Brahma Sutra

CHAPTER - II
AVIRODHA - NON-CONTRADICTION

SECTION - I

Topic-1: Conflict with Smriti
1. If it be argued (that from the acceptance of Brahman as the cause of the universe) arises the defect of the (Samkhya) Smritis being left without any scope, then not so, for otherwise will arise the defect of other Smritis losing their scope.
2. And (Pradhana is not the cause) since the others are not met with (in the Vedas and common experience).

Topic-2: Refutation of Yoga
3. Hereby is refuted Yoga.

Topic-3: Difference in Nature
4. Brahman is not the cause of the universe owing to the dissimilarity in the nature of this universe; and the fact of being so is known from the Vedas.
5. But this is only a reference to the presiding deities, because of the mention of distinction (between the sentient deities and the insentient organs and elements) and the inherence (of these deities in them).
6. But it is seen.
7. If it be said that the effect (in that case) is non-existent (before creation), then not so; for it is merely a negation (without any object to deny).
8. Since in dissolution there is the predicament of the cause becoming just like that effect, therefore this (theory that Brahman is the material cause) becomes incongruous.
9. But that cannot be so on account of the existence of supporting illustration.
10. And because the defects cling to your own point of view.
11. If it be argued that although reasoning is inconclusive, still it has to be done in a different way, (so as to avoid this defect), then even so there will be no getting away from the defect.

Topic-4: Non-acceptance by the Wise
12. Hereby are explained all the (other) theories that are not accepted by the wise.

Topic-5: Brahman Becoming an Experiencer
13. If it be argued that the distinction between the experiencer (of happiness and sorrow) and the things experienced will cease when the (experienced) objects turn into the experiencer, then we say that such a distinction can well exist as observed in common experience.

Topic-6: Origin
14. There is non-difference of those cause and effect on account of the texts about origin etc.
15. (Cause and effect are non-different) since the effect is perceived when the cause is there.
16. And (cause and effect are non-different) because the posterior one has (earlier) existence (in the cause).
17. If it be argued that the effect did not exist before creation, since it is declared (in the Upanishad) as "non-existent", then we say, no, because from the complementary portion it is known that the word is used from the standpoint of a difference of characteristics.
18. (The pre-existence and non-difference of the effect are established) from reasoning and another Upanishadic text.
19. And the effect is non-different from the cause on the analogy of a piece of cloth.
20. And this is so just as in the case of the outgoing breath etc.

Topic-7: Non-performance of Good
21. Since the other (individual soul) is mentioned (as identical with Brahman), faults like not doing what is beneficial and so on will arise.
22. But (Brahman is) greater (than the embodied being) on account of the declaration of the difference (between the two).
23. On the analogy of stone etc., as also for other reasons, that (opponent's view) is untenable.

Topic-8: Creation without Materials
24. If it be said that (Brahman) cannot be the cause, since one is noticed to procure materials (for the production of an object), then we say, no, for it is possible on the analogy of milk.
25. Also (Brahman can create without extraneous help) like gods and others (as is seen) in this world.

Topic-9: Wholesale Transformation
26. (If Brahman changes into the world, then) there will arise the contingency of either wholesale transformation or the violation of the texts about partlessness.
27. But (this has to be accepted) on the authority of the Upanishad, for Brahman is known from the Upanishads alone.
28. Because it occurs thus in the case of the individual soul as well and creation of diverse kinds occur in the cases of gods and others.
29. And because the opponent's own point of view is equally vitiated.

Topic-10: Possession of All Powers
30. Moreover (the Deity is) possessed of all (powers), it having been revealed thus (in the Upanishads).
31. If it be argued that (Brahman cannot act) on account of absence of organs, that was answered earlier.

Topic-11: Need of Motive
32. (Brahman is) not the cause, owing to the need of some motive (for creation).
33. But (creation for Brahman is) a mere pastime like what is seen in the world.

Topic-12: Partiality and Cruelty
34. No partiality and cruelty (can be charged against God) because of (His) taking other factors into consideration. For so the Vedas show.
35. If it be argued that it is not possible (to take Karma - merit and demerit - into consideration in the beginning), since the fruits of work remain still undifferentiated, then we say, no, since the transmigratory state has no beginning.
36. Moreover, this is logical and (so) it is met with (in the scriptures).

Topic-13: Propriety of All the Characteristics
37. And Brahman is the cause on account of the propriety of all the Characteristics (of a cause in It).


