The Vedanta-Sutras with the Commentary by Ramanuja Part 16

29. Jaimini thinks that there is no objection to (the word 'Agni') directly (denoting the highest Self).

So far it has been maintained that the word 'Agni,' which stands in co- ordination with the term 'Vaisvanara,' denotes the highest Self in so far as qualified by the intestinal fire const.i.tuting its body; and that hence the text under discussion enjoins meditation on the highest Self.

Jaimini, on the other hand, is of opinion that there is no reasonable objection to the term 'Agni,' no less than the term: 'Vaisvanara,' being taken _directly_ to denote the highest Self. That is to say--in the same way as the term 'Vaisvanara,' although a common term, yet when qualified by attributes especially belonging to the highest Self is known to denote the latter only as possessing the quality of ruling all men; so the word 'Agni' also when appearing in connexion with special attributes belonging to the highest Self denotes that Self only. For any quality on the ground of which 'Agni' may be etymologically explained to denote ordinary fire--as when e.g. we explain 'agni' as he who 'agre nayati'-- may also, in its highest non-conditioned degree, be ascribed to the supreme Self. Another difficulty remains. The pa.s.sage (V, 18, 1) 'yas tv etam evam pradesamatram abhivimanam,' &c. declares that the non-limited highest Brahman is limited by the measure of the pradesas, i.e. of the different s.p.a.ces-heaven, ether, earth, &c.--which had previously been said to const.i.tute the limbs of Vaisvanara. How is this possible?

30. On account of definiteness; thus Asmarathya opines.

The teacher Asmarathya is of opinion that the text represents the highest Self as possessing a definite extent, to the end of rendering the thought of the meditating devotee more definite. That is to say--the limitation due to the limited extent of heaven, sun, &c. has the purpose of rendering definite to thought him who pervades (abhi) all this Universe and in reality transcends all measure (vimana).--A further difficulty remains. For what purpose is the highest Brahman here represented like a man, having a head and limbs?--This point the next Sutra elucidates.

31. On account of meditation, Badari thinks.

The teacher Badari thinks that the representation in the text of the supreme Self in the form of a man is for the purpose of devout meditation. 'He who in this way meditates on that Vaisvanara Self as "pradesamatra" and "abhivimana," he eats food in all worlds, in all beings, in all Selfs.' What this text enjoins is devout meditation for the purpose of reaching Brahman. 'In this way' means 'as having a human form.' And 'the eating' of food in all worlds, &c. means the gaining of intuitional knowledge of Brahman which abides everywhere and is in itself of the nature of supreme bliss. The special kind of food, i.e.

the special objects of enjoyment which belong to the different Selfs standing under the influence of karman cannot be meant here; for those limited objects have to be shunned by those who desire final release. A further question arises. If Vaisvanara is the highest Self, how can the text say that the altar is its chest, the gra.s.s on the altar its hairs, and so on? (V, 18, 2.) Such a statement has a sense only if we understand by Vaisvanara the intestinal fire.--This difficulty the next Sutra elucidates.

32. On account of imaginative identification, thus Jaimini thinks; for thus the text declares.

The teacher Jaimini is of opinion that the altar is stated to be the chest of Vaisvanara, and so on, in order to effect an imaginative identification of the offering to Prana which is daily performed by the meditating devotees and is the means of pleasing Vaisvanara, having the heaven and so on for his body, i.e. the highest Self, with the Agnihotra- offering. For the fruit due to meditation on the highest Self, as well as the ident.i.ty of the offering to breath with the Agnihotra, is declared in the following text, 'He who without knowing this offers the Agnihotra--that would be as if removing the live coals he were to pour his libation on dead ashes. But he who offers this Agnihotra with a full knowledge of its purport, he offers it in all worlds, in all beings, in all Selfs. As the fibres of the Is.h.i.+ka reed when thrown into the fire are burnt, thus all his sins are burnt.' (V, 24, 1-3.)

