(105) Because of the Highest Self being shown as different (from the

individual soul) in the states of deep sleep and death.

Sushupti utkrantyoh: In deep sleep and death; Bhedena: by the

difference, as different; (Sushupti: deep sleep; Utkranti: departing at the time of death).

An ex pres sion from the sixth chap ter of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad is now taken up for dis cus sion.

In the sixth Prapathaka or chap ter of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, in re ply to the ques tion—“Who is that Self?” (IV-3-7), a lengthy ex po si tion of the na ture of the Self is given. “He who is within the heart, among the Pranas, the per son of light, con sist ing of knowl - edge”.

Here a doubt arises whether the Self is the High est Self or the in di vid ual soul.

The Su tra de clares that it is the High est Self. Why? Be cause it is shown to be dif fer ent from the in di vid ual soul in the state of deep sleep and at the time of death. “This per son em braced by the High est in tel li gent Self knows noth ing that is with out or within” Bri. Up. IV-3-21. This clearly in di cates that in deep sleep the ‘per son’ or the in - di vid ual soul is dif fer ent from the High est in tel li gent Self or Brah man.

Here the term “the per son” must mean the Jiva or the em bod ied soul, be cause the ab sence of the knowl edge of what is within and with out in deep sleep can be pred i cated only of the in di vid ual soul. The Su preme in tel li gent Self is Brah man be cause such in tel li gence can be pred i cated of Brah man only. Brah man is never dis so ci ated from all-em brac ing knowl edge. Sim i larly the pas sage that treats of de par ture i.e. death (this bodily Self mounted by the in tel li gent self moves along groan ing) re fers to the Su preme Lord as dif fer ent from the in di vid ual soul. The Jiva who casts off this mor tal body is dif fer ent from Su preme Self or Brah man. The Jiva alone passes through the stages of sound-sleep and death. Brah man has nei ther sleep nor death. He is wide awake al ways.

There fore Brah man is the chief topic in this Sec tion. The Chap - ter ex clu sively aims at de scrib ing the na ture of Brah man. The lengthy dis course on the in di vid ual soul in this Sec tion is to show that he is in es sence iden ti cal with Brah man.

nË`m{XeãXoä`…Ÿ&

Patyadisabdebhyah I.3.43 (106)

(The Being referred to in Sutra 42 is Brahman) because of the words ‘Lord’ etc., being applied to Him. “He is the controller, the Ruler, the Lord of all.” Bri. Up. IV-4-22.

Patyadi sabdebhyah: On account of words like ‘Lord’ etc., (the self in

the text under discussion is the Superme Self). The ar gu ment in sup port of Su tra 42 is given.

These ep i thets are apt only in the case of Brah man, be cause these ep i thets in ti mate that the thing spo ken of is ab so lutely free. Hence the word Self de notes the High est Self or Brah man and not the

Jiva or the em bod ied soul, from all of which we con clude that the Chap ter re fers to the Su preme Brah man.

Here ends the Third Pada of the First Adhyaya of the Brahma Sutras and of Sariraka Bhashya of Sri Sankaracharya.

SECTION 4 INTRODUCTION

In Topic 5, Sec tion 1, it has been shown that as the Pradhana of the Sankhyas is not based on the au thor ity of the scrip tures and that as all the Sruti texts re fer to an in tel li gent prin ci ple as the first cause, Brah man is the first cause.

The na ture of Brah man has been de fined in I.1.2. It has been shown that the pur port of all Vedanta texts is to set forth the doc trine that Brah man and not the Pradhana, is the cause of the world.

The Sankhyas say that it has not been sat is fac to rily proved that there is no scrip tural au thor ity for the Pradhana, be cause some Sakhas con tain ex pres sion which seem to con vey the idea of the Pradhana.

This Pada or Sec tion pro ceeds to deal with the con sid er ation of other Ve dic texts which are as serted by the Sankhyas to de clare that the Pradhana is the cause of the uni verse.

The whole of Sec tion 4 gives suit able and co gent an swers to all ob jec tions raised by the Sankhyas.

The fourth Pada or Sec tion of the first Chap ter is spe cially di - rected against the Sankhyas. This Sec tion ex am ines some pas sages from the Upanishads where terms oc cur which may be mis taken for the names of the in sen tient mat ter of Sankhyas. It de clares au thor i ta - tively that the Vedanta texts lend no sup port what so ever to the Sankhya the ory of cre ation or the doc trine of Pradhana. This Sec tion proves that Brah man is the ma te rial as well as the ef fi cient cause of the uni verse.

Adhikarana I: (Sutras 1-7) dis cusses the pas sage in Katha Upanishad I-3-10, 11 where men tion is made of the great (Mahat) and the un de vel oped (Avyaktam). Avyakta is a syn onym for Pradhana in the Sankhya Sastra. ‘Mahat’ means in tel lect in Sankhya phi los o phy. Sri Sankaracharya shows that the term Avyakta de notes the sub tle body or Sukshma Sarira as well as the gross body also and the term Mahat Brah man or the Su preme Self.

Adhikarana II: (Sutras 8-10) shows that ac cord ing to Sankara

the tri-col oured ‘Aja’ spo ken of in the Svetasvatara Upanishad IV.5 is not the Pradhana of the Sankhyas but ei ther that power of the Lord from which the world takes its or i gin or the pri mary causal mat ter first pro duced by that power.

Adhikarana III: (Sutras 11-13) shows that the

‘Pancha-pancha-janah’ men tioned in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad IV-4-17 are not the twenty-five prin ci ples of the Sankhyas.

