United States or French Southern Territories ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
The Sutrakara will distinctly enounce the same view in II, 1, 33. Up. It is in this way that room is found for those texts also which proclaim Brahman to be free from all imperfection and all change. It thus remains a settled conclusion that Brahman by itself constitutes the material as well as the operative cause of the world. And because it is called the womb. Up.
Being about to investigate the nature of meditation, the Sutrakara now declares that the meditating devotee receives the reward of meditation, i.e. Release, which consists in attaining to the highest Person, from that highest Person only: and that analogously the rewards for all works prescribed by the Veda whether to be enjoyed in this or the next world come from the highest Person only.
In order to prove the tenet that words denoting the individual soul at the same time denote the highest Self, by means of arguments made use of by other teachers also, the Sutrakara sets forth the two following Sutras.
For the same reasons the theory of a Brahman, which is nothing but non- differenced intelligence, must also be considered as refuted by the Sutrakara, with the help of the scriptural texts quoted; for those texts prove that the Brahman, which forms the object of enquiry, possesses attributes such as thinking, and so on, in their real literal sense.
As he who knows the Self has to practise meditation as long as he lives, he may also have to practise, for the same period, works that are helpful to meditation. Having thus refuted the objection on the ground of the reason of the matter, the Sutrakara proceeds to give his own interpretation of the text. Or the permission is for the purpose of glorification. The or has assertive force.
Compare texts such as 'He is to go into the forest, and is not to return from thence'; 'Having renounced the world he is not to return. And hence persons who have lapsed from their asrama are not qualified for meditation on Brahman. This view of his the Sutrakara strengthens by a reference to the opinion of Jaimini.
The Sutrakara introduces this reference to an advantage of his own view of things, in order to intimate that the views of the soul being Brahman deluded or else Brahman affected by a limiting adjunct are on their part incapable of explaining how it is that the experiences of the individual Self and the highest Self, and of the several individual Selfs, are not mixed up.
The Sutrakara will now show that the being designated as Indra and Prana, which the text enjoins as an object of meditation, for the reason that it is the means for attaining immortality a power which is inseparable from causal power , is likewise the highest Person. Prana is Brahman, on account of connexion. An individual soul, the Purvapakshin maintains.
The second adhyaya is now begun for the purpose of proving that the view thus set forth cannot be impugned by whatever arguments may possibly be brought forward. The Sutrakara at first turns against those who maintain that the Vedanta- texts do not establish the view indicated above, on the ground of that view being contradicted by the Smriti of Kapila, i. e. the Sankhya- system.
The assertion, therefore, that the difference of things is refuted by immediate consciousness, is based on the plain denial of a certain form of consciousness, the one namely admitted by every one which is expressed in the judgment 'This thing is such and such. This same point is clearly expounded by the Sutrakara in II, 2, 33. Inference also teaches difference.
Word Of The Day