And because all these objections are similarity applicable to your view also, therefore, it is not to be accepted. — 165

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 153 из 723Следующая ⇒

SUTRA II. 1. 29.

स्वपक्षदोषाच्च॥२.१.२९॥

svapakṣadoṣācca ..2.1.29..

.. Shvapakshe, in one’s own view, in the opponent’s theory that the Jiva is the creative agent. .. Doshat, because of the defect of imperfections .. Cha, and.

29. And because all these objections are similarity applicable to your view also, therefore, it is not to be accepted. — 165

COMMENTARY

The objection raised by you to our theory equally applies to your theory also. If Jiva is the creative agent, does he create with his entire energy or a portion of his energy? In the case of Brahman, the objection has been answered by us already, but in the case of Jiva being the agent, there is no possibility of getting out of the difficulty.

Now the author raises another objection and answers it The doubt arises whether Brahman shows any partiality to any Jiva, and, if so, whether it is possible for such a Brahman to be the creator. The text says Brahman is pure truth, knowledge and infinity. He is more being, etc. In these texts we do not find any energy attributed to Him. It is seen that beings possessed of energy or power (Shakti) have only the capacity to produce wonderful results, such as a carpenter and others. A man may have the whole knowledge of the art of carpentry, but if he has no power, he cannot accomplish any thing. To this objection, the author answers:

SUTRA II. 1. 30.

सर्वोपेता च तद्दर्शनात्॥२.१.३०॥

sarvopetā ca taddarśanāt ..2.1.30..

.. Sarva, all, all powers. .. Upeta, endowed with, possessed with. … This is a word formed with the affix «Trich». The crude form is «Upetri»... Cha, and, alone, … Tat, that, the possession of such power, … Darshanat, because it is seen.

30. The Lord alone is possessed of all powers, because it is so seen in the text. — 166.

COMMENTARY

The supreme Self alone is endowed with all sorts of energies (Shakti). Because we find Vedic texts to that effect:

Shvetashvatara Upanishad, I. 3: …

They, immersed in meditation, saw the self-energy of the God, eonecaled in its own qualities. Who one alone pervades and presides over all other causes, such as time, nature, destiny, etc.

So also Shvet. Up., IV. I.:

He who, one and without any colour, creates many colours through His manifold powers, and who places in them all beneficial objects with His purposes hidden, who at the time of Pralaya withdraws within Himself the whole universe. May He endow us with good understanding.

So also Shvetashvatara Upanishad, VI, 8:

There is no effect and no cause known of Him. no one is seen like unto Him or better. His high power is revealed as manifold, as essential, and so His knowledge, force, and action.

Similarly, in the Smriti we find Him described a9 possessing powers of various sorts; such as Vishnu Shakti is said to be the highest.

No doubt these powers are all inconceivable as says the Smriti: He is without hands and feet, His power is inconceivable, He is the Lord, of Self, not to be found by reasoning, and, possessed of. .thousands of powers. Therefore, it follows that Brahman is tin agent in the act of creation, etc., because of His being endowed with infinite and inconceivable powers. The texts declaring that Brahman is the tru9 knowledge, bliss, etc., reveal His essential nature, while, on the other hand, the texts like Devatma Shakti etc., of the Shvetashvatara Upanishad, declare His manifold powers. Consequently, the nature of Brahman is one which is endowed with powers Therefore, in the texts «He willed, etc»., «He saw, etc»., we find Him possessed of the power of volition (Sankalpa) and the rest Both sorts of texts — those declaring Brahman to be mere knowledge, existence, bliss, etc. and those declaring Him as willing, thinking and creating, etc., — are of equal validity and authority, because both are Shrutis and there is no difference in them as such.

The author raises another objection and answers it again.

Objection: Brahman cannot be the creator or agent, because He has no sense organs. Though Devas and others are possessed of powers, yet they are seen to be active agents in creation because they have got sense organs and not because they have got merely powers. But Brahman is without sense organs, how can He be capable of world activity? Even the same Shvetashvatara Upanishad, (III., 19) that you have quoted, to prove the possession of all powers by Brahman, declares definitely that He has no sense organs:

He sees without eyes, He hears without ears, without hands and feet He hastens and grasps, He knows whatever is knowable, but of him there is no knower; they declare Him to be the first, and the mighty person.

To this objection the author replies:

Познавательные статьи:



Как правильно слушать собеседника

Типичные ошибки при выполнении бросков в баскетболе

Принятие христианства на Руси и его значение

Средства массовой информации США