Adhikarana IV: (Sutras 14-15) shows that al though there is con -

flict as re gards the or der of cre ation, scrip ture does not con tra dict it - self on the all-im por tant point of Brah man i.e., a Be ing whose es sence is in tel li gence, which is the cause of this uni verse.

Adhikarana V: (Sutras 16-18) proves that “He who is the maker

of those per sons, of whom this is the work” men tioned in Kau. Up. IV-1-19 is not ei ther the Prana (the vi tal air) or the in di vid ual soul, but Brah man.

Adhikarana VI: (Sutras 19-22) de cides that the “Self to be seen,

to be heard” etc. (Bri. Up. II-4-5) is the Su preme Self, but not the in di - vid ual soul. The views of Jaimini, Asmarathya, Audulomi and Kasakritsna are ex pressed.

Adhikarana VII: (Sutras 23-27) teaches that Brah man is not only

the ef fi cient or op er a tive cause (Nimitta) of the world, but its ma te rial cause as well. The world springs from Brah man by way of mod i fi ca - tion (Parinama Su tra 26).

Adhikarana VIII: (Su tra 28) shows that the ref u ta tion of the Sankhya views is ap pli ca ble to other the o ries also such as the atomic the ory which says that the world has orig i nated from at oms, etc.

Anumanikadhikaranam: Topic 1 (Sutras 1-7) The Mahat and Avyakta of the Kathopanishad

do not refer to the Sankhya Tattvas

AmZw_m{ZH$_ß`oHo$fm{_{V MoÞ

earaê$nH${dÝ`ñVJ¥hrVoX©e©`{V MŸ&

sarirarupakavinyastagrihiter darsayati cha I.4.1 (107) If it be said that in some (recensions of the Vedas) that which is inferred (i.e. the Pradhana) (is) also (mentioned), (we say) no, because (the word ‘Avyakta’ occurring in the Katha Upanishad) is mentioned in a simile referred to the body (and means the body itself and not the Pradhana of the (Sankhyas); (the Sruti) also explains (it).

Anumanikam: that which is inferred (i.e., the Pradhana); Api: also; Ekesham: of some branches or school of Srutis or recensions of the

text; Iti: thus; Chet: if; Na: No; Sarirarupakavinyastagrihiteh: because it is mentioned in a simile referring to the body (Sarira: body,

Rupaka: simile, Vinyasta: contained, Grihiteh: because of the

reference); Darsayati: (the Srutis) explain; Cha: also, too, and. The Sankhyas again raise an ob jec tion. They say that the Pradhana is also based on scrip tural au thor ity, be cause some Sakhas like the Katha Sakha (school) con tain ex pres sions wherein the Pradhana seems to be re ferred to “Be yond the Mahat there is the Avyakta (the unmanifested or the un de vel oped), be yond the Avyakta is the Purusha (Be ing or Per son)” Katha Up. 1-3-11.

The Sankhyas say that the word ‘Avyakta’ here re fers to the Pradhana be cause the words ‘Mahat’, ‘Avyakta’ and ‘Purusha’ which oc cur in the same or der in the Sankhya phi los o phy, oc cur in the Sruti text. Hence they are re cog nised to be the same cat e go ries of the Sankhyas. The Pradhana is called ‘un de vel oped’ be cause it is des ti - tute of sound and other qual i ties. It can not there fore be said that there is no scrip tural au thor ity for the Pradhana. We de clare that this Pradhana is the cause of the world on the strength of Sruti, Smriti and ra ti o ci na tion.

This Su tra re futes it thus. The word ‘Avyakta’ does not re fer to the Pradhana. It is used in con nec tion with a sim ile re fer ring to the body. The im me di ately pre ced ing part of the Chap ter ex hib its the sim - ile in which the Self, the body, and so on, are com pared to the Lord of a char iot, a char i o teer etc. “Know the soul to be the Lord of the char - iot, the body to be the char iot, the in tel lect the char i o teer and the mind the reins. The senses they call the horses, the ob jects of the senses their roads. When the Self is in un ion with the body, the senses and the mind, then wise peo ple call him the enjoyer” Katha Up. I.3.3-4.

All these things that are re ferred to in these verses are found in the fol low ing: “Be yond the senses there are the ob jects, be yond the ob jects there is mind, be yond the mind there is the in tel lect, the great Self (Mahat) is be yond the in tel lect. Be yond the great (Mahat) is the Avyakta (the un de vel oped), be yond the Avyakta there is the Purusha. Be yond the Purusha there is noth ing—this is the goal, the high est path” Katha Up. I.3.10-11.

Now com pare these two quo ta tions. In this pas sage we re cog - nise the senses etc. which in the pre ced ing sim ile had been com - pared to horses and so on. The senses, the in tel lect and the mind are re ferred to in both pas sages un der the same names. The ob jects in the sec ond pas sage are the ob jects which are in the for mer pas sage des ig nated as the roads of the senses. The Mahat of the later text means the cos mic in tel lect. In the ear lier pas sage in tel lect is the char - i o teer. It in cludes the in di vid ual and cos mic in tel lect. The At man of the ear lier text cor re sponds to the Purusha of the later text and body of the ear lier text cor re sponds to Avyakta in the later text. There fore Avyakta means the body here and not the Pradhana. There re mains now the body only which had be fore been com pared to the char iot in the ear lier text.

Now an ob jec tion is raised. How can the body which is man i fest, gross and vis i ble (Vyakta) be said to be unmanifest and un evolved? The fol low ing Su tra gives a suit able an swer.