Información biológica

Mahadvaccha I.4.7 (113)

And (the case of the term Avyakta) is like that of the term Mahat.

Mahadvat: like the Mahat; Cha: and.

An ar gu ment in sup port of Su tra 1 is given. Just as in the case of Mahat, Avyakta also is used in the Vedas in a sense dif fer ent from that at tached to it in the Sankhya.

The Sankhyas use the term ‘Mahat’ (the great one) to de note the first born en tity, the in tel lect. The term has a dif fer ent mean ing in the Ve dic texts. In the Ve dic texts it is con nected with the word Self. Thus we see in such pas sages as the fol low ing—“The great Self is be yond the in tel lect” (Katha Up. I-3-10), “The great Om ni pres ent Self” (Katha Up. I-2-22), “I know the great per son” (Svet. Up. III-8). We there fore, con clude that the term ‘Avyakta’ also where it oc curs in the Srutis, can not de note the Pradhana. Though the Avyakta may mean the Pradhana or Prakriti in the Sankhya phi los o phy, it means some - thing dif fer ent in the Sruti texts. So the Pradhana is not based on scrip tural au thor ity, but is a mere con clu sion of in fer ence.

Mahat is the Buddhi of the Sankhyas. But in the Katha Upanishad the Mahat is said to be higher than Buddhi. “Buddheratma

mahan parah.” So the Mahat of the Kathopanishad is dif fer ent from

the Mahat of the Sankhyas.

Chamasadhikaranam: Topic 2 (Sutras 8-10)

The Aja of Svetasvatara Upanishad does not mean Pradhana

M_gdX{deofmV² &

Chamasavadaviseshat I.4.8 (114)

(It cannot be maintained that ‘Aja’ means the Pradhana) because no special characteristic is stated, as in the case of the cup.

Chamasavat: like a cup; Aviseshat: because there is no special

characteristic.

An ex pres sion from the Svetasvatara Upanishad is now taken up for dis cus sion in sup port of Su tra 1.

The au thor next re futes an other wrong in ter pre ta tion given by the Sankhyas of a verse from the Svetasvatara Upanishad.

We find in the Svetasvatara Upanishad IV-5, “There is one ‘Aja’ red, white and black in col our, pro duc ing man i fold off spring of the same na ture.”

Here a doubt arises whether this ‘Aja’ re fers to the Pradhana of the Sankhyas or to the sub tle el e ments fire, wa ter, earth. The Sankhyas main tain that ‘Aja’ here means the Pradhana, the un born. The words red, white and black re fer to its three con stit u ents, the Gunas, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. She is called ‘un born’. She is not an ef fect. She is said to pro duce man i fold off spring by her own un - aided ef fort.

This Su tra re futes this. The Man tra taken by it self is not able to give as ser tion what the Sankhya doc trine is meant. There is no ba sis for such a spe cial as ser tion in the ab sence of spe cial char ac ter is tics. The case is anal o gous to that of the cup men tioned in the Man tra, “There is a cup hav ing its mouth be low and its bot tom above” Bri. Up. II-2-3. It is im pos si ble to de cide from the text it self what kind of cup is meant. Sim i larly it is not pos si ble to fix the mean ing of ‘Aja’ from the text alone.

But in con nec tion with the Man tra about the cup we have a sup - ple men tary pas sage from which we learn what kind of cup is meant. “What is called the cup hav ing its mouth be low and its bot tom above is the skull.” Sim i larly, here we have to re fer this pas sage to sup ple men - tary texts to fix the mean ing of Aja. We should not as sert that it means the Pradhana.

Where can we learn what spe cial be ing is meant by the word ‘Aja’ of the Svetasvatara Upanishad? To this ques tion the fol low ing Su tra gives a suit able an swer.

Á`mo{VénH«$_m Vw VWm øYr`V EHo$Ÿ&

Jyotirupakrama tu tatha hyadhiyata eke I.4.9 (115) But (the elements) beginning with light (are meant by the term Aja), because some read so in their text.

