If it be objected that the term, at signifying modification, cannot denote Brahman (the objection is declared to be) not valid): for the (affix in the) term signifies abundance. 


Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!



ЗНАЕТЕ ЛИ ВЫ?

If it be objected that the term, at signifying modification, cannot denote Brahman (the objection is declared to be) not valid): for the (affix in the) term signifies abundance.

13. If it be objected that the term, at signifying modification, cannot denote Brahman (the objection is declared to be) not valid): for the (affix in the) term signifies abundance.

 

It cannot be said that the affix in the term is appropriate only when it denotes Prakriti, etc.; since they are either products or deities presiding over the modified, but not in the case of the Supreme Being. For he is called Anandamaya because He is perfect in bliss, not because he is a modification of it. And also of other terms. Food, etc., only abundance is meant. From the explanation of the word Anna (food) given in the Vedic text, ‘It is eaten and is the eater of all beings’, it is right to take the term (affix) in the sense of abundance. The state of being eaten is of course the state of being depended upon (by all creatures) for their means of living. In the sentence, He indeed is this’, (T. U. ii. 2) reference to the other (the distant one) is begun. ‘Those who meditate on Food a Brahman’, etc. (T. U. ii. 2). As these texts have the word Brahman used in them, and as Brahman appears in many forms, there is no modification meant. Hence no contradiction arises.

It would not be consistent to interpret (the terms) in a different way.

The termination may also signify the nature of the thing itself as in the expression ‘the Sun is a flood of effulgence’.

14. And on account of His being stated as the cause of the activity of the world, (which furnishes a reason) for His being Anandamaya.

For the text says (of Brahman) Who could make the world) act or who could make it act well, if that Akasha (Vishnu who shines on all sides) should not abound in bliss’, (T. U. ii., 7).

 

15. And because (that i.e., Brahman only) which is (distinctly) described by the mantravarna (the vedic text) is denoted (by the terms Annamaya, etc.).

 

The text having (briefly) begun with ‘He who knows Brahman attains to the highest (Brahman), goes on to describe Brahman thus, “that which is true, intelligent, and unlimited in bliss is Brahman ; so it will be observed on advertence to the identical significance (of the attributes given in the definition at the commencement, and of the attributes used along with Annamaya, etc.), that the same Brahman is sung under Annamaya and other names.

Further no difficulty is caused by the mention of Brahman as a limb of the blissful. For in the Chaturveda Sikha text, “ He is the head, he is the right arm, he is the left arm, he is the trunk. He is the tail (feet),” the Lord Himself is spoken of as different members of the body. Accordingly’ the Brihat-Samhita says ‘The head is Narayana, the right arm is Pradyumna, the left arm is Anirudha, and the trunk is Vasudeva’. Again it says Narayana is the trunk, Vasudeva is the head, Sankarshana is the tail; thus the same one appears as five (in five forms, with which the gracious Lord in blissful sport arranges Himself as parts and the whole (of a body); and on account of his divine powers no objection or inconsistency should be supposed in the case of Him the redeemer’. Reasoning is of no possible avail where it cannot reach; and but little knowledge is possible of Him who is immeasurable.

Further in the term Annarasa maya, (He who is the perfect essence of food), the word ‘Rasa’ used to distinguish food, etc., (from ordinary food, etc.), shows that only the pure spiritual essence of Brahman is meant, which is present in the various things.

And the reference made by the term ‘this’ applies by the principle of proximity to that which is abiding in the visible (head).

‘The glorious Vishnu, Lord of all, is spoken of as another (by terms implying separateness), on account of His all-powerful nature and of His displaying Himself in many forms’ (Brahmandapurana). For the reasons shown above, it cannot be said that Virincha or any other is Anandamaya.

 



Поделиться:


Последнее изменение этой страницы: 2024-07-06; просмотров: 75; Нарушение авторского права страницы; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы!

infopedia.su Все материалы представленные на сайте исключительно с целью ознакомления читателями и не преследуют коммерческих целей или нарушение авторских прав. Обратная связь - 216.73.216.196 (0.007 с.)