But Vishnu is the subject-matter of all the Vedas), because such is the appropriate interpretation of all texts — 4.

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 18 из 723Следующая ⇒

COMMENTARY

The word ‘Tu’ means ‘but’, and is employed to rebut the above Purvapaksha. It is proper to say that Vishnu is the uniform topic taught in all the Veda’s, whether of Karmakanda or Jnanakanda. Why? Samanvayat. Anvaya means construing a passage according to the six maxims mentioned above. Samanvaya, therefore, means the complete construction of a passage after full discussion of the pros and cons thereof. When the above is applied to a passage, the proper sense of a scripture comes out. That sense is that Vishnu is really taught even in those passages which apparently teach performance of Karma or ritualistic ceremony: otherwise how can we say that the text of the Gopala Upanishad is valid which says, ‘Vishnu is sung in all the Upanishads’. Even the Lord Himself says so expressedly in the Gita:

I am that which is to be known In all the Vedas. I, indeed, the knower of the Vedas and the author of the Vedanta (G., XV., 15).

Similarly in the Bhagavata Parana, we find:

None except me knows what is really taught by the commands and prohibitions as laid down in the Karmakanda; what is really expressed by the Mantras in the Devatakanda, or what is the purpose of the passages to be found in the Jnanakanda. All the Karmakandas refer to me because I am the great sacrifice; all the Mantras praise me because I am the highest Devata; and all the Jnanakanda refers to me because I am the creator of the world and withdraw it again to myself. Verily, I am this all.

Again, ‘…’:

Scriptures enjoin duties as my worship, use Indra and all other names as my appellation, the texts that prescribe, as well as prohibit acts, point to me; so, in such a state none other than myself understand their true meaning.

That it has been said:

«Either directly or indirectly, all the Vedas teach Brahman». Brahman is directly taught in the Jnanakanda, where His essential nature attributes, etc., are fully described. He is indirectly taught in the Karmakanda, for sacrifices and ritualistic ceremonies are subsidiary to Jnana and thus indirectly lead to Brahman.

This is also the purport of the text already quoted:

I ask thee about that Person who is taught in the Upanishads. (Br. Up., 9. 21).

Again,

Him the Brahmanas seek to know by the study of the Vedas, by the sacrifices, etc., (Br., Up., IV., 4. 22).

As regards the objection that the Vedas teach the attainment of phenomenal things, like getting rain, procuring a son, or acquiring Heaven, we answer thus: These are taught in the Vedas, as incitement to the acquirement of divine wisdom by baby souls; and to produce a faith in mankind. For when one sees that the Vedic Mantras have the efficacy of producing rain, etc., then he gets faith in them and has an inclination to study them, and thus comes ultimately to discriminate the real and the transitory, the permanent and the illusory things of the universe, and thus gets love of Brahman and disgust with the phenomenal. Therefore, all the Vedas teach Brahman. Moreover, sacrifices, etc., taught in the Vedas produce phenomenal results like rain, etc., only then when Kama or strong will force is joined with the Mantras. Those very sacrifices lead towards the purification of mind and illumination of the soul, when performed without such a desire for phenomenon. Thus Karmakanda itself by teaching the worship of various Devatas, becomes part of Brahmajnana and is really the worship of Brahman, when the element of desire is excluded. Such a worship purifies the heart and gives a taste for Brahman enquiry and does not produce any other phenomenal desire.

Adhikarana V — Brahman is knowable

Vishaya: By the above reasoning and by the proper construction of Vedic passages, it will now be shown that Brahman is not inexpressible or indescribable by words.

There are, however, some texts which apparently teach that Brahman is unknowable by mind and inexpressible by words. As we hear in Taitt. Up., II., 4. 1:

From whom all speech, with the mind turns away, unable to reach Him.

So also,

He who in not expressed by speech and by which speech is expressed, that alone know as Brahman, not that which people here adore (Kena. Up., 1. 5).

Doubt: Now arises the following doubt. Is Brahman expressible by word or is He not expressible?

Purvapaksha: According to above Shrutis and many other texts Brahman is inexpressible by words. For had He been so expressible, He could not be said to be self-manifest. Moreover, we find in the Bhagavata Purana also the following:

«That divinity whom mind and speech not attaining, fall back from; whom I and even these Devas know not, salutation to that Lord». (The speech of Maitreya in the Bhagavata).

Siddhanta: To this the author replies by the following Siddhanta.

Познавательные статьи:



Как правильно слушать собеседника

Типичные ошибки при выполнении бросков в баскетболе

Принятие христианства на Руси и его значение

Средства массовой информации США