33. Moreover, they record him in that.

They (i.e. the Vajasaneyins) speak of him, viz. Vaisvanara who has heaven for his head, &c.--i.e. the highest Self--as within that, i.e.

the body of the devotee, so as to form the abode of the oblation to Prana; viz. in the text,'Of that Vaisvanara Self the head is Sutejas,'

and so on. The context is as follows. The clause 'He who meditates on the Vaisvanara Self as pradesamatra,' &c. enjoins meditation on the highest Self having the three worlds for its body, i.e. on Vaisvanara.

The following clause 'he eats food in all worlds' teaches that the attaining of Brahman is the reward of such meditation. And then the text proceeds to teach the Agnihotra offered to Prana, which is something subsidiary to the meditation taught. The text here establishes an ident.i.ty between the members--fire, sun, &c.--of the Vaisvanara enjoined as object of meditation (which members are called Sutejas, Visvarupa, &c.

), and parts--viz. head, eye, breath, trunk, bladder, feet--of the wors.h.i.+pper's body. 'The head is Sutejas'--that means: the head of the devotee is (identical with) heaven, which is the head of the highest Self; and so on up to 'the feet,' i.e. the feet of the devotee are identical with the earth, which const.i.tutes the feet of the highest Self, The devotee having thus reflected on the highest Self, which has the three worlds for its body, as present within his own body, thereupon is told to view his own chest, hair, heart, mind and mouth as identical with the altar, gra.s.s and the other things which are required for the Agnihotra; further to identify the oblation to Prana with the Agnihotra, and by means of this Prana-agnihotra to win the favour of Vaisvanara, i.

e. the highest Self. The final--conclusion then remains that Vaisvanara is none other than the highest Self, the supreme Person.--Here terminates the adhikarana of 'Vaisvanara.'

THIRD PADA.

1. The abode of heaven, earth, &c. (is the highest Self), on account of terms which are its own.

The followers of the Atharva-veda have the following text, 'He in whom the heaven, the earth and the sky are woven, the mind also, with all the vital airs, know him alone as the Self, and leave off other words; he is the bank (setu) of the Immortal' (Mu. Up. II, 2, 5). The doubt here arises whether the being spoken of as the abode of heaven, earth, and so on, is the individual soul or the highest Self.

The Purvapaks.h.i.+n maintains the former alternative. For, he remarks, in the next sloka, 'where like spokes in the nave of a wheel the arteries meet, he moves about within, becoming manifold,' the word 'where' refers back to the being which in the preceding sloka had been called the abode of heaven, earth, and so on, the clause beginning with 'where' thus declaring that that being is the basis of the arteries; and the next clause declares that same being to become manifold or to be born in many ways. Now, connexion with the arteries is clearly characteristic of the individual soul; and so is being born in many forms, divine and so on.

Moreover, in the very sloka under discussion it is said that that being is the abode of the mind and the five vital airs, and this also is a characteristic attribute of the individual soul. It being, on these grounds, ascertained that the text refers to the individual soul we must attempt to reconcile therewith, as well as we can, what is said about its being the abode of heaven, earth, &c.

This prima facie view is set aside by the Sutra. That which is described as the abode of heaven, earth, &c. is none other than the highest Brahman, on account of a term which is 'its own,' i.e. which specially belongs to it. The clause we have in view is 'he is the bank of the Immortal.' This description applies to the highest Brahman only, which alone is, in all Upanishads, termed the cause of the attainment of Immortality; cp. e.g. 'Knowing him thus a man becomes immortal; there is no other path to go' (Sve. Up. III, 8). The term 'setu' is derived from _si_, which means to bind, and therefore means that which binds, i.e.

makes one to attain immortality; or else it may be understood to mean that which leads towards immortality that lies beyond the ocean of samsara, in the same way as a bank or bridge (setu) leads to the further side of a river.--Moreover the word 'Self (atman) (which, in the text under discussion, is also applied to that which is the abode of heaven, earth, &c.), without any further qualification, primarily denotes Brahman only; for 'atman' comes from _ap_, to reach, and means that which 'reaches' all other things in so far as it rules them. And further on (II, 2, 7) there are other terms, 'all knowing,' 'all cognising,'

which also specially belong to the highest Brahman only. This Brahman may also be represented as the abode of the arteries; as proved e.g. by Mahanar. Up. (XI, 8-12), 'Surrounded by the arteries he hangs ... in the middle of this pointed flame there dwells the highest Self.' Of that Self it may also be said that it is born in many ways; in accordance with texts such as 'not born, he is born in many ways; the wise know the place of his birth.' For in order to fit himself to be a refuge for G.o.ds, men, &c. the supreme Person, without however putting aside his true nature, a.s.sociates himself with the shape, make, qualities and works of the different cla.s.ses of beings, and thus is born in many ways.

