The Vedanta-Sutras with the Commentary by Ramanuja Part 53

Some teachers are of opinion that even on the part of Naishthikas and the rest the lapse from chast.i.ty const.i.tutes only a minor offence which can be atoned for by expiatory observances; in the same way as in the case of the eating of forbidden food the same prayaskitta may be used by the ordinary Brahmakarin and by Naishthikas and the rest. This has been stated by the Smriti writer, 'For the others also (i.e. the Naishthikas and so on) the same (rules and practices as those for the Upakurvana) hold good, in so far as not opposed to their asrama.'

43. But in either case (such men) stand outside; on account of Smriti and custom.

Whether the point under discussion const.i.tutes a minor or a major offence, in any case those who have lapsed stand outside the category of those qualified for the knowledge of Brahman. For Smriti, i.e. the text quoted above, 'I see no expiatory performance by which he, a slayer of Brahman as he is, could become pure again,' declares that expiations are powerless to restore purity. And custom confirms the same conclusion; for good men shun those Naishthikas who have lapsed, even after they have performed prayaskittas, and do not impart to them the knowledge of Brahman, The conclusion, therefore, is that such men are not qualified for knowing Brahman.--Here terminates the adhikarana of 'him who has become that.'

44. By the Lord (of the sacrifice), since Scripture declares a fruit-- thus Atreya thinks.

A doubt arises whether the meditations on such const.i.tuent elements of the sacrifice as the Udgitha, and so on, are to be performed by the sacrificer (for whose benefit the sacrifice is offered), or by the officiating priests. Atreya advocates the former view; on the ground of Scripture showing that in the case of such meditations as the one on the small ether within the heart, fruit and meditation belong to the same person, and that in the case of such meditations as the one on the Udgitha the fruit belongs to the sacrificer (whence we conclude that the meditation also is his). Nor can it be said that the sacrificer is not competent for such meditation, for the reason that like the G.o.dohana vessel it is connected with an element of the sacrifice (which latter the priests only can perform). For the G.o.dohana vessel serves to bring water, and this of course none else can do but the Adhvaryu; while a meditation on the Udgitha as being the essence of all essences can very well be performed by the Sacrificer--true though it be that the Udgitha itself can be performed by the Udgatri priest only.--Against this view the next Sutra declares itself.

45. (They are) the priest's work, Audulomi thinks; since for that he is engaged.

The teacher Audulomi is of opinion that the meditation on the Udgitha and the like is the work of the priest, since it is he who is engaged for the purpose of performing that which gives rise to the fruit, i.e.

of the entire sacrifice with all its subordinate parts. Injunctions referring to the performance of the sacrifices such as 'he chooses the priests; he gives to the priests their fee' indicate that the entire sacrificial performance is the work of the priests, and that hence all activities comprised within it--mental as well as bodily--belong to the priests. Capability or non-capability does not const.i.tute the criterion in this case. For although the meditations in question aim directly at the benefit of man (not at the greater perfection of the sacrifice), yet since they fall within the sphere of qualification of those who are qualified for the sacrifice, and since the sacrifice with all its subordinate elements has to be performed by the priests, and since the text 'whatever he does with knowledge that becomes more vigorous'

declares knowledge to belong to the same agent as the works which are benefited by such knowledge, we conclude that those meditations also are the exclusive duty of the priests. In the case of the meditations on the small ether, &c., on the other hand, the text says nothing as to their having to be performed by priests, and we therefore a.s.sume in accordance with the general principle that 'the fruit belongs to the performer,'

that the agent there is the person to whom Scripture a.s.signs the fruit.-- Here terminates the adhikarana of 'the lord (of the sacrifice).'

46. There is injunction of other auxiliary means for him who is such, as in the case of injunction and so on; (the term _mauna_ denoting) according to an alternative meaning a third something.

