Preparación universitaria entre la juventud rural

Pranastathanugamat I.1.28 (28)

Prana is Brahman, that being so understood from a connected consideration (of the passage referring to Prana).

Pranah: the breath or life-energy; Tatha: thus, so, likewise like that

stated before; like that stated in the Sruti quoted before in connection therewith; Anugamat: because of being understood (from the texts).

The ex pres sion ‘Prana’ is again taken up for dis cus sion. In the Kaushitaki Upanishad there oc curs the con ver sa tion be - tween Indra and Pratardana. Pratardana, the son of Divodasa, came by means of fight ing and strength to the abode of Indra. Pratardana said to Indra, “You your self choose for me that boon which you think is most ben e fi cial to man”. Indra re plied, “Know me only. This is what I think most ben e fi cial to man. I am Prana, the in tel li gent Self (Prajnatman). Med i tate on me as life, as im mor tal ity” III-2. “That Prana is in deed the in tel li gent Self, bliss, undecaying, im mor tal” III-8.

Here the doubt arises whether the word Prana de notes merely breath, the mod i fi ca tion of air or the God Indra, or the in di vid ual soul, or the high est Brah man.

The word ‘Prana’ in the pas sage re fers to Brah man, be cause it is de scribed as the most con du cive to hu man wel fare. Noth ing is more con du cive to hu man wel fare than the knowl edge of Brah man. More over Prana is de scribed as Prajnatma. The air which is non-in - tel li gent can clearly not be the in tel li gent Self.

Those char ac ter is tic marks which are men tioned in the con clud - ing pas sage, viz., ‘bliss’ (Ananda), undecaying (Ajara), im mor tal (Am - ri ta) can be true only of Brah man. Fur ther knowl edge of Prana ab solves one from all sins. “He who knows me thus by no deed of his is his life harmed, nei ther by ma tri cide nor by pat ri cide” Kau. Up. III-1.

All this can be prop erly un der stood only if the Su preme Self or the high est Brah man is ac knowl edged to be the sub ject mat ter of the pas sages, and not if the vi tal air is sub sti tuted in its place. Hence the word ‘Prana’ de notes Brah man only.

Z dºw$amË_monXoem{X{V MoXÜ`mË_gå~ÝY^y_m øpñ_Z²Ÿ&

adhyatmasambandhabhuma hyasmin I.1.29 (29) If it be said that (Brahman is) not (denoted or referred in these passages on account of) the speaker’s instruction about himself, we reply not so, because there is abundance of reference to the Inner Self in this (chapter or Upanishad).

Na: not; Vaktuh: of the speaker (Indra); Atma: of the Self; Upadesat:

on account of instruction; Iti: thus; Chet: if; Adhyatma sambandha

bhuma: abundance of reference to the Inner Self; Hi: because; Asmin: in this (chapter or Upanishad).

An ob jec tion to Su tra 28 is re futed.

An ob jec tion is raised against the as ser tion that Prana de notes Brah man. The op po nent or Purvapakshin says, “The word Prana does not de note the Su preme Brah man, be cause the speaker Indra des ig nates him self.” Indra speaks to Pratardana, “Know me only. I am Prana, the in tel li gent Self.” How can the Prana which re fers to a per - son al ity be Brah man to which the at trib ute of be ing a speaker can not be as cribed. The Sruti de clares, “Brah man is with out speech, with out mind” Bri. Up. III-8-8.

Fur ther on, also Indra, the speaker glo ri fies him self, “I slew the three-headed son of Tvashtri. I de liv ered the Arunmukhas, the dev o - tees to the wolves (Salavrika). I killed the peo ple of Prahlada” and so on. Indra may be called Prana ow ing to his strength. Hence Prana does not de note Brah man.

This ob jec tion is not valid be cause there are found abun dant ref er ences to Brah man or the In ner Self in that chap ter. They are “Prana, the in tel li gent Self, alone hav ing laid hold of this body makes it rise up”. For as in a car the cir cum fer ence of the wheel is set on the spokes and the spokes on the nave; thus are these ob jects set on the sub jects (the senses) and the sub jects on the Prana. And that Prana in deed is the Self of Prajna, blessed (Ananda), undecaying (Ajara) and im mor tal (Am ri ta). “He is my Self, thus let it be known”. “This Self is Brah man, Om ni scient” Bri. Up. II-5-19.