SECTION - II

Topic-1: Samkhya View Refuted (Impossibility of Design)
1. The inferred one (Pradhana) is not (the cause) owing to the impossibility of explaining the design, as also for other reasons.
2. And the inferred (Pradhana) cannot be the cause, since the tendency to create (cannot logically arise in it).
3. If it be claimed (that Pradhana acts spontaneously) like milk and water, then even there (intelligence is the guide).
4. And (Pradhana is not the cause) since (nothing extraneous to it exists, so that) it has nothing to rely on (for impulsion to or stoppage from action).
5. And Pradhana cannot change (automatically) like grass etc., (into milk in a cow) for such a change does not occur elsewhere (e.g. in a bull).
6. Even if (spontaneous modification of Pradhana be) accepted, still (Pradhana will not be the cause) because of the absence of any purpose.
7. If it be argued that like a (lame) man (riding on a blind man) or a lodestone (moving iron), (the soul can stimulate Pradhana), even then (the defect will persist).
8. Besides, Pradhana cannot act on account of the impossibility of (the existence of) any relationship of the principal and its subordinates (among the gunas constituting Pradhana).
9. And even if the inference be pursued otherwise (still the defect will persist) owing to the absence of the power of intelligence (in Pradhana).
10. And (the Samkhya doctrine is) incoherent because of the contradictions involved.

Topic-2: Vaisesika Objection Refuted
11. Rather (the universe may originate from Brahman) even as the great and long (triads etc.,) originate from the short (dyad) or the inextensive (atom).

Topic-3: Atoms Not the Cause of Universe
12. (Whether adrista leads the atoms or conjunction helps them), in either case no action is possible and hence there can be no creation or dissolution.
13. And (there can be no creation or dissolution) by reason of assuming inherence, for this leads to an infinite regress on a parity of reasoning.
14. (The atomic theory is inadmissible) for the further reason of (activity etc.,) persisting eternally.
15. And on account of the possession of colour etc., there will be a reversal (of the nature of the atoms), for this accords with experience.
16. And (the atomic theory is untenable) because it is defective from either point of view.
17. This (theory of atom as the cause) is to be entirely ignored, since it is not accepted (by the worthy).

Topic-4: Refutation of Buddhist Realists
18. Even if the integration be supposed to arise from either of the causes, that will not be achieved.
19. If it be argued that a combination becomes possible since (nescience and the rest) can be the causes of one another (in a successive series), then we say, no, (for nescience etc.,) can each merely be the cause of origin of another just succeeding.
20. And because the earlier is negated when the later emerges, (therefore nescience and the rest cannot each be the cause of the next in the series).
21. (If it be contended that the effect arises) even when there is no cause, then your assertion (of causation) will be stultified; else (if you contend that the entity of the earlier moment continues till the entity of the later moment emerges), the cause and effect will exist simultaneously.
22. Neither pratisamkhya-nirodha (artificial annihilation) nor an apratisamkhya-nirodha (natural annihilation) is possible, for there can be no cessation (either of the current or of the individuals forming the current).
23. And (the Buddhist view is untenable) owing to defect arising from either point of view.
24. And (non-existence cannot be asserted) in the case of Akasa on account of the absence of (its) dissimilarity (with destruction).
25. And (a permanent soul has to be admitted) because of the fact of remembrance (ie., memory).
26. Something does not come out of nothing, for this does not accord with experience.
27. And (if something can come out of nothing, then) on the same ground, success should come even to the indifferent people.

Topic-5: Buddhist Idealism Refuted
28. (External objects are) not non-existent, for they are perceived.
29. And because of the difference of nature (the waking state is) not (false) like dream etc.
30. (Tendencies) can have no existence since (according to you) external things are not perceived.
31. And (the ego-consciousness cannot be the abode), for it is momentary.
32. Besides (this view stands condemned), it being untenable from every point of view.

Topic-6: Jaina View Refuted
33. (The Jaina view is) not right since the presence (of contradictory attributes) in one and the same thing is impossible.
34. Similarly also (arises the defect of) the soul having no all-pervasiveness (or having only a medium dimension).
35. And the contradiction cannot be avoided even by an assumption of sequence (in the increase and decrease of parts), for still there will be the defects of mutability etc.
36. The ultimate size attainable (by the soul) being permanent, the other two sizes also must be so; and hence there will be no distinction (among the sizes).

