[Advaita-l] जिज्ञासाधिकरणे वर्णकचतुष्टयम् [An essay on the First Sutra] - Part 3

[V Subrahmanian]

>
>
>> श्रीग्रुभ्यो नमः
>>
>>
>> जिज्ञासाधिकरणे वर्णकचतुष्टयम्
>>
>>
>> शंकरं शंकराचार्यं केशवं बादरायणम् ।
>>
>> सूत्रभाष्यकृतौ वन्दे भगवन्तौ पुनः पुनः ॥
>>
>
>
द्वितीयवर्णकं तत्प्रसक्तिश्च


विचारस्य यद्यपि साक्षाद्विषयः वेदान्ता एव तथापि तेषां गतार्थत्वं
पूर्वशास्त्रेण सिद्धं इति मत्वा कृत्स्नस्यैव वेदस्य कर्मविधिपरत्वमेव,
तस्याश्च विधेः ’अथातो धर्मजिज्ञासा’ इति पूर्वमीमांसाशास्त्रेणैव
विचारितत्वात् तत्र वेदान्तानामपि आर्थिकविधिपरत्वनिर्णयात्
वेदान्तवाक्यार्थनिर्णयाय पृथक्शास्त्रारम्भणमनवश्यकमिति प्राप्ते
इदमुच्यते  भाष्यकारैः
-  वेदान्तमीमांसाशास्त्रस्य व्याचिख्यासितस्य इदमादिमं सूत्रम् - ’अथातो
ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा’ इति । अत्रेदं न्यायप्रदर्शनम् – यदि विधिपरत्वमेव वेदार्थस्य
तर्हि सर्वज्ञा भगवन्तः बादरायणाः ब्रह्मजिज्ञासाकर्तव्यतां न ब्रूयुः,
पूर्वशास्त्रेणैव कृत्स्नस्य वेदार्थस्य विधिपरत्वनिर्णयात् ब्रह्मणि
मानाभावात् । तथा च ब्रह्मणो जिज्ञास्यत्वोक्त्या सूत्रशब्दादेव सिद्ध्यति
यत्केनापि शास्त्रान्तरेणानवगतब्रह्मपरवेदान्तविचारः आरम्भणीय एवेति ।
सूत्रकृदभिप्रायः
भाष्यगत-व्याचिख्यासितस्य-इतिशब्दादवगम्यते । इदमेव द्वितीयवर्णकम् ।
पूर्वोक्तरीया
’अथातो ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा’ इत्येतत्सूत्रस्यैव दृष्टिभेदेन व्याख्यानत्वं
प्रथमवर्णकाद्भेदश्चात्र स्पष्टमवगन्तुं पार्यते ।


The Second varNakam and its need


Even though the subject matter of study is the Upanishad texts yet their
ultimate purport is already known through the study of the pUrvamImAmsA
shaastra which has concluded that these Upanishadic texts have ultimately
their purport in the accomplishing of enjoined karma alone. Therefore, there
is no need or purpose served by the study of the Brahma/uttara mImAmsA.  When
such an objection arises, the Commentator has a compulsion to show that this
thinking is incorrect.  An All-knowing Personality in Veda VyAsa will not be
asking us to undertake an enquiry of Brahman through the Upanishadic texts
if indeed it were a fact that the purport of the entirety of the Vedic lore
lies in the accomplishing of enjoined duties/karma.  By this arthApatti,
Shankaracharya decides that there is nothing to obstruct the commencement of
the enquiry on Brahman since the purport of the Upanishadic texts is
undoubtedly not in karma accomplishment.  The word He uses is *
vyAchikhyAsitasya* which means: that which is intended to be elucidated.  Thus,
the intended elucidation of the VedAnta mImAmsA shAstra commences with the
first sutra: athAto brahmajijnAsA (in contrast to the pUrvamImAmsA shastra
that deals with dharmajijnAsA).   This sums up the second varNakam.  As
stated earlier, here one can see the ‘different angle of viewing’ the sutra
and also its difference, in content, from the first varNakam.  There, since
there is adhyasa-caused samsara owing to ignorance, and since the sutra
teaches ‘Brahman is to be enquired into’ there is the need for taking up its
study.  Here, the subject matter is different: whether the study is to be
undertaken at all in the face of the objection that the purport of the
Vedanta texts is in karma alone as determined already by the pUrvamImAmsA
shAstra.



अत्र वर्णकद्वयोपसंहारकत्वेन अग्रिमवर्णकस्य उपक्रमत्वेन च
’भाष्यरत्नप्रभा’व्याख्यानस्य वाक्यं दृश्यते – एवं वर्णकद्वयेन
वेदान्तविचारस्य (१)विषयप्रयोजनवत्त्वम् (२) अगतार्थत्वं च इति
*हेतुद्वयं*सूत्रस्यार्थिकार्थं व्याख्याय अक्षरव्याख्यामारभमाणः
पुनरप्यधिकारिभावाभावाभ्यां शास्त्रारम्भसन्देहे सति
अथशब्दस्यानन्तार्यार्थकत्वोक्त्या अधिकारिणं साधयति – तत्राथशब्द इति ।


Says the RatnaprabhA concluding the first two varNakams and introducing the
third varNakam:  Thus by the two varNakams the (1) viShaya and prayojanam
and (2) the purport of the Vedanta texts have NOT been already understood
through the pUrvamImAmsA – are the two reasons that have been stated (in the
Bhashyam) with regard to the need for commencement of Vedanta vichara.  These
have been stated as the overall purport of the sUtra.  Now the elucidation
of the specific words of the sutra (‘atha’,  ‘ataH’, ‘ brahmajijnAsA’) is
being taken up in the bhashyam.  Now, the objection that ‘a shastra cannot
be commenced in the absence of a suitable aspirant/adhikAri’ is taken up for
reply.  In order to show that indeed a suitable adhikAri is there to study
the shAstra Shankaracharya is establishing the meaning of the word ‘atha’ as
‘after having acquired the necessary four-fold qualifications namely
‘viveka’, etc. This is the context of the third varNakam.


> To be continued
>
>
>>
>>
>