Smriti says the same: 'Though being unborn, of non-perishable nature, the Lord of all beings, yet presiding over my Prakriti I am born by my own mysterious power' (Bha. Gi. IV, 6). Of the mind also and the other organs of the individual soul the highest Self is strictly the abode; for it is the abode of everything.--The next Sutra supplies a further reason.

2. And on account of its being declared that to which the released have to resort.

The Person who is the abode of heaven, earth, and so on, is also declared by the text to be what is to be reached by those who are released from the bondage of Samsara existence. 'When the seer sees the brilliant maker and Lord as the Person who has his source in Brahman, then possessing true knowledge he shakes off good and evil, and, free from pa.s.sion, reaches the highest oneness' (Mu. Up. III, 1, 3). 'As the flowing rivers disappear in the sea, losing their name and form, thus a wise man freed from name and form goes to the divine Person who is higher than the high' (III, 2, 8). For it is only those freed from the bondage of Samsara who shake off good and evil, are free from pa.s.sion, and freed from name and form.

For the Samsara state consists in the possession of name and form, which is due to connexion with non-sentient matter, such connexion springing from good and evil works. The Person therefore who is the abode of heaven, earth, &c., and whom the text declares to be the aim to be reached by those who, having freed themselves from good and evil, and hence from all contact with matter, attain supreme oneness with the highest Brahman, can be none other than this highest Brahman itself.

This conclusion, based on terms exclusively applicable to the highest Brahman, is now confirmed by reference to the absence of terms specially applicable to the individual soul.

3. Not that which is inferred, on account of the absence of terms denoting it, and (so also not) the bearer of the Pranas (i. e. the individual soul).

As the section under discussion does not treat of the Pradhana, there being no terms referring to that, so it is with regard to the individual soul also. In the text of the Sutra we have to read either anumanam, i.

e. 'inference,' in the sense of 'object of inference,' or else anumanam, 'object of inference'; what is meant being in both cases the Pradhana inferred to exist by the Sankhyas.

4. On account of the declaration of difference.

'On the same tree man sits immersed in grief, bewildered by "anisa"; but when he sees the other one, the Lord, contented, and his glory; then his grief pa.s.ses away' (Mu. Up. III, 1, 2). This, and similar texts, speak of that one, i.e. the one previously described as the abode of heaven, earth, &c., as different from the individual soul.--The text means--the individual soul grieves, being bewildered by her who is not 'isa,' i.e.

Prakriti, the object of fruition. But its grief pa.s.ses away when it sees him who is other than itself, i.e. the beloved Lord of all, and his greatness which consists in his ruling the entire world.

5. On account of the subject-matter.

It has been already shown, viz. under I, 2, 21, that the highest Brahman const.i.tutes the initial topic of the Upanishad. And by the arguments set forth in the previous Sutras of the present Pada, we have removed all suspicion as to the topic started being dropped in the body of the Upanishad.

6. And on account of abiding and eating.

'Two birds, inseparable friends, cling to the same tree. One of them eats the sweet fruit; without eating, the other looks on' (Mu. Up. III, 1, 1). This text declares that one enjoys the fruit of works while the other, without enjoying, s.h.i.+ning abides within the body. Now this s.h.i.+ning being which does not enjoy the fruit of works can only be the being previously described as the abode of heaven, earth, &c., and characterised as all knowing, the bridge of immortality, the Self of all; it can in no way be the individual Self which, lamenting, experiences the results of its works. The settled conclusion, therefore, is that the abode of heaven, earth, and so on, is none other than the highest Self.-- Here terminates the adhikarana of 'heaven, earth, and so on.'