Topic-7: God Is Not a Mere Superintendent
37. For the Lord there can be no creatorship, for that leads to incongruity.
38. And (the incongruity arises) because of the impossibility of a relationship.
39. And (the position is untenable) because of the impossibility of (Nature) coming under (His) direction. (Or) And (God cannot be proved), since no physical support (adhisthana) is possible for Him.
40. Should it be argued that God will direct Nature like (a man directing) the organs, then it cannot be so, for that will result in God's having experiences (of happiness, sorrow etc.). (Or) If a body, equipped with sense-organs, be assumed for God, (we say that) this is not possible; because of (consequent) experiences etc.
41. God will be subject to finitude or loss of omniscience.

Topic-8: Bhagavata View Refuted
42. (The Bhagavata view that Samkarsana and others originate successively from Vasudeva and others is wrong), since any origin (for the soul) is impossible.
43. And (this view is wrong because) an implement cannot originate from its agent (who wields it).
44. Alternatively even if (it be assumed that Vasudeva and others are) possessed of knowledge, (majesty etc.,), still the defect cannot be remedied.
45. Besides, (in this scripture) many contradictions are met with and it runs counter to the Vedas.


SECTION - III

Topic-1: Origin of Space
1. Space is not (a created thing), since this is not heard of in (some of) the Upanishads.
2. But there is (a mention of the origin of space).
3. (The Upanishadic passage about creation of space has) a secondary sense, for real creation is impossible.
4. And (this is borne out) by Vedic texts.
5. And it is possible for the same word ("originated") to have (primary and secondary senses) like the word Brahman.
6. The (Vedic) assertion (that "all things become known when the one is known") can remain unaffected only if all the effects are non-different from Brahman; and this is confirmed by Vedic texts.
7. But (space is a product); for separateness persists wherever there is an effect, as it is seen in the world.

Topic-2: Origin of Air
8. Hereby is explained air.

Topic-3: Origin of Brahman Denied
9. But (origin) for Existence (Brahman) is impossible on account of illogicality.

Topic-4: Origin of Fire
10. Fire originates from this one (ie., air); for the Upanishad says so.

Topic-5: Origin of Water
11. Water (was born from this fire).

Topic-6: Origin of Earth
12. (The word "food" means) earth on the strength of the topic, colour and other Vedic texts.

Topic-7: Creation from God's Deliberation
13. It is He only, who through profound meditation on each thing (created it), as is known from His indicatory marks.

Topic-8: Reverse Order of Dissolution
14. But as compared with this order of creation, the order of dissolution proceeds in a reverse way. This is logical too.

Topic-9: The Origin of Mind and Intellect
15. If it be contended that the intellect and mind must find accommodation in some order in some intermediate stage, because indicatory marks of their existence are in evidence, then not so, because their presence creates no difference (ie., does not disturb the order of creation or dissolution).

Topic-10: Birth and Death
16. The mention of birth and death must be in the primary sense in relation to the moving and the motionless; in relation to the soul it must be in a secondary sense, the application (of such words) being possible when a body is present.

Topic-11: Origin of the Soul
17. The individual soul has no origin; because the Upanishads do not mention this, because its eternality is known from them and (because of other reasons).

Topic-12: Eternally Conscious Soul
18. The soul is eternally a cognizer for this very reason (of being free from origin and dissolution).

Topic-13: Soul's Dimensions
19. (The individual soul must be atomic in dimension owing to the mention in the Vedas) of its departure from the body, going (to the next world by following a course) and coming back (from there).
20. (The soul's atomicity stands confirmed) owing to the relation of one's own soul with the latter two facts (viz., following of a course and coming back).
21. If it be objected that the soul is not atomic because its size is heard of as not being so, we reply, no, since that context relates to the other (ie., the supreme Self).
22. And the individual soul is atomic because of the direct Upanishadic use of the word as well as mention of infinitesimality.
23. (The soul's atomicity and its feeling over the whole body involve) no contradiction, just as in the case (of a drop) of sandal paste.
24. If it be objected that (the argument holds good in the case of sandal paste) owing to its peculiarity of position, (but that is not evident in the case of the soul), then we say, no, (a peculiar location) for the soul is admitted in the Upanishads, for it exists in the heart.
25. Or on the analogy of what is seen in the world, (the soul may pervade the whole body) through its attribute (of sentience).
26. (The quality of sentience can have) separate existence like smell.
27. And the Upanishad also show this.
28. (The soul and its intelligence are separate), since they are taught separately (in the Upanishads).
29. But the soul comes to have such appellations because of the dominance of the modes of that intellect; this is just as in the case of the supreme Self.
30. And because the contact between the soul and the intellect persists so long as the worldly state of the soul continues, there can be no defect, for this is what is met with in the scriptures.
31. Rather because that contact (with the intellect etc.,) which remains latent (in sleep and dissolution) can become manifest (during waking and creation) like manhood etc., (from boyhood etc.,).
32. Else (if the existence of the internal organ be not admitted) there will be the possibility of either constant perception or non-perception or it will have to be admitted that either of the powers (of the soul or of the organs) becomes (suddenly) debarred (or delimited or lost).

