365bet娱乐

[Full title: Niyamavidhi in 艢谤补惫补峁嘺 according to the 鈥槼Р贯箖k峁�e辫补艣腻谤墨谤补办补鈥橾

厂补谤惫补箩帽腻迟尘补尘耻苍颈 composed 鈥�厂补峁僰峁�e辫补艣腻谤墨谤补办补鈥�. The followers of this composition say that 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 means that kind of mental disposition or state of the mind (肠颈迟迟补惫峁泃迟颈 which is of the form of logical consideration. This mental disposition is favourable to the production of certain knowledge鈥斺�榓ll the upani峁�adic sentences convey the meaning of the non-dual Brahman鈥�. By the word 鈥�肠颈迟迟补惫峁泃迟颈 鈥� we must understand the action caused by effort; for knowledge can not be accomplished by action and it can not be enjoined also. When Brahman is reflected upon the mind (补苍迟补岣�k补谤补峁嘺), the mind gets transformed. This transformation (辫补谤颈峁嚹乵补) is the 鈥�肠颈迟迟补惫峁泃迟颈 鈥�. It is a mental action. The unchangable eternal Brahman does not change. Its transformation is imposed because of illusion.

We have understood the meaning of 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 (a kind of 肠颈迟迟补惫峁泃迟颈). Now, this 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 does not produce direct or indirect knowledge regarding Brahman; for that knowledge is produced from the verbal testimony, perception etc. 艢谤补惫补峁嘺 means logical consideration (惫颈肠腻谤补) and it is not included in the six proofs i.e. perception, inference, analogy, verbal testimony, implication and non-recognition. So, it can not produce any knowledge.

Objection: Such meaning of 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 can not be accepted. Rather it means the verbal understanding characterized by the purport or meaning obtained from logical consideration of the Upani峁�adic sentences. This 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 verily leads to 产谤补丑尘补箩帽腻苍补.

Reply: No. 艢谤补惫补峁嘺 does not mean any knowledge. It means consideration. If 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 were to mean knowledge, then there would not be any injunction regarding 艣谤补惫补峁嘺. There is no scope of injunction with regard to knowledge. Knowledge depends on its object. It is not subject to any person or any injunction. It can not be done, nor it can be a matter which is undone, nor it can be done otherwise.

So, 艢补峁僰补谤补 蝉补测蝉鈥�

鈥�补迟补岣� 箩帽腻苍补峁� kartum, akartum, 补苍测补迟丑腻 v膩 kartum a艣kakya峁�, 办别惫补濒补峁� vastutantram eva tat; na codan膩tantram, n膩pi puru峁�atantram鈥�.^[1]

So, knowledge can not be enjoined by any injunction. For this reason, 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 can not mean knowledge.

Moreover, it is accepted that the 艣谤补惫补峁嘺vidhi is the base of the aphorism 鈥�ath膩to brahmajij帽膩sa鈥� which sanctions the obligation of consideration. The word 鈥�箩颈箩帽腻蝉腻鈥� means logical consideration. This consideration is not a kind of knowledge. It is a kind of action.

It is a mental activity consisting of:

1. 鈥�奴丑补鈥� (showing a complete argument or syllogism) and
2. 鈥�apoha鈥� (wiping out of the semblance of syllogism鈥斺��苍测腻测腻产丑腻蝉补苍颈谤腻办补谤补峁嘺).

This is the meaning of 艣谤补惫补峁嘺.

Objection: Let consideration (惫颈肠腻谤补) produce a result which can be the producer of 产谤补丑尘补箩帽腻苍补 through the ascertainement of the purport or meaning of the upanisadic sentences or through eradicating the sins like delusion regarding the purport (迟腻迟辫补谤测补产丑谤补尘补) etc. produced from that consideration. The sentences of 鈥�颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测辞辫补苍颈峁�a诲 鈥檚tarting from 鈥�sadeva somya鈥�^[2] give the meaning of the non-dual Brahman. Here consideration leads to the ascertainment of the purport of sentences thorugh destroying the obstructing factors like 鈥�迟腻迟辫补谤测补产丑谤补尘补鈥� etc. This is the direct result of consideration. If the obstructing factors (pratibandhakas) are destroyed, then the upani峁�adic sentences directly causes the knowledge of the non-dual Brahman. So, consideration can indirectly result in 产谤补丑尘补箩帽腻苍补. If the obstructing factors are absent, then a person gets the direct knowledge (补辫补谤辞办峁�a箩帽腻苍补) of Brahman from 鈥�tattvamasi 鈥� etc. directly.

