Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: June 2, 2025
But it has been shown before that the Vedanta-texts represent as the object to be attained, by those desirous of Release, on the basis of the knowledge imparted by them, something different from the individual Self engaged in action; cp. on this point Su. And Su.
But a further objection is urged as that which has to precede the systematic enquiry into Brahman we should assign something which that enquiry necessarily presupposes. The enquiry into the nature of duty, however, does not form such a prerequisite, since a consideration of the Vedanta-texts may be undertaken by any one who has read those texts, even if he is not acquainted with works.
It thus being ascertained that the whole Maitreyi-brahmana is concerned with the soul in the Sankhya sense, we, according to the principle of the unity of purport of all Vedanta-texts, conclude that they all treat of the Sankhya soul only, and that hence the cause of the world is to be found not in a so-called Lord but in Prakriti ruled and guided by the soul.
The Vedanta-texts do not, he will say, produce that knowledge which makes an end of Nescience, so long as the imagination of plurality is not dispelled.
For the same reason therefore we have to enclose in the meditation gunas mentioned in other Vedanta-texts; for being also connected with the meditation they subserve it in the same way. Here terminates the adhikarana of 'what is intimated by all Vedanta-texts. If it be said that there is difference on account of the text; we say no; on account of non-difference.
The general conclusion therefore is that the Kaushitaki-text under discussion proposes as the object of knowledge something that is different from the individual soul, viz. the highest Brahman which is the cause of the whole world, and that hence the Vedanta-texts nowhere intimate that general causality belongs either to the individual soul or to the Pradhana under the soul's guidance.
As has been said, 'By the application of knowledge on the part of the Sankhya, and of works on the part of the Yogins. And in the Bhishmaparvan we read, 'By Brahmanas, Kshattriyas, Vaisyas and Sudras, Madhava is to be honoured, served and worshipped he who was proclaimed by Sankarshana in agreement with the Satvata law. How then could these utterances of Badarayana, the foremost among all those who understand the teaching of the Veda, be reconciled with the view that in the Sutras he maintains the non- authoritativeness of the Satvata doctrine, the purport of which is to teach the worship of, and meditation on, Vasudeva, who is none other than the highest Brahman known from the Vedanta-texts?
But in all these I cannot see a clear indication, raised above all doubt, of the way to blessedness, whereby I might reach perfection'; and 'The wise Lord Hari, animated by kindness for those devoted to him, extracted the essential meaning of all the Vedanta-texts and condensed it in an easy form. The incontrovertible fact then is as follows. The Lord who is known from the Vedanta-texts, i.e.
Hence, Scripture being an authoritative instrument of knowledge in so far only as it has for its end action and the cessation of action, the Vedanta-texts must be allowed to be a valid means of knowledge with regard to Brahman's nature, in so far as they stand in a supplementary relation to the injunctions of meditation. This view is finally combated by the Mimamsaka.
The texts which represent Brahman as devoid of qualities have greater force The same reasoning applies to those passages in the Vedanta-texts which inculcate meditation on the qualified Brahman, since the highest Brahman is without any qualities. Up. Up. Up. Owing to the greater weight, we reply, of those texts which set forth Brahman as devoid of qualities. Up. Up. Thus everything is settled.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking