with the Commentary of Medhatithi 339 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 345 из 350Следующая ⇒

sarveṣāmapi caiteṣāmātmajñānaṃ paraṃ smṛtam |
tad hyagryaṃ sarvavidyānāṃ prāpyate hyamṛtaṃ tataḥ ||85||

[Question] — “From among all these good acts, is t here any one act which has been described as more efficacious in securing to man his Highest Good?” — (84)

[Answer] — Of all these, Knowledge of the Self has been declared to be the most efficacious; since it is the best of all sciences, as Immortality is attained by its means. — (85)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

(verses 12.84-85)

The ‘Knowledge of Self’ is of two kinds — (1) the Knowledge of the Self, as something distinct from the body, the sense-organs and other things, — as the doer of acts and the experiencer of results, as the object of the notion of ‘I’ which forms part of the conception of the Self, as bearing the names of ‘Soul,’ ‘Conscious Being,’ and so forth, as enjoying, even after the death of the body, the fruits of actions that have not been spent up; and (2) the Knowledge of the Self as the one Supreme Entity ensouling all entities, including men and animals, — the one eternal cause of the birth, existence and dissolution of the entire universe which assumes diverse forms through the encrustations of Illusion, — whose exact nature is indicated by such Śruti texts as — ‘The Self is to be seen, to be listened to, to be meditated upon,’ and so forth.

Now of these two, the Knowledge of the Soul comes useful în the performance of acts. If there were no such entity, distinct from the body and other things, the experiencer of effects appearing after death, — then all injunctions relating to Heaven as the desired result and such others would be meaningless; and no one would undertake these acts; hence the said knowledge is of use in this.

As for the knowledge of the one Supreme Self, which is attained by long-continued meditation and service, it would be useful in the attaining of the realisation of the Self in its pristine nature, pure, enlightened, free, blissful, eternal and imperishable.

‘It is the bent of all Sciences, as Immortality is attained by its means.’

‘Immortality’ stands for the cessation of transmigration. — ‘By its means’ — ‘its’ referring to ‘Science,’ stands for the ‘Science’ or Knowledge of the Supreme Self; its the Knowledge of the individual Soul, being useful in the performance of acts, could not bring about Immortality; hence it must stand for the realisation of the True Self, including all that is dual and nondual, which has been taught in the Vedānta texts. — (84-85)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

(verse 12.85)

‘Ātmajñānam.’ — ‘Knowledge of the Supreme Soul, taught in the Upaniṣads’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja, Kullūka and Nandana); — ‘Meditation’ (Nārāyaṇa).

VERSE 12.86

Section X - The Highest Good

षण्णामेषां तु सर्वेषां कर्मणां प्रेत्य चैह च ।
श्रेयस्करतरं ज्ञेयं सर्वदा कर्म वैदिकम् ॥८६॥

ṣaṇṇāmeṣāṃ tu sarveṣāṃ karmaṇāṃ pretya caiha ca |
śreyaskarataraṃ jñeyaṃ sarvadā karma vaidikam ||86||

Among the six aforesaid actions, the performance of ‘Vedic Acts’ should be regarded as the most efficacious for bringing about happiness in this world and as well as after death. — (80)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The six actions — Vedic Study and the rest — are all conducive to Happiness; and among these the most efficacious in bringing about happiness are the Jyotiṣṭoma and other acts prescribed in the Veda.

“If the Genitive ending in the term ‘pūrveṣām’ (‘among the aforesaid’) denotes selection, — that cannot be right; as we have ‘selection’ in a case where among a number of things forming a single group as bearing equally upon a common objective, one of them happens to be possessed of some such efficiency as marks it out as pre-eminent; e.g., in the expression ‘among men, the Kṣatriya is the bravest’; where the Kṣatriya, who is included in the class ‘men,’ is selected as the ‘bravest.’ How, then, can there be any ‘selection’ of what has not been mentioned at all among those spoken of in the foregoing verse? ‘Vedic Act’ has not been mentioned. It might be argued that — ‘since Vedic Act is also included under Vedic Study, which has been mentioned, how can the former be regarded as not mentioned?’ But in that case t he ‘selection’ of a generic entity out of the same generic entity would be all the more incongruous; one never says — ‘among cows, cows are the most milch.’ ‘Vedic Acts’ could have been selected as the most efficient in bringing about happiness only if Non-Vedic Acts had also been spoken of as conducive to happiness. Further, what are the ‘Vedic Acts’ meant here? If it be held that the Jyotiṣṭoma and such sacrificial acts are what are meant, — then it will be necessary to point out what authority there is for taking the term as referring to these in particular; since the ‘Study of the Veda’ and several such acts.also are ‘Vedic.’ — In answer to this, the following argument might be brought forward — ‘The Study of Veda and such acts are prescribed in the Smṛtis also; and hence they are not Vedic; those alone can be called Vedic which are prescribed directly by Śruti texts only. Nor do the Study of the Veda and such other acts come in as the necessary details of all Vedic Acts. This is what is going to be explained in the next verse, by the words — each of those is fully comprised in the performance of the several rites’ — The answer to this would be that, if the said acts were not Vedic, then it would be difficult to explain their forming part of the Agnihotra and other Vedic rites; so that there would be no useful purpose served by the mention of these at all. Study of the Veda and such other acts have to be performed, as also the Agnihotra and other rites; and we do not know in what way one or the other of these would be ‘more efficient’ in bringing about happiness. The results of the two sets of actions not being the same, it is not possible to make any comparison between them on the basis of those results; as there is in the case of the two acts — the giving away of a cow and the performance of the Jyotiṣṭoma and other rites, the former simply leading the agent to Heaven, while the latter is conducive to a long-continued stay in

