SrI: SrImathE SatakOpAya nama: SrImathE rAmAnujAya nama: SrImath varavaramunayE nama:
<< previous pAsuram (idumE iniya suvarggaththil?)
<< previous part (pAsuram 99 – part 1)
thaRkach chamaNarum sAkkiyap pEygaLum thAzh sadaiyOn
soRkARRa sOmbarum sUniyavAdharum nAn maRaiyum
niRkak kuRumbu sey neesarum mANdanar neeNilaththE
poRkaRpakam em irAmAnusa muni pOndha pinnE – 99
Listen
vyAkyAnam – continued as part – 2
sUniya vAdharum – (are) mAdhyamikar who say that only sUnyam (voidness) is thathvam (reality); even though they are also in the category of sAkyar, amudhanAr is separating it because of its cruelty. Those spreading this bhaudhdha philosophy are of four types – vaibhAshikar, sauthrAnthikan, yOgAchAran, and, mAdhyamikan; among these, (only) the first three mentioned above have commonly accepted that knowledge is kshaNikam (momentary); other than elements and qualities of elements (bhUtha bauthikam), they did not accept Agamam (vEdham, etc).
Among them, vaibhAshikar is – One who says – Formed by the assembling of “paramANu” (of each of pruthvi, appu, thEjas, and vAyu (they don’t talk about AkASam)) combining to form each such category of bhUtham (element), bhUthams combine to become dhEham, indhriyam, etc., (body, faculties/senses etc.,) at global level which is the world we see, and within those body and faculties/senses is AthmA which is prathyak AthmA, who is aham sarva gOcharan), and so is based on prathyakSham (seen) that is the world; the knowledge about this world is transient (kShaNikam), all matters known by knowledge would be with creation and destruction, AthmA is that transient knowledge itself, thinking of world or knowledge as stable/ever-existing is samsAram (life in material world), and realizing that such knowledge is unstable/transient is mOksham (liberation).
sauthrAnthikan is – One who says – What is learned by knowledge by seeing external things is about the diversified nature of things (different attributes of things in the world ((vaichithriyam / vichithram), like its shape, color, etc.)), and that diversified nature is how knowledge understands such things even when those things do not exist anymore; since now the knowledge knows about such things based on prior seeing, it is to be concluded that such diversified knowledge (vaichithriyam / vichithram) of things is based on anumAnam (guess/conjecture based on prior seeing);
diversified nature of things in the world has created diversified nature (vaichithriyam) in knowledge;
and such knowledge is transient (kshaNikam); thinking of world or knowledge as stable/ever-existing is samsAram, and realizing that such knowledge is transient is mOksham.
yOgAchAran is – One who says – like attributes (AkAram (like shape, color, etc.)) of external things, knowledge (gyAnam) also has got/knows (such) attributes, and (so) there is no need for those things to exist (gyEyam), it is there in the knowledge itself; since an external thing and the word to name it/describe it are always together and cannot be separated, it is enough to have the knowledge about it, and the thing need not exist; knowledge itself has got such diversified information, and there is none of those external things existing; and realizing that such knowledge is transient is mOksham.
SrI parAsara bhattar mentioned these three together as a group in: ‘yOgAchArO jagadh apalapayathra sauthrAnthikasthu , eevaichithriyAdhanumithipadham vakthi vaibhAshikasthu | prathyakSham thathkShaNikayathi thE ranganAtha! thrayO(S)pi, gyAnAthmathva kShaNabhidhurathE chakShathE thAn thath kshipAma: || [SrI rangarAja sthavam – uththara sathakam – 8]’
(Out of the four baudhdhas, yOgAchAran is hiding the world, nullifying it; sauthrAnthikan says that that world is understood by anumAnam due to varying attributes of knowledge; while vaibhAshikan is saying that this world which is there to see, as one which gets destroyed in a moment (transient); these three are saying that knowledge itself is AthmA and that knowledge is destroyed in a moment (transient); we are rejecting all these three);
(Note: these three are described here when talking about mAdhyAmikan who argues that nothing internal or external exists. These three are included as sAkkiyap pEygaL earlier in this pAsuram; next is the one describing sUniya vAdhar separately due to their cruel arguments).
mAdhyamikan is – one who says – Understanding that there is pramANam, pramEyam, and, pramAthA is a confusion (bhramam) (of mind); only the argument of sUnyam (voidness) is the ultimate happiness;
(What I say is what my guru budhdha said, but) the aforementioned three followers said that there is existence of mind and sentience, etc., and that there is existence of transient knowledge – these are only based on the learning from guru who taught them these based on their level of ability to understand / inclination to follow.
