Sutra 2
suksmam tu tad-arhatvat
suksmam - subtle; tu - certainly; tad-arhatvat - because of appropriateness.
The word "carira" (body) here certainly means the sutble body (suksma-carira) because that is appropriate in this context.
Purport by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
The word tu (certainly) is used here to dispel doubt. The word carira here means suksma- carira (the subtle body). Why? Because that meaning is appropriate. Because it is appropriate to describe the 2}suksma-carira as avyakta (unmanifest). The quote from Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad (1.4.7) 2}"tad dhedam tarhy avyakrtam asit (Then there was the unmanifested)" shows that before the gross material universe was manifested the living force was present. This shows that the word "unmanifested" is appropriate to describe the subtle body.
The objection may be raised: If the original cause is subtle, then why should that subtle cause not be described as the pradhana (unmanifested material nature) of the 2}sagkhya theory. To answer this doubt he says:
Sutra 3
tad-adhinatvad arthavat
tad - on Him; adhinatvad - because of dependence; arthavat - possessing the meaning.
This meaning should be accepted because the pradhana (unmanifested material nature) is ultimately dependent on Him (the Supreme Brahman).
Purport by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
The meaning here is that because pradhana is ultimately dependent on the Supreme Brahman, which is the original cause of all causes, the creative actions of 2}pradhana are not the original cause, but are themselves caused by the Supreme Brahman. Because pradhana is naturally inactive, it only acts when inspired by the glance of Brahman. This is described in the following statements of Vedic literature.
mayam tu prakrtim vidyan mayinam tu mahecvaram
"The Supreme Personality of Godhead is a magician, and the material world is His magical show."
- Svetasvatara Upanisad (4.10)
asman mayi srjate vicvam etat
"The master of Maya creates this world."
- Svetasvatara Upanisad (4.9).
ya eka varno bahudha sakti-yogad varnan anekan nihitartho dadhati
"He who has no rival creates the varieties of this world, using His own potencies according to His own wish."
- Svetasvatara Upanisad (4.1). sa eva bhuyo nija-virya-coditm
sva-jiva-mayam prakrtim sisrksatim anama-rupatmani rupa-namani vidhitsamano 'nusasara sastra-krt
"The Personality of Godhead, again desiring to give names and forms to His parts and parcels, the living entities, placed them under the guidance of material nature. By His own potency, material nature is empowered to re-create."
- Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.10.22
pradhanam purusam capi
pravicyatmecchaya harih ksobhayam asa samprapte sarga-kale vyayavyayau
"At the time of creation Lord Hari enters the changing pradhana and the unchanging living souls, and agitates them according to His wish."
- Visnu Purana
mayadhyaksena prakrtih
suyate sa-caracaram hetunanena kaunteya
jagad viparivartate
"The material nature, which is one of my energies, is working under my direction, O son of Kunti, producing all moving and non-moving beings. Under its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again." - Bhagavad-gita 9.10
We do not accept the sagkhya theory because it considers pradhana the original, independent cause of all causes.
Sutra 4
eyatvavacanatvac ca
jYeyatva - the state of being the object of knowledge; avacanatvat - because of non- description; ca - and.
The "avyakta" of this passage is not described as the object of knowledge. This another reason for not interpreting this "avyakta" to be pradhana.
Purport by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
Claiming that liberation is obtained by understanding the difference between the the spiritual living entity, or soul and the modes of material nature, the sagkhya theorists affirm that one should know the real nature of 2}pradhana in order to obtain certain powers. Because this passage from the Katha Upanisad in no way describes any of this, the word avyakta here cannot refer to the pradhana of the Sagkhyites.
vadatiti cen na prajYo hi prakaranat
vadati - says; iti - thus; cet - if; na - no; prajYo - the omniscient Paramatma; hi - indeed; prakaranat - because of reference.
If someone says "This passage does describe pradhana in this way" then I say "No. That statement refers to the omniscient Personality of Godhead."