Heaven, as has been shown under Pūrva-Mīmāṃsā Sūtra, 1.3.17.”

The answer to the above is as follows — As for the argument that the declaration in question is meaningless, — some people offer the following explanation: — What is meant by the Vedic Acts being more efficient is that whenever there is opposition between what is prescribed in the Veda and what is laid down in the Smṛti, the latter is always to be rejected in favour of the former; this is what has been declared in such assertions as — ‘when two opposite injunctions are of equal strength, the two courses are to be regarded as optional alternatives, but when they are of unequal strength, the weaker Smṛti is always set aside by the stronger Śruti.’ This is what has been declared under 2.14 above, where it is stated that ‘when they are two contrary Vedic injunctions bearing on the same point, both the courses are to be regarded as lawful; when however there is opposition between Śruti and Smṛti, the latter is to be regarded as only reiterative, not injunctive.’

“If this be the meaning of the present verse, then, inasmuch as it has been already asserted in the text just quoted, why should it have been asserted again in the present text?”

It has been repeated for the purpose of making the fact clearer; so that there is nothing wrong in this.

It may be possible to find some other meaning of the present text. But the actual meaning appears to be as has been just explained. Thus the meaning comes to be that the ‘Vedic Acts’ are more efficient than those laid down in the Smṛtis, — the mention of ‘Vedic Study’ and the rest being meant to include all those that are laid down in Smṛtis. The peculiar form of the assertion being due to the exigencies of metre.

Our own view however is as follows: — What is stated here is a fact established by reasoning; and it is in a friendly spirit that the Author states, without reference to anything particular, a fact so established. In fact, what is directly spoken of Is the ‘Knowledge of Self’; what then could be the need of the mention of ‘Study of Veda’? Writers on Smṛti do not support their statements by their own statements. It might be argued that — “What are meant to be cited in support are the declarations of Yājñavalkya, and not those of the writer himself.” On the strength of the context we take the ‘Study of Veda’ and other acts as distinct from the Agnihotra and other acts prescribed in the Veda. As a matter of fact, the present declaration is not made with special reference to the ‘Knowledge of Self.’ All that is done is to take it as referring to the Śruti texts hearing upon the ‘Knowledge of Self.’ And the purport of it all is that — (a) the ‘Study of the Veda’ and other such acts prescribed in the Smṛtis are good, (b) better than these are the Agnihotra and other acts prescribed in the Veda, and (c) best of all is the ‘Knowledge of Self.’ If this were not what is meant, then the whole section would be found to have started with one subject and ending with a totally different subject.

Another view is that the term ‘Vedic Act’ here stands for the Knowledge of Self; and this on the ground that, the whole purpose of the Veda is the propounding of this knowledge.

As for the Injunctions contained in the Veda regarding the Agnihotra and other such acts, — these are meant to draw on young boys (slowly, to the undertaking, gradually, of the Higher Knowledge, through the simpler acts); just as old men lead children on to the drinking of unpleasant medicines (by beginning with giving them less unpalatable things).

Or, what is meant is that cultured men shall, by means of the ritualistic acts, shake off their inborn beginningless Illusion, which is the source of predispositions and attachments to sensual objects, — and having acquired the faculty of studying the scriptures, they shall in due course acquire dispassion and thereby loosen the bonds of desire, finally come to be led on to the highest purpose. In fact, the Vedāntins hold that the sole purpose of the Ritualistic section of the Veda lies in thus preparing the agent for the higher purpose. Thus what the present assertion — ‘the Vedic Act is in every way more efficient in the bringing about of good’ — points to is the act of ‘withdrawing from activity’ that is going to be spoken of later on.

