Page 7 of 10

Complementary Nature of Mata-Traya Commentaries on Prasthna-Tray(Answer to Arun Shouries Criticism)1. Arun Shouries Criticism of Vednta stras Prasthna Tray (Three Reference-Scriptures):One of ri Shouries complaints1 against the Prasthna Tray2 is that they lend themselves to several mutually contradictory interpretations and thus the student that wants to know their true meaning gets bewildered. (Hence, ri Shourie concludes, the Vednta system lost its usefulness as it does not have a unique Ttparya or overall import). The scriptures are at present reduced to something more or less like an empty box, into which anyone can stuff anything he likes and parade that as the real meaning. In this state of confusion, the scriptures are used for supporting meaningless, useless and sometimes even harmful and unethical practices by dishonest people. According to ri Shourie, the whole field of Adhytma Vidy is thus in a state of Avyavasth (disorder) with very little of practically and socially useful content in it.On the other hand, there is a school of thinkers who feel that while the misuse of the scriptures by unscrupulous, opportunistic and dishonest people and self-styled Gurus should by all means be actively opposed, that does not warrant a wholesale rejection of the stra as such. Only its misuse is to be opposed and all attempts made to re-form the Adhytma Vidy Vyavasth in its pure and original form. Once such a step is taken, the very capability of the scriptures of meaning various things to various students depending on their particular conditions-this flexibility can itself be useful for their universal application and relevance.2. Gurus (Expert Teachers) from a Spiritual Parampar (Tradition) Only Qualified to Interpret stras Correctly: The interpretation and teaching of (i) the Vedas (of which the Upanishads form a part), (ii) Bhagavad Gta, (iii) Brahma Stras2 (the latter two take the Vedas as their reference) and (iv) the Bhshyas (commentaries) on them by the three great chryas, di amkara Bhagavatpda, Bhagavad Rmnuja and rman-Madhva can be done correctly and usefully only by qualified Gurus. Mere-Bookish knowledge without Sdhan (Spiritual Practice under the guidance of a Guru [qualified expert-teacher])-Depending on ones own intellect alone for understanding the stras, which is the limitation of most of the present-day philosophers not belonging to a proper Guru-ishya-Parampar (tradition of spiritual discipleship), or-Feeling oneself spiritually inspired (self-certification)Are utterly insufficient3.Self-study by unqualified persons can result in Viparta Jnna (misunderstanding). One should be an expert or at least a Practitioner at an advanced stage of Sdhan (Uttama Sdhaka) under the guidance of a Guru (qualified expert-teacher) in the field of Adhytma Vidy before attempting to interpret or teach them4. A qualified expert-teacher or Guru is one who has Vijnna (ie., Aparoksha Paramtma-Anubhava: direct experience of the Ultimate Self) and stra-Jnna (a good knowledge of the works of previous experts in the tradition). This latter involves not only bookish knowledge, but also familiarity with the Tradition of right understanding of stra (strrtha-Sampradya). Such a Tradition exists till date and in fact ri amkara expressly says that a person who does not know this tradition ought to be ignored as an idiot (Mrkha)5. A Guru (Qualified Expert-teacher) can be recognized by the characteristics enumerated in Bhagavad Gta under the names of Sthita-Prajna, Bhakta and Gutta6. These are not mere ideals unattainable in practice. There have been many saints in our history after Veda Vyasas time (ie., in Kali Yuga-the age of conflict) who were universally recognized as having these characteristics, eg: the Alwrs and Nayanmrs, Dramidchrya, Upavarsha (Bodhyana), Gaudapda, Govinda, amkara Bhagavatpda, Ymuncharya, Bhagavad-Rmnuja, rman-Madhvchrya, Chaitanya, Samartha Rmads, the famous Maharashtra saints Tukrm, Jnnadeva [author of Jnneswari-commentary on Bhagavad Gta], Nmadeva and Ghora Kumbhra, Bhakta Meerbai, Annamcharya, Purandaradsa, Vidyraya, Aruagirintha, Sadiva Brahmendra, Vysaraya, Appayya Dkshita, Vednta Deika, Bodhendra, Rghavendra Swmi (Mantrlayam), Tygarja, Trailinga Swmi, Rmakrisha Paramahamsa, Viveknanda, Aurobindo, Ramaa Maharshi and Kanchi