An Analysis Of The Brahma Sutra - Swami Krishnananda

2y ago
79 Views
2 Downloads
504.28 KB
97 Pages
Last View : 1m ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Mariam Herr
Transcription

AN ANALYSIS OF THEBRAHMA SUTRAbySWAMI KRISHNANANDAThe Divine Life SocietySivananda Ashram, Rishikesh, IndiaWebsite: swami-krishnananda.org

ABOUT THIS EDITIONThough this eBook edition is designed primarily fordigital readers and computers, it works well for print too.Page size dimensions are 5.5" x 8.5", or half a regular sizesheet, and can be printed for personal, non-commercial use:two pages to one side of a sheet by adjusting your printersettings.2

CONTENTSChapter I: The Forest of the Brahma Sutra . 5Chapter II: The Critique of Erroneous Doctrines . 16Chapter III: Erroneous Notions Refuted . 26Chapter IV: The Origin of Bondage . 34Chapter V: Towards Liberation . 41Chapter VI: The Controversy Over Actionand Knowledge 48Chapter VII: Specimens of Vedantic Meditations . 59Chapter VIII: Upasana – Upanishadic Meditations . 70Chapter IX: The Causal Law as a Limitation . 84Chapter X: Vaishvanara Vidya . 90Chapter XI: The Preliminaries to Sadhana . 94Chapter XII: Brahman and Its Realisation . 104Chapter XIII: Consideration on Some Issues Arising inthe Brahma Sutra . 1123

Chapter ITHE FOREST OF THE BRAHMA SUTRAThe greatest truths available for human comprehensionare supposed to be documented in the great scriptures calledthe Upanishads. They are exultations of masters who aredeeply involved in the ultimate principles of the cosmos.They are realised souls, called Rishis, but these Rishis in theirexpressions through the Upanishads spoke in terms of theirparticular vision of the Ultimate Reality.A common student of the Upanishads is likely to feelembarrassed over apparently irreconcilable differences andcontradictions among the statements of these great Masters.Every kind of philosophy you will find in the Upanishads.There are provisions for establishing the monism aspect ofphilosophy, the dualistic aspect, the active aspect, thevolitional aspect – everything can be found. Even Sankhyaand Mimamsa have a reference.What is it that you are supposed to take from this bigforest of statements on the nature of Reality? To clarify theintention of these sages and to reconcile these statements ina harmonious manner, and to point out that differentexpressions do not necessarily mean contradictorypresentations, Brahma Sutras was written. They can beharmonised by a higher perception of what is there and whatis happening. In order to harmonise these multifacetedstatements, Bhagavan Sri Krishna Dvaipayana Vyasa wrote anew text called the Brahma Sutras. Sutra is a thread thatconnects different parts of the vision of Truth.All the statements connected with Ultimate Reality,known as Brahman in the Sanskrit language, have to bethreaded together so that instead of the various statementsof the Upanishads being contradictory outbursts, theybecome beautiful pearls in the garland of the knowledge ofthe Supreme Being, from various points of view. This act ofreconciliation is called samanvaya.

We have problems like this in the Gita also. What is it thatthe Gita is telling us? ‘Go ahead and fight’; ‘Think of Mealways’; ‘I am doing everything’ – what is the point in sayingall these things which seem to be negating one another?When a Cosmic Perception enunciates a Truth, it maylook like a multiple proclamation of different hues, coloursand emphases, which an ordinary person will not be able toreconcile. You cannot know which is the correct vision andwhich is lesser or higher. To obviate these difficulties, thegreat Master Krishna Dvaipayana Vyasa wrote the wonderfulinterpretative textbook called the Brahma Sutras.‘What do you want?’ is the first question. ‘I want theultimate Being, Brahman’. This is a terrific question, and astatement. Who is it that wants Brahman?To avoid the quandary that may arise out of making astatement of this kind, the Sutra – the first one – avoids ‘who’,‘why’ and all that. It simply makes an impersonal statementthat Brahman should be known. Who should know It, it doesnot say, because if you ask such questions you will involveyourself in some kind of preliminary contradiction. Who areyou to know Brahman? What right have you? So, avoidingsuch possible objections, the Brahma Sutra goes directly intothe main theme, ‘It has to be known’.What is the meaning of ‘knowing’? You know that there isa meeting here, I know that many people are sitting here, youknow that I am speaking – this is a kind of knowledge, ofcourse. Is it in this sense that you have to know Brahman? Oris there any other way?The word ‘Brahman’ comes from a Sanskrit root, brhm –to expand, to be comprehensive, to include and be perfect. Ifthe thing that is to be known you call Brahman is that whichis inclusive and comprehensive, it must be including theknowing individual also. If the knowing person is outside thiscomprehensive Being, then that being would not becomprehensive, because it has excluded the knower or the6