Jyotirupakrama: elements beginning with light; Tu: but; Tatha: thus; Hi: because; Adhiyate: some read, some recensions have a reading; Eke: some.

This is ex plan a tory to Su tra 8.

By the term ‘Aja’ we have to un der stand the causal mat ter from which fire, wa ter and earth have sprung. The mat ter be gins with light

i.e., com prises fire, wa ter and earth. The word ‘tu’ (but) gives em pha - sis to the as ser tion. One Sakha as signs to them red col our etc. “The red col our is the col our of fire, white col our is the col our of wa ter, black col our is the col our of earth” Chh. Up. VI-2-4, 4-1.

This pas sage fixes the mean ing of the word ‘Aja’. It re fers to fire, earth and wa ter from which the world has been cre ated. It is not the Pradhana of the Sankhyas which con sists of the three Gunas. The words red, white, black pri mar ily de note spe cial colours. They can be ap plied to the three Gunas of the Sankhyas in a sec ond ary sense only. When doubt ful pas sages have to be in ter preted, the pas sages whose sense is be yond doubt are to be used. This is gen er ally a re - cog nised rule.

In the Svetasvatara Upanishad in Chap ter I we find that Aja is used along with the word “Devatma Sakti—the di vine power.” There - fore Aja does not mean Pradhana.

The cre ative power is Brah man’s in her ent en ergy, which em a - nates from Him dur ing the pe riod of cre ation. Prakriti her self is born of Brah man. There fore Aja in its lit eral sense of ‘un born’ can not ap ply to Prakriti or Pradhana. Lord Krishna says, “Mama yonir mahad

Brahma—My womb is the great Brah man, in that I place the germ

thence com eth forth the birth of all be ings, O Bharata.” This shows that Prakriti her self is pro duced from the Lord.

H$ënZmonXoemƒ _Üdm{XdX{damoY…Ÿ&

Kalpanopadesaccha madhvadivadavirodhah I.4.10 (116) And on account of the statement of the assumption (of a metaphor) there is nothing contrary to reason (in Aja denoting the causal matter) as in the case of honey (denoting the sun in Madhu Vidya for the sake of meditation) and similar cases.

Kalpana: the creative power of thought; Upadesat: from teaching; Cha: and; Madhvadivat: as in the case of honey etc.; Avirodhah: no

incongruity.

The ar gu ment in sup port of Su tra 8 is con tin ued.

The Purvapakshin says, “The term Aja de notes some thing un - born. How can it re fer to the three causal el e ments of the Chhandogya Upanishad, which are some thing cre ated? This is con - trary to rea son.”

The Su tra says: There is no in con gru ity. The source of all be ings viz., fire, wa ter and earth is com pared to a she-goat by way of met a - phor. Some she-goat might be partly red, partly white and partly black. She might have many young goats re sem bling her in col our. Some he-goat might love her and lie by her side, while some other he-goat might aban don her af ter hav ing en joyed her. Sim i larly the uni - ver sal causal mat ter which is tri-col oured on ac count of its com pris ing fire, wa ter and earth pro duces many in an i mate and an i mate be ings

like unto it self and is en joyed by the souls who are bound by Avidya or ig no rance, while it is re nounced by those souls who have at tained true knowl edge of the Brah man.

The words ‘like honey’ in the Su tra mean that just as the sun al - though not be ing honey is rep re sented as honey (Chh. Up. III.1), and speech as cow (Bri. Up. V-8), and the heav enly world etc., as the fires (Bri. Up. VI-2.9). So here the causal mat ter though not be ing a tri-col - oured she-goat, is met a phor i cally or fig u ra tively rep re sented as one. Hence there is noth ing in con gru ous in us ing the term ‘Aja’ to de note the ag gre gate of fire, wa ter and earth. ‘Aja’ does not mean ‘un born’. The de scrip tion of Na ture as an Aja is an imag i na tive way of teach ing a Truth. The sun is the honey of the gods, though the sun is not mere honey.