Paramcharya-Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswati, to name a few. There should have been many more who have not been recognized so universally but nevertheless had the same experience. In fact, such great men exist at all times in the world. Serious students interested in Sdhan, can definitely find them at all times because the search is mutual7. Judging from these qualifications required to be an Adhikri for interpretation of the stras, all the spurious, ill-informed and inexperienced commentators that do not belong to a proper Guru-ishya-Parampar can be identified and ignored as Anadhikris (unqualified persons). They cannot be taken as standard as their interpretations are liable to contain mistakes8.3. Tri-Mata-chryas Mutually Different stra-Interpretations: All are Correct. How? To start with, the three famous chryas, viz., ri amkara, Bhagavad Rmnuja and rimat- Madhvchrya can be taken as qualified expert-teachers. It is here that Shourie faces the difficulty of choosing between their mutually differing expositions of several portions of the Prasthna Tray. If all of these are Gurus, all their three views must be correct. But how? To understand this, one has to first understand that none of these three chryas was interested in propagating a theory of Truth per se9. All the three actively interacted with the people of their times and each brought about radical changes and reforms in the spiritual practices of his times and consequently in the other aspects of their contemporary social life also10A. A sincere student of any of these three commentaries learning them from a Guru in the proper traditional manner cannot fail to recognize their stress to be more each on a particular method of Sdhan than on a particular theory. The theories were put forward neither for their own sake nor as the only correct exposition of Truth, but for the sole explicit purpose of propagating the practice of a particular line of spiritual practice (Sdhan)10B. The theories are meant to be used only for the specific purpose of preparing one mentally to start practicing these specified Sdhans. All the three chryas stressed that the Truth as such can only be experienced by oneself by following the methods expounded by them respectively. It can only be lived in Practice but can never be comprehensively stated in mere words10C.Thus what the chryas primarily taught through their expositions (Bhshyas) were different, but not contradictory, methods of Sdhan suited to their times and the corresponding theoretical frameworks about the nature of the individual self (Jvtm), the Ultimata Self (Paramtm) and the world (Jagat) that aid in following these Sdhans initially. As the Sdhan progresses, the same Bhshyas are meant to give newer and deeper insights to the Sdhaka through their repeated contemplative reflection (Manana) and ultimately lead him to Nididhysa that bestows that indescribable direct experience of Truth (Nirvikalpa Samdhi) 10D. Each knew quite well that the ultimate Truth is Avng-Mnasa-Gochara-that it can be experienced comprehensively only directly at first hand (Aparoksha)- that no amount of explanation and theorizing can circumscribe it totally as it is infinite10E. Each was elucidating a part of that infinite Truth-that portion which was most necessary and best suited to the people of his times. Each clearly stated that what he was teaching should be used as a guide for Practice and not as a source of mere acrimonious debate11. Thus the commentaries themselves-let alone the Prasthna Tray can be understood at different levels by a Sdhaka depending on the stage of his Sdhan. In fact, this is universally accepted as one of the characteristics of a great work, i.e., its ability to give deeper and newer insights to a serious student continuously as he studies it again and again. Thus, when the commentaries themselves have this ability to mean differently depending on the Sdhakas level, it is no surprise that the original sources have this ability much more. But how are they so rich in this ability?4. Vedas: Common Knowledge of Several Things at Multiple Levels of Truth in Nature-All Existing Simultaneously: Traditionally, the Vedas have been considered as the repositories of all knowledge. What it means is that they give the most common and the most general of all knowledge12. Each Mantra