman who is Akila
Heya
Pratyaneeka: and Ananta Kalyaana Gunaakara:
"Visistayoho Advaitam" means - The Brahman having the subtle (sukshma)
chit
and achit entities as his Saareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam (body/mode/attribute)
before creation is the same Brahman having the expanded (stUla) chit
and achit
entities as his Saareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam (body/mode/attribute)
after
creation. This brings out the fact that Shreeman Narayana Para Brahman
is the
only material cause and efficient cause of the universe.
Shreeman Nigamaantha Maha Desika defines the same as "Asesha Chit-Achit
Prakaaram Brahmaikameva Tatvam". This is the most precise definition
of our
Siddhaantham.
The Brahman is the UpAdAna kAraNam and the Nimitha kAraNam for all chit
and
achit entities. This does NOT mean that his "Swaroopam" gets changed
to Chit
and Achit. But only his "Roopam" (Sareeram) which was subtle
(sUkshma) chit,
achits becomes expanded (stUla) chit, achits ie., the chit achits
gets
form,name etc.,. Therefore, the Brahman is "Satyam-Ignyaanam-Anantam"
only,
even though the Brahman is the UpAdAna kAraNam. The changes in
his "Roopam"
does not in any way contradict "Satyam-Ignyaanam-Anantam". The
same is the
case with his divine "Roopam" (divya mangala vigraham) also which
changes as
per his wish in various avataaras. The Brahman who had subtle
chit and achit
as his "Roopam/Sareeram" is the same Brahman who is having expanded
chit and
achit as his "Roopam/Sareeram". Therefore the Brahman is UpAdAna kAraNam
(Visistayoho Advaitam Visistadvaitam). As the Brahman wished
and created the
universe, the same Brahman is the "Nimitha kAraNam". The Brahman
with all the
chit and achit tatvas as his body and who is with infinite divine
attributes
and untouched by all impurities is unparalleled and unsurpassed
(Visistasya
Advaitam Visistadvaitam). ""Satyam-Ignyaanam-Anantam" states the nature
(swaroopa) of Brahman as unchanging, sentient infinite is the nature
of
Brahman. The "Satyam" term makes it clear that the Brahman is different
form
Achit. The "Ignyaanam" term makes it clear that the Brahman is different
from
Baddha Jeevaatmans. The "Ananta" term makes it clear that the Brahman
is
different from the Muktha and Nitya Jeevaatmans. Therefore the Brahman
is
"Purushothama:" Shreeman Narayananan. The sruthi "Anena Jeeveenaatmana
Anupravisya Naama RUpe Vaakaravaani" confirms the Sareera-Aatma Bhaavam
between the universe and the Brahman.
"Tat Ikshata: Bahusyaam Prajaayethi" The Brahman denoted by "Aadesa"
term by
his characteristic of controlling the entire universe thought in his
mind "Tat
Ikshata:" What was thought by the Brahman? "Bahusyaam Prajaayethi"
The Brahman
thought that "I become many".
To summarise, the Brahman having sUkshma chit-achit entities as his
body is
the upAdAnam and the same Brahman having sthUla chit-achit entities
as his
body is the upAdeyam. "Ekameva" confirms that the Brahman (Sat) is
the upAdAna
kAraNam and "Adveeteeyam" confirms that the Brahman (Sat) is the nimiththa
kAraNam. Up to this, it was explained that the Brahman who is Purushotthama:
Shreeman Narayana: Pundareekaksha: is the only cause of the universe.
Before taking up the ascertaining the meaning of the verse "Tat Tvam
Asi",
Shree Bhagavath Ramanuja explains the "Naama Roopa VyaakaraNa" as mentioned
in
the Upanishad as follows. I have added the outline of on
"AarambhanaadhikaraNam" for better understanding and ascertaining that
Advaita's interpretation in this context is not warranted by Brahma
Sutra
itself. I request the reader to very carefully follow the points.
"Hantaahamimaa: tisro devathaa: anena jeeveenaathmanaanupravishya naama
roope
vyaakaravaani"
As told earlier regarding "Samashti Srushti" and "Vyashti Srushti",
the
"Vyashti Srushti" is told here. The Brahman by its second wish, created
the
representative divinities of "Prakruthi, Tejas & Ap", entered into
them by
having the Jeevaatman as his body and gave names and forms to them.