Or, lastly, whether we accept Duality, or reject it as a dream, and accept the Non-dual Self as the only real entity, — in either case, the ‘Knowledge of Self’ is the better means (of attaining the highest good). As for the ‘Study of Veda’ and other acts since they involve the notion of duality, they have to be performed, since these also have been laid down in the Veda.

As regards the objection based upon the use of the Genitive ending (in ‘eṣām,’ etc.), this has been answered by pointing out that its use is justified by the explanation that it is based upon a distinction assumed in the mind; just as we have in the expression — ‘Māthurāḥ pātaliputrakebhyaḥ āḍhyatarāḥ,’ ‘the inhabitants of Mathurā are wealthier than those of Pātaliputra.’

“But in that case the Ablative ending should have been used (instead of the Genitive in ‘Ṣaṇṇām eṣām,’ ‘among these six’).”

This has been answered by the remark that there would be no difference in the denotations of the Genitive and Ablative endings in the present connection. — (86)

VERSE 12.87

Section X - The Highest Good

वैदिके कर्मयोगे तु सर्वाण्येतान्यशेषतः ।
अन्तर्भवन्ति क्रमशस्तस्मिंस्तस्मिन् क्रियाविधौ ॥८७॥

vaidike karmayoge tu sarvāṇyetānyaśeṣataḥ |
antarbhavanti kramaśastasmiṃstasmin kriyāvidhau ||87||

All these are fully included, each in its turn, in a particular course of performance of the Vedic Act. — (87)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The ‘Vedic Act’ stands, in this verse, for the Jyotiṣṭoma and other acts, and ‘performance’ also refers to the actual working out, in practice, of the details of those same acts that are laid down in the Veda.

‘All these’ — the study of the Veda and its esoteric sections and so forth — ‘are included’ in the said ‘act,’ which comprises them all; one act being included in one, and the other in another and so forth.

The ‘act,’ ‘karma yoga,’ having been already mentioned, the ‘performance,’ ‘kriyāvidhi,’ has been mentioned again, for the purpose of filling up the metre. Or some distinction may he drawn on the basis of the different substances — Soma and the rest — used at sacrifices.

(a) Now, the ‘Study of the Veda’ is included in the ‘Sattra,’ Sacrificial Sessions; on the ground that Veda is of use in connection with all the sacred texts that have to be recited at sacrifices. — (b) ‘Austerity’ is included in the Dīkṣā, the Upasada and the Soma sacrifices. — (c) ‘Knowledge’ is included in all sacrifices; as no sacrifices can be performed by men devoid of knowledge. — (d) ‘Control of the sense-organs’ comes in useful in all sacrifices, as it has been laid down for all sacrifices that ‘he shall not have intercourse with his wife; — he shall not eat meat’ and so forth. — (e) So also ‘Harmlessness’; in view of such declarations as — ‘he shall not deprive any creature, not even the lizard, of its life.’ — (f) ‘Service of elders’ also would come in in the same manner.

There are some people who hold that ‘withdrawing from activity’ is the only ‘act’; and the present text serves the purpose of indicating to these men the necessity of such positive acts as the ‘Studying of the Veda’ and the rest, ‘They are included’ — That is, these acts also become included as are of the nature of ‘worship.’ When the Upaniṣads prescribe expiation for persons devoted to ‘worship,’ they do so for the purpose of the destroying of sins, and they do not mean to countermand the act of worship which has been enjoined by Vedic texts. Hence in all cases, whenever one either omits to do what is enjoined, or does what is forbidden, he incurs sin.

“Under the circumstances (if all these acts would continue to be performed), how could there be Liberation?”

Liberation would be attained in the following manner: — (a) The sinful acts committed during previous lives would become exhausted by their effects having been duly experienced, — (b) fresh sinful acts would not. he done intentionally, — (c) those that might he done unintentionally would he expiated by the force of repeated ‘Breath-Suppression’ and other practices, — and (d) thus the man would be enabled to obtain the direct perception of the real nature of the Self.

It is for this reason that even one who is bent upon seeking Brahman should perform all such acts as ‘Study of the Veda’ and the like. As for the acts whose renunciation has been prescribed, the subject, has been dealt, with under Discourse VI.