Topic-14: Soul as Agent
33. The individual soul must be an agent, for thus alone the scriptures become purposeful.
34. (The soul is an agent) because there are teachings about its roaming.
35. (The soul is an agent) because of its taking up (the organs).
36. And the soul is an agent because of the mention (as such) in respect of action; were it not so, there would have been a contrary indication.
37. As in the case of perception (there is no uniformity), so also there is no uniformity (in the case of action).
38. (The soul must be an agent), for (if the intellect be so), it will lead to a reversal of power.
39. And (the soul must be an agent) because (a contrary supposition will) lead to a negation of deep meditation (on God).

Topic-15: The Soul under Two Conditions
40. And (rather) this is like the carpenter existing under both conditions.

Topic-16: Soul's Agentship Derived from God
41. But the agentship (of the individual soul) is derived from God, for that is what is stated in the Vedic texts.
42. (God is), however, dependent on the efforts made, so that injunctions and prohibitions may not become meaningless and other defects may not arise.

Topic-17: Relation of Soul and God
43. (The individual souls are) parts of God because of the mention that they are different, also because some read otherwise of (Brahman's) identity with fishermen, slaves, gamblers and others.
44. This follows from the words of the mantras also.
45. And this is also stated in the Smriti (Gita).
46. The Supreme Self is not so (touched by the suffering of the individual soul), even as light etc., are not (affected by the things that condition them).
47. They say so in the Smritis and (the Upanishads declare thus).
48. Injunction and prohibition become effective owing to physical association, just as it is in the case of light etc.
49. And there is no intermixture (of actions and results), since the soul has no connection with all (the bodies).
50. And (the individual soul) is only a reflection (of the supreme Self) to be sure.
51. (Even the unseen potential results of works cannot regulate individual allocation), since the unseen potential results (themselves) cannot be allocated thus.
52. And the same (defect springs up) even in the case of resolves etc.,
53. If it be said that this (individual allocation of pleasure and pain) can be possible in accordance with the separate part (of each soul in each body), then it cannot be so, because of all (the omnipresent souls) getting included in all (the bodies).


SECTION - IV

Topic-1: Origin of the pranas
1. Similarly the organs (are produced from the supreme Self).
2. (Origin of the organs has to be accepted) because of the impossibility of (the text about origin having) the secondary sense.
3. Also because that term, ("is born"), is used earlier (in the primary sense) in the Upanishad (in connection with Prana).
4. (Pranas must have originated from Brahman) since speech is preceded by them.

Topic-2: Number of Pranas
5. The pranas are seven in number because of being so known and because of such a specification.
6. But the hands etc., are there; since (an excess is) established thus, therefore it is not so.

Topic-3: Atomic Pranas
7. And the organs are atomic (ie., subtle and limited in size).

Topic-4: Chief Prana: Its Creation
8. So also the foremost (Prana is a product of Brahman).

Topic-5: Nature of Prana
9. Prana is neither air nor a function, because it is taught separately.
10. But Prana is not independent just like the organs of vision etc., because instruction is impared along with them and because of other reasons.
11. No fault accrues, because Prana is not a sense-organ. For thus it is shown in the Upanishads.
12. It is taught that Prana has five states like the mind.

Topic-6: Prana Is Atomic
13. And the chief Prana is atomic (ie., subtle and limited in size).

Topic-7: Presiding Deities
14. But there is the (fact of) presiding over by (the deities) Fire and others, for so it is taught in the scriptures.
15. (The organs are) connected with the possessor of the organs, as is known from the Vedic texts.
16. And on account of that soul's constant relation (with the body).

Topic-8: Prana and Pranas
17. As distinguished from the chief Prana, the other pranas (eleven in number) are the organs, for they are so designated.
18. Because of the (mention of) difference in the Upanishads.
19. And (the organs are different from Prana) because of the dissimilarity in characteristics.

Topic-9: Creation of Gross Objects
20. The arrangement of designation and shape, however, is by Him who made the elements tripartite, for it is taught (in the Upanishad).
21. Flesh etc., are produced from earth as it is shown in the Upanishads. From the other two as well (evolve other things).
22. But owing to the preponderance (of any one) occurs the corresponding designation, occurs the corresponding designation.