"Anena
Jeeveenaatmanaa" makes it clear that the Jeevaatman has the Brahman
as its
"Aatma". "Nama Roope Vyaakaravaani" makes it clear that the expanded
form of
the chit and achit entities is the form (sareeram) of Brahman. At this
point,
one needs to know a very important truth: When a demi-god or a human
being or
a animal or a tree is alive (meaning - with jeevaatman), we denote
them by
their respective names like "Indra" or "Devadatha" or "Lion" or "Neem"
respectively. When it is dead, we denote "them" as "corpse" (dead body)
or
wooden-log. The corpse, wooden-log etc are Achit composed of the five
elements. If there is nothing in them as "Aatma" after the departure
of
Jeevaatman, then even such denoting (as corpse, wooden-log etc.,) is
not
possible. This establishes that an "Aatma" is inside even after the
departure
of Jeevaatman after death. One has to now understand that the entry
of
Jeevaatman having Brahman as its "Aatma" into various bodies with name,
form
etc., is in "Vyashti Srushti" which is as per the second wish of Brahman.
In
the "Samashti Srushti", which is as per the first wish of Brahman,
the Brahman
alone enters into Tejas, Ap and Annams. The Veda has therefore explained
the
"Advaarakam" and "Saddvaarakam" terms as follows: The creation of name,
forms
etc., for Tejas, Ap etc., is done by the Brahman only and is called
"Advaarakam". This is "Samashti Srushti". The same Brahman by having
the
Jeevaatman (Chit) as his body (sareeram/prakaaram/viseshanam) entered
and did
the creation of name, forms etc (as we see the universe now) and this
is
called "Saddvaarakam".
Bhagavath Ramanuja here gives an important explanation. Let us first
read the
greatest Aacharya's own words before reading my words.
"Ethaduktam Bhavathi - Jeevaatma Thu Brahmana: Sareerathayaa Prakaaratvaath
Brahmaathmaka: "Yasya Aatma Sareeram" Ithi Sruthiyantharaath Evam Bhoothasya
Jeevasya Sareerathayaa Prakaara Bhoothaani Deva Manushyaadhi Samsthaanaani
Vasthuuni Ithi Brahmaathmakaani Thaani Sarvaani Ahta: Devo Manushya:
Yaksho
Raakhasa: Pasu: Mruga: Pakshii Vruksho Lathaa Kaashtam Silaa Trunam
Ghata:
Pata: Ithyaadayassarve Prakruthi Prathyayayogena Abhidhaayakathayaa
Prasiddhaa: Sabdaa: Loke Thatthatdravyavaachyathayaa Prateeyamaanathatthat
Samsthaanavasthu Mukena Thadabhimaani Jeeva-Thadantharyaami Paramaatma
Paryantha Samghaathasyaiva Vaachakaa: Ithi"
Now an important discussion starts. The viseshanam-prakaaram is of two
types.
The first type is that, being the body as well as viseshanam and the
second
type is being only as viseshanam but not as body. For example, if suppose
I
wear an ornament, the ornament is just viseshanam but not body of the
Jeevan
(chit). On the other hand, the body of the Jeevan is both viseshanam
as well
as "body". I think this might me bit confusing. Let me explain
1. What does "body" mean? And
2. What is meant by "soul"?
Soul is the one that eternally and inseparably supports controls and
owns the
body for its purpose. Body is the one that is eternally and inseparable
supported, controlled and owned by the soul and exists for the purpose
of the
soul. This is the definition of soul and body respectively. Generally
when I
say "body", the picture of it which comes to a person's mind is "that
which
has head, legs, hands etc.". If you take the body of a snake, it does
not
possess legs hands etc as it is found in human body. The body's physical
form
thus varies from species to species. Therefore the definition is not
in terms
of these physical natures but only the definition given above holds
well as
far as the soul-body relationship is concerned.
Bhagavat Raamaanuja in his Shree Bhaasya talks about this as "Yasya
Chetanasya
Yat Dravyam Sarvaatmanaa Swaarthe Niyantum Dhaarayitum Cha Sakyam Tat
Seshatayka Swaroopam Cha Tat Tasya Sareeram". He further explains the
same in
Vedaartha Sangraha itself as "Prutak Sidhi Anarha Aadhaara-Aadheya
Bhaava:
Niyantru Niyaamya Bhaava: Sehsi-Sesha Bhaavancha".
The Brahman supports controls and owns the entire universe eternally
and
inseparably. The entire universe is supported controlled and owned
by the
Brahman and exists for the purpose of Brahman eternally and inseparably.
Therefore the Brahman is the soul of the universe and the universe
is the body
of the Brahman.