'Therefore let a Brahmana after he has done with learning wish to stand by a childlike state; and after having done with the childlike state and learning (he is) a Muni' (Bri. Up. III, 5). A doubt arises whether this text enjoins Muni-hood in the same way as it enjoins learning and the childlike state, or merely refers to it as something already established.-- The Purvapakshin holds the latter view on the ground that as 'Muni-hood'

and 'learning' both connote knowledge, the word 'Muni' merely refers back to the knowledge already enjoined in the phrase 'after he has done with learning.' For the text presents no word of injunctive force with regard to Muni-hood.--This view the Sutra controverts. 'For him who is such,' i.e. for those who possess knowledge, 'there is an injunction of a different co-operative factor' 'in the same way as injunctions and the rest.' By the _injunctions_ in the last clause we have to understand the special duties of the different asramas, i.e. sacrifices and the like, and also such qualifications as quietness of mind and the like; and by the 'and the rest' is meant the learning of and pondering on the sacred texts. Stated at length, the meaning of the Sutra then is as follows--in the same way as texts such as 'him Brahmanas seek to know through the reciting of the Veda, through sacrifices and charity, and so on,' and 'Quiet, subdued,' &c. (Bri. Up. IV, 4, 23) enjoin sacrifices and so on, and quietness of mind and the like, as helpful towards knowledge; and as texts such as 'the Self is to be heard, to be pondered upon' (Bri. Up. II, 4, 5) mention hearing and pondering as helpful towards knowledge; thus the text under discussion enjoins learning, a childlike state of mind, and Muni-hood as three further different auxiliaries of knowledge.--'Muni-hood' does _not_ denote the same thing as 'learning'--this the Sutra intimates by the clause 'alternatively a third,' i.e. as the word muni is observed alternatively to denote persons such as Vyasa distinguished by their power of profound reflection (manana), the abstract term munihood denotes a third thing different from _learning_ and the 'childlike state.' Hence, although the phrase 'then a Muni' does not contain a word of directly injunctive power, we must all the same understand it in an injunctive sense, viz.

'then let him be or become a Muni'; for Muni-hood is not something previously established. Such munihood is also something different from mere _reflection_ (manana); it is the reiterated representation before the mind of the object of meditation, the idea of that object thus becoming more and more vivid. The meaning of the entire text therefore is as follows. A Brahmana is at first fully to master knowledge, i.e. he is to attain, by means of hearing and pondering, to the knowledge of Brahman in all its fulness and perfection. This is to be effected through the growth of purity of mind and heart, due to the grace of the Lord; for this Smriti declares, 'Neither by the Vedas nor by austerities, and so on, can I be so seen--; but by devotion exclusive I may be known'

(Bha. Gi. XI, 53-54); and Scripture also says, 'Who has the highest devotion for G.o.d' (Svet. Up. VI, 23), and 'That Self cannot be gained by the study of the Veda,' &c. 'He whom the Self chooses by him the Self is to be attained' (Ka. Up. I, 2, 23). After that 'he is to stand by a childlike state'; what this means will be explained further on. And after that he is to be a Muni, i.e. he is to fix his thoughts so exclusively and persistently on Brahman as to attain to the mode of knowledge called meditation. Having by the employment of these three means reached true knowledge he--the text goes on to say--having done with amauna and mauna is a Brahmana. Amauna, i.e. non-mauna, denotes all the auxiliaries of knowledge different from mauna: employing these and mauna as well he reaches the highest goal of knowledge. And, the text further says, there is no other means but those stated whereby to become such, i.e. a true Brahmana. The entire text thus evidently means to enjoin on any one standing within any asrama learning, a childlike state, and mauna as auxiliary means of knowledge, in addition to sacrifices and the other special duties of the asramas.--But, an objection is raised, if knowledge, aided by panditya, and so on, and thus being auxiliary to the action of the special duties of the asramas, is thus declared to be the means of attaining to Brahman; how then are we to understand the Chandogya's declaring that a man, in order to attain to Brahman, is throughout his life to carry on the duties of a householder [FOOTNOTE 711: 1]?--To this the next Sutra replies.

[FOOTNOTE 711:1. Ch. Up. VIII, 13.]