Purport by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
Someone may object: "Your contention that the word avyakta in this passage of Katha Upanisad cannot refer to pradhana because the avyakta here is not described as the object of knowledge has in no way been proved. Pradhana is described in this way in the very next verse (Katha Upanisad 1.3.15):
acabdam asparcam arupam avyayam
tatha-rasam nityam agandhavac ca yat anady anantam mahatah param dhruvam nicayya tam mrtyu-mukhat pramucyate
"By meditating on the soundless, touchless, formless, unchanging, tasteless, eternal, fragranceless, beginningless, endless, Supreme Great, one becomes free from the mouth of death."
Someone may object: If these words do not describe 2}pradhana as the ultimate object of knowledge, then what do they describe?
To this objection I reply: These words describe the omniscient Personality of Godhead. These words are an appropriate description of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, about whom the following words are said:
purusan na param kiNcit sa kastha sa para gatih
"Nothing is higher than the Supreme Person. The Supreme Person is the highest."
- Katha Upanisad 1.3.11
esa sarvesu bhutesu gudhatma na prakacate
"Hiding in the hearts of all beings, the Supreme Personality of Godhead is not openly manifest." Katha Upanisad 1.3.12
To further explain that the word in question does not refer to pradhana he says: Sutra 6
trayanam eva caivam upanyasah pracnac ca
trayanam - of the three;eva - indeed; ca - certainly; evam - in this way; upanyasah - mention; pracnac - question; ca - and.
In this context three questions certainly are mentioned. Purport by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
The word ca (certainly) here is meant to remove doubt. In this passage of Katha Upanisad only three questions are asked. They are: 1. Naciketa's request that his father be kind to him, 2. his request for celestial fire, and 3. his desire to know the true nature of the self. Nothing else is asked. There is no mention of pradhana 1}.
Sutra 7
mahadvac ca
mahat - the mahat; vat - like; ca - also.
This usage is like the usage of the word "mahat". Purport by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
Because the word mahan in the phrase 2}buddher atma mahan parah (The Great Self is higher than the intelligence.) is never taken to mean the mahat- tattva (material nature) of the sagkhya theory, in the same way the avyakta (unmanifested) mentioned here to be higher than this mahat should not be taken to mean the pradhana of 2}sagkhya.
Adhikarana 2
The "Aja" of Svetasvatara Upanisad 4.5 Does Not Mean Pradhana Introduction by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
Now another smarta theory is refuted. The following is quoted from the Svetasvatara Upanisad (4.5): ajam ekam lohita-cukla-krsnam
bahvih prajah srjamanam sarupah ajo hy eko jusamano 'nucete jahaty enam bhukta-bhogam ajo 'nyah
"A certain unborn male serves the red, white, and black unborn female that creates the many living entities and their forms, while another another unborn male abandons her as she enjoys pleasures."
Samcaya: Does the word aja here mean the pradhana of sagkhya, or does it mean the potency of Brahman described in this 2}Upanisad?
Purva-paksa: Without any external help the unborn material nature creates the innumerable living entities.
Siddhanta: In regard to this, the 2}sagkhyas' belief concerning the creation, he says: Sutra 8
camasa - a cup; vat - like; avicesat - because of not being specific.
(The word "aja" in Svetasvatara Upanisad 4.5 does not mean the sankhya conception of material nature) because of the lack of a specific description. It is like the word "camasa" (cup) in Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 2.2.3.
Purport by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
The word na (not) should be read into thisSutra from sutra 1.4.5. It cannot be said that the female
described here is the material nature as described in the sagkhya-smrti. Why? Because the material
nature is not specifically described in this passage. Because there is no specific description, but only the
mention of being unborn in the word aja, which is derived from the phrase na jayate (it is not born). It is
like the example of the cup. In the Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad (2.2.3) it is said:
arvag-bilac camasa urdhva-budhna
"There is a cup with its mouth down and its bottom up."
It is not possible to take the word camasa, which is derived from the verb cam (to drink), in this mantra as literally a cup, or vessal to consume what was offered in a yajna. It is also not possible to consider the meaning of a word without reference to etymology. For this reason it is not possible to interpret the word in this mantra as the material nature described in the sagkhya-smrti. It is also not possible because the sagkhya-smrti considers that material nature creates the living entities independently.