This relation is to be eternally and inseparably present between the
soul and
the body otherwise the concept is ruled out. For example, assume that
a man is
supporting an object say "pot". Though he is the supporter and the
pot is
supported, the man cannot be the soul of the pot and the pot cannot
be called
as his body. This is because it is possible that the same pot can be
supported
by someone else (if he gives it to another person) or by something
else say
ground (if he keeps it on the ground). The inseparable eternal relation
is not
present here in this example. Similarly in an example, a man controls
his
servant by his order. Though the man is the controller and his servant
is
controlled, the man cannot be called as the soul of the servant and
the
servant cannot be called as his body. This is because it is possible
that
someone else can control the same servant. The inseparable eternal
relation is
not present in this example also. Follow another example where a man
owns a
land and gets benefits from it. Though the man is the owner of the
land and
enjoys the benefits from his land and the land is owned and exists
for the
purpose of the man, the man cannot be called as the soul of the land
and the
land cannot be called as the body of the man. The inseparable eternal
relation
is not present in this example also, as another person can own the
land if it
is sold or seized.
The body-soul relationship between the Universe and the Brahman is eternal
and
inseparable. The universe cannot exist without the Brahman and the
Brahman is
not without the universe as his body. Before creation, the Brahman
has the
subtle Chit & Achit entities as his body. He creates the universe
by giving
expanded form, name etc to them. The form, name etc are given to the
Chit
entities as per their karma, which is without a beginning. The Brahman
after
creating the universe has the expanded universe as his body. Therefore
the
Brahman is declared as the material cause and instrumental cause of
the
universe. The Brahman has infinite divine qualities and is untouched
by all
impurities of the universe as he is the soul and the universe is his
body.
This key concept of Visistaadvaita is declared by many verses in Veda
explicitly like "Ya: Aatmani Thistan Ya: Aatmaanaam Antaro Yamayati
Yam Aatmaa
Na Veda Yasya Aatma Sareeram".
Therefore the Jeevan (Chit) is the "Sareeram" (body) of Brahman and
therefore
it is aprutak-siddha-viseshanam of Brahman.
We find words like "Deva:", "Manushya:" etc., in the world denoting
respective
entities. Each word has two parts namely "Prakruti" and "Vikruthi"
as per the
grammar of which each part has its own meaning. Let us now consider
a word
"Manushyow". Here the "Prakruthi" part "Manushya" denotes the nature
of the
entity "being human" and the "Vikruthi" "ow" denotes "twin" such entities.
Like this, all words are composed of to denote various entities.
Now, the terms "Deva:", "Manushya:" etc., first denotes the form "body"
(as
seen by eyes). (The term "body" is here understood to mean "Prakaaram"
here
just for understanding - "body" is called "body" (sareeram) by the
above key
concept of Visistaadvaita). Through the way of denoting the body, it
then
denotes the Jeevaatman who is the "Aatman" of the "body"(sareeram).
Then most
importantly, the same word denotes the "Paramaatman (Brahman)" who
is the
"Aatman" of the "Jeevaatman". The "Jeevaatman" is the body of "Paramaatman".
Now an objection arises in this context: The term "Manushyow" has the
"Prakruthi" part "Manushya" denoting the nature of the entity "being
human"
and the "Vikruthi" "ow" denotes "twin" (number) such entities. But
these
aspects "being human", "being two in number" etc., are not applicable
for the
"Brahman-Paramaatman". How is that the term "Manushyow" is denoting
the
Brahman? Bhagavath Ramanuja answers this question ((objection in the
form of
question) by "Vastu Mukena". The terms do not denote "Paramaatman-Brahman"
directly by their meaning but it is definite that these words denote
finally
"Paramaatman-Brahman" through the entities having only the Paramaatman-Brahman
as their "Aatman" and all such entities being the body (Sareeram) of
Paramaatman-Brahman. The objection is refuted, rejected and the question
is
answered in full accordance with the Pramaanams.
The "Vaacha-Aarambanam" sruti, which was considered, is considered with
its
treatment in Brahma Sutra. As I told before, this is written just to
make it
clear that this sruthi has been interpreted against the Saastra in
Advaita.
Actually I apply no interpretation here.
The second chapter of Brahma Sutra named "Avirodha-Adyaaya" has its
first
paada named "Smruthi Paada". This paada has the "Aarambanaadhikaranam".
The
first sutra in this is "Thadanyathvam AARAMBANA Sabdaadibhya:". Here
in this
adhikaranam, it is established that the Brahman is the kAranam and
kArayam -
meaning, sUksha chit-achit visishta Brahman is the sthUla chit-achit
visishta
Brahman. Advaita has taken "Vaachaarambanam" as one word. On the other
hand,
the Brahman Sutra is only "Thadanyathvam Aarambanaa Sabdaadibhya:"
The sutra
is NOT "Thadanyathvam Vaachaarambana Sabdaadibhya:" The Brahma Sutra
therefore
implicitly (actually explicitly) states that "Advaita is against Saastra".