has several meanings and can be interpreted to throw light on the nature of several things in nature13. This is because our shis perceived all this differentiation (Vaividhya) as emanating from one omnipresent Truth, as a self-expression of Its own dynamic nature14. This one Truth manifests Itself variously at various places and times15. The Vedas are Its natural (breath-like) outcome during various states of Its Self-manifestation16 and thus they exist in nature eternally, independent of our knowledge of them17. The shis were able to experience these various natural states of the one essential reality in their dynamic and vibratory (abda) aspects by acquiring Divya-rotras18 (divine ear) and the Vedas came out of them during such states of Yoga Samdhi19. This one reality can be experienced in other Atndriya (extra-sensory) ways also; for example, Arjuna was able to see the state of the world in the immediate future before the great Kurukshetra-war as the Viwarpa of Lord Ksha by ri Kshas gift of Divya-Chakshus20 (divine eye) to him.Thus, when various chryas give various meanings to one single mantra, they are only referring to the various levels of natural reality that the mantra itself refers to or implies. One may never be able to exhaust these meanings as the world and its knowledge are both infinite. Along with the evolution of human society and its needs, the Veda mantras ought to be explained by qualified persons in suitable different and constructive ways to cater to societys needs by all possible methods21. Each mantra has the capacity to lead its Upsaka to an experience that gives a comprehensive knowledge of the properties of various objects, substances, forces and living beings in nature that are all various manifestations of the same aspect of that one essential Truth22. Thus the Vedas do have a number of meanings but none of them are mutually contradictory; the various meanings only supplement and complement each other.5. Bhagavad Gta-Compendium of All Yoga-Sdhan-Mrgas (Spiritual Practices): The Bhagavad Gta is also intended to cover all the various Sdhan Mrgas. The Gta is a Yoga stra23, i.e., a stra that teaches Vedic Yogic practices. These practices are several. There are as many different practices as the variety in human beings. Each person is unique in some aspects and Lord Kshas aim in teaching Gta to Arjuna is to cater to the evolutionary needs of all human beings in a summary form24. Various chryas at various times and places expand and explain those portions of the comprehensive meaning of the Gta stra that is most required to their contemporary needs. But the vision of our three chryas is so broad that their interpretations of Gta are directly relevant even today to a large extent25. Those portions that seem irrelevant at first sight, do not attract negation but require only their amplification to bring out those aspects of their meanings that are most relevant to the present time26.6. Brahma Stras-Concise Clues of Comprehensive Oral Discussions on Adhytma Vidy and Veda Vysas Conclusions:The Brahma Stras are concise clues, meant to recollect a series of discussions that had been held by the Adhyatma-Vidya- chryas belonging to Bdaryaa Vysas times and his conclusions based on them. These discussions were regarding the interpretation of various Veda-Samhita, Brhmaa, rayaka, Upanishad, Itihsa and Pura passages and their interconnections27. Those discussions as such were passed on orally from teacher to disciple in the tradition and the Stras were used only to recollect a whole connected series of discussions. For this purpose, the Stras were grouped into various Adhikaraas or topics. Thus the most important means of understanding the Stras correctly is access to the right Sampradya27A or tradition of the original oral discussions held under Veda Vyasas Chairmanship at the end of Dwpara Yuga. A Sutra ideally should have the following six characteristics: minimum required syllables, not give room for any doubt, make some special point, cover the point concerned noting its occurrences in all branches of Veda, not contain meaningless syllables, and not have corrupt expressions. (adapted from the KT Pandurangis translation of Skanda Purana passage quoted by Srimat Madhva in his Sutra Bhashya as per Sri Jayateerthas explanation in his Tatvaprakasika).