Thus mAdhyamikan says, as said in ‘nasan nachAsan na sath asath nachApyanubhayAthmakam chathush kOti vinir muktham thaththvam mAdhyamikO vidhu:’, it cannot be said as sath, asath, or sadh asth, or different from sadh asath – one which is distinguished from these is the thathvam; knowing that it is sUnyam in sUnyam, is mOksham (understanding with AthmA which is sUnyam, that it is all sUnyam is mOksham)– is how they show as greatness of their philosophy.
(His argument as an example: Is something made from an existent thing or non-existent thing? If from non-existent thing, then how can a non-existent thing result in an existent thing? So it would be just a non-existent thing only as a result; if you say that from an existing thing (mud), a so far non-existent thing is formed (pot), then – it is possible to make pot only when mud becomes non-existent (converted to pot); so it is also about non-existent ones – so everything is non-existent, that is sUnyam).
{ Summary of these four baudhdha philosophies:
| Philosophy | External world | Knowledge (Internal) | samsAram | mOksham |
| vaibhAshikar | Exists, understood by prathyakSham (seeing, etc.) | Exists but Transient (kshaNikam) | is – Not understanding this about knowledge | is – Understanding this about knowledge |
| sauthrAnthikar | Understood by anumAnam (based on prior experience / conjecture) | Exists but Transient | is – Not understanding this about knowledge | is – Understanding this about knowledge |
| yOgachAran | sUnyam (Not exists) | Exists but Transient | is – Not understanding this about knowledge | is – Understanding this about knowledge |
| mAdhyamikar | sUnyam (Not exists) | sUnyam (Not exists) | is – Not understanding that everything is sUnyam? | is – Understanding that everything is sUnyam (he accepts there is mOksham) |
}
nAn maRaiyum niRkak kuRumbu sey neesarum – unlike those baudhdha, etc., (who as seen previously, did not accept ‘Sabdham’ (SAsthram) as reference as they considered it as anumAnam, sUnyam, etc.), the mAyAvAdhis discussed here, while accepting the four vEdhas that are rig etc., as authoritative reference, did not say the true inner meanings as shown by upabrahmaNa, upabrahmitham, due to their thAmasa (ignorant) mind that is ‘sarva arthAn vipareethAnScha budhdhissA pArtha thAmasee [SrI bhagavath gIthA]’ (Oh arjuna! Your mind of thamas is pulling you to some other meaning), they came up with untrue/contrary meanings, and setting true meanings aside into corner and confusing the people of the world by their deceptive arguments, and as said in ‘bibhEthyalpa SruthAth vEdhOmAmayam pratharishyathi’ (Without understanding properly he has given wrong meanings (says vEdham)), even as they are accepting vEdhas, even as they are as sages, they are very lowly (for misinterpreting) – such mAyAvAdhis;
Saying kuRumbu sey neechar – is about Sankara, bhAskara, and yAdhava together – for these three, pramANam (reference/SAsthram, vEdham), and pramEyam (knowledge (from pramANam)) are accepted in the same manner;
Sankaran is – One who says: Since it is said ‘sadhEva sOmyEdhamagra Aseeth EkamEva adhvitheeyam’ (Oh saumya (beautiful child)! brahmam was sath (existing) during pralayam (annihilaition), before that it was sath, it was as One and there is no other second entity), nirviSEsha chinmAthram itself is brahmam (brahmam is without having any of three types of bhEdham (differentiation from others and itself) (that is, not having sajAtheeya (nothing of its kinds), vijAtheeya (nothing of some other kind), svagatha bhEdhams (no difference within itself)), does not have any qualities (like form, name, etc), it is with just knowledge only; it is anirvachaneeyam (not describable)),
and since it is said, ‘Evam jAgrath prapanchOyam mayi mAyA vijrumbitha:’ (brahmam is affected by ignorance (avidhyA) and gets confused (bhrama) ) – this world that is there to see, is learned to be present due to mAyA, and so would be false in existence;
and since it is said ‘indhrOmAyadhi: pururUpa eetheeyathE’, that brahmam itself is affected by mAyA and gets confused – and that is samsAram (being in this world); and when this confusion is eliminated by understanding that those things created by it and itself are same and thus gets aikya bhAvanA (realising the singular nature) – then that is mOksham.