Even a person who has not read Shree Bhaasya also can easily point
out this!
In Shree Bhaasya, Bhagavath Ramanuja refutes the Kaanaatha-Matham that
argues
favouring difference between kAraNam and kAryam considering pratyaksham
and
anumaanam only.
I will take the verse "Tat Tvam Asi" in the next part of this series.
I would
like to say few words regarding "Bhaasyam". "Bhaasyam" means "Commentary".
What is commentary? Commentary is the work of commentator done to explain
the
purport of original text. How a commentary should be? The commentary
should be
without the prejudice of the commentator. Why should there be a commentary?
A
commentary has to be there where there is a need to comprehend clearly
on the
grounds of pramaanams with valid logical reasoning the purport of original
text.
Any rational soul will identify only the commentary of Bhagavat Ramanuja
Yatiraja on Saareeraka Saastra as "The Commentary". That is why the
commentary
of Bhagavat Ramanuja is called as "Shree Bhaashyam" by all. It is the
same
case with the other works of our greatest Aacharya. An example is quoted
here.
A person once quarrelled with his mother badly. He left his mother
saying that
I will not even utter the word "Amma" (mother) in future. He fell down
accidentally when he skidded over rough track. Out of pain he unknowingly
uttered "Amma" (called "mother")! Like this, even if a person wants
to say
something against the Bhaasya of our greatest Aacharya, he has to take
the
name of it only as "Shree Bhaasya" with or without his liking. In fact,
not
even a single person has refuted even a single word of our Bhagavat
Ramanuja
Yatiraja. Even if someone tries to talk something against Bhagavat
Ramanuja
Yatiraja's divine works, before Swamy Nigamaantha Maha Desika's words
dismiss
those counter-arguments, the Veda-BrahmaSutra-Gita themselves dismiss
those
arguments against our Yatiraja's works. This greatness is unparalleled
and
unsurpassed and is unique only for Swamy Yatiraja's works - just because
only
Swamy Bhagavath Ramanuja Yatiraja's works are telling only what the
Veda-BrahmaSutra-Gita are telling. On the other hand, the commentaries
of
other schools of thoughts are just opinions of individuals based on
individual's prejudices. I am very proud that I have an unparalleled
and
unsurpassed greatness, which is not even applicable for Bhagavat Ramanuja
Yatiraja! Surprised? Yes. I call myself identifying my swaroopam as
"Ramanuja
Daasa:" (servant of Bhagavath Ramanuja Yatiraja). It applies to all
those who
call themselves identifying their swaroopam as "Ramanuja Daasa:". This
"Daasya
Nama" and hence worshipping the Divya Paaduka of Bhagavat Ramanuja
Yatiraja
are not applicable for Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja himself! Is it not?
That is
why such a unique greatness hence expression of being proud in this
regard. In
fact this is not expression of being proud but only the actual
jeeva-swaroopa-anusandaanam. I am sure that Lord Vishnu is most delighted
when
he hears the chanting of Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja's name. Swamy Desikan
has
stated "Parichita Gahana Samyameendrasya Sooktha:" meaning - "The purport
of
Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja's words are difficult and deep to be understood
even when they are learnt again and again". Shreemath Nadaadoor Ammal
has
stated "ikva Pathi Vidhushaam Eshaa Prowdi: Sriya: PrabhuNa Sape" meaning
"The
greatness and wisdom enshrined in the words of Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja
cannot be even sensed by scholars who are not following the Parama
Vaidika
Matham - It can be known only by the those who follow Bhagavat Ramanuja
Yatiraja Darsanam, this is sworn on the Lord of Lakshmi himself". Such
is the
immeasurable greatness of Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja's divine works.
When I
find myself (adiyEn) to write articles every week on Bhagavat Ramanuja
Yatiraja's divine works, I ascertained that it is only because of the
divine
mercy of my Aacharya Shreemath Ahobila Shree Lakshmi Nrusimha Divya
Paaduka
Sevaka ShreevaN Satakopa Shree Narayana Yatindra Maha Desika's Divya
MaNi
Padukaa.
"Tasmai Raamaanujaaryaaya Nama: Parama Yogine |
Ya: Sruthi Smruthi SootraaNaam Antar ijvaramaseesamath ||"
"Shreematey Raamaanujaaya Nama:"
| Previous | Next | Preface | TOP |