Brahmasutras satisfy all these requirements of a Sutra. Therefore, the expression 'Sutra' primarily refers to Brahmasutras. These Brahmasutras help to determine the purport of the entire sacred literature.

From this the following points are clear:

1. Brahmasutras were composed at the close of Dvapara age.2. Composing these was a part of a large literatry renaissance undertaken by Sri Vedavyasa by way of systematising the vast vedic literature, Puncharatra and Itihasa-purana. This is the earliest known literary renaissance in India.

3. Brahmasutras cull out the Vedanta Philosophy from the entire veda and allied sacred literature.

Now, generally, all the three chryas claim that they were writing only what was traditional; nevertheless, they give different meanings to the same Stra in some cases. In some other cases, they even interpret a Stra as referring to different Vedic (largely Upanishadic) passages. What this means is that when ri Veda Vysa formulated that Stra, he intended to cover the discussions relating to all the claimed Vedic passages by that Stra; each of the three chryas had recorded only a portion of the original discussions in his commentary: that portion that needed an emphatic restatement in his time for the furtherance of social evolution although the discussions were preserved and transmitted in their entirety in their Guru-ishya-Parampar27B. Each of the three chryas had to focus only on certain aspects for the sake of clarity and conciseness even at the expense of reduced scope due to an all round reduction in the spiritual capacity of the people of their time for practicing the Upsanas covered in the Sastras and clarified comprehensively in the original discussions. This can be seen from the references ri amkara Bhagavatpda, Bhagavad Rmnuja and rimat Madhvchrya make to other commentators on Prasthna Tray. Thus, various valid interpretations to the same Stra and Adhikaraa are possible28, as all were intended by Bhagavn Veda Vysa, the original author of the Stras (as evidenced by the tradition). Also in some cases what ri amkara Bhagavatpda interprets as Prvapaksha (hypothesis or prima facie view) and Siddhnta (conclusion) portions of an Adhikaraa were interpreted by Bhagavad Rmnuja conversely. This became possible in those cases because, at those places, both the Prvapaksha and Siddhnta portions contain different aspects of the Truth and while one chrya chose to stress one portion of the Tattva, another, because of the necessity of his times, selected to highlight the other aspect of the same Tattva29. The Tattva, in totality, includes both the parts and all the above chryas took care to indicate the inherent validity of those other portions that he was not stressing, at some or other place in their Bhshyas30A. 7. riman-Madhvchrya-Preserver of Parts of Several Veda-khs subsequently lost and a Great Paurika:Similarly, riman-Madhvchrya had included the original discussions of Bhagavn Vysas time regarding clarifying the meaning of passages from several Veda-khs and Puras that were not covered by the earlier two chryas30B. Many of these Veda-khs were lost to posterity due to the social and political disturbances that occurred throughout the country after riman-Madhvchrya. That is the reason for the oblivion about these Veda-khs in the Guru-ishya traditions subsequent to the three chryas and we are left with only those passages quoted in their Bhashyas by the chryas. Manuscripts of one or two of these Veda-khs are found in the indices of libraries in Germany and/or France. These points can be properly understood and appreciated only if one is humble and patient enough to clearly see the uniformly high ethical standards followed by all these three great chryas scrupulously throughout their lives; if instead of that, one hastily judges them by ones own or the lower ethical standards prevalent in our time, one is likely to misunderstand. It is generally known that the ethical standards of past times were higher than what exists at present and all the three chryas stand high according to those past standards themselves.

8. Brahma Stra: Jijns-Bhakti-stra, The Most Effective Memory-Cleanser-cum-Best Means of Cultivating Sdhana-Chatushtaya-Sampat:In fact, the Brahma-Jijns of the Brahma Stras is meant as a form of Bhakti or Anushthna, for which ethics is an essential prerequisite and which if practiced properly, leads the Uttama Sdhakas that crossed a threshold (as certified by their respective Gurus) in the practice of Sdhana Chatushtaya31 to Aparoksha Brahmtmnubhava and The others32 to cultivate the qualities of Sdhana Chatushtaya so as to ultimately lead them to direct Yogic experience.The stress is on this experience rather than on mere intellectual conviction alone. Intellectual knowledge should be used as a bridge to reach this State of Continuous Experience.Hence, if one wishes to understand the stra correctly and experience the Truth, it should be studied under the guidance of a Guru and such study should be coupled with actual practice of one of the Sdhan Mrgas. The Bhshyas should be approached and studied in this manner and for that purpose alone and such proper study surely transforms one to a state where one can get direct experience of Truth. Depending on ones own intellect leads to misunderstanding and delusion in this field, as, most of us human beings, do not possess the purity of heart (Chitta uddhi) and attendant resolute conviction (Vyavasytmik Buddhi) required to understand the Adhytma Vidy without guidance.9. CONCLUSION:Putting in serious, sincere and one-pointed efforts for getting this direct experience under the supervision of a proper Guide is the best course of action for any person at any time-best from the point of view of the development and happiness of oneself and others in society, i.e., of being in tune with the dynamic evolution of society and nature as a whole (of which one is an organic part). One can truly serve the society and nature best only by empathizing with its evolution as, then only, the innermost and hence the strongest Samskras that motivate one to act, get tuned (by their self-transformation) with the laws of evolution of society and nature-thus seamlessly resulting solely in socially relevant and optimum actions. This is what is meant by Sarva-Bhta-Hite Rata: in Bhagavad Gta. When one gets this experience, what has been a discipline or Sdhan till then becomes ones own nature- that is instead of striving for perfection towards an ideal, one becomes that ideal oneself. All the actions of such people, even their very existence-furthers the evolution and consequently all round knowledge, growth and happiness of the society fully, by being a source of perennial inspiration for others.