person who aspires for it. So, it should include even theaspirant for it. Here is a knotty point before us.If that which is to be known includes the knower of italso, then what is the answer to this question “Brahman is tobe known?” Known by whom? It is already told that nobodyis there to know it. Yet at the very beginning itself is astatement, ‘It has to be known’. Is Brahman knowing Itself?Brahman is to be known – athato brahma jijnasa – when thusit is said, does it mean that Brahman is wanting to knowItself? What for is this book which is to be read by peoplewhen only Brahman can know Itself and no one else canknow It? That is to say, there is no passage to It with whichyou can be acquainted.We are all in the world of dualistic perception. We arehere seeing something and there is something else which weare seeing. This is how we feel in this world. We cannot evenuse the word ‘world’, unless it is seen and confronted by us,because worldly perception which needs a duality, adichotomy between the seer and the seen, which is theworld, creates another difficulty regarding the way in whichwe can bring together the seer and the seen. The seer is notthe seen, the seen is not the seer, is something very clear. Youare not the world that is seen and the world which is seen isnot yourself.Such being the case, how would you bring together in astate of harmony the seer and the seen? Who is to work outthis mystery? This deep analytical process, which will stunthe mind of any person and debar anyone from evenapproaching it; this wonderful self-identical means ofknowing Brahman is called Jnana, which cannot betranslated into English language easily. People say Jnanameans knowledge, wisdom, but they are all inadequateexpressions of the operation that is taking place whenBrahman is known.You will be terrified at the very outset when feelingwithin yourselves the consequences that may follow from7

attempting to know a thing which can be known only byItself. The meaning of this situation, if it has entered yourmind, would explain to you what Knowledge is. It is notanything that you are thinking in your mind. It is not a degreequalification or a perceptual vision or empirical knowledge.Jnana may frighten away anyone even while approachingit. It can throw you out. You cannot go near It, as it willhappen if you go near a powerful magnetic field. It will kickyou back; you cannot go near. It is considering this aspect ofthe nature of Jnana, that Bhagavan Sri Krishna mentions inthe Gita – ‘this is a difficult path’.Klesodhikataras tesham avyakta saktachetasamAvyakta hi gatirdukham dehavadbhiravapyate(Bhagavad Gita XII.5)Body-consciousness is the obstacle to understandingwhat all this means. Body-consciousness is just individualconsciousness, affirmation of this particular individuality, the‘me’. It contradicts that which is inclusive and is completeand is itself, as it were. Brahman is also called bhuma, the Allcomprehensive Absolute, Plenum, including everything.Those who are located in one body only – ego – are far fromthis Fullness.Again the fear strikes us: Including everything? Includingme also? ‘Oh! This is not for me, this is not for me!’ Everyonewill say ‘this is not for me’, ‘I will not go near It!’. BrahmaSutrakara Krishna Dvaipayana Vyasa knows all theseproblems, that people will be turned away by the thought,the very thought of the question regarding Brahman.The Upanishads define Brahman. Let us see again whatkind of thing It is. What kind of thing is Brahman? Satyam,jnanam, anantam. This is what the Taittiriya declaresregarding Brahman.8

Satyam jnanamanantam brahma.Yo veda nihitam guhayam parame vyoman.Soshnute sarvan kaman saha brahmana vipashchitetiOne sentence, this particular declaration in the beginningof the Second Chapter of the Taittiriya Upanishad can makeyou so happy, thrill you to the brim, if only you could sensewhat depth of meaning this sentence contains. The momentyou know Brahman, the whole Universe of Bliss enters intoyou and simultaneously you enjoy the whole universe; sahabrahmana vipashchita.You can enjoy so many things in this world. You can eat,you can go on a tour, you can read books, you can go to adrama or a cinema, you can dance – there are so manyvarieties of enjoyment; but when one enjoyment is takingplace, another cannot come. They are all different things. So,successively we are enjoying different things in the world,but not all things at one stroke. Here is the difference.The joys of all kinds of pleasurable encounters, whateverthe number of these be, innumerable, infinite ways of theenjoyment of things in the world – when they all get clubbedtogether into a melting pot of a single instantaneousexpression of Oceanic Bliss – that will be your experiencewhen you experience Brahman, perhaps.You shudder even to think that such a Bliss is possible.Even the thought of such an unthinkable Bliss can causeterror and tremor in our body. We can be in a state of terrorand tremor by seeing fearful things, but here we can haveterror even by imagining the superb Absolute – Brahman,wherein Bliss is a simultaneous completeness.All disturbing and distracting notions in the mind have tobe obviated first before we try to plunge into the nature ofBrahman that is to be known.The Brahma Sutra makes a statement ‘Brahman is to beknown’. Commentators write pages after pages in explainingthe meaning of one Sutra only, athato brahma jijnasa.9

