The "Science-as-a-Saarathi" (Saas, different from Software-as-a-Service :) model) verse that I
blogged about in the previous post, seems to be favorite to both Vallabhacharya and Yogi Gopeshvarji, as I came across another Brahmsutra 1-4-1-1 commentary where it is quoted.
Ok, a little bit of background won't hurt. The first chapter of Brahmsutra/Anubhashya is concerned about learning the Swaroop (Nature) of Brahm as the ultimate assimilation of all the Vedants. It has four sections, the first three basically covers all the Vedanta while establishing the Brahm's manifestation through Kaarya (Creation), Antaryaami (Soul-within-soul) and Upaasyaroop (Deity form) respectively. The fourth is interesting - it focuses on Prakirnak (Miscellaneous) sentences of the Vedas particularly the ones following the Kapil's Saankhya philosophy and being misunderstood as the essence of the Vedas. This section tries to remove such illusion by invalidating their authenticity, however Bhashya-Prakash author Shree Purushottamji is very adept in clarifying that there is no intention to invalidate the authenticity of the philosophy all together.
Here we go :
आनुमानिकमप्येकेषामिति चेन्न शरीररुपकविन्यस्तगृहीतेर्दर्शयति च || (ब्रह्मसूत्र १|४|१|१)एवं वेदान्तानां ब्रह्मपरत्वे निर्णीते, केचिद् वेदार्थाअज्ञानात् क्वचिद् वेदभागे कापिलमतानुसारिपददर्शनेन तस्यापि वेदमूलकत्वं वदन्ति | तन्निराकरणाय चतुर्थः पाद आरभ्यते | तत्र, ईक्षतेर्नाशब्दमिति सांख्यमतमशब्दत्वादिति निवारितम् | वेदेन प्रतिपादितमिति तत्राशङ्कते | आनुमानिकमप्येकेषाम् |Vallabhacharya first takes up the argument "Brahm is Ashabdam (indescribable), therefore Sankhya philosophy is valid as per the Vedas." He starts by quoting what one of the branches of Kath line of Saankhya teaches.
एकेषां शाखिनां शाखासु सांख्यपरिकल्पितप्रकृत्यादि श्रूयते |
'इन्द्रियेभ्यः परा ह्यर्था अर्थेभ्यश्च परं मनः |
मनसस्तु परा बुद्धिर्बुद्धेरात्मा महान् परः ||
महतः परमव्यक्तमव्यक्तात् पुरुषः परः |
पुरुषान्न परं किंचित सा काष्ठा सा परा गतिः' || इति काठके श्रूयते |
तत्र बुद्धेरात्मा अहंकारः | ततो महान् महत्तत्वम् | ततोअव्यक्तं प्रकृतिः | ततः पुरूष इति | न ह्यहंकारादयः पदार्था ब्रह्मवादे संभवन्ति | तस्मादेवंजातियकेषु तन्मतपदार्थानां श्रवणान्मायाप्रकृत्यविद्यावादा अपि श्रौता इति चेन्न | शब्दसाम्यमात्रेण न तन्मतं सिद्ध्यति |
In that branch, Buddhi - Atma - Ahankaar - Mahad Tattva - Avyakta Prakruti - Purush, that way the superiority hierarchy is established to prove the Maya-Prakruti-Avidya-Vaad philosophy. But as per Vallabhacharya, Ahankaar etc have no place in Brahmvaad, so that philosophy cannot be considered as coming from Shruti (Authentic). He gives a very beautiful linguistic explanation : philosophy is not proved by (arguments based on observation of) word-similarities only. He emphasizes the importance of (spatio-temporal) context in deriving the meaning of words. (Wow, contextual semantics. He could make a good professor in a linguistics department even today!)
'संदिग्धानां पदार्थानां पौर्वापर्येण निर्णयः |
न तू संदिग्धवाक्येन सर्वव्याकुलतोचिता' ||
Purushottamji explains by throwing a bit more light on linguistics "Ambiguities arise generally at the word meaning level. Words are parts of sentences and sentences those of a major axioms. Therefore meaning of the words should be decided in reference to the major axioms and not the other way around which would cause the pain of not being able to prove the philosophy."
अत्र हि पूर्वम् |
So, now he exemplifies, by quoting what should have been understood before (temporal left context) :
'आत्मानं रथिनं विद्धि शरीरं रथमेव तू |
बुद्धिं तू सारथिं विद्धि मनः प्रग्रहमेव च ||
इन्द्रियाणि हयानाहुर्विषयाँस्तेषु गोचरान् |
आत्मेन्द्रियमनोयुक्तं भोक्तेत्याहुर्मनीषिणः' ||
तदनु चत्वारि वाक्यानि | 'यस्त्वविज्ञानवान्' इत्यादि | तदनु 'इन्द्रियेभ्यः पराः' इति |
Then follow the four verses - these are the first four of the
"Science-as-a-Saarathi" blog post. So, now you, the blog reader, also get one of the contexts of that post. After that, one should understand the Indriyebhyah Parah verses quoted at the beginning of this Sutra-Anubhashyam (i.e. this blog post).