(upAdhi (one which causes confusion) is the body, and it gets confused that there is jeevAthmA in each body; both bodies and jeevAthmAs are non-existent; only brahmam exists, is the argument of Sankaran)
bhAskaran is – One who says: Since it is said, ‘avidhyOpa bhramitham brahma jeeva ithyabitheeyathE’ (brahmam itself thinks of itself as jeevan (AthmA), due to being covered by ignorance (avidhyai)); that brahmam, getting combined with mind and other senses/faculties of bodies which Do exist, attains the imagined state as a jeeva (AthmA) due to confusion – that, is samsAram; (like a mirror which Does exist, and the reflections within it which do not exist inside the mirror; mirror is upAdhi since it is due to mirror that one thinks that the things shown by mirror are true), (unlike Sankaran, existence of upAdhi (bodies, etc.) is accepted by bhAskaran);
The thought that the world is true (example, what is reflected in the mirror) would not go away for brahmam by an understanding knowledge that what is seen does not exist ((example) because by looking at the mirror again it would think that those things reflected are existing), so as said in ‘vidhyAncha avidhyAncha yasthath vEdha ubhaya(gm)saha – vidhyayA mruthyum theerthvA avidhyA amrutham aSnuthE’ (~by karmam remove samsAram and by gyAnam attain mOksham), by breaking the upAdhi (body) (like breaking the mirror, so that it would be clear for ever that what would have been seen in it is known to be not existing), the way to break that upAdhi is by the knowledge of upAsanam (worship/meditation) which is as per the varNASramam, as said by the vEdham, in ‘thathvamasi’ etc.
Once the upAdhi is destroyed, as said in ‘gata dhvamsE gatAkASO na bhinna: napasAyathA’ (there is space (AkASam) inside a pot, and there is space beyond (outside) it (mAhA AkASam); once the pot is broken, these two spaces would get combined; in the same way once upAdhi (body) is gotten rid of, then AthmA that is inside and outside would become one), like the combining of space once a pot is broken, when upAdhi (body, etc.) is removed, AthmA and brahmam (paramAthmA) would be combined and become one – and that is mOksham.
yAdhavan is – One who says: When thinking that brahmam which is existing, being true, and with non-sentient and sentient which are Not different from itself, brahmam is confused by thinking that such non-sentient and sentient are different from itself – this is samsAram (tied to being in this world, with such confusions).
Since it is said as ‘vidhyAncha avidhyAncha’, and ‘upAbhyAmEva pakShAbhyAm yathAkE pakShINAm gathi: – thadhaiva gyAna karmabhyAm prApyathE brahma SAsvatham’ (Like how a bird needs two wings to fly, one needs karmam (deeds) and gyAnam (knowledge) together by which to destroy the upAdhi (knowledge of bhEdham (thinking that it is different from non-sentient and sentient)) and so attain mOksham),
by the combining of knowledge (gyAnam) and karmam, that knowledge of bhEdham (differentiating) would be destroyed – and that, is mOksham.
It is emperumAn himself and also through rudhran, who spread these philosophies to confuse the asuras and rAkShasas who were not following emperumAn’s orders (which he gave through SAsthram, etc).
(Details of that would be continued in the next part).
Summary of three philosophies that mis-interpret vEdhas, as discussed above.
| Philosophy | External world | samsAram | mOksham |
| Sankara | Not exists | is the thinking of brahmam that the world exists.
brahmam does not have any quality, place, etc. |
is – when this confusion is eliminated by understanding that those things created by it and itself are same and thus gets aikkya bhAvanai. |
| bhAskara | Body, mind, senses exist | is the combining of brahmam with body, mind, senses, etc., and thinking that it is a jeevAthmA | is – By karmam and by gyAnam need to remove the confusion, and attain mOksham respectively. |
| yAdhava | Not exists | is – thinking that sentient and non-sentient are different from itself | is – By the combining of karmam and gyAnam, remove the confusion and attain mOksham |
{ To be continued in Part 3 }
From AzhwAr thirunagari SrI u.vE. vi(dhwAn thirumalai nallAn chakravarththi rAmakrishNa iyengAr’s ‘amudha virundhu’ :
(Continued as part – 2)
nAn maRaiyum niRkak kuRumbu sey neesarum – by this he talks about kudhrushtis (those who mis-interpret vEdhas). The others that are jaina and bhudhdha did not have any reference text so they set their philosophy by whatever came to their mind; but kudhrushtis took vEdhas as reference, but without being under its control they forced their own opinions on those vEdhas. Oh! what a sorrow this is! – laments amudhanAr.
neesar – lowly people. As said in ‘niRam kiLarndha karum sOdhi nedunthagaiyai ninAiyAdhAr neesar thAmE [periya thirumozhi – 11.6.8]’, having the black hued divine body, naturally present greatness of knowledge, strength, and actions (for emperumAn) are the meanings from the four vEdhas – not taking up these meanings are the kudhrushtis – so they are lowly.
{ To be continued in part 3 }
– – – – –
Translation: raghurAm SrInivAsa dasan
archived in https://divyaprabandham.koyil.org
pramEyam (goal) – https://koyil.org
pramANam (scriptures) – http://granthams.koyil.org/
pramAthA (preceptors) – http://acharyas.koyil.org
SrIvaishNava education/kids portal – http://pillai.koyil.org