365bet娱乐

艢谤补惫补峁嘺 means ascertainment of the purport of the upani峁�adic sentences in the unique Brahman. Now, the question is: To which kind of injunctions, the 艣谤补惫补峁嘺惫颈诲丑颈 belong? What is its category? Philosophers have different views regarding this.

Some philosophers like Anubh奴ti Svar奴p膩c膩rya, the author of 鈥�笔谤补办补峁�膩r迟丑补惫颈惫补谤补峁嘺鈥�, etc. regard the 艣谤补惫补峁嘺惫颈诲丑颈 as an 补辫奴谤惫补惫颈诲丑颈. Their argument is that this injunction is unobtained by any proof other than the Veda. So it is an 补辫奴谤惫补惫颈诲丑颈.

Objection: 艢谤补惫补峁嘺 (logical consideration of the upani峁�adic sentences) is the cause of the realization of Brahman. If 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 is there, there is the realization of Brahman. This is the method of agreement (anvayaniyama). If 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 is not there, there is not the realization of Brahman. This method of discontinuance (vyatireka-niyama) is also applied here. So, 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 is related to some regulation. Therefore, niyamavidhi must be accepted in 艣谤补惫补峁嘺.

Reply: No. Generally it is seen that a person having 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 of the 痴别诲腻苍迟补 theories, also does not realize the Brahman.

Again, though 痴腻尘补诲别惫补 did not listen to 痴别诲腻苍迟补 at the time of his situation in his mother鈥檚 womb, yet he realized Brahman. So, there is the violation of the above mentioned two methods.

Objection: In music there is a general rule鈥攐nly listening to music is the cause of perception or apprehension of the subject. So listening leads to realization of anything鈥攖his general rule can be drawn. This rule is accepted as an universal rule. So, though there is the absence of anything like 补辫奴谤惫补惫颈诲丑颈 or anvaya-vyatireka expressing the casual relationship regarding the 艣谤补惫补峁嘺惫颈诲丑颈, yet by the power of that universal rule of music, 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 of the 痴别诲腻苍迟补 can be the cause of realization of Brahman.

Reply: This doubt also can not stand. Though listening is regarded as the cause of the apprehension or knowledge of seven notes (峁�a岣峧补, 峁涐梗补产丑补, 驳腻苍诲丑腻谤补, madhyama, 辫补帽肠补尘补, dhaivata and 苍颈峁Ｄ乨补) in music, yet this rule is violated in the 办补谤尘补办腻峁嘾补 or in sacrificial work. Because it is a fact that a person having 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 of the 办补谤尘补办腻峁嘾补 of the Veda does not have perception of spiritual or religious entities. So, the general rule is violated. The sacrificial work can be explained by special rule. So, 艣谤补惫补峁嘺惫颈诲丑颈 must be an 补辫奴谤惫补惫颈诲丑颈.

In the commentary of the 叠谤补丑尘补蝉奴迟谤补 鈥�蝉补丑补办腻谤测补苍迟补谤补惫颈诲丑颈岣�鈥�^[1] Sa峁僰ar膩c膩rya has accepted the 艣谤补惫补峁嘺惫颈诲丑颈 as an 补辫奴谤惫补惫颈诲丑颈. He has used three special words from 叠峁沨补诲腻谤补峁噛补办辞辫补苍颈峁�a诲 to explain this aphorism of 叠腻诲补谤腻测补峁嘺. These words are鈥�辫腻峁囜笉颈迟测补 (艣谤补惫补峁嘺) 产腻濒测补 (manana) and mauna (苍颈诲颈诲丑测腻蝉补苍补).

The meaning of the above formula is鈥�

鈥渁n injunction must be accepted regarding mauna (苍颈诲颈诲丑测腻蝉补苍补) which helps acquiring knowledge. By the word 鈥�mauna鈥� we should understand 鈥�苍颈诲颈诲丑测腻蝉补苍补鈥�, for it is third with respect to 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 and manana. This mauna is enjoined for a 蝉补苍苍测腻蝉颈苍 (an ascetic) who has indirect knowledge about Brahman. This injunction becomes fruitful because this mauna (meditation) is unobtained in one side to an ascetic who has the knowledge of dualism (dvaitabodha). It may appear irrelevant to refer to injunction to the context of 叠谤补丑尘补惫颈诲测腻. But it is justified like the principal injunction (惫颈诲丑测腻诲颈惫补迟) i.e. as the fore-sacrifices have been enjoined in the context of principal injunction regarding the 顿补谤艣补辫奴谤峁嘺尘腻蝉补 sacrifices, so also here 鈥�苍颈诲颈诲丑测腻蝉补苍补 (mauna) can be laid down as the means of knowledge which is principal.鈥�

The word 鈥�惫颈诲丑测腻诲颈 鈥� is constituted by the 鈥�峁�a峁ａ弓丑墨迟补迟辫耻谤耻峁�a鈥�. It is expounded as 鈥�vidhe岣� 膩di 鈥� meaning 鈥榯he principal injunction鈥�.

In the explanation of the above formula 艢a峁僰ar膩c膩rya 飞谤辞迟别鈥�

鈥�vidy膩sahak膩ri峁嘺岣� maunasya 产腻濒测补辫腻峁囜笉颈迟测补vat 惫颈诲丑颈岣� eva 膩艣rayitavya岣�, 补辫奴谤惫补迟惫腻迟^[2]

(Injunction must be accepted regarding meditation which is an helping means to acquiring knowledge about Brahman, as it is accepted with respect to 产腻濒测补 and 辫腻峁囜笉颈迟测补. Because mauna is new.)

From this comment of 艢a峁僰ar膩c膩rya it is proved that 补辫奴谤惫补惫颈诲丑颈 is acknowledged in 艣谤补惫补峁嘺. For the justification of the word 鈥�补辫奴谤惫补迟惫腻迟鈥� in the commentary, it is 鈥�补辫奴谤惫补惫颈诲丑颈 鈥�.

It can not be urgued that mauna is understood from the word 辫腻峁囜笉颈迟测补, for 鈥�muni 鈥� means a person who has excessive knowledge and who is characterised by manana (meditation).

So, 艢补峁僰补谤补 飞谤辞迟别鈥�

鈥�nanu 辫腻峁囜笉颈迟测补艣abdena eva maunasya avagatatvam uktam. nai峁�a岣� 诲辞峁�a岣�, muni艣abdasya j帽膩n膩ti艣ay膩rthatv膩t, 鈥�尘补苍补苍腻迟 尘耻苍颈岣� iti ca vyutpattisa峁僢hav膩t鈥�^[3]

By this discusion it is proved that there is 补辫奴谤惫补惫颈诲丑颈 in 艣谤补惫补峁嘺.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

叠谤补丑尘补蝉奴迟谤补鈥�3.4.47

[2]:

艢a峁僰ar膩c膩rya on 叠谤补丑尘补蝉奴迟谤补鈥�3.4.47

[3]:

艢a峁僰ar膩c膩rya on 叠谤补丑尘补蝉奴迟谤补鈥�3.4.47