prakṛtiśca pratijñādṛṣṭāntānuparodhāt ..1.4.23..

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 122 из 723Следующая ⇒

SUTRA I. 4. 23.

प्रकृतिश्च प्रतिज्ञादृष्टान्तानुपरोधात्॥१.४.२३॥

prakṛtiśca pratijñādṛṣṭāntānuparodhāt ..1.4.23..

… Prakritih, the material cause, the Prakriti. .. Cha, and. … Pratijna, the proposition to be proved, promissory statement, the enunciation. … Drishtanta, illustrative instances. … Anuparodhat, on account of this not being in conflict.

23. Brahman is the material cause also, because this view is not opposed to the illustrations and the proposition sought to be established, in the Upanishad texts under consideration. — 131.

COMMENTARY

Brahman is not only the operative cause of the universe, but is the material cause as well; for thus alone is harmony established between Upanishad texts which show the propositions to be established and illustrations to be given. Thus in Chhandogya Upanishad, VI., 1. 3., we find Uddalaka asking his son Shvetaketu, who had returned from his teacher’s house, after having finished his days, conceited, considering himself well-read and stern:

Shvetaketu, as you are so conceited, considering yourself so well-read and so stern, my dear, have you ever asked for that Adesha (generally translated as instruction, but meaning here the Ruler) by which we hear what cannot be heard, by which we perceive what cannot be perceived, by which we know what cannot he known?

Here the proposition to be proved is the existence of that Ruler or Adesha by knowing whom alone, everything else is known. This Adesha or Ruler must be the material cause also, otherwise how can His knowledge lead to the knowledge of the material universe. If he were merely the operative cause, then from mere knowledge of an operative cause you cannot know the material cause. In the case of the potter and the pot, the two causes are different, not so however here, for the above passage clearly shows the unity of the operative cause and the material cause. Not only the proposition to be proved asserts this unity, but the illustrations given in the whole of that chapter of the Chhandogya Upanishad, prove the same. Thus, to give a few illustrations:

My dear, as by one clod of clay all that is made of clay is known, the difference being only a name, arising from speech, but the truth being that all is clay.

And, as, my dear, by one nugget of gold all that is made of gold is known, the difference being only a name, arising from speech, but the truth being that all is gold.

And, as, my dear, by one pair of nail scissors all that is made of iron (Karshnayasam) is known, the difference being only a name, arising from speech, but the truth being that all is iron, thus, my dear, is that Adesha.

These illustrations show that by knowing the material cause, you know the various substances or effects of that matter, and they are opposed to the view that Brahman is only the operative cause. Nor is it possible to know the pot, from the knowledge of the potter alone. But here the text says, «you can know this universe by mere knowledge of Brahman alone». Therefore, for the sake of harmony between the proposition to be established and illustrations given therein, we conclude that Brahman is the material cause of the universe, while the text expressly declares Him to be the operative cause as well.

Познавательные статьи:



Как правильно слушать собеседника

Типичные ошибки при выполнении бросков в баскетболе

Принятие христианства на Руси и его значение

Средства массовой информации США