Volumes have been written, commentaries have beenwritten, and commentaries on commentaries, and a thirdcommentary on the second and the first! harya,Nimbarkacharya, all wrote great commentaries on theBrahma Sutras.Sankaracharya’s commentary was commented on byVachaspati Mishra in his exposition called bhamati. One ofthe disciples of Sankara, Padmapada, wrote aracharya, wrote a third commentary, in his ownway. They approached this subject from three viewpoints.Together they present three angles of vision of Sankara’scommentary. Of these Sureshwaracharya treats the entirecreation as a cosmic illusion, whose nature cannot bedescribed by a person involved in that illusion. You cannotsay Brahman creates the universe because Brahman iseternity, complete, indefinable, infinite, perfect existence parexcellence. It has no necessity to create. The appearance ofsomething being created is the result of a peculiar admixtureof confusion cosmically called maya, and individually avidya.Vachaspati Mishra’s position is that your mind which isconditioned by what is known as avidya or ignorance distortscorrect perception and the world does not exist as it is; itappears to be existing according to the particular form ofavidya or ignorance in which you are involved.Padmapadacharya is more realistic in his nature. He haswritten a commentary on the first four Sutras, calledPanchapadika. Generally people follow the trend ofPanchapadika only, with its great commentary calledvivarana.Vedantacharyas and people who teach Vedanta generallydo not follow Bhamati’s view or Sureshwaracharya’s.Panchapadika’s view is taken usually, with its commentaryknown as vivarana. The whole text of Panchadasi written bySwami Vidyaranya follows the line of Panchapadika of10

Padmapada. What is its speciality? The objective world mustbe existing. You cannot simply say your mind is creating theworld of trees and mountains and all that. Such fantasticstatements should not be made. Supposing it is accepted thatyour mind is creating things by avidya operation inside, thenyou have to agree that the trees in the forest are created byyour mind; the cows and the pigs and the dogs that aremoving in the streets – they are created by you only; themountains, the sun and the moon and the stars are createdby your mind. You cannot accept this view and you will berepelled by the very idea that your mind is creating the sunand the moon and the stars. You have to follow the dictum ofthe Upanishads that originally the creation was effected by aCosmic Being and not by any individual human being. In theprocess of creation, man is a latecomer. There were thespace-time manifestation, the five mahabhutas – earth,water, fire, air and ether; then the plants – trees etc. Mancame later on. How can the late-comer, man, be regarded asthe originator of the universe? An objective creator, Ishvara,is to be accepted and it is futile to say that the human mindcreated the universe. This is Padmapada’s school of thought:srishiti-drishti – creation first, seeing afterwards.One of the subjects or themes of philosophy whichBrahma Sutra refutes vehemently is Sankhya, the duality ofconsciousness and matter, known as Purusha and Prakriti.We are usually prone to accept the Sankhya doctrine sincewe ourselves feel that consciousness is inside us and theworld is outside. So, there is a duality. Then, what is wrongwith Sankhya? Don’t you believe that the world is material inits nature and you are conscious inside? This is what exactlythe Sankhya doctrine proclaims. There are only two things inthis universe, consciousness and matter.What is the trouble with Sankhya, now? Why are youobjecting to its doctrine? The problem is this. Consciousnesscan never become matter; matter cannot becomeconsciousness. They are totally distinct things. If that is the11

case, how would consciousness know matter? How wouldconsciousness come in contact with the material world, andknow that it exists at all? Contact of dissimilar things is notpossible. Only similar things will come in contact with eachother. There is a complete disparity between consciousnessand matter. Your capacity to be conscious is different innature from the objects that you see in the form of the world.How could Sankhya explain this problem? Who bringsconsciousness and matter together? There is no answer. Thisis a great defect in Sankhya. For that, to save its own skin, theSankhya says they can come in contact with each other inanother way. How?Suppose there is a pure crystal which is radiating lightfrom all sides. You bring a red rose flower near this crystal.You will see the whole crystal is red because of the reflectionof the rose flower in the crystal. You may say this is a form ofcontact of the rose flower with the crystal. Crystal may becompared to consciousness, rose flower to matter. Don’t youagree that they have come in contact with each other? Thefact that the crystal has not become the rose, but imaginesthat it is the rose, is the bondage of the crystal.That the matter of the world outside cannot touch youand you are pure consciousness, and yet it appears as if theobjects have entered your mind and tempt you and repel you,is the tragedy of the whole of life. This is one explanation theSankhya gives. Two things do not really meet each other.They appear to meet so. If that is the case, bondage would bean appearance only. There will be no real bondage. Hereagain a contradiction in the Sankhya. If bondage is not real,then liberation also will not be real.What is all this great effort of Sankhya to attainliberation? What is liberation? The freedom of the crystalfrom having any contact with the red flower – that is Moksha.That the red flower exists even when it is taken away, faraway from the crystal so that the crystal does not appear anymore red – can you say that it is the freedom or the12