Sankhyopasangrahadhikaranam: Topic 3 The five-fold-five (Pancha-panchajanah) does not

refer to the twenty-five Sankhyan categories

Z g§»`mong§J«hmX{n ZmZm^mdmX{VaoH$mƒŸ&

Na sankhyopasangrahadapi nanabhavadatirekaccha I.4.11 (117) Even from the statement of the number (five-fold-five i.e., twenty-five categories by the Sruti it is) not (to be understood that the Sruti refers to the Pradhana) on account of the differences (in the categories and the excess over the number of the Sankhyan categories).

Na: not; Sankhya: number; Upasangrahat: from statement; Api:

even; Nanabhavat: on account of the differences; Atirekat: on account of excess; Cha: and.

This Su tra dis cusses whether the twenty-five prin ci ples of the Sankhyan phi los o phy are ad mit ted by the Sruti.

The Sankhya or Purvapakshin failed in his at tempt to base his doc trine on the text which speaks of the ‘Aja’. He again co mes for - ward and points to an other text. “He in whom the five groups of five and the ether rest, Him alone I be lieve to be the Self; I who know be - lieve Him to be Brah man” (Bri. Up. IV-4-17). Now five-times-five makes twenty-five. This is ex actly the num ber of the Sankhya Tattvas or prin ci ples. The doc trine of Pradhana rests on a scrip tural ba sis. Here is the scrip tural au thor ity for our phi los o phy.

This Su tra re futes such an as sump tion. Panchapanchajanah, five-five-peo ple can not de note the twenty-five cat e go ries of the Sankhyas. The Sankhya cat e go ries have each their in di vid ual dif fer - ence. There are no at trib utes in com mon to each pentad. The Sankhya cat e go ries can not be di vided into groups of five of any ba sis of sim i lar ity, be cause all the twenty-five prin ci ples or Tattvas dif fer from each other.

This is fur ther not pos si ble ‘on ac count of the ex cess’. The ether is men tioned as a sep a rate cat e gory. This will make the num ber twenty-six in all. This is not in ac cor dance with the the ory of the Sankhyas.

From the mere enu mer a tion of the num ber 25 we can not say that the ref er ence is to the twenty-five Sankhya cat e go ries and that hence the Sankhya doc trine has the sanc tion of the Vedas.

The pas sage re fers to At man also. Then the to tal num ber will be twenty-seven. At man is de scribed as the ba sis of the oth ers. There - fore it can not be one of the twenty-five prin ci ples.

The prin ci ples of Sankhya phi los o phy are pro pounded as in de - pend ent of Purusha. But here the cat e go ries are known to be en tirely de pend ent on Brah man or At man who is said to be the main stay of them all. So they can not be ac cepted as the in de pend ent prin ci ples of Sankhya.

The word Panchajanah is a group de not ing term. It is the spe cial name be long ing to all the mem bers of that group. The group con sists of five mem bers, each of whom is called a Panchajanah. There fore the phrase ‘Pancha-panchajanah’ does not mean five times five be - ings but five be ings. Ev ery one of whom is called a Panchajanah. It is just like the phrase Saptarshi, which de notes the con stel la tion Ursa Ma jor, con sist ing of seven stars. The word Saptarshi is a spe cial name of ev ery one of these stars. When we say seven Saptarshis we do not mean seven times-seven stars but seven stars each one of whom is called a Saptarshi. There fore ‘Pancha-panchajanah’ does not mean five times five prod ucts, but five peo ple ev ery one of whom is called a Panchajanah. The twenty-five Tattvas of the Sankhyas are these: 1, Prakriti; 2-8, seven mod i fi ca tions of Prakriti viz., Mahat etc., which are causal sub stances, as well as ef fects; 9-24 six teen ef fects; the 25 is the soul which is nei ther a causal sub stance nor an ef fect.

Who then are these be ings called Panchajanah? The fol low ing Su tra gives the re ply.