"Anu" in Anubhashya and Vedic Models

Anubhashya is one of the foundational scriptures of the Shuddhadwait school of philosophy and Pushtimarg branch of Hinduism religion. It was written by Vallabhacharya as a commentary on the Brahmsutra which was composed by Badarayan Vyas to summarize the various Upanishads.

What is the meaning of "Anu" in the Anubhashya? There are three different possibilities:

1. Brahm is omnipresent but is also saakaar and so can be atomic ( अण्वपि ब्रह्म व्यापकं भवति कृष्ण यशोदाक्रोडे स्थितोऽपि सकल जगदाधारो भवति I ). To signify the atomic nature of Brahm, the commentary is called Anu-Bhashya.
2.  Vallabhacharya used to compose his work in two forms - a sutra (small) form and an expanded form. He might have referred the sutra form commentary on Brahmsutra as Anu and the expanded form as Bhashya. Over time the two forms got merged and was called Anubhashya
3.  Vallabhacharya had studied under a Madhva guru. Madhvacharya originited the hierarchical summarization analysis (summaries of the whole Brahmsutra, each Adhyay, each section, each Adhikaran and each Sutra). He had called one of the summaries as Anubhashya and since Vallabhacharya had incorporated some of his verses in the commentary, out of respect for Madhvacharya he called his commentary also Anubhashya.

This is explained by Shri Shyam Manohar Goswami in the ongoing discourse on Anubhashya available from pushtimarg.net. He also explains nicely the Adhikaran thought process for Vedic literature composition consisting of five stages - Vishay(subject), Samshay(doubts), Purva Paksha(prior disagreeing views), Uttar Paksha(the views put forward) and Sangati(contextual relevance). The classification system used for subdividing a Vedic work has four classes - Samanvay(co-ordination), Avirodh(non-contradiction), Saadhan(means) and Fal(result) and in Pushtimargiya literature, we find Samanvay=Pramaam(basis) and Avirodh=Pramey(theorem).

On the second day of the discourse, he explains the modeling framework used in the Vedic times which appears to be similar to the modern scientific modeling. Since the Vedic literature is so vast, how can we create Samanvay( or Avirodh) for many different verses. If we can have a model of a specific type of Avirodh, then we can account for similar verses encountered later without having to establish the Avirodh for each different instance of the same model. A model in this sense is a generalized encapsulation of the common properties pertaining to the different instances of a subject matter of interest. In the modern science, we develop different types of models for analysis( and synthesis) of a natural phenomenon. These models can be mathematical, computational, statistical, dynamical, chemical or biological and represent the real phenomenon upto an error threshold. Today we can possibly develop a computational linguistic model of Vedic verses that can perform syntactic, semantic and pragmatic analysis of the verse to decide if it qualifies for an Avirodh established earlier and therefore mimic the Vedic modeling approach, only faster!

Meet Shree Vallabh, the Microblogger, er the Twitterer of the medieval period

The advent of the 21st century saw the rise of social media, the so-called web 2.0 which facilitated anyone with a computer and internet to publish their thoughts instantly for the entire world to read and comment. However, not everyone is interested or gifted to write a detailed articles or blog posts, that's where the microblogging phenomenon comes into picture. Twitter is an example of it as it allows one to publish a short (140 character i.e. 10-15 words) "microblog" to describe anything one wants. You can follow this blog on twitter @ShuddhAdwait

Now, fast backward to the medieval period (15th century AD) when scholars used to write lengthy commentaries on scriptures to establish their philosophy. However, there was one who was different! Meet Shree Vallabh, the microblogger, er the twitterer of the spirituality. Vallabhacharya's writing was so succinct that few sentences would suffice him to comment on a Brahm Sutra of Ved Vyas (who himself was a great twitterer to express the entire Vedas as Brahm Sutras or shall we say, Brahm Tweets!) Here is an example of a Sutra and the commentary:

अत एव न देवता भूतं च || १|२|८|२७ ||
वैश्वानरो न ऊत्येत्यादिमन्त्रैर्देवताया महाभूताग्नेर्वा वाक्यार्थतेति कस्यचिद बुद्धिः स्यात | तदप्यतिदेशेनैव परिहरति | मुख्योपपत्तिर्भगवत्परत्वे संभवति नान्यकल्पना युक्तेति ||

This sutra is a part of the Vaishvanar-adhikaran which is a part of the second section of the first chapter of Anubhashya. Here Vallabhacharya establishes that Brahm is the Vaishvanar who is universal and not just limited to the devata (the belly-fire or digestion acid of a living entity), because the main purpose of Brahm Sutra is related to the Supreme Brahm and not any other imagination.