तत्र पूर्वसंबन्ध एवार्थ उचितस्तमाह शरीररूपकविन्यस्तगृहीतेः | शरीरेण रूप्यन्ते ये शरीरेन्द्रियादयस्ते विन्यस्ता यत्र रूपकभावेन रथादिषु तेषामेवात्र गृहीतिर्ग्रहणम् | अन्यथा प्रकृतहानाप्रकृतपरिग्रहापत्तिः |
Here is the beauty of Vallabhacharya. Not only he advocates the contextual meaning, but also ascertaining the validity of the contexts themselves! That is where he uses the second part of the Sutra. And, he is so adorable when he provides the definitions of novel terminology. In the present times, Shyamubava of Mumbai/Kishangarh also does that sometimes. Linguistic richness is the hallmark of one's intellectual wealth.
जीवप्रकरणं ह्येतन्मुक्त्युपायोअस्य रूप्यते |
योग्यं शरीरमारूह्य गच्छेदिति हरेः पदम् ||
तत्र जीवस्य ब्रह्मप्राप्तौ मुख्यं साधनं शरीरम् | स रथः | सर्वसामग्रीसहिताअपराधीनयानत्वात् | रथस्तु हयाधीनः | हयाश्च स्वबुद्ध्यधीनाः | सा च प्रग्रहाधीना | स च सारथ्यधीनः | स च स्वबुद्ध्यधीनः | सा च मार्गाधीना | स च प्राप्याधीन इति | एवं ज्ञात्वा युक्तसामग्रीकस्तद्देशं प्राप्नोति | तत्रेन्द्रियाणामात्मा विषयाः |
He establishes that Shareer (Body) is the main instrument in a Jeev's (Living Entity's) achieving/realizing the Brahm. Having established the analogy of the Rath (Chariot) to the Shareer (Body), he gives the dependency chain from Chariot to the Final Goal (Brahm). Finally he establishes that the subject matter of the Indriys (senses) is the Atma (soul). Purushottamji also quips in with additional proofs in that regard, which the curious should read from the Bhashya-Prakaash.
ते च मनसा सम्यक्त्वेन भावितास्तथा भवन्ति | विरक्तेन्द्रियाणामतथात्वात् |
बुद्धेरात्मा विज्ञानम्, तद् ब्रह्मविषयकं महद् भवति | ततः परमव्यक्तं, न प्रकटं, भगवत्कृपैव | सा तु भगवदधीना, न साधनान्तराधीना | स च भगवान् स्वाधीन इति | एवमेवार्थस्तस्योचितः | किंच, दर्शयति स्वयमेवेममर्थम् |
He brings in the devotional aspects of his philosophy by saying that the senses nourished with a devotional equipoised mind will also become the same, because they are detached. From the Saarathi analogy, Buddhi (Intelligence) is higher than Mind while Atma is higher than Buddhi. Completing the understanding of the original verse, Vallabhacharya says Vigyan (Science) is higher than Buddhi and Atma and it goes even higher when it is purely related to Brahm (The Supreme). Further higher is the Impersonal Brahm which is so by the grace of the Bhagvaan (Supreme). That grace is in turn dependent on Bhagvaan only and not to any endeavors. Bhagvaan is the Highest and Independent. This is the proper meaning of the original verses.
As the icing on the cake, he concludes the Sutra-AnuBhashya by quoting and explaining the following beautiful lovely verse and also completing the temporal right-context:
'एष सर्वेषु भूतेषु गूढोत्मा न प्रकाशते |
द्रश्यते त्वग्र्या बुद्ध्या सूक्ष्मया सूक्ष्मदर्शिभिः' || इति |
सूक्ष्मया उपनिषदनुसारिण्या बुद्ध्या | भगवज्ज्ञाने हि तत्प्राप्तिरिति | चकारात्, 'ततो मां तत्त्वतो ज्ञात्वा विशते तदनन्तरम्' इति स्मृतिर्गृहीता | तस्मात्, साधनोपदेशान्न सांख्यमतमिह विवक्षितमिति || १ ||
Religion and Science have been at odds since long in Europe. We know from the medieval history about the famous Galileo controversy where the Catholic Church prosecuted him and forced him to disown the heliocentric theory. To counter the brutal persecution of scientists by religious groups, some illuminati(enlightened) retaliated violently as depicted in the movie Angels and Demons starring Evan McGregor and Tom Hanks.