Reply: This objection also does not stand. Because the ascertainment of the purport of sentences is not accepted as the cause of verbal understanding. The absence of impeding factors is not also said to be the cause of any action.

鈥�迟腻迟辫补谤测补鈥� (purport) means the intention of the speaker. It is not the cause of verbal understanding; for though there is not any intension in the words uttered by a parrot or uttered by a boy, yet a person can understand the meaning of that words. In fact, expectation (腻办腻峁僰峁Ｄ�), capability to be connected with another word (测辞驳测补迟腻) and proximity (sannidhi) are the causes of verbal undestanding. But if impeding factors are there, then consideration plays its role. So, consideration is not the cause of understanding the purport, but it destroys the impeding factors. Consideration can not be the cause of verbal understanding through the destruction of the impeding factors. Because the absence of the impeding factors is not the cause of any action. The 狈补颈测腻测颈办补蝉 admit the absesnce of pratibandhakas as the cause. But the question is鈥攚hat is the nature of pratibandhaka ? If it is said that pratibandhaka is different from cause, then there will arise the fallacy of 鈥�补苍测辞苍测腻艣谤补测补鈥� (reciprocal dependence). Again, if it is said that the defectiveness of the assemblage of causes (办腻谤补峁嘺蝉腻尘补驳谤墨) is pratibandhaka, then there will also arise the previous fallacy. In both cases the causes are included in the definition.

The defectiveness of the assemblage of causes can not be regarded as pratibandhaka. The paddies stored in the corn-bin do not transfer into sprout, because there is the absence of the assemblage of causes (办腻谤补峁嘺办奴迟腻产丑腻惫补) i.e. there is the defectiveness of the assemblage of causes (办腻谤补峁嘺蝉腻尘补驳谤墨 ) in those paddies. But no one says that the coriander (产墨箩补诲丑腻苍测补) is the impeding factor of sprout. Actually, the absence of pratibandhaka is 鈥�补苍测补迟丑腻siddha鈥� (an unessential cause or a concomitant circumstance) to an effect like 鈥�诲补峁囜笉补迟惫补鈥� (the state of being a stick) to a pot.

From this discussion, it is proved that the knowledge of the purport of sentences or the absence of the obstructing factors produced from the consideration of the purport, can not be the cause of effect.

If it is accepted that the 产谤补丑尘补箩帽腻苍补 is produced from consideration which is different from the varbal testimony and which is of the form of inference, then the validity of that 产谤补丑尘补箩帽腻苍补 will depend on another cause. It will lead to par补迟补岣�pr膩m膩峁噛av膩da. But the Advaitins and the 笔谤腻产丑腻办补谤颈苍蝉 admit the 鈥�sv补迟补岣�pr膩m膩峁噛av膩da鈥� with reference to validity of knowledge. According to them, the authencity of knowledge is produced with that knowledge and it is realised at the time of acquiring of that knowledge. There is no necessity of admitting a seperate cause for the validity of knowledge.

Therefore, according to the followers of 鈥�厂补峁僰峁�e辫补艣腻谤墨谤补办补鈥�, 产谤补丑尘补箩帽腻苍补 is not produced from consideration. Consideration only helps in the ascertainment of the purport of sentences and through this it eradicates the obtructing factors. For the eradication of the obstructing factors like sins, niyamavidhi is accepted in 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 i.e. 惫颈肠腻谤补. The word 鈥�诲谤补峁ａ弓补惫测补岣�鈥� in the injunction is also meant for the praise of the soul. It is used for instigating the striver in the realization of the soul or Brahman. The result of 艣谤补惫补峁嘺 is not mentioned here by the word 鈥�诲谤补峁ａ弓补惫测补岣�鈥�.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

艢膩峁僰arabh膩峁�yam on Brahmas奴tra鈥�1.1.4.

[2]:

颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测辞辫补苍颈峁�a诲 6.2.1.

[???] to 鈥�tat satya峁� sa 膩tm膩 tattvamasi 鈥� [Ibid 6.8.7.]