emancipation of the crystal? Now, what is emancipation? It isthe establishment of oneself in oneself, the establishment ofconsciousness in consciousness. What is consciousness? TheSankhya establishes the truth that it is infinite in its nature.Consciousness cannot be divided into parts, something here,something there. Because even to imagine a sub-division inconsciousness, consciousness has to be present in thedivision itself. So nobody can conceive a division ofconsciousness. That would be a self-contradiction. Then, inthat case, when the infinite consciousness establishes itself initself, as the crystal would remain pure and shining as it was,the question arises: ‘where is the rose at that time’? Asconsciousness is infinite, it is omniscient, it knowseverything, and there is no rose outside it!If this state of omniscience of consciousness is moksha asthe Sankhya says, does that omniscient consciousness knowthat there is a rose flower outside it? The rose flower is onlyan example of matter, world, Prakriti. If due to theomniscience of consciousness, Purusha, it has to knoweverything, then it has to know Prakriti also, and even inemancipation it will come in contact with Prakriti. Thebondage will be once again there. Prakriti is eternallyexisting according to Sankhya, it does not vanish in theliberation of a particular centre of consciousness. What doesall this mean, then?Vyasa, in the Sutras connected with this subject, refutesSankhya philosophy vehemently and takes special pains tosee that nobody gets contaminated by Sankhya dualism.You should not imagine that Brahma Sutra is as simple asI am explaining! I have sugar-coated it and made it halwalike. Otherwise, as it is, you will not go near it. It is a very longsubject.13

Chapter IITHE CRITIQUE OF ERRONEOUS DOCTRINESAtha atah brahma-jijnasa. Atha is an auspicious word.You should utter atha, ‘Om Auspicious!’, ‘Om Auspicious!’,‘Om Auspicious’.Om Atha, Om Atha, Om Atha – very auspicious words.These words came from the throat of Brahma himself, theCreator. Atha, auspicious; now we discuss something mostauspicious. Om Atha, Om Atha, Om Atha.Atha: Therefore. What is ‘therefore’? ‘Therefore’ meansafter having equipped oneself adequately for entering into adiscussion on Brahman. The other day, we pointed out thedifficulty, who is to know Brahman? If I am to know Brahmanor you are to know Brahman or someone is to knowBrahman, that someone stands outside Brahman. So, aBrahman known by someone else cannot be a completeBrahman, because Brahman is inclusive. Bhuma is the nameof this Brahman, as the Chhandogya Upanishad puts it – theFull.Where one does not see anything outside, where onedoes not hear anything outside, where one does notunderstand or think anything outside – That Great Being,Plenum of Felicity is Brahma. But if there is someone to see,hear see, hear and understand and imagine that one is goingto know Brahman, that Brahman would not be the realBrahman because the point to be remembered always is thatBrahman is inclusiveness.Brhmati iti brahma; Everything is inside It. Even the oneaspiring to know It is included in It. So there is no such thingas aspiring to know Brahman! This is the problem of JnanaMarga. Nobody can touch Jnana. It will close all talk andpeople can go crazy bec

Brahma Sutras. Sankaracharya’s commentary was commented on by Vachaspati Mishra in his exposition called bhamati. One of the disciples of Sankara, Padmapada, wrote another commentary. Another disciple of Sankara, Sureshwaracharya, wrote a third commentary, in his own way. They approached this subject from three viewpoints.

Related Documents:

May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)

Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .

On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.

̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions

Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have

Commentaries on Brahma Sutra The primary commentary as well as the oldest commentary on Brahma Sutra (which is available at present) is the commentary of Sankaracharya termed as Brahma Sutra Bhashya or Shareeraka Bhashya (Brahma Sutra is also termed as Shareeraka sutra as it is about Brahman even as the body encompasses the Self or Atman).File Size: 286KBPage Count: 38

Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được

Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.