The term ‘Kriyāvidhi,’ ‘performance,’ may be taken as standing for the act of devoted attention, prescribed by such passages as — ‘He should be heard, meditated upon, etc., etc.;’ and since there are many methods of such devoted attention, the text has rightly added the phrase — ‘each in its turn.’ For instance, in such passages as — ‘one should worship Brahman,’ ‘the Golden Person in the Sun,’ ‘this is the Self, free from sin,’ and so forth — the object of devoted attention is sometimes spoken of in some form attributed to It by our own mind; sometimes in the form of a ‘Golden Person,’ where the expression is used figuratively; sometimes again as the ‘lord’ of all forms of worships the sinless Self: — e.g., such passages as ‘Below Him, above Him,’ etc. It is on account of these diverse declarations that we have the repeated phrase ‘tasmin, tasmin.’ — (87)

VERSE 12.88

Section X - The Highest Good

सुखाभ्युदयिकं चैव नैःश्रेयसिकमेव च ।
प्रवृत्तं च निवृत्तं च द्विविधं कर्म वैदिकम् ॥८८॥

sukhābhyudayikaṃ caiva naiḥśreyasikameva ca |
pravṛttaṃ ca nivṛttaṃ ca dvividhaṃ karma vaidikam ||88||

The ‘Vedic Act’ is of two kinds — (a) the ‘active,’ which is conducive to happiness and prosperity, and (b) the ‘passive,’ which is conducive to the highest good. — (88)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

“The Vedic Act has all along been described as of the active kind; how is it that it is now said to be of two kinds?”

There is no force in this objection. Where it was said that the Vedic Act is of the active kind, what was meant was that the greater part of it is of that’ kind, as is found in the ease of the Agnihotra and other acts; but the same cannot be said of ‘renunciation’ and acts of that kind; — and yet both sets are equally ‘Vedic.’

‘Conducive to happiness and prosperity’ — i.e., which serve these purposes; and — ‘Conducive to the highest good’ — that which accomplishes this purpose. These two terms are to be construed respectively with the foregoing terms (‘active’ and ‘passive’). — (88)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (3.58); — and in Aparārka, (p. 1033).

VERSE 12.89

Section X - The Highest Good

इह चामुत्र वा काम्यं प्रवृत्तं कर्म कीर्त्यते ।
निष्कामं ज्ञातपूर्वं तु निवृत्तमुपदिश्यते ॥८९॥

iha cāmutra vā kāmyaṃ pravṛttaṃ karma kīrtyate |
niṣkāmaṃ jñātapūrvaṃ tu nivṛttamupadiśyate ||89||

That which is done with knowledge and brings about the fulfilment of desires either in this world, or in the next, is described as ‘active’; while that which is done with knowledge and without desires, is declared to be ‘passive.’ — (89)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘In this world’ — such as the Kārīrī (which brings on rain), the Vaiśvānarī (which secures a son), and so forth.

‘In the next’ — such as the Jyotiṣṭoma and the like.

All these are acts that bring about the fulfilment of some desired end. What is ‘Kāmya’ (lit. ‘desirable’) is really the reward; but the term is made applicable here to the action which brings about that reward; since as an instrument, that also is ‘desirable.’

‘Niṣkāma,’ which is done without desire for any reward, is the compulsory act.

‘With knowledge’ — is to be construed with both, as a man devoid of knowledge is not entitled to the performance of any Vedic Act If however ‘knowledge’ be taken as that of the esoteric section only, then it cannot qualify both. [It can go with the latter only.

The term ‘pūrva’ in the compound ‘Jñānapūrvam’ denotes precedence; hence the compound means ‘that of which knowledge forms the important factor.’ And the purport then comes to be that ‘knowledge is to be pursued as the most important end in view; and Vedic Study and other acts are to be pursued only to the extent that they have been enjoined by the scriptures.’ — (89)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 1033); — and in Mitākṣarā (3.58).

VERSE 12.90

Section X - The Highest Good

प्रवृत्तं कर्म संसेव्यं देवानामेति साम्यताम् ।
निवृत्तं सेवमानस्तु भूतान्यत्येति पञ्च वै ॥९०॥

pravṛttaṃ karma saṃsevyaṃ devānāmeti sāmyatām |
nivṛttaṃ sevamānastu bhūtānyatyeti pañca vai ||90||

He who devotes himself to the ‘active’ side, attains equality to the gods; while he who devotes himself to the ‘passive’ section, passes beyond the five material substances. — (90)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

