The Vedânta-Sûtras with the Commentary of Râmânuja, Part III — SBE Vol. 48 (trans. George Thibaut, 1904)

If Sankarsha/za, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha are of the nature of the highest Brahman, then truly there can be no objection to a body of doctrine

1 Or ' by that which is knowledge and cause.'

p. 525

which sets forth this relation. The criticism that the Bhagavatas teach an inadmissible origination of the individual soul, is made by people who do not understand that system. What it teaches is that the highest Brahman, there called Vasudeva, from kindness to those devoted to it, voluntarily abides in a fourfold form, so as to render itself accessible to its devotees. Thus it is said in the Paushkara-sa^hita, 'That which enjoins that Brdhma^as have to worship, under its proper names, the fourfold nature of the Self; that is the authoritative doctrine/ That this worship of that which is of a fourfold nature means worship of the highest Brahman, called Vasudeva, is declared in the Satvata-sa/^hitd, 'This is the supreme ^•astra, the great Brahmopanishad, which imparts true discrimination to Brahma//as worshipping the real Brahman under the name of Vasudeva/ That highest Brahman, called Vasudeva, having for its body the complete aggregate of the six qualities, divides itself in so far as it is either the ' Subtle ' (sukshma), or ' division ' (vyuha), or ' manifestation ' (vibhava), and is attained iri* its fulness by the devotees who, according to their qualifications, do worship to it by means of works guided by knowledge. ' From the worship of the vibhava-aspect one attains to the vytiha, and from the worship of the vyuha one attains to the " Subtile" called Vasudeva, i.e. the highest Brahman' — such is their doctrine. By the ' vibhava ' we have to understand the aggregate of beings, such as Rama, Krishna, &c, in whom the highest Being becomes manifest ; by the ' vyfiha ' the fourfold arrangement or division of the highest Reality, as Vasudeva, Sankarsha^a, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha; by the c Subtle ' the highest Brahman itself, in so far as it has for its body the mere aggregate of the six qualities — as which it is called ' Vasudeva/ Compare on this point the Paushkara, 'That body of doctrine through which, by means of works based on knowledge, one fully attains to the imperishable highest Brahman, called Vasudeva/ and so on, Sankarsha^a, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha are thus mere bodily forms which the highest Brahman voluntarily assumes. Scripture already declares, * Not born he is born

526 vedAnta-sutras.

Scripture already declares, * Not born he is born

526 vedAnta-sutras.

in many ways/ and it is this birth — consisting in the voluntary assumption of bodily form, due to tenderness towards its devotees — which the Bhagavata system teaches ; hence there lies no valid objection to the authoritativeness of that system. And as Sankarsha/za, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha are the beings ruling over the individual souls, internal organs and organs of egoity, there can be no objection to their being themselves denoted by those latter terms, viz. individual soul, and so on. The case is analogous to that of Brahman being designated, in some texts, by terms such as ether, breath, and the like.

43. And on account of contradiction.

The origination of the ^iva is, moreover, distinctly controverted in the books of the Bhagavatas also. Thus in the Parama-sawhita 'The nature of Prakrzti consists therein that she is non-sentient, for the sake of another, eternal, ever-changing, comprising within herself the three gu/zas, and constituting the sphere of action and experience for all agents. With her the soul (purusha) is connected in the way of inseparable association; that soul is known to be truly without beginning and without end.' And as all Sa;?zhitas make similar statements as to the eternity of the soul, the Pa/z£aratra doctrine manifestly controverts the view of the essential nature of the ^iva being something that originates. How it is possible that in the Veda as well as in common life the soul is spoken of as being born, dying, &c, will be explained under Su. II, 3, 17. The conclusion, therefore, is that the Bhagavata system also denies the origination of the soul, and that hence the objections raised on this ground against its authoritativeness are without any force. Another objection is raised by some. 6a/z^ilya, they argue, is said to have promulgated the Pa^aratra doctrine because he did not find a sure basis for the highest welfare of man in the Veda and its auxiliary disciplines, and this implies that the Pa#£aratra is opposed to the Veda. — This objection, we reply, springs from nothing else but the mere unreasoning faith of men who do not possess the faintest knowledge

p. 527

— This objection, we reply, springs from nothing else but the mere unreasoning faith of men who do not possess the faintest knowledgep. 527 of the teachings of the Veda, and have never considered the hosts of arguments which confirm that teaching. When the Veda says, 'Morning after morning those speak untruth who make the Agnihotra offering before sunrise,' it is understood that the censure there passed on the offering before sunrise is really meant to glorify the offering after sunrise. We meet with a similar case in the 'bhumavidya' (Kh. Up. VII, 2). There at the beginning Nârada says, ' I know the Rtg~veday the Ya^ur-veda, the Sama-veda, the Atharva^a as the fourth, the Itihasa-pura^a as the fifth,' and so on, enumerating all the various branches of knowledge, and finally summing up ' with all this I know the mantras only, I do not know the Self.' Now this declaration of the knowledge of the Self not being attainable through any branch of knowledge except the knowledge of the Bhuman evidently has no other purpose but to glorify this latter knowledge, which is about to be expounded. Or else Narada's words refer to the fact that from the Veda and its auxiliary disciplines he had not obtained the knowledge of the highest Reality. Analogous to this is the case of SândilyzLS alleged objection to the Veda. That the BMgavata doctrine is meant to facilitate the understanding of the sense of the Veda which by itself is difficult of comprehension, is declared in the Paramasanzhit&, ' I have read the Vedas at length, together with all the various auxiliary branches of knowledge. But in all these I cannot see a clear indication, raised above all doubt, of the way to blessedness, whereby I might reach perfection ' ; and ' The wise Lord Hari, animated by kindness for those devoted to him. extracted the essential meaning of all the Vedanta-texts and condensed it in an easy form/ The incontrovertible fact then is as follows. The Lord who is known from the Vedanta-texts, i.e. Vasudeva, called there the highest Brahman — who is antagonistic to all evil, whose nature is of uniform excellence, who is an ocean, as it were, of unlimited exalted qualities, such as infinite intelligence, bliss, and so on, all whose purposes come true — perceiving that those devoted to him, according as they are differently placed in the four castes and the

p. 528