Indra said to Pratardana, “Wor ship me as Prana”. This can only re fer to Brah man. For the wor ship of Brah man alone can give Mukti or the fi nal eman ci pa tion which is most ben e fi cial to man (Hitatma). It is said of this Prana, “For he (Prana) makes him, whom he wishes to lead out from these worlds, do a good deed.” This shows that the Prana is the great cause that makes ev ery ac tiv ity pos si ble. This also is con sis tent with Brah man and not with breath or Indra. Hence ‘Prana’ here de notes Brah man only.

The chap ter con tains in for ma tion re gard ing Brah man only ow - ing to plenty of ref er ences to the In ner Self, not re gard ing the self of some de ity.

But if Indra re ally meant to teach the wor ship of Brah man, why does he say “wor ship me”? It is re ally mis lead ing. To this the fol low ing Su tra gives the proper an swer.

emóÑï>çm VynXoemo dm_XoddV² &

Sastradrishtya tupadeso vamadevavat 1.1.30 (30) The declaration (made by Indra about himself, viz., that he is and with Brahman) is possible through intuition as attested by Sruti, as in the case of Vamadeva.

Sastradrishtya: through insight based on scripture or as attested by

Sruti; Tu: but; Upadesah: instruction; Vamadevavat: like that of Vamadeva.

The ob jec tion raised in Su tra 29 is fur ther re futed.

The word ‘tu’ (but) re moves the doubt. Indra’s de scrib ing him - self as Prana is quite suit able as he iden ti fies him self with Brah man in that in struc tion to Pratardana like the sage Vamadeva.

Sage Vamadeva real ised Brah man and said “I was Manu and Surya” which is in ac cor dance with the pas sage “What ever Deva knew Brah man be came That” (Bri. Up. I-4-10). Indra’s in struc tion also is like that. Hav ing real ised Brah man by means of Rishi-like in tu ition, Indra iden ti fies him self in the in struc tion with the Su preme Brah man and in structs Pratardana about the High est Brah man by means of the words ‘Know me only’.

Indra praises the knowl edge of Brah man. There fore it is not his own glo ri fi ca tion when he says ‘I killed Tvashtri’s son’ etc. The mean - ing of the pas sage is ‘Al though I do such cruel ac tions, yet not even a hair of mine is harmed be cause I am one with Brah man. There fore the life of any other per son also who knows me thus is not harmed by any deed of his. Indra says in a sub se quent pas sage ‘I am Prana, the in tel li gent Self.’ There fore the whole chap ter re fers to Brah man only.

Ord_w»`àmU{b“mÞo{V MoV² Z CnmgmÌ¡{dÜ`mV²

Am{lVËdm{Xh VÚmoJmV² Ÿ&

Jivamukhyapranalinganneti chet na upasatraividhyat

asritatvadiha tadyogat I.1.31 (31) If it be said that (Brahman is) not (meant) on account of characteristic marks of the individual soul and the chief vital air (being mentioned); we say no, because (such an interpretation) would enjoin threefold meditation (Upasana), because Prana has been accepted (elsewhere in the Sruti in the sense of Brahman) and because here also (words denoting Brahman) are mentioned with reference to Prana.

Jivamukhyapranalingat: on account of the characteristic marks of

the individual soul and the chief vital air; Na: not; Iti: thus; Chet: if; Na: not; Upasana: worship, meditation; Traividhyat: because of the three ways; Asritatvat: on account of Prana being accepted (elsewhere in Sruti in the sense of Brahman); Iha: in the Kaushitaki passage; Tadyogat: because of its appropriateness; as they have been applied; because words denoting Brahman are mentioned with reference to Prana.

But an other ob jec tion is raised. What is the ne ces sity of this Adhikarana again, “med i ta tion of Prana” and iden ti fy ing Prana with Brah man, when in the pre ced ing Su tra, I-1-23 it has been shown that Prana means Brah man?

