kāraṇatvena cākāśādiṣu yathāvyapadiṣṭokteḥ ..1.4.14..

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 114 из 723Следующая ⇒

SUTRA I. 4. 14.

कारणत्वेन चाकाशादिषु यथाव्यपदिष्टोक्तेः॥१.४.१४॥

kāraṇatvena cākāśādiṣu yathāvyapadiṣṭokteḥ ..1.4.14..

… Karanatvena, as a cause, by being the cause. … Cha, and. … Akashadishu, with reference to Akasha and the rest .. Yatha, as. … Vyapadishtah, described. Ukteh, on account of being declared.

14. The Brahman is described in the Upanishads as cause of Akasha and the rest, and the Brahman so described must be taken to be the cause of the universe, and not Akasha and the rest which are created by Brahman. — 122.

COMMENTARY

The word ‘Cha’ is used in the Sutra in the sense of ‘but’, and removes the doubt raised in the preceding passage. It is possible to ascertain from the Vedanta texts that Brahman alone is the sole cause of the universe, because with regard to other and the rest, Brahman as described in the Upanishads is declared to be the cause. «The Brahman as described» of the Sutra means the Brahman distinguished by omniscience, omnipotence, and other qualities as described in the defining Sutra, I., 1., 2. That Brahman alone is described in the Vedantas to be the cause of Akasha and the rest Thus the passage of the Taittiriya Upanishad, II., 1. 1, says, «Brahman is true, infinite and intelligence»; and shows that He has the qualities of omniscience, etc. This very Brahman is said to be the cause of the universe in the next sentence «from that Self (Atman) sprang Akasha, etc». Therefore, the word Self or Atman used here must refer to Brahman as described above — Satyam Jnanamanantam — and not taken in its etymological sense of all-pervading. Similarly, in the Chhandogya Upanishad, VI., 8. 1., «Sad eva somya idam agre asit» — «Being alone was in the beginning, one only without an equal», shows that Sat was in the beginning. And the next verse shows: «He thought — let me become many — « «And He created light, etc». Here also the creation of light, eta, proceeds from .an intelligent being, who thinks, and therefore the Sat of this passage must mean Brahman, who thinks; and not Pradhana, an unintelligent entity. Thus wherever creation is described, it refers to Brahman as defined in the beginning, namely, a being who is omniscient, omnipotent, etc. Of course, effect is similar to the cause, and therefore, sometimes an effect is spoken of as cause. But this argument can apply in the case of Brahman also. For where the text describes Akasha or Prana to be the cause of the universe, we say they really mean Brahman and not Pradhana, for though they may be the effect of Pradhana in a secondary sense, they are the effect of Brahman. This we shall explain later on in detail. The five words Atman, Akasha, Prana, Sat, and Brahman, literally denote all-pervading, all-luminous, all-controlling, the Essence, and the Great, respectively, and so in their literal sense also, these terms are more appropriate with regard to Brahman, than with regard to Pradhana. While the term Ikshan «thinking» is absolutely inappropriate with regard to Pradhana, and a metaphorical meaning is given to this term by the Sankhyas, in order to harmonize their theory with the texts.

Note: The word Ikshan is found in the Chhandogya passage referring to Sat. Vide, Chhandogya Upanishad, VI., 1. 1.

The next Sutra explains the two words Asat (non-being) and Avyakrita (undeveloped). These two words in their ordinary sense cannot be applied to Brahman, for He is neither non-being, nor undeveloped. Therefore, those Upanishad texts which say that creation proceeds from the non-being or the undeveloped, must be now explained.

Познавательные статьи:



Алгоритмические операторы Matlab

Конструирование и порядок расчёта дорожной одежды

Исследования учёных: почему помогают молитвы?

Почему терпят неудачу многие предприниматели?