The aja here is the potency of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, which is described in the 2}Vedas. Giving a specific reason to accept this, he says:
Sutra 9
jyotir upakrama tu tatha hy adhiyate eke
jyotih - light; upakrama - beginning with; tu - indeed; tatha - in that way; hi - indeed; adhiyate -iread; eke - some.
Light is its origin. Also, other passages confirm it.
Purport by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
The word tu (but) is used in the sense of certainty. The word light is used to mean the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In this way He is celebrated in the sruti-sastra ( 2}Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 10.4.16):
tad deva j yotisam j yotih
"The demigods meditate on Him, the light of lights."
The word upakrama should be understood here in the sense of "cause". Because this aja (unborn) has Brahman as its cause, its being unborn is metaphorical only, just as the "cup" in Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 2.2.3. In that passage it is said: arvag-bilac camasa urdhva-budhna
"There is a cup with its mouth down and its bottom up."
As the "cup" here is actually the skull, in the same way the aja (unborn) here is not actually unborn, but is the potency born from Brahman, as is described in the first and fourth chapters of Cvetasvatara Upanisad. The first quote is (Cvetasvatara Upanisad 1.3):
te dhyana-yoganugata apacyan devatma-saktim sva-gunair nigudham
"The dhyana-yogis saw the Supreme Lord's potency, which was hidden by its own qualities." The second quote is (Cvetasvatara Upanisad 4.1): ya eka-varno bahudha sakti-yogat
"He (the Lord) who is one has become many by the touch of His potency."
Then the author gives another reason in the 2}sutra's words tatha hi. Hi in this context means "reason". The reason is the evidence given in other passages (adhiyate eke). That the material nature is born from the Supreme Personality of Godhead is also explained in the following passage (Mundaka Upanisad 1.1.9):
tasmad etad brahma nama rupam annam ca jayate
"From Him (the Lord), pradhana 1}, names, forms, and food, are all born."
The word brahma here means pradhana 1}, which is situated in the three modes of nature, and which is also called brahma in 2}Bhagavad-gita (14.3):
mama yonir mahad brahma
"The total material substance, called Brahman, is the source of birth."*
Now our opponent may ask: How, then, is the material nature unborn? Then, if it is unborn, how can it be born from light? Fearing that these questions may be raised, he says:
Sutra 10
kalpanopadecac ca madhv-adi-vad avirodhah
kalpana - creation; upadecat - from the instruction; ca - certainly; madhv - honey; adi -beginning with; vad - like; avirodhah - not a contradiction.
Because it is said to be created by the Supreme it is not a contradiction to say that pradhana is both created and uncreated. In this way its is like honey and some other things that are both created and uncreated.
This doubt is dispelled by the word ca (certainly). It is possible for pradhana to be both created and uncreated. How is that? That is explained by the word kalpana. Kalpana here means {.sy 168}creation". It should be understood in that way because it was used with that sense in the Rg Veda's statement, yatha-purvam akalpayat (In the beginning the Supreme Personality of Godhead created thew world). The meaning of this is that the pradhana is manifested from the Supreme Brahman, who is the master of the potencies of darkness. That is the truth in this matter. The Lord has an eternal and very subtle potency named tamas (darkness), which is described in the following statement (Rg Veda 10.1.29.3):
tama asit tamasa gudham agre praketam yada tamas tan na diva na ratrih
"In the beginning was darkness. Darkness covered everything. When the darkness was manifested there was neither day nor night." Tamas is also described in the Culika Upanisad:
gaur anadavati
"Matter has no power to speak."
At the time of cosmic annihilation pradhana attains oneness with Brahman, but does not merge into Brahman. In the passage from sruti-sastra beginning with the words prthivy apsu praliyate it is said that the material elements, beginning from earth and culminating in ether, all merge into tamas (darkness), but there is no mention of tamas merging into another substance because tamas is already one with the Supreme. Because tamas is very subtle there is no possibility of it being separate from the Supreme, and therefore it is one with Him. It is not otherwise. This does not mean that tamas is identical with the Supreme. If it meant identity with the Supreme the use of the pratyaya cvi 1} in eki-bhavati, would not be appropriate.
