I – First Sutra
On The Existence Of God
1. அவன் அவள் அதுவெனும் அவை மூவினை மையின்,
தோற்றிய திதியே யொடுங்கி மலத்துளதாம்,
அந்தம் ஆதி என்மனார் புலவர்.
Sutra. As the (seen) universe, spoken of as he, she, and it, undergoes three changes (origin, development, and decay), this must be an entity created (by an efficient cause.) This entity owing to its conjunction with Anava Mala has to emanate from Hara to whom it returns during Samharam. Hence, the learned say that Hara is the first cause.
Commentary :
This Sutram establishes by an inference that this universe has Hara as its First cause and it consists of three principal arguments.
First Argument :
Churnika. – The universe undergoes the three changes of original production, development, and decay.
Varthikam.-As an existing object has its origin and decay, it is shown that the cosmic entity which is spoken of as he, she, and it is subject to origin, development, and decay.
Udarana.-The world, if it exists, is followed by destruction and reproduction. Having seen that particular species in nature have particular seasons of reproduction, development, and decay, will not the wise argue that the world also undergoes periodical changes?
Second Argument :
Churnika. – These changes are caused by Hara.
Varthikam.-Objects not in existence (unreal) do not come into visible being hence the seen universe must be an entity. As products of industry cannot be produced except by an artisan, so the world which appears as a product has a Creator or an Efficient Cause. And the cosmos can only be developed from the condition into which it had been dissolved previously in Samharam.
Udarana (a). The world which has been resolved into Hara must emanate from Him. The dissolution is required as rest for Karma Mala, and the reproduction for the removal of Anara Mala. All will admit that things will be reproduced from what they had been resolved into. If you say that the world resolved into Vishnu whose form is Mulaprakriti, then all the higher products of Maya above Mulaprakriti will not be dissolved. All the products of Maya become resolved along with Vishnu and Brahma into Hara who is the author of both.
(b). Just as a sprout appears when a seed is embedded in moist earth, so the world is created from Maya by the Sakti or Light of Iswara, whose creation is in accordance with the unchangeable laws of Karma; and Lo! The Power of Sakti!
Just as, when not sprouting, the seed is concealed in the earth, so Maya exists in God when not differentiated. And he gives each his form as he desires it, just as the worm in a wasp’s nest gets the form it desires.
(c). Just as Time the producer of all changes, itself remains without change, so God who creates, develops, and destroys the world without any mechanical means and by his mere will, remains without change. He has in consequence no ties (Pasa 28 Bantham) just like the mind having certain impressions, itself remains different (i.e., does not become changed into them) and like the man who has learnt the truth in the waking state will not be misled by the dreams he has had.
Or
God is eternal and like Time is without change when with His mere will and without any mechanical means, He creates, develops, and destroys the world. His creation is without any purpose to Himself as the dreamer finds no benefit in his dreams in his waking state.
Third Argument :
Churnika. – The other two (Vishnu and Brahma) are also subject to these three changes.
Varthikam.-As the known cosmic entity has no power of action except through the unknown author of Samharam, this author, Hara is the only supreme God.
Udarana.-Hara who is neither the one nor the other in the Universe of mind and matter, is the only Supreme being of the said Universe, as the Universe of mind also becomes dissolved in Him in the same way, after they (minds) had been created and developed. The said Universe of mind which like Him is eternal is subordinate to Him even in Moksha.
NOTES
GENERAL :
The argument proceeds from a Prathiatcha fact admitted by the Lokayitha or materialist. This fact, the seen universe which can be described under the terms He, (masculine gender), She (feminine gender) or It (neuter gender) or as Thanu (animal Bodies), Karma (internal and external organs) or senses, Buvana (worlds) 29 and Bhoga (sensations) is then shown to be capable of change or evolution. Its present condition is itself the product of causation, evolved from its primordial nature; and its decay is its resolution into its primordial state. This primordial substance is what is called Maya or cosmic matter. This Maya is not a nonentity nor is it caused from God or Atma (soul) as will be shown later on.
The definition of Maya and its treatment will include all the phenomena noted by the present-day Materialist and Biologist in the field of Physics and Biology. It is best translated by the word “object and object consciousness.” This “Maya” therefore undergoes Srishti, Sthithi and Samharam; Samharam is not destruction and the chain of evolution does not stop but it proceeds; and the reason for this successive change i.e., recreation and rebirths is given in the text ‘மல‑ளதா&.’ it is caused by or necessitated by its conjunction with Anava Mala.