47. But on account of the existence (of knowledge) in all, there is winding up with the householder.

As knowledge belongs to the members of all asramas it belongs to the householder also, and for this reason the Upanishad winds up with the latter. This winding up therefore is meant to ill.u.s.trate the duties (not of the householder only, but) of the members of all asramas. a.n.a.logously in the text under discussion (Bri. Up. III, 5) the clause 'A Brahmana having risen above the desire for sons, the desire for wealth, and the desire for worlds, wanders about as a mendicant,' intimates duties belonging exclusively to the condition of the wandering beggar, and then the subsequent clause 'therefore let a Brahmana having done with learning,' &c., enjoins panditya, balya, and mauna (not as inc.u.mbent on the parivrajaka only, but) as ill.u.s.trating the duties of all asramas.-- This the next Sutra explicitly declares.

48. On account of the others also being taught, in the same way as the condition of the Muni.

The injunction, on him who has pa.s.sed beyond all desire, of mauna preceded by parivrajya (wandering about as a mendicant), is meant to ill.u.s.trate the duties of all asramas. For the duties of the other asramas are taught by Scripture no less than those of the Muni (and the householder). Similarly it was shown above that in the text 'There are three branches of sacred duty--he who is founded on Brahman goes to immortality,' the term 'founded on Brahman' applies equally to members of all asramas.--It therefore remains a settled conclusion that the text under discussion enjoins panditya, balya, and mauna as being auxiliaries to knowledge in the same way as the other duties of the asramas, such as sacrifices and the rest.--Here terminates the adhikarana of 'the injunction of other auxiliaries.'

49. Not manifesting itself; on account of the connexion.

In the text discussed above we meet with the word 'balya,' which may mean either 'being a child' or 'being and doing like a child.' The former meaning is excluded, as that particular age which is called childhood cannot be a.s.sumed at will. With regard to the latter meaning, however, a doubt arises, viz. whether the text means to say that he who aims at perfect knowledge is to a.s.sume all the ways of a child, as e.g.

its wilful behaviour, or only its freedom from pride and the like.--The former, the Purvapakshin maintains. For the text gives no specification, and texts enjoining restraints of different kinds (on the man desirous of knowledge) are sublated by this specific text which enjoins him to be in all points like a child.--This view the Sutra disposes of. 'Not manifesting itself.' That aspect of a child's nature which consists in the child not manifesting its nature (viz. in pride, arrogance, and so on), the man aiming at true knowledge is to make his own. 'On account of connexion,' i.e. because thus only the 'balya' of the text gives a possible sense. The other characteristic features of 'childhood' the texts declare to be opposed to knowledge, 'He who has not turned away from wicked conduct, who is not tranquil and attentive, or whose mind is not at peace, he can never attain the Self by knowledge' (Ka. Up. I, 2, 24); 'When food is pure, the whole nature becomes pure' (Ch. Up. VII, 26, 2), and so on.--Here terminates the adhikarana of 'non-manifestation.'

50. What belongs to this world, there being no obstruction at hand; as this is seen.

Knowledge, as enjoined by Scripture, is twofold, having for its fruit either exaltation within the sphere of the Samsara, or final Release.

With regard to the former the question arises whether it springs up only immediately subsequent to the good works which are the means to bring it about; or, indefinitely, either subsequent to such works or at some later time.--The Purvapakshin holds the former view. A man reaches knowledge through his good deeds only, as the Lord himself declares, 'Four kinds of men doing good works worship me,' &c.(Bha. Gi. VII, 16); and when those works have been accomplished there is no reason why the result, i.e. knowledge, should be delayed.--This view the Sutra disposes of. 'What is comprised in this world,' i.e. meditation, the result of which is worldly exaltation, springs up immediately after the works to which it is due, in case of there being no other works of greater strength obstructing the rise of knowledge; but if there is an obstruction of the latter kind, knowledge springs up later on only. 'For this is seen,' i.e. Scripture acknowledges the effects of such obstruction; for a statement such as 'what he does with knowledge, with faith, with the Upanishad that is more vigorous,' means that works joined with the knowledge of the Udgitha, and so on, produce their results without obstruction (which implies that the action of other works is liable to be obstructed).--Here terminates the adhikarana of 'what belongs to this world.'

51. In the same way there is non-determination with regard to what has Release for its result; that condition being ascertained, that condition being ascertained.

So likewise in the case of the origination, through works of very great merit, of such knowledge as has for its result final Release, the time is not definitely fixed; for here also there is ascertained the same condition, viz. the termination of the obstruction presented by other works. A further doubt might in this case be raised on the ground that such works as give rise to knowledge leading to final Release are stronger than all other works, and therefore not liable to obstruction.

But this doubt is disposed of by the reflection that even in the case of a man knowing Brahman there may exist previous evil deeds of overpowering strength.--The repet.i.tion of the last words of the Sutra indicates the completion of the adhyaya.--Here terminates the adhikarana of 'what has Release for its result.'

FOURTH ADHYAYA

FIRST PADA.

1. Repet.i.tion, on account of the text teaching (what has to be done more than once).

The third adhyaya was concerned with the consideration of meditation, together with its means. The Sutras now enter on a consideration of the results of meditation, after a further preliminary clearing up of the nature of meditation. The question here arises whether the act of knowledge of Brahman inculcated in Vedanta-texts, such as 'He who knows Brahman reaches the Highest,' 'Having known him thus he pa.s.ses beyond death,' 'He knows Brahman, he becomes Brahman,' is, in the view of Scripture, to be performed once only, or to be repeated more than once.-- Once suffices, the Purvapakshin maintains; for as the text enjoins nothing more than knowing there is no authority for a repet.i.tion of the act. Nor can it be said that the act of knowing, a.n.a.logous to the act of beating the rice-grains until they are freed from the husks, is a visible means towards effecting the intuition of Brahman, and hence must, like the beating, be repeated until the effect is accomplished; for knowing is not a visible means towards anything. Such acts as the Jyotishtoma sacrifice and the knowledge inculcated in the Vedanta-texts are alike of the nature of conciliation of the Supreme Person; through whom thus conciliated man obtains all that is beneficial to him, viz.

religious duty, wealth, pleasure, and final Release. This has been shown under III, 2, 38. The meaning of Scripture therefore is accomplished by performing the act of knowledge once only, as the Jyotishtoma is performed once.--This view the Sutra sets aside. The meaning of Scripture is fulfilled only by repeated acts of knowledge 'on account of teaching,' i.e. because the teaching of Scripture is conveyed by means of the term 'knowing' (vedana), which is synonymous with meditating (dhyana, upasana). That these terms are so synonymous appears from the fact that the verbs vid, upas, dhyai are in one and the same text used with reference to one and the same object of knowledge. A text begins, e.

g. 'Let him meditate (upasita) on mind as Brahman,' and concludes 'he who knows (veda) this shines, warms,' &c. (Ch. Up. III, 18). In the same way the knowledge of Raikva is at first referred to by means of vid, 'He who knows (veda) what he knows is thus spoken of by me,' and further on by means of upas,'teach me the deity on which you meditate' (Ch. Up. IV, 1, 2). Similarly texts which have the same meaning as the text 'He who knows Brahman reaches the Highest'--viz. 'the Self should be seen, be heard, be reflected on, be meditated upon (nididhyasitavya)'--'Then he sees him meditating (dhyayamana) on him as without parts' (Mu. Up. III, 1, 8), and others--use the verb dhyai to express the meaning of vid. Now dhyai means to think of something not in the way of mere representation (smriti), but in the way of _continued_ representation. And upas has the same meaning; for we see it used in the sense of thinking with uninterrupted concentration of the mind on one object. We therefore conclude that as the verb 'vid' is used interchangeably with dhyai and upas, the mental activity referred to in texts such as 'he knows Brahman' and the like is an often-repeated continuous representation.

2. And on account of an inferential mark.

Inferential mark here means Smriti. Smriti also declares that that knowledge which effects Release is of the nature of continued representation. Meditation therefore has to be repeated.--Here terminates the adhikarana of 'repet.i.tion.'

3. But as the Self; this (the ancient Devotees) acknowledge (since the texts) make (them) apprehend (in that way).