When the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master of the tamas potency, desires to create, from Him arises the unmanifested (avyakta) three modes of material nature. The sruti-sastra explains:
mahan avyakte liyate avyaktam aksare aksaram tamasi
"The mahat merges into the 2}avyakta, the avyakta merges into the 2}aksara, and the aksara merges into 2}tamas."
The 2}Mahabharata explains,
tasmad avyaktam utpannam tri-gunam dvija-sattama
"O best of the brahmanas, the unmanifested three modes of material nature was born from the Supreme Personality of Godhead."
These passages from scripture clearly describe the creation of pradhana and the other elements. In this way the the scriptures teach that pradhana is created and that it is both cause and effect simultaneously. The Visnu Purana explains this in the following words:
pradhana-pumsor ajayoh karanam karya-bhutayoh
"Lord Visnu is the cause of the unborn 2}Pradhana and Purusa."
At the time of creation the three modes of material nature arise in pradhana and pradhana manifests many different names, such as pradhana- avyakta, and many different forms in red and other colors. At this time it is said that the pradhana is manifested from the Supreme Light (jyotir-utpanna). Next he (the author of the sutras) gives an example: "It is like honey and other similar things ( 2}madhv-adi-vat)." The sun, when it is a cause, remains one, and when it is an effect it becomes other things, such as the honey enjoyed by the Vasus. In this way the sun is both cause and effect simultaneously. There is no contradiction in this.
Adhikarana 3
The Phrase "Panca-panca-janah" in Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 4.4.17 Does Not Refer to the 25 Elements of Sagkhya
Visaya: The Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 4.4.17 explains:
yasmin panca-panca-jana
akacac ca pratisthitah tam eva manya atmanam vidvan brahmamrto 'mrtam
"I, who am immortal spirit, meditate on the Supreme Brahman, in whom the ether element and the paYca- paYca-jana rest."
Samcaya: Do the words paYca- paYca-jana refer to the 25 elements described in the Kapila-tantra, or to some five other things?
Purvapaksa: Because paYca-pa{.sy 241}ca is a bahuvrihi-samasa and 2}paYca-paYca-janah is a 2}karmadharaya-samasa, the word paYca- paYca-janah refers to the 25 elements described by Kapila. Somehow the two elements atma and 2}akaca are here added to the list of elements. The word jana here means tattva (elements). Siddhanta: He says:
Sutra 11
na sagkhyopasaggrahad api nana-bhavad atirekac ca
na - not; sagkhya - of numbers; upasaggrahat - because of enumeration; api - even; nana -various; bhavat - states; atirekat - because of going beyond; ca - and.
Even though they give the same numbers as the sagkhya theory, these words do not refer to the sagkhya theory because the the numbers here actually exceed sagkhya's numbers and because the elements of sagkhya are variegated (and not grouped into five groups of five).
Purport by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
The word api (even) here is used in the sense of "even if we consider for a moment this view." By noting that the number here is the same number as the 2}sagkhya elements does not prove that pa{.sy 241}ca-paYca-jana refers to the sagkhya 1} elements. Why? The answer is given in the words
beginning 2}nana-bhavat. Because the variegated sagkhya 1} elements are not divided into five groups of five, it is not possible to accept the 5 X 5 here as referring to the 25 2}sagkhya elements. Also, the addition of atma 1} and akaca brings the number up to 27. Simply by hearing the word paYca five) twice one should not be bewildered into thinking these two fives refer to the 25 elements of the sagkhya theory. {.sy 168}What is your interpretation of paYca-pa{.sy 241}ca-jana?" someone may ask. The word pa{.sy 241}ca-jana is the name of a group just as the word 2}saptarsi (the seven sages) is the name of a group. This is explained by Panini (Astadhyayi 2.1.50) in the words dik-sagkhye samjYayam (Words indicating direction or number may be compounded with another word in the same case). As each of the saptarsis may be called saptarsi, in the same way there may be five paYca-janas, each of whom may be called a paYca-jana, and all the 2}paYca-janas together may be called the five 2}paYca-janas. In this way the meaning of the word paYca-jana is very clear. Who are these paYca-janas? To answer this question he says:
Sutra 12
pranadayo vakya-cesat
prana - breath; adayah - beginning with; vakya - of the statement; cesat - from the remainder.