The word Anava is derived from the root “Anu” meaning exceedingly small and the word Anu which is a synonym for soul, is so called, as the soul which is a Vibhu in its real state is made Anu (small as an atom) by its conjunction with Anava Mala. This Anava Mala is the imperfection or ignorance or impurity or darkness which covers or conceals the intelligence or light or purity of the soul. It is the presence of this imperfection or impurity in nature, which necessitates Evolution or Successive Recreations and Rebirths, as it can only be removed by such evolution. Maya is therefore evolved but not by its own inherent power.
Maya or Matter is capable of motion but cannot move itself; just as a wheel capable of motion cannot move unless moved by some other person or thing or by the force of gravity, or just as products of industry cannot shape themselves except through an artificer and his instruments or tools, though they possess such capability. This grand Force, then, which moves and evolves the whole universe is the First cause, and the grand Artificer, the Supreme Being. Maya is the material cause, Upadana Karma of the universe, supplying its form and matter; God is the efficient cause or Nimitha Karana; and the Thunai 30 Karana, Sahakari or instrumental cause is His Chit Sakti which is defined in the second sutra.
The inference employed here is an inductive inference and the argument is represented by two syllogistic Forms called Kevalanvayi Anumanu and Anvaya Vyatireki Anumana. The first syllogism is represented like this.
(1) Pratidgna – Proposition. This universe has a Karta.
(2) Hetu – The reason. Because it has been evolved into forms such as he, she, and it.
(3) Utharana – The instance. A pot is made by a potter.
(4) Upanayam – The assumption. The universe is such a product as a pot.
(5) Nigamana – The deduction. Therefore, the universe has a Karta.
For further forms see the commentaries of Sivagra Yogi on Sivagnana Siddhi.
The word Samhara which means change connotes both Srishti and Sthithi and hence Hara who is Samhara Karta represents in Himself the Powers of Srishti and Sthithi Kartas. In fact, when we look at the universe and postulate God, the one idea we have of Him is as The Supreme Evolving Energy or Force working for the perfection of Salvation of the world of Mind and Matter. The root meaning of Hara 31 is change producer or destroyer. He evolves the world and removes darkness or Agnana.
An adhikarana or argument comprises (1) Vishaya – The proposition (2) Samsaya – The doubt or objections (3) Purvapaksha – The Theory refuted, (4) Siddhanta – The Theory proved or established and (5) Sankathi – The sequence in the argument.
And it is a point worthy of note how in the treatment of the whole subject, the argument proceeds step by step one based upon or following the first without a single break in the chain. And it is also possible to exhibit each argument in the five modes abovementioned; but it is unnecessary to do so.
Churnika is a particular style of expression. It expresses in a short sentence the substance of the whole argument.
Varthikam means an explanatory note.
Udarana or analogy is here used as a method of inductive proof and should be distinguished from the various kinds of Upamana Polis or false analogies and figures of rhetoric. The sole condition of a real analogy is, as stated by Dr. Bain, that the sameness apply to the attribute found by induction to bear the consequence assigned.
1. The first argument needs no comment; no body now denies that Cosmos undergoes successive evolutionary changes.
2. The second argument in fact consists of three arguments. The first argument refutes the theory of Buddhists and Mayavathis (Idealists) who assert the nonreality of the universe. The 2nd argument refutes the theory that world can evolve of itself; and the third deals with the mode of evolution i.e., by dissolution and reproduction.
(a.) The first illustration shows the reason why dissolution is required. It is as rest for Karma; just after the exertions of the day, we require rest during the night for undergoing the struggles of tomorrow, so death gives us a prolonged rest to the human monad to enable it to eat its previous Karma in the next birth. Why should it have a next birth? Because it must eat the fruits of previous Karma and unless it does so, its Anava Mala or Ignorance cannot be removed. This latter then is the reason for reproduction.
(b.) The seed is the Maya; the sprout, the Karma; and the tree, the world; and the Earth, God; and its moisture and heat, the Sakti of God. God is “Viyapaka.” Souls are Vyapti and Maya and other Mala are Vyappia. Sea is Vyapaka, water is the Vyapti and the salt is Vyappia.
“That the worlds are created out ‘of Brahm.” is to be understood as when we say that the tree sprung out of the earth: of, also the word Pangaja meaning sprung out of mire.
The text of the Veda.
