iti śrīmatkṛṣṇadvaipāyanakṛtabrahmasūtreṣu prathamādhyāyasya caturthaḥ pādaḥ samāptaḥ

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 127 из 723Следующая ⇒

इति श्रीमत्कृष्णद्वैपायनकृतब्रह्मसूत्रेषु प्रथमाध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः समाप्तः

iti śrīmatkṛṣṇadvaipāyanakṛtabrahmasūtreṣu prathamādhyāyasya caturthaḥ pādaḥ samāptaḥ

Here ends the Fourth Pada of the First Adhyaya.

iti śrī-vedānta-sūtra-govinda-bhāṣye prathamo’dhyāyaḥ

Here ends the First Adhyaya of the Vedanta Sutras and the Govinda Bhashya.

॥इति प्रथमोऽध्यायः॥

.. iti prathamo’dhyāyaḥ ..

***

॥अथ द्वितीयोऽध्यायः॥

SECOND ADHYAYA

.. atha dvitīyo’dhyāyaḥ ..

॥प्रथमः पादः॥

First Pada

.. prathamaḥ pādaḥ ..

May that Lord Krishna be my refuge and goal, who with His discus called Sudarshana protected in the womb of his mother Uttara, the holy Parikshita, the son of Abhimanyu, even before his birth, from the burning arrows of the cruel son of Drona.

Note: This verse has a double meaning. It may be applied to Krishna Dvaipayana and the author of the Sutras also.

In the first Adhyaya, it was established that the Lord of all is the chief object, which the Vedanta texts teach; that He is the material as well as the operative cause of all; that He is different from everything; that He is the Inner Self of all things; that He is free from all imperfections; that He possesses inconceivable infinite powers, and has measureless auspicious qualities. This was established by the Samanvaya or correct interpretation of all the .Vedanta texts. But in the second Adhyaya, it would be proved that all contrary views establishing Pradhana to be the cause of the universe are wrong; and it will reconcile the conflicts of Smriti and reasonings, which go to establish that contrary view, by proving that those reasonings are fallacious, and the systems of creation, etc., established by the Vedanta are the only right view. Thus this chapter proves that the philosophy of Kapila is not supported by Vedanta texts.

Adhikarana I — The Refutation of Sankhya

At first, the author of the Sutras disproves that Sankhya is opposed to the sacred texts and removes the doubt that the Vedanta view contradicts those texts which establish the Sankhya theories. It shows that, properly speaking, there is no foundation for the Sankhya view in the Vedanta texts.

Doubt: Here the doubt arises, whether the view that Brahman is the sole cause of the universe, as established by the reconciliation of the texts, in the first Adhyaya, is not contradicted by the Sankhya Smriti.

Purvapaksha: The opponent says, if Brahman is the sole cause of the universe, then what becomes of those texts which establish the Sankhya view that Pradhana is the material cause of the universe. According to Vedanta, this Sankhya Smriti would find no scope. Kapila, the author of Sankhya, is called a Rishi in the following text of the Shvetashvatara Upanishad:

«It is the one who superintends every cause, all forms and all germs; who sustains with knowledge the wise Kapila, the first born, and who saw him born». — (Shvet. Up., V., 2)

This sago Kapila is thus an authoritative person, because the Shruti itself calls him the Rishi Kapila. This Rishi acknowledges the validity of fire-sacrifices, etc., as taught in the Karma Kanda (and is not a scoffer of ritualism like some other heretics). He has composed the Sankhya Smriti, as Jnana Kanda, in order to teach men the nature and means of getting release, to those who desire Mukti. The first aphorism of his system is:

… Atha, now… Trividha, three-fold… Duhkha, sorrow… Atyanta, complete, … Nivrittih, cessation… Atyanta, complete… Purusharthah the summum bonum.

The complete cessation of three sorts of sorrows is the highest end of man.

In another aphorism he says:

.. Na, not. … Drishtartha, visible means, … Siddhih, attainment. Nivritteh, after cessation. .. Api, also. .. Anuvritti, return. …. Darshanat, because of being found.

This cessation of pain is not possible by material means, because the relief afforded by them is temporary only; and there is the recurrence of pain.

In this system the non-sentient Pradhana is the independent cause of the world; and Pradhana creates the world in order to give release to the bound Jivas, or for her own sake. Though insentient, it creates the world; just as the insentient milk turns of its own accord into curd, etc. If, therefore, Brahman be held to be the sole cause of the universe, then Woe Sankhya doctrine becomes contradicted and will find no scope anywhere, because it is entirely devoted to the. setting forth of theoretical truth and not practical duty, and if it is not accepted in that quality, it is of no use whatsoever. Therefore, Vedanta texts should be so ‘Construed as not to contradict the system of Kapila who is a greet authority. It can not be said, that if we interpret Vedanta texts in conformity with Sankhya, then Manu and other Smritis like that would be contradicted. There is no harm, if Smritis like Manu and the rest are contradicted on theoretical points, for such contradictions would not make those works useless. For Manu and similar works inculcate practical religious duty, and are authoritative in matters of Karma Kanda and will thus have a scope of their own. The Sankhya Smriti, however, is purely theoretical.

Siddhanta: This objection the author replies by the following Sutra:

Познавательные статьи:



Техника прыжка в длину с разбега

Организация работы процедурного кабинета

Области применения синхронных машин

Оптимизация по Винеру и Калману