To this we an swer: this Adhikarana is not a re dun dancy. In the Su tra I-1-23, the doubt was only with re gard to the mean ing of the sin - gle word Prana. In this Adhikarana the doubt was not about the mean - ing of the word Prana, but about the whole pas sage, in which there are words, and marks or in di ca tions that would have led a per son med i tat ing, to think that there also Jiva and breath meant to be med i - tated upon. To re move this doubt, it is de clared that Brah man alone is the topic of dis cus sion in this Kaushitaki Upanishad and not Jiva or vi - tal breath.

There fore this Adhikarana has been sep a rately stated by the au thor.

The Purvapakshin or the op po nent holds that Prana does not de note Brah man, but ei ther the in di vid ual soul or the chief vi tal air or both. He says that the chap ter men tions the char ac ter is tic marks of the in di vid ual soul on the one hand, and of the chief vi tal air on the other hand.

The pas sage ‘One should know the speaker and not en quire into speech’ (Kau. Up. III-4) men tions a char ac ter is tic mark of the in di - vid ual soul. The pas sage “Prana, lay ing hold of his body, makes it rise up” Kau. Up. III. 3 points to the chief vi tal air be cause the chief at trib - ute of the vi tal air is that it sus tains the body. Then there is an other

pas sage, ‘Then Prana said to the or gans: be not de ceived. I alone di - vid ing my self five fold sup port this body and keep it’ Prasna Up. II-3. Then again you will find ‘What is Prana, that is Prajna; what is Prajna, that is Prana.’

This Su tra re futes such a view and says, that Brah man alone is re ferred to by ‘Prana’, be cause the above in ter pre ta tion would in volve a three fold Upasana, viz., of the in di vid ual soul, of the chief vi tal air, and of Brah man. Which is cer tainly against the ac cepted rules of in - ter pre ta tion of the scrip tures. It is in ap pro pri ate to as sume that a sin - gle sen tence en joins three kinds of wor ship or med i ta tion.

Fur ther in the be gin ning we have “know me only” fol lowed by “I am Prana, in tel li gent Self, med i tate on me as life, as im mor tal ity”; and in the end again we read “And that Prana in deed is the in tel li gent Self, blessed (Ananda), undecaying (Ajara) and im mor tal (Am ri ta).” The be gin ning and the con clud ing part are thus seen to be sim i lar. There - fore we must con clude that they re fer to one and the same sub ject and that the same sub ject-mat ter is kept up through out.

There fore ‘Prana’ must de note Brah man only. In the case of other pas sages where char ac ter is tic marks of Brah man are men - tioned the word ‘Prana’ is taken in the sense of Brah man. It is a set tled con clu sion that Brah man is the topic or sub ject mat ter of the whole chap ter.

Thus ends the first Pada (Sec tion 1) of the first Adhyaya (Chap ter I) of the Brahma Sutras; or the Vedanta Phi los o phy.

SECTION 2 INTRODUCTION

In the First Pada or Sec tion Brah man has been shown to be the cause of the or i gin, sus te nance and dis so lu tion of the whole uni verse. It has been taught that the Su preme Brah man should be en quired into. Cer tain at trib utes such as Eter nity, Om ni science, All-pervadingness, the Self of all and so on have been de clared of the Brah man.

In the lat ter part of Sec tion I cer tain terms in the Sruti such as Anandamaya, Jyoti, Prana, Akasa, etc., used in a dif fer ent sense have been shown through rea son ing to re fer to Brah man. Cer tain pas sages of the scrip tures about whose sense doubts are en ter - tained and which con tain clear char ac ter is tics of Brah man (Spashta-Brahmalinga) have been shown to re fer to Brah man.

Now in this and the next Sec tion some more pas sages of doubt - ful im port wherein the char ac ter is tic marks of Brah man are not so ap - par ent (Aspashta-Brahmalinga) are taken up for dis cus sion. Doubts may arise as to the ex act mean ing of cer tain ex pres sions of Sruti, whether they in di cate Brah man or some thing else. Those ex pres - sions are taken up for dis cus sion in this and the next Sec tions.