It is Karma that determines the number of successive births and creations and the forms in succession, and not God. Though it is the worm which passes into various forms before it becomes the wasp, yet without the aid of the parent wasp which affords it warmth and food, the worm cannot obtain its full development, so God adjusts the birth according to Karma and makes the souls eat the fruits thereof. Without His Divine Presence and Energy, the soul cannot take for itself its own material body and it can have no progress unless when it is in conjunction with its material body. It is in Him we live, move, and have our very being.
(c.) The question arises whether God in producing these changes does change in any way. When one man reaps good and another reaps evil, does God like the one and dislike the other?
He is Nirvikari. He has neither likes nor dislikes. (ேவ”$த ேவ”டாைம1லா)
This is answered in the negative, in the illustration in Kural
One other illustration given in the 2nd Sutra and elaborated by the commentator of Ozhivilodukham is as follows: “The sun shines without any desire or intention or volition on its part, yet in its presence, the lotus plant receives its development and while one flower is still a bud, another has fully blown out and a third is withering; So, in the Divine Presence, Maya undergoes changes and so the author says “சG4ேக அK9ெதாWலா&.” (His Presence possesses five functions).
One other peculiarity in the nomenclature of God employed by the various schools and affecting the various ideals formed, deserves to be noted here. The Vaishnava would hardly describe God in any other form than masculine. All specific names of Vishnu are masculine, and they cannot be declined in any other gender and even when so declined they will not denote Vishnu, e. g. Vishnu, Vaishnavi, and Vaishnavam and Narayana, Narayani, and Narayanam. And of course, the image which the use of the word calls up is a male form. A follower of Sankaracharya would prefer to use a neuter form of expression and calls his God, Brahm, Param and so on, though with his peculiar adaptability he would also use such words as Narayana, Iswara, Isa, &c. the Saiva however uses all the three forms. ‘He, She and It’ in describing God, and all the specific names of Siva are capable of declension in all the three forms without change in its denotation and connotation. Siva, Sivah, Sivam; Iswara, Iswari, Iswaram; Sankara, Sankari, Sankaram; Para, Parah, Param and so on. And accordingly, the images which he employs in his temples correspond to these forms. All nature is comprised in the three forms he, 34 she and it. And when we use human language and forms of Nature to describe Him, there is no reason why one form should be preferred to the other, when all forms of Nature are His.
I may note here another peculiar doctrine of this School.
In fact, if there is any one doctrine which is more insisted on in this School than any other, it is this that God cannot be born in the flesh and He cannot have human Avatars. It is the height of absurdity to suppose that God who is the inconceivable and the unknowable and indescribable (வா4>மனாYத&) can be born as a man when He ceases to be such. (See notes to sixth Sutra for a further discussion of the point).
3. This argument establishes the supremacy of Hara and the One-ness of God.
The commentaries here discuss why God is not Brahma or Vishnu or Atma or the rest, the answer being that these latter are all liable to change and possess no Swathanthram; and why there should not be too many Gods as Aneka Iswara Vathis assert and several other questions besides.
It should here be noted that Hara or Siva or Isa or Iswara as used in the text is not to be identified with one of the Hindu Trinity bearing the same name. In the whole of the sacred literature we find Him described as the Lord of the Trinity, and as One who cannot be known even to the Trinity. The Trimurthis are themselves regarded as Mortals, being born at the beginning of each Kalpa and dying at the end of each. And the Vishnu of the text means only the Puranic Vishnu, clothed with such attributes and personal qualities as are ascribed to Him and capable of Avatars and the Vishnu of the Trinity representing Mula Prakriti and the function of Sthithi.
Concluding remarks
The first Sutra therefore establishes the existence of the three Mala, (Maya, Anava, and Karma) and of God. In the terminology of this School, the three Mala are called by a generic name Pasa and God is called Pathi. Pasa means, a bond or tie or shackle, or Bantham, and the three Banthams are distinguished as follows:-
Anava Pasa binds or limits the Omniscience or Perfect Knowledge of the Soul and hence called Prathibantham.
Karma Pasa like an unceasing flood follows the Soul and drives it to eat the fruits of karma (Bhoga) without permitting it to seek Moksha and hence called Anubandham.
Maya Pasa limits the Omnipresence (Vyabaka) of the Soul and confines it to a Particular body and hence called Sambantham.
Atma in the terminology of this School is called Pasu as a thing bound by Pasa. The terminology employed by the Ramanujas for these Thripadarthas is chit, achit and Iswara and that by the school of Sankaracharya is Jagat, Jiva, and Para.
The next Sutra proceeds to define Chit Sakti by which alone the relation between God and Atma and Mala is established and by whose Power alone Re-births are induced.