(A) “It has been said that the ‘active’ act is that which brings about desirable rewards; and among actions leading to desirable rewards, some securing for the agent Heaven or some such results, while some bring about only visible results. There is none that is known to bring any such desirable result as ‘equality to the gods.’ Why then should it be said that the man ‘attains equality to the gods’? Those actions also in connection with which no particular rewards are mentioned, — such for instance, as the Viśvajit and other sacrifices, — have been held to have their reward in the attaining of Heaven. Thus we do not know what those acts are of which the reward consists in attaining ‘equality to the gods.’ — It will not be right to argue in this connection that — ‘Those actions that have been laid down as bringing a particular reward, when done by men who have no desire for that reward, bring about the said equality to the gods.’ — as this would involve the rejecting of what is directly asserted and thus assuming of that which is nowhere asserted. In fact what is spoken of in the Veda as the ‘reward’ of actions is something that is desired, such as village, Heaven and so forth, and not the taking of poison and such things. Under the circumstances, to say that ‘equality to gods’ is attained (as the result of acts) and yet it is not ‘desired,’ would be a contradiction in terms. — ‘How is it then that under Prohibitions, such results are mentioned as not desired?’ — It is in the very nature of the prohibited act that its results should be undesirable; what is evil cannot be desired [and the result of the prohibited act can only be evil]. If it be held that ‘equality to gods’ is the result of the compulsory acts, then that would deprive these acts of their ‘compulsory’ character; — a character that has been understood to belong to them on the basis of the declaration that they are to be performed ‘as long as one is alive.’ If it be absolutely necessary to assume some reward in the case of these acts also, we may assume it to consist in ‘escaping from sin;’ as such a reward, if assumed, would not be inconsistent with the compulsory character of the acts.”

(B) “As regards the latter part of the verse — ‘passes beyond the five material substances’ — we do not understand how ‘atyeti’ can mean ‘passes beyond’ or ‘becomes freed from.’ As a matter of fact, ‘atyaya’ is used in the sense of ‘laya,’ ‘becoming resolved into’; and certainly it is not meant that the soul ever becomes ‘resolved into’ the material substances; what is meant is that ‘it becomes one with Brahman.’ Others also have explained the passage to mean that ‘the man goes beyond (atikrāmati) the five material substances,’ — i.e., ‘his body is no longer made up of the five substances, it becomes purely luminous.’ But this also is nothing; as ‘Liberation’ means not being fettered with a body; so that whether the body is take to be constituted of five substances, or of only one (Light), it is all the same so far as the metempsychic bondage of the Soul is concerned.”

“For these reasons some other explanation, has to be found for this verse.”

The answer to the above is as follows: —

(A) The question has been asked — “What action is that of which equality to gods is the reward? The compulsory acts have no reward, while those that are done for the purpose of obtaining a reward, have distinct rewards mentioned along with them.” Our answer to this is, that the reward spoken of in the text is not one that is held to follow from all Vedic Acts; what is meant is that if a man does an act of the ‘passive’ kind, but with a distinct desire for its result (in the shape of Liberation), and somehow fails to attain it, then the reward that he obtains is equality to the. gods. The purport of it all is that, of all that is laid down in the Ritualistic Section of the Veda, the culminating point of the reward is the attainment of equality to the gods, and not Liberation. As for the acts prescribed in the Esoteric Section of the Veda, which leads to the result that the man never again returns to metempsychic existence, — if the Agent happens to be desirous of obtaining a reward, he becomes tainted by that hankering, and that act of his turns out, on account of that taint, to be a cause of bondage. It is in the very nature of actions that they prompt the Agent, to undertake them for the purpose of bringing to him a definite reward. Thus the compulsory acts also, if left undone, become sources of sin; and as such these also tend to invest the Agent with a material body (for the experiencing of the fruits of that omission). — “If one performs the compulsory acts, and does not perform those that are conducive to rewards, or those that are forbidden, there being no acts that would bring about a material body for him, the man would naturally attain Liberation; — where then would there be any use for the ‘knowledge of self’? This is what has been declared in such passages as — ‘With a view to avoid sin, one should perforin the compulsory and occasional acts; it is only when one is unfit for Liberation that he undertakes such as are either forbidden or conducive to desirable results.’” — This has been explained already: Knowledge is necessary for the destruction of Ignorance; until Ignorance has been destroyed by Knowledge, — it is not possible for one to become one with Brahman. It is with a view to this that action done without desires has been spoken of as ‘done with knowledge’ (Verse 89); — and also ‘selfishness is not commended’ (2.2). — When two persons act similarly, they gain equal prosperity; this is what is meant by the ‘equality’ (of gods); — the meaning being that he attains the same condition as that of the gods.

(B) As regards the objections against the declaration that the man ‘passes beyond the five material substances,’ and the confusion that is made regarding its real signification, — that also is not right. Because ‘atyaya’ may mean disappearance also; so that what the text means is that the whole phenomenal world, consisting of material substances, disappears for the man.

Познавательные статьи:



Коммуникативные барьеры и пути их преодоления

Рынок недвижимости. Сущность недвижимости

Решение задач с использованием генеалогического метода

История происхождения и развития детской игры