Coming back to microblogging, it requires a great deal of intellectual skill to express a complex topic into a few words - anyone who had to do a comprehension or summarization as part of the school exam knows how difficult it can get. Late Prof G H Bhatt has glorified this brevity of Vallabhacharya in his book Shree Vallabhacharya and his Doctrines. Especially read the chapters 8 and 9 where it is also established how the mentality of Vitthalnathji was different from that of his father Vallabhacharya, resulting in stark contrast of writing and expressions.

Vallabhacharya has also written "macroblogs". In fact, the above book clarifies why Anubhashya is called Anu-Bhashya and hints that there was a Brihad-Bhashya written by Vallabhachrya but was lost. By the way, Bhashya in sanskrit means "the speech/commentary" which in bird language would mean "tweets", there you have it! The take away from this blog post is that depending on the circumstances, you should be able to convey a message as succinctly and precisely as possible. It reflects your intellectual scientific advancement. Otherwise you will litter the blogosphere with spam!

Buddhi < Atma < Science

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 ||

Science as a Saarathi

While reading Brahmasutra-Anubhashya-Prakaash-Rashmi, I came across this nice segment in the commentary on the Sutra 1-2-4-12 "विशेषणाच्च |" within the "गुहां प्रविष्टौ आत्मनौ इति" adhikaran 4 of the second section of volume 1.

यस्त्वविज्ञानवान भवति अयुक्तेन मनसा सदा |
तस्येन्द्रियाण्यवश्यानि दुष्टाश्र्वा इव सारथेः ||
यस्तु विज्ञानवान भवति युक्तेन मनसा सदा |
तस्येन्द्रियाणि वश्यानि सदश्र्वा इव सारथेः ||
यस्त्वविज्ञानवान भवत्यमनस्कः सदा अशुचिः |
न स तत्पदमाप्नोति संसारं चाधिगच्छति ||
यस्तु विज्ञानवान भवति समनस्कः सदा शुचिः |
स तु तत्पदमाप्नोति यस्माद्भूयो न जायते ||
विज्ञानसारथिर्यस्तु मनः प्रग्रहवान्नरः ||
सोअध्वनः परमाप्नोति तद्विष्णोः परमं पदम ||

The rough translation of the above four verses is :

He who becomes a possessor of non-science due to always uncollected mind, his senses become uncontrollable like the bad horses of a charioteer.
He who becomes a possessor of science due to always collected mind, his senses become controllable like the good horses of a charioteer.
He who becomes a possessor of non-science, always remains unbalanced and unclean and doesn't reach The Goal (of being liberated or being with Supreme) and goes (afterwards) to the realm of false reality.
He who becomes a possessor of science, always remains equipoised and clean, reaches The Goal (afterwards) from which he isn't born again as mortal.
He who has Science as his driver and the controlled-mind as reins, reaches the Supreme state of Vishnu.

Vallabhacharya has quoted this (methinks Kath Upanishad) in the context of explaining the concept of Jiv (Soul) and Brahm (Supreme). The Bhagavad Gita also has a similar verse "आत्मानं रथिनम, शरिरं रथमेव तु | बुद्धिं सारथिं विद्धि, मनः प्रग्रहमेव च ||". The author of Rashmi - Shri Gopeshwarji - intelligently construes the synonymity between बुद्धि (intelligence) and विज्ञान (science) and explains why बुद्धि is given the analogy of सारथि (charioteer) as follows : "बुद्ध्या पदार्थान जानातीति ज्ञाने करणत्वेन बुद्धिसारथेर्विनियोग उक्तः |" ( Buddhi or Intelligence facilitates in the process of acquiring knowledge about objects i.e. Science). In nutshell, this segment asks us to make Science our driver in life. Science is equally important to Society as is Spirituality.