In the Sec ond and Third Padas will be shown that cer tain other words and sen tences in which there is only ob scure or in dis tinct in di - ca tion of Brah man ap ply also to Brah man as in those of the First Pada.

Doubts may arise as to the ex act mean ing of cer tain ex pres - sions of Sruti, whether they in di cate Brah man or some thing else. These ex pres sions are taken up for dis cus sion in this and the next sec tions.

It is proved in this sec tion that the dif fer ent ex pres sions used in dif fer ent Srutis for Di vine con tem pla tion in di cate the same In fi nite Brah man.

In the Sandilya Vidya of the Chhandogya Upanishad it is said that as the form and the char ac ter of a per son in his next life are de ter - mined by his de sires and thoughts of the pres ent one, he should con - stantly de sire for and med i tate upon Brah man who is per fect, who is Sat-Chit-Ananda, who is im mor tal, who is Self-lu mi nous, who is eter - nal, pure, birthless, death less, In fi nite etc., so that he may be come iden ti cal with Him.

Adhikarana I: (Sutras 1 to 8) shows that the be ing which con -

sists of mind, whose body is breath etc., men tioned in Chhandogya Upanishad III-14 is not the in di vid ual soul, but Brah man.

Adhikarana II: (Sutras 9 and 10) de cides that he to whom the

Brahmanas and Kshatriyas are but food (Katha Up. I-2-25) is the Su - preme Self or Brah man.

Adhikarana III: (Sutras 11 and 12) shows that the two which en -

tered into the cave (Katha Up. I-3-1) are Brah man and the in di vid ual soul.

Adhikarana IV: (Sutras 13 to 17) states that the per son within

the eye men tioned in Chh. Up. IV-15-1 in di cates nei ther a re flected im age nor any in di vid ual soul, but Brah man.

Adhikarana V: (Sutras 18 to 20) shows that the In ner Ruler

within (Antaryamin) de scribed in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad III-7-3 as per vad ing and guid ing the five el e ments (earth, wa ter, fire, air, ether) and also heaven, sun, moon, stars etc., is no other than Brah man.

Adhikarana VI: (Sutras 21 to 23) proves that which can not be

seen, etc., men tioned in Mundaka Upanishad I-1-6 is Brah man.

Adhikarana VII: (Sutras 24 to 32) shows that the At man, the

Vaisvanara of Chhandogya Upanishad V-11-6 is Brah man.

The opin ions of dif fer ent sages namely Jaimini, Asmarathya and Badari have also been given here to show that the In fi nite Brah - man is some times con ceived as fi nite and as pos sess ing head, trunk, feet and other limbs and or gans in or der to fa cil i tate di vine con tem pla - tion ac cord ing to the ca pac ity of the meditator.

Sarvatra Prasiddhyadhikaranam: Topic 1 (Sutras 1-8) The Manomaya is Brahman.

gd©Ìà{gÕmonXoemV² Ÿ&

Sarvatra prasiddhopadesat I.2.1 (32) (That which consists of the mind ‘Manomaya’ is Brahman) because there is taught (in this text) (that Brahman which is) well-known (as the cause of the world) in the Upanishads.

Sarvatra: everywhere, in every Vedantic passage i.e., in all

Upanishads; Prasiddha: the well-known; Upadesat: because of the

teaching.

Sruti de clares, “All this in deed is Brah man, em a nat ing from Him, liv ing and mov ing in Him, and ul ti mately dis solv ing in Him; thus know - ing let a man med i tate with a calm mind.” A man in his pres ent life is the out come of his pre vi ous thoughts and de sires. He be comes that in af ter-life what he now re solves to be. There fore he should med i tate on Brah man who is ide ally per fect, who func tions through his very life-en ergy and who is all-light. “He who con sists of the mind, whose body is Prana (the sub tle body) etc.” Chh. Up. III-14.

Now a doubt arises whether what is pointed out as the ob ject of med i ta tion by means of at trib utes such as con sist ing of mind, etc., is