The paYca-janas here are five things beginning with prana (breath), as is clear from the words immediately following the mention of paYca- jana.
Purport by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana
The five things beginning with prana are described in the following words (Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 4.4.18):
pranasya pranam uta caksusac caksur uta crotrasya crotram annasyannam manaso ye mano viduh 1}
"They know the breath of breath, the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear, the food of food, the mind of the mind."
The objection may be raised: The word annam (food) here is included in the Madhyandina recension of the Upanisad but not in the Kanva recension. In the 2}Kanva recension, then, there are only four items and not five. To answer this doubt he says:
Sutra 13
jyotisaikesam asaty anne
jyotisa - by light; ekesam - of some; asaty - in the absence; anne - of food.
In some versions (the Kanva recension) the word "jyotih" (light) replaces the word "anna"
(food).
In the version of some (the Kanvas), even though the word 2}anna is missing, the addition of the word 2}jyotih brings the number up to five. This word 2}jyotih is found in Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 4.4.6 in the words tad deva jyotisam jyotih (The demigods worship Him, the light of lights). The word 2}jyotih appears here in both recensions and it should be counted among the five or not as is appropriate.
Adhikarana 4
Brahman Is The Only Original Cause
The sagkhya theorist raises another doubt: "It cannot be said that the Vedanta describes Brahman as the sole cause of the universe, for the 2}Vedanta philosophy does not describe a single original cause of creation. In Taittiriya Upanisad 2.1.1 atma (self) is revealed as the source of creation in the following words:
tasmad va etasmad atmana akacah sambhutah
"From atma the sky was born." Another passage (Tatittiriya Upanisad 2.7.1) describes asat (non-existence) as the original cause in the following words:
asad va idam agra asit tato va sad ajayata tad atmanam svayam akuruta
"In the beginning was non-existence. From non- existence existence was born. Existence created the self."
Another passage (Chandogya Upanisad 1.9.1) affirms that akaca (sky) is the original cause: asya lokasya ka gatir ity akaca iti hovaca
"What is the origin of this world? Sky is the origin, he said."
Another passage (Chandogya Upanisad 1.11.5) affirms that breath is the original cause in the following words:
sarvani ha va imani bhutani pranam evabhisamvicanti
"Everything was born from breath and ultimately enters into breath again."
Another passage again proclaims asat (non-existence) as the original cause in the following
words:
asad evedam agra asit tat samabhavat
"In the beginning was non-existence. From non- existence this world was manifested."
Another passage ( 2}Chandogya Upanisad 6.2.1) proclaims Brahman the original cause in the following words:
sad eva saumyedam agra asit
"O saintly one, in the beginning was Brahman." Another passage (Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 1.4.7) proclaims avyakrta (the unmanifested) as the original cause in the following words:
tad vaidam tarhy avyakrtam asit tan-nama-rupabhyam vyakriyata
" In the beginning was the unmanifested. From it all the names and forms have come."
Many other passages could also be quoted to show the different theories of creation. Because in these passages of the Vedas many different things have been described as the sole original cause of creation, it cannot be said that Brahman is the sole cause of the creation of the world. However, it is possible to say that pradhana is the sole cause of creation, as we find in the passage (beginning with the word tarhi already quoted from the Brhad- aranyaka Upanisad. If this view is accepted, then the contradiction of seeing one thing sometimes as the original cause and sometimes as a product of the original cause becomes at once resolved.
Because it is all-pervading the pradhana can appropriately be called atma, akaca, and 2}brahma, because it is the resting-place of all transformations and because it is eternal it may appropriately be called asat, and because it is the origin of all breathing it may metaphorically be called breath. When the scriptures state that the original cause performed activities, such as thinking (Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 1.2.5 explains sa aiksata: The original cause thought.) these may also be considered metaphors. All this evidence clearly demonstrates that pradhana is the original cause of creation of the world as described in the Vedanta literature. In the context of this argument: